Several months after completing the first three parts of his memoir,

Grégoire Perra posted further reminiscences

[https://gregoireperra.wordpress.com/2012/10/02/ma-vie-chez-les-anthroposophes/].

This, then, is the continuation of his story:

Part 4 

A Broken Relationship

The story of my Anthroposophical life does not end with the trial I discussed previously. [147]  It continued until August, 2014, in a romantic relationship with a person who, like me, had become entangled in the Waldorf movement and Anthroposophy. I must now tell her history, which had been closely linked to mine in recent years, from 2011 to 2014. The end of this relationship marks the real end of my life in the world of Anthroposophy. If I have delayed discussing this, it is because of the impossibility of safely telling a story that is still in progress. Our parting in August, 2014, released me from the duty to be silent, allowing me to write down facts and thoughts about Waldorf schools and Anthroposophy that I consider highly important for an understanding of this movement. As long as we two were together, I was reticent. Even now, it is not easy for me to relate intimate facts that evoke the joy but also the pain that come into my life. If I could, I would gladly avoid this task. But I feel bound by a sense of duty that has led me to witness what I experienced and understood within the Anthroposophic community, as evidenced by the blog entries I have posted for several years now. [148] In order to protect individuals' privacy, I took care to change all the names and give no clues that would identify people who shared my life during this period. My aim is not in any way bring harm to them; quite the contrary, it is simply to continue my work of reflection, drawing on my unique personal experience.

I met Maria in February, 2005, when I began training at the Institute Rudolf Steiner Chatou. [149] At that time, she had been a Spanish teacher in a Waldorf school for about five years. She had been recruited when she decided to enroll her two children in the school. Indeed, this institution had come to understand that it could not restrict its students to the traditional and unchanging choice of English and German as first and second foreign languages, but it should also provide the opportunity to study Spanish. This change ran contrary to the school's secular tradition and it came despite the contempt Anthroposophic educationalists feel for the Spanish language and culture, because of their preference for Nordic languages. But even Anthroposophic teachers had come to understand that the evolution of our society made this change necessary. The school had contacted her in August, just weeks before the autumn term, while she was still at university and had not completed her PhD. She accepted their offer. Despite her reluctance and awareness of her unpreparedness, the insistence of the Waldorf faculty persuaded her. [150] In truth, she was never able to finish her PhD after this decision — the school gradually absorbed all her time and all her freedom. In accepting the Waldorf position, she was also influenced by her experiences under the South American refugee policy; she remembered suffering in the mainstream French school system, struggling to adapt after arriving in France. That early trauma helps explain why she fell so easily into the seductive Waldorf trap.

She would long remember her "job interview." The school's German teacher received her at his home. They had tea while his six-year-old daughter played around them without panties, exposing her naked derriere in front of a complete stranger. This was actually an early sign that should have alerted Maria and made her back off. The interview taking place in a teacher's private home, and that teacher's unconcern at letting a future colleague witness the behavior of his daughter, suggested how this school did not respect the normal rules separating the private sphere from the workplace. Moreover, this teacher of German had received Maria and interviewed her for the evident purpose of demonstrating that he would be her superior. For years afterward, in the same jealous spirit, he would continue to seek to subjugate her. Indeed, for Anthroposophic educationalists, German is the only truly noble language, the only one truly worthy of being taught. Latin languages, such as Spanish, are considered barbaric tongues. So this German teacher wanted to establish his superiority over his new colleague. The school had agreed to introduce the teaching of Spanish under pressure from parents and students, in a general context of the widespread disinclination among the French for learning German. The German teacher had taken the introduction of Spanish as a personal offense. He accepted it only reluctantly. In addition, having had that teacher myself when I was a student, I can testify that he was one of the worst teachers that can be conceived. Unable to control or guide the students, he was able to prevent students from dropping his courses only by lowering requirements and inflating the grades he gave out. By the last year of my studies, we did not even know the declensions, after twelve years of German! To him, then, the arrival of Spanish instruction represented a clear threat, reducing his sphere of control. This was aggravated by the fact that Maria quickly proved be a competent and motivated teacher who stimulated her students to make significant progress, combining requirements with the pleasure of learning the material.

—

I will skip ahead here a short distance.

Perra writes that Maria was married to an abusive and controlling man;

he suggests this may explain why Maria fell under the control of Anthroposophists:

"I believe that being trapped by a sectarian movement usually occurs 

only if the ground is well prepared. This was the case for Maria, 

who was accustomed to being tightly controlled in her personal life, 

which prepared her for control by the Anthroposophic community."

Maria's marital difficulties also help explain why she looked for a different partner. 

— R.R.

—

In this context, we can understand why she decided to take the plunge and start a relationship with another man, who happened to be me. Our relationship lasted only a few months. I soon became convinced that she would never leave her husband, and at that time I aspired to more than a clandestine relationship with a secret lover. Also about then I met someone else in the Anthroposophical community — the companion who would eventually testify against me at trial — and this made me prefer what appeared to be a clearer and more complete relationship. Maria and I were in touch again several times, but finally this all seemed to be over, despite our genuinely warm feelings. For about three years, from 2007 to 2010, I had no news of her.

It was only in April, 2010, that Maria again contacted me. During these three years, she had had a third child with her husband. The fact of pregnancy had given her the strength to hold him at a bay and then require him to leave the marital home. After that she lived in straitened conditions for more than two years, sleeping on a couch with her daughter. I believe this was the first time in her life Maria asserted her right to autonomy. She asserted herself first with her husband, and later she did so within the Anthroposophical context. We spoke soon after I gave my critical lecture, "The Anthroposophic Way, Animalizing the Life of Thought", at the headquarters of the Anthroposophical Society. I had begun distancing myself from the Waldorf movement, so now I was wary about growing close again with a Waldorf teacher. This was especially so because I knew that Maria belonged to the administrative circle of her school. We discussed this, and she said she was not aware of my lecture. But she said that even though she had put aside thoughts of me for three years, recently my image arose often in her mind. She explained that she, too, had distanced herself from Waldorf, because her colleagues had caused her tremendous suffering. She then described the practices of harassment and persecution that she said had been inflicted on her. Because of their revealing character, they deserve to be recounted in detail.

Bullying at Work

In 2007, she endured a sharp reduction in the income provided by her husband. She needed an additional source of income. Officially, she worked just eleven hours a week at the Waldorf school, for which she was poorly paid, although she also did many hours of volunteer work at the school. She worked not only on weekdays but also weekends. Through her mother, she found a Spanish position at a university. However, she was unaware that Waldorf faculties do not approve of their colleagues accepting outside positions. Indeed, they know that opening such a window to the outside world, even when this is motivated by financial considerations, carries the risk that the person will come in contact with another reality. A member of their team who experiences another professional and social reality may no longer be wholly under the Waldorf school's control. [151] Maria might make comparisons that would reflect badly on Waldorf. Therefore, according to what she told me, her colleagues began to pressure her, without openly stating that they wanted her to give up her outside job. In any event, I'm not sure that Waldorf faculties consciously understand why they act this way. Rather, I believe such behavior is the result of the sectarian conditioning in which everyone on a Waldorf faculty is caught. In a way, one could speak of it as a kind of group instinct.

That year, Maria was pregnant with her third child. Overworked due to her responsibilities (paid and volunteer) at the Waldorf school in addition to her work at the university, she entered a state of exhaustion leading to an emergency hospitalization. She might lose her child. However, her Waldorf colleagues took no pity on her. As it was the time of year for student assessments, they phoned several times a day to her hospital bed, where she was receiving transfusions, demanding that she tell them about this or that, or that she report her evaluations of her students. They went so far as to warn her in writing that she must fulfill her duties. Already weakened by her health problems, she was completely unnerved by this personal attack, which felt completely unjustified. She nearly suffered a complete collapse, except that her husband convinced her to reply to the letter she had received and challenge its charges. Which she did. She received no response to her own letter.

Why were they so hard on a pregnant woman lying in a state of exhaustion on a hospital bed? First, you must know that such inhumane behavior is quite common in Waldorf schools. As I have related in this story of my own life, Anthroposophy and the organizational arrangements in Anthroposophic schools necessarily produce cruel behavior. [152] Another part of the explanation lies in the fact that Maria had found herself, for some time, a member of school's "college of teachers." [153] This psychologically harmful action was probably meant to remove her from that post.

How had she found herself in the college of teachers? Following criticism of Waldorf schools and Anthroposophy in 2000 by the Parliamentary Inquiry Commission on Sects and Finances, and due to numerous subsequent inspections of the schools, defects in the confused organizational structure of these schools had come to light. Some inspectors even descried the medieval customs in the schools. The Federation of Waldorf Schools therefore had to fall in line. This is why some schools embarked on a process called "Road to Quality" which ostensibly created a more transparent internal organization. This "process," initiated by Anthroposophists, and directed by the Anthroposophical headquarters in Switzerland, looks very inadequate when scrutinized objectively. But it was a giant leap for these schools, which were still functioning for the most part in accordance with Rudolf Steiner's ninety-year-old guidelines. That is to say, they consulted only their own inner compasses, accepting only the guidance of diehard Anthroposophists, mostly members of the School of Spiritual Science who took orders from the Goetheanum. [154] The "Road to Quality" provided the opportunity for all Waldorf teachers to apply for membership in the management team through a process of free elections. It was revolutionary! Normally, neither Waldorf schools nor the Anthroposophical Society would risk losing control this way. But French authorities were monitoring the schools at that time, and the Federation's attempts at public rehabilitation necessarily involved accepting, at least apparently, this process of democratization. And it worked — Waldorf schools obtained the expected benefit. That's what allowed some of them to obtain teaching certificates for many of their teachers following a single inspection visit, bypassing normal regulatory procedures.

This democratic transformation was necessary if Waldorf schools wished to appear to meet National Education requirements. But the schools hoped to be able to get away with a simple change of façade, designed to deceive, while in reality the same people would remain in control. But Maria was naive enough to believe in the authenticity of this change and she was stood for election, despite warnings from some of her colleagues. The school director [155] said openly that "she made too much of it" and she would do better to step aside. In plain language, this amounted to a final warning. But Maria did not understand it and persisted.

So she entered the management circle of her school. However, she soon realized that her presence would remain purely formal. First of all, she was required to take a solemn oath before God to never repeat to her colleagues, or her family, or their relatives, or anyone else, anything that was said within this circle. Then for a year she attended meetings but had no right to open her mouth. When she asked that at least the minutes of the meetings be written in a way that would make them easier to understand and follow, she was told contemptuously that there was no time for that. When she sometimes ventured to intervene, her remarks were instantly swept aside. In short, within an administrative structure that was tantamount to an occult brotherhood, everything was done to make her understand that she was out of place and she should leave because Anthroposophical matters should be handled by Anthroposophists. As Maria did not understand this message, extreme measures had to be taken. And it worked, because after her hospitalization, which was followed by a maternity leave, she resigned from the management circle.

An Anthroposophic Conversion 

through Behavior Changes

We might now inquire into Maria's views on Anthroposophy. How, indeed, she was able to enter and work in this school without fully being an Anthroposophist? One might think this shows that Waldorf schools are not really sectarian, while the truth is precisely the opposite. Indeed, one characteristic of this cult is that they do not attempt to directly impose their doctrines on people; instead, they work to gradually alter people's behavior and psyches. When I myself was still an Anthroposophist, I often asked Maria the following question:

- Maria, what are your views.

- I'm an atheist, she replied. But I agree that there are forces in nature.

- So you do not believe in angels, reincarnation, Christ, and the rest? I asked in return.

- Not at all!

- But how can you work in a school that is based on Anthroposophy without believing in all this? How can you recite the "Morning Verses" with students, or mantras at the beginning of each faculty meeting, without believing in what is written there?

- I do not know, I have not really thought about it. For me, these are just opening texts. I was proud when I read Steiner's "Foundation Stone Meditation" in front of all the parents and teachers at the celebration of the school's fiftieth anniversary. But it is true that the explanations I was provided regarding this text never allowed me to really understand it. Anyway, every time you sent me to the school's leaders to ask for explanations of Steiner texts, I was never really informed about their meaning.

One could certainly blame Maria for thoughtlessness. Maria was quite capable of thinking for herself, but in these matters she was intellectually lazy, unreflectingly accepting the beliefs of her parents and colleagues without formulating clear positions of her own. Thus, she never sought to conscientiously come to terms with Anthroposophy, even though this was the doctrinal basis of the school that employed her. But, these days, how many people really strive to be consistent in doctrinal matters? Moreover, we must understand that this is how Anthroposophists often work. They usually do not seek to impose a complete set of beliefs on those they capture in their web. Indeed, it is very rare that they themselves know Anthroposophical doctrine in its entirety. I do not think even Steiner himself truly cared about achieving deep coherence in his esoteric teachings. Jose Dupré, in his book ANTHROPOSOPHY AND LIBERTY, showed the complete intellectual corruption in the founder of Anthroposophy, extending back to 1900. Steiner's main objective was to create a social movement. Clearly, what Anthroposophists want is not so much for you to share their ideas, but to lure you into their environment so that you become like them and share their lifestyle. Their underlying aim is the alteration and subjugation of individuals, not the transmission of a belief system that in reality was never coherent nor very clear. This is the reason that in ten years, Maria was never forced to directly confront a doctrinal clash between her atheistic ideas and the beliefs of Anthroposophists. In fact, Anthroposophists often go out of their way to avoid such a confrontation. They are deliberately very vague, carefully gauging the impact of their statements on others. They advance their ideas and especially their practices in small steps, working to convert each individual insidiously, without her noticing. They rarely speak directly to the conscience of others; on the contrary, this is what they avoid.

Maria was influenced in this manner. Gradually, she adopted a vegetarian diet and imposed it on her family. She adopted some of Rudolf Steiner mantras, and — following the recommendations of the children's teachers — she began to recite these to her children at night before sleep. She became interested in eurythmy. She accepted the school's Anthroposophic doctor as her personal physician. Sometimes she spent her holidays at the Goetheanum. And so forth. She never would have called herself an Anthroposophist, but she began to adopt the behavior of Anthroposophists — with the exception of her wardrobe, which retained a certain elegance, sparking resentment among her colleagues.

Of Suffering Children

Maria then told me about serious problems that, she said, her children experienced in relation to their schooling. While telling me these things, she in no way questioned, at that time, the merits of Waldorf pedagogy, which she considered the best in the world and the only one acceptable for her offspring. But she indicted the teaching staff of the school.

The first problem concerned her son Gaëtan. Because he was of mixed race [Maria's husband was black], Gaëtan had begun to be subjected to openly racist taunts from his kindergarten classmates. He was told that he had "skin the color of poo," and other nefarious statements of that kind. Alarmed, Maria had spoken to the aides and the teacher of her son's class. But they always temporized, saying that it was no big deal, that children do not really mean what they say, and such talk does not have lasting effects. Three years passed thus; Gaëtan progressed from the "first class" to "third class" without any appropriate response from the teaching team. But at the insistence of Maria, who saw that her son was daily suffering a real martyrdom, the teacher finally deigned to tell the children in her class a story presented as a fairy tale, in which the prince was a black-skinned child. You should know, in fact — as I learned during my training at the Institute Rudolf Steiner — Waldorf faculties refuse to directly intervene with children in matters of morality. [156] Instead, we tell the children fables, or stories invented by the teachers, depending on the circumstances. These indirectly suggest changed behavior for the children. Needless to say, this little story of a black prince had not the slightest effect on Gaëtan's classmates, and the racism directed against him continued unabated. But the teachers continued to stand aside, so the abusive situation, treated as normal, continued. When Maria and I discussed the reasons for the teachers' inaction, I knew that it was partially related to the racism found in Anthroposophic doctrines. For my part, I believe that if the Anthroposophic teachers at this school had truly been disturbed by the racism of their students, directed at a child in their care, they would not have tolerated it for one minute. Instead, they allowed it to continue for years. Silence is a form of consent. (Drawing from the doctrines of the Theosophist Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, Anthroposophy teaches that there is an evolutionary path extending from the colored races upward to the white Aryan race). [157]

But another factor must be considered if we are to understand how such a situation could persist. Gaëtan was certainly a very intelligent young child and especially insightful. I even think he would have been directed towards a school for the gifted, if the appropriate examinations had been administered. That's why he realized very quickly that something was seriously wrong in the Waldorf school his parents had put him in. From the age of seven, he begged his mother to remove him:

- Mom, these people are crazy! Get me out of there, mom! If I do not go to a different school next year, I am running away!

But his mother flatly refused, deaf to the entreaties of her son, convinced that Waldorf "education" was the best in the world. Yet the Waldorf teachers were quick to realize that Gaëtan, in his child's heart, recognized the sectarian nature of their institution. And to them this was unbearable. They contrived various ways to subdue him, multiplying the bullying he endured, and trying to implant a guilt complex. Indeed, when Anthroposophists realize that a person in their orbit begins to realize that they are a cult, they try to convince that person that s/he is in fact it is crazy, as I describe in my article entitled Rapports à soi-même et rapports aux autres dans le milieu anthroposophique. To my certain knowledge, they sometimes practice this method on children in their charge in the Waldorf schools. Maria and Gaëtan were reproached for certain weaknesses in his personality — this was done with great finesse that was not wholly devoid of accuracy, in order to persuade them that the problems lay with Gaëtan and not the school. The message was that it was he who had gone astray, not the Anthroposophists who were responsible for his education! The best example of this process, of which Maria kept a written record, was a poem written by his teacher when he was in the "third class." Waldorf classroom teachers stay with the same group of children for six to eight years, and at one stage they must write a short poem for each student under their care. This poem is supposed to express something of each child's innermost nature. [158] The poem offered to Gaëtan described a lion that ran freely on the savannah but that eventually agreed to be tamed. The intelligent child immediately understood what was being suggested. He forcefully rejected this attempt to tame his rebellious nature and make him submit.

—

I will skip ahead here a short distance.

Perra says that Gaëtan's inclination to reject authority 

— which was in part a response to his father's imperiousness —

 was only aggravated by his Waldorf experiences.

- R.R.

—

Maria also told me about her concerns for her daughter, Constance. She noticed that her daughter had become a dreamer — unworldly,  gullible — to a worrisome extent. When she expressed this concern to Constance's kindergarten teacher, she was rebuffed:

- But that's normal! [the teacher said]. It is wrong to make children rational too soon! And Constance is a soul so pure, so pure! She is extraordinary!

Of course, parental pride is strongly stimulated by such statements, which tend to lull vigilance to sleep. But after several years, finding no change, Maria became worried to a degree that could not be so easily assuaged.

- I'll watch her in class and carefully monitor her work! replied the class teacher. Soon thereafter, the teacher reported that her investigations had found no abnormality.

- But it is not normal, the indignant mother finally insisted. If I tell Constance that there is a woolly mammoth in the yard, she runs to the window to see! She has no sound judgment. She doesn't understand the metaphorical! She is phenomenally gullible for her age! When I ask what she has learned in class, she does not remember anything. She just says she listened to a story, but she is unable to remember it. She does not know anything about her own body! She is ignorant of her own gender!

Each time, the teacher sought to soothe Maria's concerns with flattering and affable words. But resolving to look into the teacher's conduct, Maria finally realized that this teacher did not try to help the students to progress, but she spent most of her time telling the students stories, myths, and legends. You should see how they drink in my words, the teacher proudly stated in staff gatherings. This teacher's approach to her students was to constantly plunge the students into imaginary worlds, sparking a dazed state of mind that she greatly enjoyed witnessing. [159] I even believe that her enjoyment was partially sexual. She saw little of her husband, who was mostly absent on business trips. Something similar is true for many Waldorf teachers: They are women whose husbands supply all their material needs, and they look to their teaching careers to give meaning to their otherwise idle existences, receiving certain psychological satisfactions that they do not attain through normal channels. One could almost speak — if the term was not likely to be misinterpreted — of "psychic pedophiles." Thus, for this teacher, entering into communion with her students by telling them stories that transported them all to the same fantasy universe was effectively a way to "make love" to them. When she spoke of her relationship with her students, she used a vocabulary more appropriate to romance than to the field of education.

Maria described another interesting episode to me. When the teacher wrote a poem for Constance, she also gave the child a postcard depicting a young lady, blonde with blue eyes, lying in the grass. Maria had talked to the teacher about this gift, saying that considering the difficulties Constance confronted due to her mixed racial heritage, the self-image suggested by such a picture was inappropriate. But you do not understand! the teacher replied. This is a representation of her soul, not her body! she added. Her soul is blonde with blue eyes? asked Maria, taken aback.

When I knew Constance, the marks of her suffering were plain. She was then a child who spoke very little. She watched the world through the eyes of someone who might have come from another planet. She was intimidated by everything. Her capacity for analysis and reflection was surprisingly limited for her age. She was disconnected from her own body. However, things began to improve substantially when she transferred to a public school and received the benefit of instruction that called upon her powers of reasoning. Because she was younger than her brother, the damage was probably less deep and not, in my opinion, irreversible. [160]

We may wonder why Maria did not listen to her children or know how to protect them, when all the signs indicated that the Waldorf school was hurting them deeply. She had wanted to be proud of the educational choices she had made, so she was shut her ears to the misery expressed by her son and denied the legitimate concerns she should have had for her daughter. An individual who has not truly questioned the ethical issues in her own life cannot really recognize her situation. So she is unable to truly know or protect herself or her family. I do not write these words to cast stones at a victim, but to try to understand how a normal person, who has not adopted esoteric beliefs, may still be captured by Anthroposophy to the extent of allowing the flesh of her flesh to suffer appalling consequences.

Return to Work and Harassment

So we readily understand why, at the end of her maternity leave, Maria hesitated for some time before returning to her post at the school. Paradoxically, however, she returned for her children's sake. Waldorf teachers receive a substantial tuition discount at their schools. Considering how high the tuition is otherwise, this is a strong incentive. I knew many Waldorf teachers who remained at their schools, despite all they suffered there, because they were financially unable to enroll their children elsewhere without great sacrifices. Maria made this calculation. To keep her children in the Waldorf system, she had to return to her teaching.

Yet her reluctance was not based solely on what she had observed in her children. She felt more and more doubts about her own work in the Waldorf system. Hence, she refused to participate with her colleagues in the "educational exhibitions" that were staged during "festivals" or "open houses." She was more and more uneasy about these. She was beginning to understand that giving visitors the usual spiel about the benefits of Steiner-Waldorf schooling, when she knew the real inside story, meant simply lying to them. She no longer wanted to participate in this game of enticement. Having briefly left and then returned, she felt uncomfortable in this role that she had accepted for years.

Upon her return, she told me, her colleagues resumed their obnoxious behavior toward her. First of all, they made her understand immediately that she could no longer serve on the governing board, although her term had not expired. They began to ridicule her South American origins. They took no action when her car was vandalized in the school yard by a student who happened to be, coincidentally, the son of a teacher. She was given temporary assignments that were systematically the reverse of her expressed wishes, forcing her to remain at school for many hours when she should have been off-duty. Although she was known to be allergic to gluten, special dishes were prepared for her with extra gluten, so that she often had to sit through long faculty meetings with an empty stomach. [161]

One day she was summoned before the school's college of teachers. The person who transmitted the summons acted most affably, saying the group simply wanted to bring her up to date in a friendly spirit. But Maria sniffed a trap and asked a parent of a student to accompany her, as was her right. He was a member of the board of directors. [162]. But he proved to be craven. When the college of teachers heard of his coming, they immediately called to tell him his appearance was inappropriate. He obeyed and abandoned Maria, who to her surprise found herself alone on the day of the appointment. It was probably one of the worst moments of her life. She still became tearful, three years later, when she told me about it. After some polite introductory remarks, one of the college members began making sharp criticisms of Maria's teaching and personality. His criticisms were soon echoed by others, voiced by all the members present in the chamber. Very intimate aspects of her psychology were dissected, as Anthroposophists know how to do, probing and hurtful. It was a rampage of aggressive thrusts! The more Maria wept, the more they pressed their advantage, like predators who have brought their prey to ground. Some of the fiercest attackers, Maria told me, were individuals who had been subjected to the same process before they became members of the college. Now they vented their pain on Maria, who had never done anything to them. The chairperson, who was supposed to be a ensure civility in the meeting, watched the process with sad eyes but did not intervene at any point to end it, knowing what the consequences would be for herself if she did so. When Maria, unable to bear more, wanted to get up and leave, she saw that she had been seated in a part of the room where her colleagues physically blocked her access to the exit. So the damaging procedure continued, as she wept and begged them to stop. [163]

What are the reasons for such behavior as these Waldorf teachers directed toward Maria? I think I can explain. Meetings like this one, held by the college of teachers, are a kind of tradition in Waldorf schools. It is also common, to my certain knowledge, for such meetings to take this kind of dramatic turn. What is the conscious objective? Not necessarily to break a person in order to subjugate her. In the minds of the leaders, the purpose of having colleagues delve into the profound aspects of an individual's character is to help that person to gain self-knowledge and thus encourage her to improve. It is meant to be a kind of psychological, behavioral, and spiritual counseling. A Waldorf faculty is conceived to be a community in the true sense of the term, that is to say, a group of men and women living together and sharing a common dynamic of personal development. Each member monitors the qualities and defects of the others to help them improve. The idea, superficially attractive, is that the psychological and moral progress of each member will help the institution as a whole. Thus, it frequently happens that the college of teachers confidentially discusses the deep characteristics of a particular member of the faculty, sometimes penetrating with some accuracy into the faults or basic psychological tendencies of these teachers. Do not forget that Anthroposophists believe they possess clairvoyant perception that gives them great insight into people. And in fact their observations sometimes do not lack finesse or relevance. On the other hand, these sessions are mostly devoid of any kindness. In Maria's case, I think the faculty in her school had surely taken a dislike to personality traits that they considered problematic. It is therefore very likely that the college of teachers wanted to force Maria to face what they deemed to be her faults, and even to do this violently, hoping she would come to her senses and reform. Metaphorically, we could compare this to surgery without anesthesia, meant to excise an abscess in Maria's soul. To these conscious motives, I would add an unconscious desire to subdue someone who certainly spoke too freely on occasion and disrupted the prescribed etiquette at meetings. Here we touch upon a fundamental problem in the organizational processes of Waldorf schools. By looking upon themselves as communities where each individual's personal development is everyone's business — or at least the business of the management — Waldorf schools fail to distinguish between the professional sphere and the private sphere. They also confuse the discipline of occult initiation with ordinary professional discipline. [164] The leaders of these institutions consider themselves the "spiritual guides" and "spiritual masters" of the staff. Therefore, they believe they have a right to intervene aggressively in the private concerns of the staff members, which often leads to situations of abuse and even illegal harassment. If you think about it, you will see that the phenomenon is quite similar to the process that gave birth to the Holy Inquisition in the Middle Ages. The Church as a public authority believed it had the right to invade the private consciences of its adherents, seeking to save their souls, which led to torturing people who were considered witches. Similarly, Waldorf schools imagine they have the right to intervene in the moral and psychological development of their employees, which leads to inexcusable harassment in the workplace. Importantly, this shows one of the deeply regressive aspects of Anthroposophy and Waldorf schools: their organizational rejection of modernity. At an individual level, it is very difficult to accept that we cannot change our fellow human beings or even make them recognize problematic aspects of themselves, if they do not agree to this and have not already begun the process of self-correction. But at the institutional level, trying to force people to change can give rise to absolutely abominable behavior. Whatever Maria's faults may have been, no members of the school administration had the right, either professional or moral, to treat her as they did.

Our Reunion in 2010

It was after having enduring such hardships that Maria made contact with me in May, 2010. But, at that time, she still did not question Steiner-Waldorf education itself. When she heard my views along those lines [165], she retorted that my criticisms might well apply to the school where I had worked and from which I had departed three years earlier, but they did not apply to all Waldorf schools or even to her own school. Despite everything she had experienced, she did not yet understand that Anthroposophy was the cause of the abuse she had suffered. Because of her affection for me, she did not press her views forcefully enough for us to quarrel. But I could see, in the small smile lines that appeared in the corners of her eyes when I spoke, that she absolutely did not agree with my analyses. And I did not try hard to convince her. At the time, for my part, our relationship was casual. I did not want to build a life with Maria. There was no way I wanted to have a serious relationship with a Waldorf teacher so soon after I had come to see the cult for what it is. I told her this openly. She pretended to accept and understand, thus preserving our ties to one another. Moreover, I had other, similar relationships at the time. Still, I had to constantly fight against the attraction I felt for her, since we had a physical and mental affinity that I had not found with anyone else.

The meetings we contrived in the mornings or afternoons were bright stolen moments in her schedule, allowing me to help a little in her difficult life. I urged her to seek psychological counseling despite her reluctance (stemming from Anthroposophic doctrine) [166], and I suggested that she begin divorce proceedings. I was well aware that she, too, pursued other relationships outside of our episodic encounters, but this did not bother me.

She also told me about my Anthroposophic ex-girlfriend, who for some time had frequented Maria's school, and whom Maria met during teacher training. Maria said my ex-girlfriend was spreading tales about me in order to represent herself as my victim. She evidently hoped to please the school's leaders, so that they might offer her an attractive position at the end of her training.

In September, 2010, I communicated with UNADFI, and my plan to write an article about the Waldorf education was born. [167] I had enough faith in Maria to tell her of this. Doubtless unaware of what this might mean for her school, she offered to help me by giving me all the notes she had taken during her training at the Institute Rudolf Steiner, so that I could compare them to mine. [168] As she told me about her life, I became aware of many problematic things going on in her school, some of which were shameful. However, at that time — November, 2010, to May, 2011 — we had a long break in our relationship. In fact, I had just met a woman with whom I wanted to try to build a significant relationship, which however failed. By chance, this woman played a decisive role in the creation my first blog on WordPress. [169] She was indeed responsible for my decision to take an online course offered by the IT department of a large Parisian university. Without it, without meeting this woman, all the subsequent work I have done on the Internet, publishing articles critical of Anthroposophy and Waldorf schools, would probably never have happened. If Anthroposophists really believe in the concept of karma, this should give them plenty to mull over.

I next saw Maria in May 2011. I had to undergo a major surgery that included the risk of serious complications. This gave me a lot of time to write. My article was then in progress. Maria read a few portions, but they did not seem to particularly affect her. When the article was posted on the internet, July 8, 2011, she was the first person I notified, and she rushed to read it. She called me three days later, very moved. She told me she had not slept for three days and had finally understood. She realized that her children and she herself had for years been in a cult. She resolved to get her children out. Deeply troubled, she still thought she could still work one more year at the school, before resigning, to have time to find another job. But the future was not so kind. In fact, I do not think it is possible to escape the claws of Anthroposophists unharmed. They find it necessary to tear! And to strike at those you love! They do not allow anyone to leave peacefully. And it was thus for Maria.

Their Cruel Claws

Early in July, 2011, Maria asked the school secretary to arrange the transfer of her children to public schools. The transfer of her son to the Sport-Etudes had long been planned, but not the transfer of her daughter. The secretary pretended to comply but did nothing, not sending out the paperwork. Thus, as I know, Steiner-Waldorf officials contrive for some students to remain a few more years in their schools, despite the desire of their parents to get them out. Sometimes secretaries say that files were sent but somehow got lost. Since it is then too late, since most places in the public schools are filled early in the year, parents resign themselves and blame the system, not the Waldorf secretaries who brazenly lied. Maria fortunately followed the situation closely and when she realized the problem, she busied herself with administrative procedures that would force the secretary to act. She took her children's records and carried them herself to the neighborhood schools, and thus she managed to get what she wanted. Her children were saved!

But for her, it was the beginning of serious trouble. [170] Immediately, Constance's class teacher came to demand explanations:

- Why are you taking Constance from the school? she sobbed. How can you do this to me? Is it because of your husband? Is he forcing you? How can you take my Constance from me?! And so on.

More in the same vein poured forth, clearly showing that this class teacher felt that the child belonged to her more than to her mother. [171] She wept with sorrow and rage throughout a meeting that lasted a half hour. But Maria stood firm and gave no explanation other than citing family and personal considerations that needed no justification. Indeed, I had advised Maria that if she tried to explain herself to the school, even in a watered-down way, the harassment from Anthroposophists would only increase. If that happened, things would become dangerous for her. The wall of silence that Maria erected provided some protection, and it sealed off the the apparent hatred of her daughter's teacher. The teacher kept arguing, and then she went to complain to the "college of the small classes" [172], which immediately decided to use further means to force Maria to confess the reasons for removing her children from the school. They spoke openly of Maria's "insult to the school." The last words ["incivilité envers l’école"] were explicitly noted in the minutes of the college's meeting. Maria was able to read and photocopy the minutes discreetly. So she was knew that the school would take additional measures to force her to talk. I urged her to be extra careful.

The school attempted to be more subtle, a task undertaken by no less than the school director. She came to see Maria at the end of a mealtime, professing that she wanted to discuss vacations, the rain, and weather. Maria was amused. This person had an exalted regard for herself, always maintaining a busy schedule to demonstrate her importance. It was implausible that she would it take time to chitchat with one of her colleagues. Whatever she did, it was always with a goal that she considered momentous. Maria therefore immediately understood that behind her charming smile and engaging tone of voice, the director was actually on duty. So Maria cleverly kept the discussion on the same level for over forty minutes, discoursing on the vagaries of holiday rain and weather, while the director slowly became incensed. Eventually the director could no longer contain herself, but directly asked the question that had been her mission all along: the reasons Maria was removing her children from the school. But Maria responded as she had with Constance's class teacher, saying nothing except that the start of a new school year was a good time to make the transfer.

I recount this episode in detail not only because it shows the practices of the Waldorf schools, but also in order to help parents to know how to proceed if they find themselves in a similar situation —- that is to say, removing their children from an institution that they have realized is part of a cult. Under no circumstances allow yourself to be dragged into fruitless arguments with them. You do need to justify yourself to the school. Your children are your children! If you want to send your children to a different school, you do not have to answer to anyone. If you start debating with Anthroposophical teachers, they will drag you into an unending confrontation, using every possible tactic to turn you around. They will employ all the arts of persuasion, stopping at nothing, even resorting to magical ceremonies meant to undermine your resolve. [173] The efficacy of such ceremonies is not the question: What matters is the state of mind and the intentions that lie behind them. Waldorf teachers will try to manipulate you through the use of magic because they believe in such things. Advising teachers of the first Waldorf School, Rudolf Steiner told how they could prevail in difficult confrontations by using certain intonations of voice and by accentuating certain phrases. I well know that such practices, aimed at manipulation of the subconscious, are used in cases like the one we are discussing here, namely when doubting parents want to remove their children. That is why you should refuse to let one or more Anthroposophists corner you for long inquisitions, even if you must walk out in the middle of such a "conversation." You must preserve your free will and the integrity of your soul! [174]

—

I will skip ahead here to Part 5 of Perra's memoir. 

- R.R.

—

Part 5 

Facing Trial with Maria

Maria stood alongside me when I underwent the trial instituted by the Federation of Steiner-Waldorf Schools. Despite the ending of our relationship, nothing can tarnish this fact or my recognition of it. Indeed, it was probably crucial that I did not have to suffer this ordeal alone. Maria managed to play an active and positive role. Without her, I do not know if I would have had the strength to hold up or to overcome some of the challenges that awaited me. Similarly, I believe that our love was key to the aid Maria derived from me in dealing with the school that employed her and that her children attended. Without my help, I doubt that she would have succeeded. The difficulty may have been too great for her to overcome otherwise, despite the insights that came from reading my article. Maria was still not accustomed to forming her own views or managing her life independently. And she was unsure that she would ever have had that strength. Only her faith in me enabled her to follow my advice, allowing her to take the necessary steps to remove her children from the Waldorf school and then to initiate proceedings with aa lawyer, which led to her departure. If destiny guides human beings, I think it does so in such ways and for such reasons as were shown in our relationship and our separation. Indeed, the deep meaning of our union was surely the support we each received at this crucial moment of our lives, facing similar dangers and a common enemy. Looking back, it seems logical to me that our relationship could not last: Our shared past in a distracting sect united us initially, but then we could only move away from one another as we each strove to make new lives for ourselves, an effort that called for normality. We very likely would not have become a couple, except that we were able to help and love each other as we crossed a huge and significant milestone. Nothing can erase that. And if there is uncertainty about the effects we had on each other, the benefits Maria bestowed on her children are clear.

Firsthand Information

The publication of my article occurred in July, 2011. On September 1, 2011, Maria contacted me to say that the college of teachers at the school where she worked was discussing a reply titled "Grégoire Perra's Article: The Point of View of the Federation." The same night, she phoned to give me a detailed account. She was absolutely stunned that the President of the Federation of Steiner-Waldorf Schools had, at the meeting, defended my article against the complaints of the attending teachers, saying that much of what I had written was true. She added however that the Federation would probably be obliged to attack my my article as defamation, to counter the effects it could produce in public opinion. Counsel for the Federation had indeed concluded that the existence of this article on the Internet could prove ruinous for the Steiner-Waldorf schools in the long term. She told me that it was said at the meeting that the Federation's strategy was to dismiss my work as unimportant. The plan was to publicly characterize my article as a "tirade" and to depict me as a drunken lunatic bent on revenge. But if my article attracted a great deal of publicity in the press, the Federation would change its approach, activating its networks to obtain testimonials in favour of Waldorf schooling. Still, at that meeting, the President said that internally Waldorf teachers should not reject my words as a tirade, because the article expressed my considered opinions, and that schools should take seriously what was written in order to improve their modes of operation. According to Maria, this aroused the indignation of the hard-core Waldorf teachers at the meeting. Maria also told me of an internal communication addressed to Steiner-Waldorf teachers, signed by the Secretary General of the Federation, supporting the position advocated by the President. He clearly stated that the article b Grégoire Perra posed important questions, that I was not the first to raise such questions, and the schools should think hard to gain the benefits of my action. Moreover, this communication states that my article was very well written, which made me smile when I heard this.

—

Perra returns to the story of his trial,

revealing that Maria was an important behind-the-scenes ally.

The mystery figure who appeared in Perra's previous account of the trial 

— the shadowy figure who assisted Perra from inside the Waldorf universe — 

was in fact Maria.

I will not attempt to translate Part 5 of Perra's memoir in its entirety.

Instead, I will present some key excerpts.

To read about the trial as Perra described it previously,

see "My Life Among the Anthroposophists, Part 3".

—

[Maria told me that] the teachers discussed another aspect of my article, describing the practices of concealment and cheating during inspections [by state education officials]. "What shall we do if his statements fall into the hands of the inspectors, or come to the knowledge of a relevant department of Education Ministry?" one assistant wondered. "We do this [i.e., mislead the inspectors] all the time!" remarked a teacher. [175] Then another class teacher, who had just arrived at the school after teaching for several years at another Waldorf school, took the floor and said, "As for me, I'm very uncomfortable! You remember that for a few months, in history and geography classes, I did no real teachings but used the time to have the students prepare false notebooks in anticipation of an inspection that was to occur late in the year? [176] When the inspector came, he suspected something, but he did not act on his suspicions. I never want to be placed in a similar situation again!" This did not prevent the same teacher, later, to become a spokesman for the Federation addressing parents, giving lectures entitled "Pedagogical Sharing," swallowing all shame about the malpractices that he said had made him feel guilty.

◊

Shortly before the trial, a number of violently insulting messages reached me either through my blog or secondhand through acquaintances who received such messages and passed them to me. Most of these messages were vile insults and defamatory. They attacked not only me personally but my immediate family and my relations. They could have been prosecuted if the preparation for the trial did not require all my energy. What was especially troubling about some of these messages was that clearly the writers possessed information that could have come only from people involved in the case, knowing well the arguments that were being presented to the Federation's lawyers for use in the trial. Did the messages come from Federation members, or were they an attempt by the Federation itself to unnerve me before the event, or a way to test my reactions? The fact is that this series of insults, sent over the Internet, suddenly ceased just before the trial and did not recommence afterward. If these messages were linked directly to the Federation, they show how far a cult is prepared to go when it feels attacked; or they reveal the degree of verbal abuse (and more?) that may come from people close to this movement and these institutions.

◊

While we usually make life choices driven by unconscious motives, I aspire to base my conduct on clear and conscious thoughts. And that is precisely what those who accused me [i.e., Waldorf school representatives] could not conceive or imagine. Indeed, what is the main feature of life within the Anthroposophic community? It is the abolition of thought. Call it progressive anesthesia. This may seem surprising, since many Anthroposophists can be found making sophisticated speeches based on their esoteric doctrines. But these people do not truly cogitate. [177] They repeat or shuffle the ideas of Rudolf Steiner. Their consciousness is akin to a daze, whereas life requires rational clarity. They have little experience with consciously reasoned decision-making. Their lives are imprinted with directions drawn from ideas that are obscure to them, so they scarcely comprehend that human actions can be based on rational considerations. [178] My motives for communicating with UNADFI and writing my article were plain and transparent. [179]

◊

During the trial, I saw or at least glimpsed again many acquaintances from the Anthroposophic community and Steiner-Waldorf schools, most of whom I had not seen since 2009, that is to say, three years previously. Some had been close, very close to me, such as my former girlfriend. [180] Of course, being the accused, I could have "reunions" with them only stealthily, in the form of briefly exchanged glances or rapid once-overs....  

[A]nthroposophists had decided to come to this hearing in droves. No less than thirty crowded through the door. You could see in their eyes that they had come to attend a "spectacle" in which they expected to be avenged ... They appeared absolutely confident and presented themselves with aplomb, as if they had come to claim compensation for a violation of their rights, a vindication in which the perpetrator would be executed.

◊

In response to my article [181], the Federation of Steiner-Waldorf Schools had filed a complaint for defamation on October 6, 2011 — just two days before the end of the three-month statute of limitations. After a trial that took place on April 5, 2013, in the Seventeenth Criminal Court of Paris, the complaint was denied on May 24, 2013. The Federation did not appeal the verdict. My final release was delivered by the Seventeenth Criminal Court of Paris on June 4, 2013. [182]

◊

The moral responsibility for bringing an unjust legal action against me is first of all collective and institutional: Because they have been compromised since their inception...in a culture of dissimulation and lies [183], the Steiner-Waldorf schools cannot do otherwise than to try to prevent the emergence of the truth as soon as it occurs. It was therefore all but inevitable that they would sue me for speaking out.

◊

What struck me at the end of this ordeal is the danger of Steiner-Waldorf schools. It is a danger that I obviously had not probed deeply enough when I wrote my article. Indeed, it is a very serious matter that the representative bodies of this "education" should try to stifle sincere accounts by those who had negative experiences while attending their "schools." It is like attaching a lead weight to lives that, tattered, are already difficult and complicated enough. I know some fragile individuals who, after what they suffered in Steiner-Waldorf education, could be driven to suicide if attacked in this way. To be denied the expression and recognition of what one had to bear in childhood and adolescence can mean that the pain will never be relieved. For my part, writing my article was not only a civic duty but an inner necessity that could be accomplished only after decades of maturation. Those wishing to express everything good that they think came from their Waldorf-Steiner schooling can do so without incurring the threat of a trial. Why should alumni who, like me, want to honestly discuss the problematic parts of their schooling not have the same right? For I am not alone, far from it, in perceiving the need to criticize Steiner-Waldorf education. Due to my acquittal, the way is now open for critical alumni to speak out.

—

Maria was a great help to Perra during the trial, 

and he writes that he grew to love her intensely.

But the two ultimately separated, almost of necessity, as each strove 

to establish a new life outside the Waldorf community.

Maria began to see another man while still involved with Perra, 

and in the end she chose this new love. 

The separation was painful to Perra, 

but perhaps it was beneficial to both Perra and Maria.

Each had to chart a new course in life.

I will proceed now to Part 6 of the memoir.

—

Part 6

Winning the lawsuit that was brought against me by the Federation of Steiner-Waldorf schools was, in a sense, an achievement. Of course, apart from a few relatives and some representatives of associations and institutions engaged in the fight against cults, few people in the wide world paid much attention. This does not detract, however, from the event's importance ... I won not only because I had the services of an excellent lawyer, who immediately understood the best line to take in mounting a defense, but also because I showed that I was willing to fight ... In all modesty, it took courage to withstand charges brought by the very cult in which I had spent my childhood, and then to endure false testimony about my entire life from my former teachers, my former colleagues, and my former girlfriend ... But as things transpired, [those individuals] were shown to be the ones who were trapped by their own lies and their self-contradictions....

Today, my victory has been attained. It means more than having been able to avoid a wrongful conviction. First, it represents for me legitimization by the court of the long process of liberating thought that was the central thread of my life for years. If my conclusions [about Waldorf education and Anthroposophy] had been denied and condemned by the court, I would have been shattered. But now the victory has established my right to continue discussing these matters in the future. Finally, the end of the trial means a radical distancing from the world of Anthroposophy, that is to say it gave me my final release.

On the other hand, I know that I must now live the rest of my life having made implacable enemies. Enemies who will scrutinize my words, looking for my weaknesses, seeking angles for possible attacks ... Knowing this means I must live, to some degree, with fear ... Society at large has not yet recognized the dangers and power of the Anthroposophical movement ... But to me the truth is more important than comfort or safety ... I hope that when my life is done I will know that I did all I could [in the cause of truth], and perhaps the effects will outlive me.

◊

I know that my blog and my article published on the UNADFI website have contributed meaningfully to society's awareness about Steiner-Waldorf schools and Anthroposophy. Surely this awareness will grow further. If events take the correct turn, I think that we should move towards an outright ban of these schools. These institutions do not just deliver a problematic education containing insidious Anthroposophical teachings. Their pedagogy is structured in ways that are potentially damaging for children, as my story and many other examples have demonstrated. [184] The schools have gone so far with their systematic strategy of concealment — including actions that may be illegal — that they may be compared, in a manner of speaking, to an organized criminal operation. Hence, in my opinion, they should be banned. [185]

However, I feel sure that this will not happen in my lifetime. Steiner-Waldorf schools will continue to exist in France and in the world long after my death, regardless of my efforts. At most, perhaps in France we may overturn the schools' status as private academies under contract with National Education, which is a real scandal. [186] Thus, my efforts are not limited to myself as one individual, although I have acted wholly independently. What I have done, said, and written is just a part of a broad change in general awareness that may take a very long time to reach fruition. I am only a forerunner.

Today I am pleased that, almost every week, I receive messages from people who have found my writings helpful: Waldorf alumni, parents of students, former members of Anthroposophic institutions, former believers, and the like. All of them tell me of their struggles, in this place or that, in many different forms: fighting against lies, struggling to assert their rights, struggling to rebuild their lives, fighting to help a loved one, working to rescue a student, and so forth. While I cannot personally follow each of these fights, I see how they are all related to my own efforts. I carry them in my heart, because I see the beginning of a broad substantive movement that, beyond particular victories and losses, indicates that a profound and irreversible change is occurring. Everyone does what s/he can where s/he is. But beyond the limits of each case and each individual, we are deciding what kind of society — and even what kind of civilization — we will live in tomorrow. Will it be a "New Age" civilization with Anthroposophy near its center? Or will our civilization remain a culture of reason and freedom, committed to the search for truth? Each individual struggle, today and tomorrow, helps determine our answer to this question.

And Me?

My adventure in the Anthroposophic community began at the age of nine and ended 35 years later, at age 44, with the end of my relationship with Maria. Certainly, since 2009, I have travelled a significant distance in my effort to reconstruct my life freed from sectarian confusions. What is the cost of such an effort? It is huge, but I cannot complain. Everything is remade! Absolutely everything! [187]

Fundamentally, I have needed to rebuild all of my social relationships: with old classmates, with friends, acquaintances, family members, and so on. Then all my economic, medical, and other habits: I've stopped consuming products from biodynamic farms [188], quit buying Weleda products [189], no longer see Anthroposophic doctors [190] or homeopathic doctors close to the New Age movement, etc. Likewise, I've changed my cultural habits: the publications I read, the shows I attend, my tastes, my interests, all of it. Finally, I have not only changed particular behaviors but my entire lifestyle: I do not meditate as Anthroposophists meditate [191], I do not eat as Anthroposophists eat [192], I do not sleep as Anthroposophists sleep [193], I do not form judgments as Anthroposophists judge [194], etc. Moreover, for thirty years my thinking was determined by Anthroposophic ideas and reading. Therefore I have to be vigilant: Often during some conversations, or even when simply mulling over some ideas, I find myself thinking as an Anthroposophist would think, unconsciously following a set mental pattern. Such thinking is not always bad or wrong. But it becomes a problem when it controls me in spite of myself. [195]

In all of this, I have to stand on my own. But in writing of such things, I am conscious that the reconstruction of my life after Anthroposophy may have meaning beyond myself. My life among the Anthroposophists has consumed, up to the present, virtually all of my years. Is a different life possible beyond this? And what will it be?

—

This is the end of "My Life Among the Anthroposophists".

You can use the following links to visit the other parts of Perra's memoir:

Part 1, Part 2, Part 3

—

The Truth About Steiner-Waldorf Schools.

[Grégoire Perra's second blog.]

"I had to quickly catch up on everything 

that was intentionally ignored previously [at our school]. 

Today my impulse is to compensate by travel, as if I need to see and learn 

about all the lands and cultures about which not a word had been breathed 

— with the obvious exception of Germany, which had been held up 

as the panacea, the dear native homeland of Steiner." 

— Gregoire Perra, "Charlie Hebdo".

Endnotes

As in other parts of my translation of Perra's memoir,

the endnotes are — for better or worse — my own contribution. — RR.

[147] See "My Life Among the Anthroposophists, Part 3".

[148] See "Blog de Grégoire Perra".

[149] See "He Went to Waldorf".

[150] In telling us things that Maria told him, Perra is providing secondhand testimony, which necessarily has less evidential value than his firsthand accounts of his own experiences. Still, we have reason to hear him out. Perra established his credibility, his knowledge of Anthroposophy and the Waldorf movement, and his powers of penetration and analysis in previous sections of his memoir as well as in his other essays presented here at Waldorf Watch. If he believes much of what Maria told him (essentially, all of her statements that he relays to us), we almost certainly should take her reported assertions seriously as well. Moreover, most of what Maria told Perra is consistent with numerous other reports we have heard from other former Waldorf teachers, parents, and students. [See "Ex-Teacher 2" and the pages that follow it, and "Our Experience" and the pages that follow it.] Maria's reported statements gain considerable plausibility as a result. We should not uncritically accept everything that Perra claims that Maria told him; but on the other hand, while reserving ultimate judgment, we certainly should take this secondhand testimony into account. Perra and, through him, Maria deserve to be heard.

[151] While a Waldorf teacher, Perra himself had held a secondary job outside Waldorf. [See "My Life Among the Anthroposophists, Part 1".]

[152] See "My Life Among the Anthroposophists, Part 1", "Part 2", and "Part 3", and "Mistreating Kids Lovingly".

[153] This is the central administrative committee that typically holds the power at a Waldorf school. The membership is usually confined to senior teachers who are devoted to Anthroposophy. [See "Faculty Meetings".]

[154] I.e., the schools were run by Anthroposophists having direct ties to the Anthroposophical headquarters — called the Goetheanum — which is located in Switzerland. [For more on the Goetheanum, see "Is Anthroposophy a Religion?"]

[155] Waldorf schools are often said to be organized collegially, with no hierarchy of officials holding positions above their colleagues. But in fact many Waldorf schools have directors, headmasters, and other officially designated leaders, as well as — in many cases — elaborate bureaucratic structures. (As Perra points out, these structures can often be complex and even chaotic, but they are nonetheless hierarchical.)

[156] Anthroposophists believe that children should be allowed to enact their karmas. If this means some children have the karma to be bullies, while others have the karma to be bullied, so be it. [See "Slaps".]

[157] See "Steiner's Racism", "Races", and "Basics".

[158] See "Mistreating Kids Lovingly".

[159] This approach is shared by many Waldorf teachers. Rudolf Steiner taught that myths and fairy tales are spiritually true, far truer than modern science and scholarship. Waldorf education thus places great emphasis on such narratives. [See "The Gods" and "Fairy Tales"].

[160] Perhaps the greatest harm inflicted by Waldorf schools is to inculcate a mystical, unrealistic frame of mind from which a child may have great difficulty emerging. S/he may be permanently estranged from the real world and permanently unable to find a footing in that world. [See "Thinking Cap" and "Who Gets Hurt?"]

[161] For the Anthroposophical view on food intolerance, see "Growing Up Being Made Sick by Anthroposophy".

[162] This is a supervisory group theoretically superior to the faculty. Many Waldorf schools have such boards, but in many instances these serve essentially as window dressing, little more. (Often Anthroposophists sit on the boards and essentially direct them in accordance with the wishes of senior Waldorf faculty members.)

[163] For other accounts of inquisitorial meetings at Waldorf schools, see, e.g., "My Life Among the Anthroposophists, Part 2", "Ex-Teacher-2" and "Coming Undone". When such meetings are not official faculty gatherings, Waldorf teachers nevertheless usually preside formally or informally, and some of these teachers may in fact be members of the groups in question (e.g., parents' groups, which usually include numerous Waldorf teachers).

[164] Anthroposophists consider themselves to be occult initiates. [See "Inside Scoop".] As Perra indicates, this means — among other things — that many of them believe they are clairvoyant. [See "The Waldorf Teacher's Consciousness."]

[165] See "He Went to Waldorf".

[166] Anthroposophists consider Anthroposophy itself to be the only true form of therapy. They reject modern psychiatry and virtually all other approaches that do not stem, directly or indirectly, from the teachings of Rudolf Steiner.

[167] UNADFI is the Union Nationales des Associations de Defenses des Families et de l'Individu Victimes des Sects {The National Union of Associations for the Defense of Families and Individual Victims of Sects}. [See "He Went to Waldorf".]

[168] For Perra's account of his own Waldorf teacher training, see "My Life Among the Anthroposophists, Part 2".

[169] See "Blog de Grégoire Perra". For Perra's second blog, see "La Vérité sur les écoles Steiner-Waldorf". And his third: "Mes Petits Voyages".

[170] Leaving a Waldorf school is often treated as an act of unforgivable treachery. [See "Waldorf Straight Talk: Leaving - How Can We?" Note that the advice given there is somewhat different from the advice Perra gives here. Which approach is best may depend on specific factors in individual situations.]

[171] This is a common attitude among Waldorf teachers. Rudolf Steiner encouraged Waldorf teachers to supplant their students' parents, taking charge of the children in order to undo the harm caused by the parents. Anthroposophists think only they truly understand children, and therefore parents who are not Anthroposophists inevitably make serious mistakes in raising children. [See "Advice for Parents".]

[172] This is a subset of the college of teachers, focused on the lower grades. Waldorf schools often strive to be unbureaucratic, but frequently committees of various sorts proliferate.

[173] Anthroposophists believe in magic, astrology, etc. [See "Magic", "Astrology", "Power Words," etc.] As Perra says, the point here is not that any hoodoo practiced by Waldorf teachers will succeed, but such practices reflect precisely the sort of mystical mindset from which you should want to distance yourself and your children.

[174] Anthroposophists claim to honor and promote freedom, but in fact they believe that there is only one right path forward: the path set out by Rudolf Steiner, the path they themselves have chosen. Exercising the "freedom" to choose any other path is, in their eyes, tantamount to allying oneself with demonic powers. [See "Freedom".]

[175] For Perra's account of ploys used by Waldorf school to mislead official inspectors, see the section "Concealment Vis-å-Vis Institutions" in "He Went to Waldorf". 

[176] For the importance Waldorf schools attach to class books or notebooks, see "His Education" and "Lesson Books". Often, the books — quite attractive, and produced under close supervision by teachers — impress the unwary. But in reality the students rarely master the subject matter being "studied." They have spent their time copying text and drawings from the blackboard.

[177] Perra's judgment here is harsh, but remember that he can speak authoritatively: He himself had been an Anthroposophical "intellectual." [See "My Life Among the Anthroposophists, Part 2".] If Perra goes a bit far in defending himself and criticizing the people who attacked him, this is perhaps understandable.

[178] Perra has argued that Anthroposophy is fundamentally incoherent; Steiner bequeathed his followers an irrational vision. Hence, in basing their actions on Steiner's teachings, Anthroposophists are guided by ideas that they cannot truly understand. 

◊ "Who really [has understood Anthroposophy]? Maybe not even Steiner himself! Anthroposophy is so huge, complex, and confused." [See "Mistreating Kids Lovingly."] 

◊ "[I]t is very rare that [Anthroposophists] themselves know Anthroposophical doctrine in its entirety. I do not think even Steiner himself truly cared about achieving deep coherence in his esoteric teachings. Jose Dupré, in his book ANTHROPOSOPHY AND LIBERTY, showed the complete intellectual corruption in the founder of Anthroposophy, extending back to 1900." [See "My Life Among the Anthroposophists, Part 4".] 

Anthroposophical behavior, based on an incoherent worldview, is itself necessarily incoherent, Perra asserts. He says further that Anthroposophists assumed his motives for criticizing Waldorf education were emotional and hateful; they did not accept that someone might have rational and truthful reasons for making such criticisms.

[179] Put in its simplest terms, Perra's motive was to inform the public and education authorities about the real nature of Waldorf schooling — information that the schools themselves have made great efforts to conceal.

[180] Perra tells of his relationship with this young woman in "My Life Among the Anthroposophists, Part 2".

[181] To read a translation of the article that the Federation alleged was defamatory, see "He Went to Waldorf".

[182] For Perra's account of the trial, see "My Life Among the Anthroposophists, Part 3".

[183] Waldorf schools often intentionally and systematically conceal and misrepresent their purposes. [See, e.g., "Secrets", "Our Experience", and "Summing Up".]

[184] See "Cautionary Tales".

[185] Whether any operations of Waldorf schools literally violate the law is, of course, open to question, and the answer would vary from case to case, depending on the laws instituted within that state or region. Still, Perra has made a strong case that Waldorf schools often skirt social norms and regulations. [See the section "Concealment Vis-å-Vis Institutions" in "He Went to Waldorf".] 

[186] As Perra has described, Waldorf schools in France have received what amounts to an official stamp of approval. Perra contends that they have received this largely because they have deceived educational authorities about the true nature of Waldorf schooling. The same argument can be made concerning Waldorf schools in other countries, with variations reflecting the laws and constitutions of those countries. In the USA, if a Waldorf school is accepted as a charter school, thereby receiving taxpayer support, the result arguably violates the U.S. Constitution's requirement that church and state be kept separate. [See, e.g., "Is Anthroposophy a Religion?"]

[187] For another account of rebuilding one's life after Waldorf, see "My Sad, Sad Story".

[188] See "Biodynamics".

[189] Weleda is an Anthroposophical firm that sells health and beauty products created in accordance with Rudolf Steiner's occult indications.

[190] See "Steiner's Quackery".

[191] See "Power Words".

[192] Generally, Anthroposophists prefer foods produced in biodynamic farms and gardens. Such foods are sold by the Anthroposophical firm called Demeter.

[193] Anthroposophists believe that during sleep, certain invisible parts of themselves fly up to the spirit realm. [See "Incarnation".] They also believe that, with training, they can learn to have clairvoyantly true dreams. [See "Dreams".]

[194] Anthroposophists aspire to be clairvoyant. They believe that true thinking does not occur in the brain but in nonphysical organs of clairvoyance. Waldorf schools promote mystical forms of thought by encouraging the use of imagination and intuition. [See "Clairvoyance", "Thinking", and "Thinking Cap".]

[195] Perra here returns to a central theme of his work, the indoctrination that occurs among Anthroposophists and students in Waldorf schools, molding their mental lives in accordance with Anthroposophic beliefs. [See "Indoctrination".] Individuals who are thus indoctrinated lose, or risk losing, the ability to form their own independent views.