And the Warlord (Waldorf Watch)

STEINER AND THE WARLORD

I. THE WARLORD WHEN ALIVE

On other pages at this Web site, we’ve examined Rudolf Steiner’s visions of the distant future and the distant past. Now let’s look at how Steiner dealt with the major historical event of his own time, and his evident failure to foresee that event's consequences. We can do this readily by considering the case of General Helmuth von Moltke, Chief of the German General Staff at the outbreak of World War I. Rudolf Steiner knew von Moltke well, both in his most recent earthly incarnation and in other stages of his existence.

Like other German military men at the beginning of the twentieth century, von Moltke devoted himself to preparations for “Der Tag,” The Day when Germany would unleash its military might and begin “the march to final mastery of Europe.” [1] But when The Day finally arrived, von Moltke received a dreadful shock. Germany’s emperor, Kaiser Wilhelm II, suddenly vacillated, casting about for alternatives that would prevent the outbreak of total war. Wilhelm proposed ditching the German war plan, which entailed launching a massive assault on northern France by sweeping through small, neutral Belgium. Instead, Wilhelm contemplated attacking Russia forthwith. Shocked that the Kaiser would, at the last moment, undo all the years of meticulous preparation for The Day, von Moltke stood up to Wilhelm and, after a tussle, prevailed: The opening battles of World War I would proceed as planned. But the emotional toll on von Moltke was great. “I never recovered from the shock of this incident. Something in me broke and I was never the same thereafter.” [2]

Rudolf Steiner attempted to minister to the von Moltke’s spiritual needs. He exchanged messages with Germany’s top general both before von Moltke’s death and, even more interestingly, after the general was laid to rest. For the contents of von Moltke’s messages from beyond the grave, we have only Steiner’s unsubstantiated testimony. But I’m glad to report that the Rudolf Steiner Press has published the Steiner/von Moltke correspondence in LIGHT FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM: Rudolf Steiner’s association [sic] with Helmuth and Eliza von Moltke: Letters, Documents and After-Death Communications. [3]

The aggression over which von Moltke presided led to a war that ultimately caused more than 20 million deaths and perhaps 40 million additional serious injuries. At least half of all these casualties — about 30 million — were suffered by civilians. The toll in Germany alone was approximately six million casualties. Postwar Germany was so traumatized and chaotic that a vicious fringe political party was able to gain power and, eventually, order the German army to repeat its attack upon Belgium and France. That party was headed by Adolf Hitler; the war he launched led to approximately 120 million casualties: 40 million deaths and 80 million other severe injuries. [4]

As an amazingly gifted clairvoyant, Rudolf Steiner should have foreseen — before the first German boot trod upon Belgian soil in 1914 — the dreadful carnage to come as well as its horrific results. [5] Yet he associated himself with the leader of Germany’s military, a man who might fairly be described as a war criminal. [6] Steiner, of course, did not see von Moltke in this light. Rather, he saw him as a latent spiritualist. Both Helmuth von Moltke and his wife, Eliza, studied Steiner’s works, which they found compelling. [7] In a letter to Eliza, Helmuth wrote that Steiner’s teachings struck a chord in him: “No other philosophizing author has so far been more comprehensible to me than he.” [8] Steiner returned von Moltke’s high regard, finding in him the reincarnated Pope Nicholas I. [9]

Steiner was a spiritualist, an advocate of love, and — in his own heretical fashion — a devotee of Jesus Christ, who advised turning the other cheek. Given all this, we might find Steiner’s association with a militarist perplexing. How can we account for it? Several plausible possibilities present themselves. • Steiner was a kind soul who wanted to spread goodness, comfort, and light wherever he could. • Steiner, as a religious leader, could not turn his back on any of his followers or potential converts. • The von Moltkes were aristocrats — Steiner saw benefits in their patronage. • Both Steiner and General von Moltke understood the need for cleansing, heroic combat. [10] • Both Steiner and von Moltke were German nationalists. • Both Steiner and von Moltke understood the sovereign importance of Germany’s “mission” in the world.

Some of these possibilities should give us pause. Let’s concentrate on the last. Steiner taught that Germany has a special mission of great significance for all of mankind. This mission has been aborted so far, but it will unfold in the future. In a letter to General von Moltke, Steiner wrote, “Excellency ... Through your suffering you are serving the great cause which the German people must serve now. One day, when what is the present now will be the past, those who want to understand will know for certain: that your thoughts and intentions as well as your suffering were part of the necessary seed from which the future mission of the German people will flower. The task which lies ahead of this people is so significant that it may only be accomplished through destiny’s solemn working.” [11] Moltke agreed that he acted and suffered in service to a great cause. Germany, he said, will play a pivotal role in humanity’s advancement, a role which must not be left uncompleted because a “spiritual progression of humanity is only possible through Germany.” [12]

Hearing Germans speak of their nation’s destined importance has scared a lot of people during the last few centuries. The French, for instance. And the Poles. And the Finns, the English, the Russians ... And Jews. And Christians. And blacks, browns, reds, yellows ... The solemn workings of destiny have caused all these people much hardship, at least some of it at the hands of militant Germans. We’ve discussed Steiner’s racism, previously, and also his elevation of German/Middle European “culture.” We needn’t return to those topics now. [13] But it is evident that we are here glimpsing a worrisome side of Steiner’s life and legacy.

Helmuth von Moltke the Younger, ~ 1912.

[German General Staff, public domain.]

II. THE WARLORD WHEN DEAD

After Helmuth von Moltke’s death, in 1916, Steiner “received” many communiqués from him. In turn, Steiner sent written accounts of these messages to Eliza von Moltke. [14] Interestingly, many of Helmuth’s post-death communications (as related by Steiner) affirm the truth of Steiner’s teachings: Individuals who pass through the “veil” to the spirit realm are able to see truths that Steiner managed to see while still on this side of death. Way to go, Rudolf. You’ve been right all along, as confirmed by deceased General von Moltke (according to yourself).

In the following message from the dead general, we learn that Germany stands in opposition to demonic forces: Bolshevik Russia (Lucifer) on one side, and materialistic America (Ahriman) on the other. We also learn what Steiner so often tried to teach us, that science and “modern thinking” are bunk: “Ahriman-America should not have the only voice; Lucifer-Bolshevism should not be allowed to do the only deed. However, as no one knows any different from what the stupefying and spirit-alienating institutions of ‘modern science’ have been teaching people, a real ‘enlightenment service’ is needed above all else. A lot would be gained if a number of people were to admit to themselves that they cannot but commit wrong actions in the world if they apply what they owe to ‘modern thinking’ and were to realize that a new way of thinking had to be adopted.” [15] I’m an American, so perhaps — bearing Ahriman in mind — you don’t want to take my word for it, but the new type of thinking von Moltke/Steiner recommends is, ultimately, clairvoyance; and on the road to that, it is “Imagination, Inspiration and Intuition.” [16] The “enlightenment service” von Moltke calls for (as related by Steiner) is Theosophy/Anthroposophy — we’ll see von Moltke explicitly endorse “spiritual science,” below. Concerning the nature of Ahrimanic people, we’ll get to that soon enough, too.

Although von Moltke became far more mystic and wise after his transition to the spirit realm, he continued to chew over the war that he helped implement. “How many people are saying now: Germany is to blame for this world war. To spiritual vision, which I am only able to apply now after the physical sheath [i.e., his physical body] has dropped away, the question is a very different one: could this catastrophe have been averted in the position into which my physical person had been placed by karma? ... The catastrophe could not be averted.” [17] So von Moltke and, by extension, Steiner are vindicated, according to von Moltke (as related by Steiner). “Karma,” which is a major component in Steiner’s doctrines, caused von Moltke to be Chief of the German General Staff, in which position he had no option but to order mobilization — Russia had begun mobilization, so Germany had to act. [18] We might note, however, that von Moltke did not send the great bulk of German forces against Russia, nor did he array all those forces in a defensive posture facing the Red menace. Instead, karma caused Helmuth to violate Belgium’s neutrality and invade France. Karma works in mysterious ways, sometimes.

Dead von Moltke affirmed Steiner’s belief system explicitly, including the need for vigorously deflecting the injurious influences of inferior races. The message I’m about to quote also includes discarnated Helmuth’s embrace of his past life as Pope Nicholas (Steiner was right about that, too): “The ‘Spirit of Peter’ was often before my ‘I’ in the ninth century ... If the Asian way of thinking had been victorious then, a great spiritual darkness would have descended on Europe ... ‘[S]he’ stood at my side and understood that European thought had to be strengthened vis-à-vis Asian thought. All this resulted in the build-up of forces with which we still had to grapple in our last earthly lives. Those people who were around me then succumbed to the powers of Ahriman because they had no real interest in the European spirit ... That is why spiritual science became a necessity for my soul; but then the ahrimanic people, with their intense hatred for everything spiritual, were again around me....” [19] The “I” is the third human nonphysical body, according to Steiner. “She” is Eliza, who has been with Helmuth a long, long time. [20] The “ahrimanic people” around von Moltke included his enemies as well as his insufficiently spiritual military advisers. “Spiritual science” is Steiner’s body of esoteric teachings. If everyone around von Moltke had been more spiritual — if they, like von Moltke, had found Steiner’s teachings “a necessity” for their souls — much misery would have been averted.

Von Moltke’s obsession with clearing himself of war guilt becomes tiresome, but this next message holds points of interest: “‘She’ brought to me during my earthly life the reality of the spiritual while I was forced to live, with many of my professional colleagues, in an earthly world of pictures [i.e., illusions]. One believed that one was accomplishing practical things together with [one’s] colleagues. In truth, one merely gave expression to illusory ahrimanic thoughts. For 14 years until 1914 the world was dominated by ahrimanic illusion; this paved the way for the luciferic period which began in 1914 and in which the feelings of human beings became entangled. This entanglement persists to the present day ... What is not yet totally confused in Europe is now confused by the Turks. The world needs the light which can spring from western civilization and Central European culture and spirituality.” [21] During his earthly life, von Moltke (aka “one”) was brought toward “the reality of the spiritual” by his wife, who discovered Steiner before he did. But unfortunately, Helmuth was partially caught up in “ahrimanic illusion,” and his “professional colleagues” (German military and political leaders) were even more “entangled.” Central Europeans can get entangled in illusion, but others such as the Turks are even more prone. The architects of mankind’s confusion and misery are the demons Ahriman, who created the conditions that led to war, and Lucifer, who presided over the war and its wretched aftermath. Blame these devils for what began during Helmuth’s watch, don’t blame Helmuth (said Helmuth, according to Steiner).

In assessing von Moltke’s after-death messages, we must realize that (according to Steiner) the world desperately needs the spiritualism that can arise only from Central European culture, once it becomes unentangled and demon-free. Germans, in particular, are destined to lead the world to the true, spiritual path. But before von Moltke’s time, during it, and even afterwards, Central Europeans failed to follow that path, and calamity ensued. Karma and devils were responsible, and so was Otto von Bismarck, who established the German Empire upon a faulty, non-spiritual basis. All the subsequent misfortunes of the German nation stem from Bismarck’s fundamental error. “Had the universal mission of the Central European Spirit failed? ... The German misfortune began with the foundation of the [German] empire which, as Rudolf Steiner says, lacked ‘a task which really emanated from the essential being of the German people.’” [22] The “essential being” of the German people is spiritually pure. Entangled, worldly Germans such as Bismarck and Wilhelm II chose impure methods in their efforts to spread German influence — an error Hitler would repeat. But according to von Moltke (as related by Steiner), one spiritually pure German offers the world Germany’s true gifts. Can you guess who this paragon is? It is Steiner himself, of course, with his enlightenment service, which is spiritual science.

We might have hoped that messages from eternity would amount to more than a dubious endorsement of Rudolf Steiner. Helmuth von Moltke opened a direct line of communication between the mortal realm and the great beyond, yet he had little to say about spiritual matters except what Steiner had already said many times. Frustrating. But so it goes.

Eliza von Moltke presumably took comfort from the letters Steiner sent to her, letters in which he relayed her husband’s convenient postmortem messages: “My dear Frau von Moltke: Helmuth assures me that he is well, and he wants me to say that everything I have taught you about the spiritual realm is quite correct.” Evidently she bought it. But what should we today make of this intriguing record? Steiner was usually unable to support his spiritualistic assertions — he generally offered only his own uncorroborated word as ratification. [23] But after Helmuth’s demise, Steiner had proof that his assertions were correct: “I see sights that are invisible and I hear sounds that are inaudible. No, really. I do. Cross my heart. What’s more, a dead German general backs me up.” This is powerful, powerful stuff. Very convincing.

And so it goes.

— Roger Rawlings

◊◊◊◊

Odin's sword — from a drawing

made by a Waldorf student

[courtesy of PLANS].

◊◊◊◊

ENDNOTES

[1] Barbara Tuchman, THE GUNS OF AUGUST (Ballantine Books, 1994), p. 78.

T. H. Meyer, a Steiner supporter, criticizes THE GUNS OF AUGUST for presenting a “biased picture” of von Moltke. [LIGHT FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM, p. xiii.] See endnote 3.]

World War I began in 1914 and ended late in 1918.

[2] THE GUNS OF AUGUST, pp. 81-82.

The basic German war plan had been established by von Moltke’s predecessor, Count Alfred von Schlieffen. By some accounts, von Moltke revised the Schlieffen Plan so much as to transform it, essentially, into the Moltke Plan. (See endnote 6.) Von Moltke’s emotional response to the Kaiser’s meddling shows his deep commitment to the plan. The Kaiser’s last-minute notion was to persuade Britain’s King George to remain out of the coming conflict: If George would agree, Wilhelm would cancel the invasion of Belgium and France, wheel his armies about, and send them against Russia. Tuchman describes von Moltke’s reaction thus: “Aghast at the thought of his marvelous machinery of mobilization wrenched into reverse, von Moltke refused point-blank.” [p. 78] For more on the beginning stages of World War I, see the Encyclopedia Britannica http://www.britannica.com/.

Note: Helmuth von Moltke should not be confused with his uncle (1800-1891), who bore the same name and was chief of the Prussian general staff. The first von Moltke, working in conjunction with Otto von Bismarck, directed the Prussian victory over France in 1870. It is not difficult — but perhaps unfruitful — to surmise how the younger von Moltke may have been both inspired and intimidated by his uncle’s accomplishments.

[3] T. H. Meyer, editor, LIGHT FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM: Rudolf Steiner’s association [sic] with Helmuth and Eliza von Moltke: Letters, Documents and After-Death Communications (Rudolf Steiner Press, 1997, introduction by T. H. Meyer, commentaries by Johannes Tautz and Jens Heisterkamp). According to Meyer, this English-language edition omits some materials found in the original German edition. By Meyer’s account, these excisions only focus the book more completely on esoteric matters. [p. vii]

The first letter reprinted in the book, from Rudolf Steiner to Eliza von Moltke, is dated August, 1904. Helmuth von Moltke became interested in Steiner’s work at approximately that time. Steiner broke from Theosophy to establish his own religion, later called Anthroposophy, in 1912. Thus, the early contacts between Steiner and the von Moltkes occurred while Steiner was still a Theosophist. Helmuth von Moltke died in 1916. Steiner (who claimed to have contacted many discarnated individuals [Ibid., p. xxvii]) maintained “contact” with von Moltke almost until the end of his own life in 1925.

[4] Germany did not start the war. At the end of June, 1914, Austria-Hungary declared war against Serbia in reprisal for the assassination of a Austro-Hungarian noble by a Serb. Innocent of these events, Germany and von Moltke bore great responsibility for subsequent developments. “Der Tag” had long been eagerly anticipated in Berlin, and the declaration of war by Austria-Hungary triggered that epochal day. On August 1, 1914, Germany declared war against Serbia’s ally, Russia. Simultaneously, the German army began mobilizing to attack France through Belgium. When German forces entered Belgium on the night of August 3-4, Britain — a guarantor of Belgian neutrality — declared war on Germany, as von Moltke and Wilhelm II anticipated. At this point, armed conflict between several major European powers had, on paper, begun. The paper war quickly became a shooting war, with Germany fighting on both the eastern and western fronts. (The Schlieffen/Moltke plan was to stage a holding action in the east, keeping Russia at bay, while securing victory in the west. Germany would then be free to turn its attention to Russia.) Other nations eventually entered the fray: Italy, the Ottoman Empire, Japan, Australia, the United States ... A Balkan conflict had metastasized into a world war, largely due to Germany’s actions.

After the reversals suffered by Germany at the First Battle of the Marne, in September of 1916, Helmuth von Moltke was cashiered as Chief of the General Staff. He was held responsible for a series of errors, including authorizing German forces on the east to stage their own attack against France instead of maintaining their planned defensive posture facing Russia. Von Moltke, thus, was responsible for two separate acts of aggression against France. [See the Encyclopedia Britannica, “Helmuth von Moltke,”

http://www.britannica.com.]

According to Steiner, the war was unavoidable: it was ordained by Europe's karma. Steiner said that Central Europe — especially Germany — stood between the powers of East and West. The position is analogous to Christ's, standing between the demons Lucifer and Ahriman. “In Central Europe we have been assigned the immensely important task of finding equilibrium between East and West." [Rudolf Steiner, “Christ in Relation to Lucifer and Ahriman” (Anthroposophic Press, 1978).] Germany had a messianic role to play in human evolution. (Steiner also said that Waldorf schools have, in effect, a messianic role related to Germany's and, specifically, Anthroposophy's purpose. For more on these matters, see my essays “Unenlightened” and “The Good Wars”.)

[5] Steiner often forecast the future — sometimes peering many millennia ahead. [See “Oriphiel,” “Evil,” “# 6,” etc., at this site.] In LIGHT FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM, we learn that, after his death, von Moltke told Steiner about the near-term future, including our own time. [p. xxx]“Many adversities are yet to pass. But the light at the end of the twentieth century shines brightly before my soul.” [p. xlii] Much of this light — which may not have arrived yet, despite von Moltke’s words (as relayed by Steiner) and Steiner’s vaunted clairvoyance — is to be supplied by Germany as it fulfills its mission.

[6] Assigning war guilt is always a complex matter. Meyer goes to some length in an effort to clear von Moltke: “Moltke is either unknown [today] or depicted in a very distorted way. One of the chief aims of the present publication, therefore, has to be to set the record straight.” [LIGHT FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM, p. xiii] “Moltke was certainly not interested in leading Germany into war....” [Ibid., p. xvii]

Perhaps von Moltke was reluctant, but he did lead Germany into war. Moreover, during the execution of the war, he made such statements as “Our advance in Belgium is certainly brutal, but we are fighting for our lives and all who get in the way must take the consequences.” [THE GUNS OF AUGUST, p. 74.] The consequences included, as a matter of policy, mass executions of civilians. “The turn of events in Belgium was a product of the German theory of terror. Clausewitz [the great German military theoretician] had prescribed terror as the proper method to shorten war....” [Ibid., p. 313] Tuchman describes the German advance: “Hewing to their schedule, harassed by the Belgians’ blowing up bridges and railroads, [the Germans] dealt out reprisals ruthlessly ... On the second day at [the town of] Tamines some 400 citizens were herded together under guard in front of the church in the main square and a firing squad began systematically shooting into the group. Those not dead when the firing ended were bayoneted.” [p. 314]

Von Moltke, a student of Clausewitz, was the chief enforcer of the German army’s all-important schedule. In THE LAMPS WENT OUT IN EUROPE (The World Publishing Company, 1966), Ludwig Reiners describes von Moltke as “an aristocratic, goodhearted person” who was both weak and sickly. [Ibid., p. 96] The Kaiser selected von Moltke to be chief of staff based on their boyhood friendship. [p. 96] As war approached, von Moltke grew nervous, “But all he could think to do about it was to have a talk with Rudolf Steiner.” [p. 97] Von Moltke actively directed the war effort, taking personal responsibility for many decisions. “Moltke telephoned [General] Ludendorff and informed him that he wanted to send several army corps ... Ludendorff was game enough to tell him he did not absolutely need this assistance ... Nevertheless, Moltke sent two corps....” [p. 177]

Retired Brigadier General S. L. A. Marshall (USAR) attributes heavy responsibility to both von Schlieffen and von Moltke. “Germany had long since endorsed an unconscionable war plan ... [S]chlieffen, planning to outflank France through Belgium, and Moltke, ordering that it be done, were bold and original only in their defiance of civilized opinion.” [S. L. A. Marshall, THE AMERICAN HERITAGE HISTORY OF WORLD WAR I (Dell Publishing, 1964), p. 63.] Marshall argues that von Moltke’s revisions to the Schlieffen Plan created “another strategic concept altogether.” [Ibid., p. 62] Marshall accuses von Moltke of malfeasance: “[H]e was doing the worst possible thing in the beginning by giving the ultimate provocation to the greatest possible number of Germany’s enemies. In the light of history, there is no possible explanation of von Moltke’s vagaries except lazy-mindedness, awe of the establishment that he was supposed to master, timidity about putting himself in opposition to political authority [primarily the Kaiser], and the desire for high honor through vainglorious timeserving.” [pp. 64-65]

Marshall’s assessment of von Moltke stands in striking contrast to Steiner’s — see endnote 9.

[7] Tuchman describes von Moltke as “a follower of Christian Science with a side interest in anthroposophism and other cults.” [THE GUNS OF AUGUST, p. 78.] For more about Christian Science, see "Choosing" on this Web site.

[8] LIGHT FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM, p. xvi — letter dated March 8, 1904.

[9] Ibid., p. xxvii.

LIGHT FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM presents von Moltke as a good fellow who wished for peace [p. xvii] and died “of a broken heart, as his wife put it” [p. xxvii]. After passing through the veil, von Moltke became “the heavenly individuality” mentioned on p. xl.

Steiner asserted that von Moltke bore no war guilt. Von Moltke was “a man who was obliged to do his military duty [emphasis by Steiner]. And who did so with a bleeding heart.” [p. 94] The Nuremberg tribunal, convened after World War II, established the principle that soldiers have a moral duty that transcends military duty. Perhaps Steiner did not clairvoyantly foresee this, or perhaps he didn’t agree with the tribunal — an odd stance for a highly spiritual moral guide to take. At Nuremberg, Admiral Karl Doenitz and General Alfred Jodl, among others, were convicted of war crimes. They had less authority in WW II than von Moltke wielded in WW I. By these standards, von Moltke was guilty and Steiner’s defense of him is erroneous.

Note that Steiner plays fast and loose with the facts. Von Moltke's heart did not bleed because of his “duty”to supervise the “calamitous invasion of Belgium,” as Steiner himself calls it [p. 94]. The central truth is that von Moltke's “military duty”did not come from his superior, the Kaiser (Steiner says that von Moltke told him that the Kaiser did not know of the plan to invade Belgium until just a few days before the invasion began [p. 95]). Von Moltke created his own duty by planning and then directing the invasion.

Let's look a bit further into the consequences of the invasion, turning our attention from von Moltke to Steiner. German aggression in World War I led to Germany’s defeat, the catastrophic Treaty of Versailles, the rise of Nazism, World War II, and the Holocaust. Arguably, Steiner contributed to these disasters not only by supporting von Moltke but by making antisemitic and racist statements, by asserting the superiority of Aryans, and by supporting the notion that Germany has a crucially important mission in the world, however that mission may be defined. [See my essays “Unenlightened”, “Steiner’s Racism”, and “Atlantis and the Aryans”.] There are two divergent ways to look at these matters. •Steiner was not clairvoyant, so he did not see what was coming, so he bears little or no guilt for what came. This is my position. As a rationalist, I do not claim that Steiner was directly responsible for actions taken by others years after his death. Steiner said some stupid and hateful things, but he did not know that Hitler would lead the world into its darkest nightmare. •The other possibility is that Steiner was clairvoyant, as he claimed, so he did see what was coming, so he is guilty. This is the position that Anthroposophists should logically be driven to, although few seem to grasp this. If he could to see the future, Steiner should have known where history was tending, and he should have made every effort to forestall the horrors of Nazism, instead of helping — even slightly — to pave the way for them. Failing to do so was, by Steiner’s own standards, a great sin.

Nicholas I “was the last pope who was still aware of the individual spirit and of the world of the hierarchies. And he was the last pope who, based on his true individual experience, justly acted as a spiritual authority....” [p. xxxix] Catholics may be surprised by Meyer’s assessment of all subsequent popes. Pope Nicholas I, also known as Saint Nicholas I, was pope from 858 to 867. [See http://www.britannica.com. For a discussion of hierarchies, see “Rankings,” at this site.]

[10] Steiner frequently spoke of the historical need for a cataclysmic War of All Against All. This conflict will be waged largely on the spiritual plane, but whether it will therefore be less terrible than ordinary wars is open to question. If the spiritual plane is more important than the physical, a war fought there would be more momentous — and perhaps more destructive — than any fought elsewhere. In LIGHT FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM, Steiner is quoted as saying that the German mission cannot be “based on the exercise of power [emphasis by Steiner] in the outer sense of the word.” [p. 96] Attempting to spread German influence by the sword (or submarine, or bomber) would thus appear to be illegitimate. The use of power in other senses, however, would seem to be okay. Steiner said that humanity can reach its next stage of evolution only through “a violent fight between white mankind and colored mankind in the most varied areas.” [Rudolf Steiner, DIE GEISTIGEN HINTERGRÜNDE DES ERSTEN WELTKRIEGES {The Spiritual Background of the First World War} (Rudolf Steiner Verlag, 1974), p. 38.] The prospect is horrifying, but according to Steiner the good must triumph over the evil (or the “white” over the “colored”) for evolution to proceed correctly. [For more about the War of All Against All, see “Oriphiel” and “Sixth,” at this site.]

[11] LIGHT FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM, pp. 145-146.

Steiner speaks of Germany’s “future mission” because, to date, the German mission has not been fulfilled. Here is Steiner concerning the establishment of a united Germany; he attributes part of the statement to von Moltke: “The German Reich was ‘placed in the context of world events without a substantial mission that justified its existence.’ This mission should not have been such that only military power could carry it out ... It could [i.e., should] only have been directed towards the inner [emphasis by Steiner] development of its culture ... A German Reich should have developed policies that disregarded the outer exercise of power. It should have developed the politics of true culture.” [Ibid., p. 96] Germans in the past failed to find their true mission, but Steiner can lead Germany to it (according to Steiner).

[12] Ibid., p. 105.

This statement comes from a manuscript von Moltke is said to have written for his wife’s eyes alone. According to Meyer, Steiner later convinced Eliza von Moltke to permit publication, and Steiner prepared a preface, but then German authorities intervened to prevent publication. [For Meyer’s account, see LIGHT FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM, pp. xx-xxii.] I will not contest the legitimacy of this document, although obvious questions leap to mind. Steiner gave the manuscript the title “The Question of War-‘Guilt’ — Reflections and Memories of the Chief of the General Staff H. v. Moltke about the events [sic] from July 1914 to November 1914.” Meyer refers to this projected pamphlet as “A Document that could have Changed World History” [sic]. “Steiner wanted the Germans to have clear ideas about the outbreak of the war ... He considered Moltke’s memoirs as ‘the most important document to be found in Germany about the outbreak of the war’ ... Germany’s political leadership had reached an absolute ‘nadir’.” [pp. xxi-xxii] The German people were not guilty, nor was the German military — it was the politicians. “[T]hose around the Kaiser were anxious to avoid exposing the whole world to the pathetic house of cards which German politics had become....” [p. xxii] Blaming politicians for almost everything was perhaps even more common in Germany than elsewhere. After the war, many Germans believed that their nation's defeat was caused by traitorous politicians and their associates: It was said that these “November criminals” engineered Germany's surrender, which occurred in November, 1918. Some office seekers, including Hitler, turned this belief to their own benefit.

Concerning national missions: According to Steiner and friends, Germany’s mission is extremely important, but other nations also have their own, lesser missions, which are tied to the evolutionary characteristics of their peoples. Von Moltke discussed national characteristics in these words: “The Latin peoples have already passed the zenith of their development ... The Slav people, primarily Russia, are still too far back in their culture ... England pursues only material aims.” [Ibid., pp. 104-105] A footnote in LIGHT FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM presents a classic Anthroposophical defense of such vile nonsense: “What is said here about nations must, of course, not be taken in terms of individual human beings who, in their essential being, are always above [sic] the element of nation.” [p. 298] Take this defense with salt. Granted, each true human soul is arguably transcendent. But in Steiner’s doctrines, racial and national classifications certainly apply to individual humans — otherwise, such classifications would be meaningless. If, for example, every individual Slav were “above” the national characteristics of the “Slav people” as a whole, then those characteristics would not exist except as null abstractions. In order for the characteristics of the Slav people as a whole to have any reality, individual Slavs must embody those characteristics, to greater or lesser degrees, some a bit “above” the median, some a bit below, but all clustered in and around the generality. (Please bear in mind that I am not presenting my own views here. I am discussing Steiner’s/Moltke’s views, which I consider appalling.)

According to Steiner, the German national mission or task does not arise from Germanic nationalism. Here is a description of Steiner addressing an English audience: “[S]peaking of the character and task of the German people, [Steiner] went on to say: 'The Germans are not really nationalistic'. This was met with evident surprise; the war [World War I] had not been long over. Dr. Steiner repeated his statement and proceeded to illustrate it with a story of the opening week of the Waldorf School [in Germany] ... the children, running up and down the corridors and in the playground, would keep singing, not any German Lied or folksong, but 'My Heart's in the Highlands'.” [George Adams, A MAN BEFORE OTHERS: Rudolf Steiner Remembered: “Rudolf Steiner in England”(Rudolf Steiner Press, 1993), p. 19.] I think Steiner proved his point, don’t you?

[13] See my essays “Steiner’s Racism”, “The Good Wars”, and “Rankings”.

[14] LIGHT FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM, p. 177ff.

[15] Ibid., p. 230.

Steiner often disparaged science. [See “Steiner’s ‘Science’” at this site.] Yet he claimed that his teachings constitute “spiritual science.”

“Enlightenment,” for Steiner, means the rejection of Enlightenment values. The Enlightenment — also called the Age of Reason — occurred in the 1600s-1700s. It placed emphasis on careful observation, logic, and respect for evidence. Steiner’s “enlightenment” is a spiritualistic concept: seeing the light of occult “truth.” [See “Unenlightened” at this site.]

Ahriman is a Zoroastrian devil.

[16] Ibid., p. viii. [See my essays “Thinking Cap” and “Steiner’s Illogic”.]

[17] Ibid., pp. 230-232.

[18] Ibid., p. 232.

[19] Ibid., pp. 273-274.

[20] Helmuth and Eliza are bound to one another by their joint destiny: “Only ‘she’ saved my inner being from this illusion [i.e., entanglement in “outer appearance”] by spiritual means. For this was our shared karma.” [Ibid., p. 232]

[21] Ibid., pp. 279-280.

[22] Ibid., p. 11.

Steiner’s words are from An das deutsche Volk und die Kulturwelt, March 1919.

[23] The primary “substantiation” Steiner offered aside from his own word was the concurrence of other, earlier spiritualists. Thus, he spoke of karma. Others had spoken of it previously. Ergo, what he said is true. The glaring flaw in this “reasoning” is that repeating an error does not convert the error into a truth.

Put the matter this way: Steiner often alluded to ancient myths, etc., as if they contain verifiable truth. He pointed out, for instance, that Mars had long been associated with war (e.g., Rudolf Steiner, LIFE BETWEEN DEATH AND REBIRTH (SteinerBooks, 1985), p. 207). Sure. People long ago looked up into the sky, saw a red “star,” and were reminded of bloody warfare. This association may or may not strike us as poetically evocative, but it conveys absolutely no real information about the fourth planet from the Sun. If you want to know about Mars, consult NASA, not ancient myths.

Relying on the “testimony” of the ancients often means relying on ignorance. Anthroposophy, like Theosophy, in an amalgam of ancient bits of ignorance. When ignorance is added to ignorance, the result is not knowledge. It is ignorance compounded.

◊◊◊◊

I asked Peter Staudenmaier if I could reprint here a list of sources he recommends

for further study of the Steiner - Moltke connection. He kindly agreed: