The main tools used by PLANS at the mailing list "waldorf-critics", owned by the Secretary of the group and at its website, to "spice up" its campaign against Waldorf education, are the ever more explicit building, cultivation and publishing of a "Protocol of Steiner" mythology and a "Protocol of Waldorf" mythology.
A "Protocol of Steiner" mythology
What is cultivated and used by PLANS as a special form of "Protocol of Steiner" mythology against Waldorf education was probably originally in the case of PLANS constructed by its Secretary. The mythology in an early form asserts that Rudolf Steiner as the originator of Waldorf education, after having "failed" "to found a spiritually-oriented party" should have "turned to education as a way to carry out his work by preparing souls for reincarnation as leaders in the next epic of history". In articles and postings from the "waldorf-critics" list, (re)published at its site, PLANS tries to tie the mythology in question to the strife of National Socialism to conquer and rule the world during the last century.
The paranoically tinged mythology, portraying it as the secret agenda and goal of Waldorf schools, not told to the parents, to prepare and train the future leaders of the world, ruling over and telling the rest of humanity what to think, feel and do, can be documented since at least 1999 in a Press Release from the law firm representing PLANS in a litigation against two public school districts in CA. Later, it has been argued for by among other the Vice-President of PLANS on the WC mailing list. The works by Steiner used to argue this part of the mythology are four lectures on the Gospels and Christ, published as "The Universal Human".
The mythology, laid as seed at the beginning of PLANS' anti-Waldorf campaign, has been cultivated ever more explicitly by PLANS since at least the end of 1998. The main tool in the cultivation of the mythology in question since the beginning of 2000 has been a number of articles by a Peter Staudenmaier, creating and laying a forgery as the foundation stone of his first article on the subject; 'Anthroposophy and Ecofascism', put at PLANS' site by its webmaster, the Secretary of PLANS.
In discussions, Staudenmaier is fond of describing and referring to himself as 'historical scholar' (while also having described that he not is an academical scholar in a formal sense). His forgery consists in asserting the existence of and "describing" a lecture by Steiner, that no documentation that he has mentioned points to the existence of, in terms of the "content" he ascribes to it, except the fantasy of Staudenmaier himself, as "explanatory introduction" to his story. The forgery-introduction to his article seemingly paraphrases Steiner, portraying him as a proto-Nazi, dreaming the dreams of Hitler and Himmler. The only 'source' for the existence of his fantasy-forgery that Mr. Staudenmaier himself has given is loosely mentioning reading of different journals.
As the source for the title he gives for his forgery, Staudenmaier points to a book by a person, Hans Mändl, whom he carelessly in the article describes as a 'German anthroposophist', 'fascinated' by what he describes in his forgery, later to change his mind about Mändl and describe him as a 'Norwegian anthroposophist'.
A closer look would have shown that the person in question, Hans Mändl, that Mr Staudenmaier lightheartedly describes as a 'German', 'fascinated' by the dreams of Hitler and Himmler, was a person of Jewish origin, fleeing Austria in 1938 to escape the Nazi persecutions to go to Sweden together with another person, also of Jewish origin, Emarie Vidakowich. Later, Hans Mändl became editor of the journal of the Swedish Anthroposophical Society; Antropos and one of the leading anthroposophists in Sweden in his time up to his death in 1972.
His friend on the flight, Emarie Vidakowich, later became one of the main founders of the mother school of the Waldorf school movement in Sweden, Kristofferskolan in Stockholm together with among other another person of Jewish origin, also having fled Austria. A daughter later became a leading person at two anthroposophical curative homes in Sweden. A grandson became a Waldorf teacher.
A third person of Jewish origin fleeing the Nazi persecutions in Austria, Gustav Ritter, became the founder and long time leader of the mother institution of the anthroposophical 'Curative home for disabled children' movement in Sweden, Mikaelgården in Jaerna. A fourth person of Jewish origin fleeing Austria, Hans Glaser, became the founder and long time leader of the other main anthroposophical curative institution in Jaerna; Saltå Arbetsskola. A fifth person of Jewish origin from Central Europe became one of the founders of anthroposophical medicine in Sweden, the son of a sixth Jew coming to Sweden from Central Europe today is one of the central physicians in anthroposophical medicine in Sweden.
In general, the anthroposophical movement and the Waldorf movement, that Mr. Staudenmaier, making a forgery (in the sense described) the foundation stone of his writings on the subject, portrays as centrally anti-Semitic, in Sweden (where I live) to a high degree has been founded by people of Jewish origin as pioneers coming or fleeing from Central Europe because of Nazi persecutions.
Other persons of Jewish origin went to other countries, one being Karl König, (also here) who became the founder of another mother institution of another, now world wide anthroposophical movement; the Camphill in Aberdeen for people who have special needs, with daughter homes in other parts of Europe, North America, India and Africa (In Nov 2001, Google points to 954 pages on the net when searching with "Camphill communities".)
Faced with his careless, untruthful and unreliable way of describing his alleged sources, like Mändl, except for the forgery, Staudenmaier's comment has been: "Oops, that was foolish of me. Moreover, I made the same mistake twice - in the original version of my article I identified Mandl as German, before I found him in several lists of Scandinavian anthros, which I somehow reduced to Norwegian.".
The forgery and the double 'foolish' mistake, and Mr. Staudenmaier's continued defense of the forgery for (in Nov 2001) soon two years since his production of it, and 'regret' about the carelessness of his 'mistake' on Mändl, in a nutshell summarize the unreliability and untrustworthiness of Mr. Staudenmaier's work on the subject that he later has continued to produce, on different levels repeatedly adding some form of untruth or twist to what he writes in trying to contribute to the building of the 'Protocol of Steiner' mythology cultivated by PLANS.
In spite of the total lack of any source documenting the lecture that Staudenmaier asserts the existence of, with regard to the content Staudenmaier ascribes to it, (for the different stories by Staudenmaier on this, see here) neither any well known source, nor any specific source having been given by Staudenmaier himself from the moment of the first publication of the forgery up to 21 months later, November 2001, except loose "reading of journals", he continued to defend the "existence" of the "lecture" as described by him, playing different word- and mind-games with regard to it in discussions, to cover up for his profound unreliability as self described "historical scholar".
Only in discussions during the summer of 2003 has Staudenmaier, again faced with his untruthfulness, lightheartedly pointed to a new, slightedly edited version of the introduction, again playing different word- and mind games about it, worthy of a Christopher "Rockefeller".
After the forgery has been exposed, he has tried to play down as "only" an "opening device" of the article, at one time asking that it be dismissed in reading the rest of the article, while later - when reminded of this - has answered that he does not "understand" what the reminder refers to.
What he probably realizes is that the public admission of the actual embarrassing truth - that he has committed the to actual historians deadly sin of making up a "historical source" out of his speculative imagination as the foundation stone and central, explanatory introduction to the article - would demonstrate his complete lack of credibility and trustworthiness for the future in what he has continued to write on the subject of anthroposophy as a self proclaimed "historical scholar" on anthroposophy.
If Staudenmaier from the beginning had admitted that the "lecture" as such that he describes does not exists as he describes it and that he made up its content out of his imagination on the basis of his loose picture at the time of writing the article of the lecture series "Mission of Folk Souls" that seemingly is what he actually referred to with his forgery, he maybe still would have at least some credibility left. By instead having continued to defend his forgery for so long as describing an actual "lecture" instead of admitting that he has made it up with regard to its content, making it not exist as he describes it, and that it was a "mistake" to do it, he for ever has deprived himself of any credibility as "scholar" on anthroposophy.
If Staudenmaier had been the academic "scholar" he likes to depict himself as, the forgery - if published in a serious journal on history - probably would have gotten him sacked from the University he had worked at.
The "Protocol of Steiner" mythology, in both its constructed forms, has been made a part of the anti-Waldorf and anti-anthroposophy campaign of PLANS, and is today cultivated and used by PLANS in a similar way that the Protocol of Zion forgery was used during the last century, then to incite anger and hatred against Jews.
Today the cultivation of the mythology in question and publication of it at PLANS' site via the archives of PLANS' mailing list and directly as separate articles at PLAN' site, is used by PLANS as a tools to incite from serious antipathy to hatred against anthroposophy and Waldorf education in especially the Jewish community.
For some comments on the argumentation for the allegations of anti-Semitism and racism in anthroposophy by putting together number of "quotes" from the works of Rudolf Steiner and other sources at the site of PLANS, see here. On a work by a group on the relation between anthroposophy and Judaism, see here.
Except for the mythology in question, the Secretary of
PLANS as one of many views he puts forth, has argued on PLANS' mailing
list that fully trained
and licensed physicians should be deprived of their licences simply on
the basis of having read anthroposophical literature and that anthroposophists
by normal standards must be considered to be insane.
A "Protocol of Waldorf" mythology
A second mythology cultivated by PLANS is a "Protocol of Waldorf" mythology in different forms. It focuses on portraying Waldorf education as based on a pagan religion inspired by the Devil. This is done by among other repeatedly pointing to a sentence taken out of context from a Waldorf publication and using it as a slogan on the mailing list of PLANS.
This mythology more seems to originate with the present President of PLANS, on the WC-list defending allegations that Waldorf teachers perform voodoo against criticism.
Some of the main elements of this second mythology cultivated by PLANS at its mailing list, supported by the President and Secretary of PLANS, portray and argue that elements in Waldorf education are used as ritual magic or used to make magical talismans, and allegations that Steiner at the beginning of his career probably practised sex magic, that he was schizophrenic and that rumours say that he was a drug addict.
(For the full text of Rudolf Steiner's autobiography online, see here)
The two mythologies are used to drag and flame Waldorf teachers, parents and pupils, and anthroposophists into long discussions on the list, one trick used being to put and answer all letters sent to the webmaster of the site on the list to make them discuss the allegations of drug addiction, schizophrenia, sex magic, ritual magic, paganism, racism and anti-Semitism of Rudolf Steiner.
The mailing list is then continuously put up at the site of PLANS on a monthly basis by PLANS' secretary as "Archives", building the ranking of the site with some search engines as an "informational" site on anthroposophy and Waldorf education on the basis of all the times "anthroposophy", "Waldorf education" and "Waldorf school" are mentioned in the discussions.
On the WC-list, the Secretary of PLANS has expressed it as his personal opinion that he "consider[s] the throwing of pies in the faces of people who never expected it and not being able to defend themselves as an expression of [...] the basic essence of the First Amendment".
Maybe that is simply the way he and the President of PLANS look at the support, cultivation and publishing on the internet of the two mythologies at the site of PLANS as articles and as postings published as "Archives", using the "Protocol of Steiner" mythology to incite from anger to hatred in the Jewish Community against Waldorf education and anthroposophy and the corresponding "Protocol of Waldorf" mythology to incite a similar anger and hatred in parts of the Christian Communities.
Page last updated 15 July, 2003