The Rudolf Steiner Archive

My dear friends! When we discuss the affairs of the threefolding movement and related matters in such a circle, we must be well aware that the whole threefolding movement can only be conceived of as being part of the necessities of the present, of that which can and should go from the essence of our entire movement into general culture. Now it is quite natural that in our extraordinarily fast-moving times, we have to adapt our working methods to the changed circumstances. It is quite natural that there can be no general programs, that we have to work quite differently in Germany today than we did in 1919, for example, and so on.

But one thing, my dear friends, is necessary to bear in mind, and that is: we cannot work fruitfully in such a field as the threefolding movement is, if we, as it were, limit ourselves to the threefolding impulse, which we may discuss in the abstract from various perspectives, and form groups to discuss the threefolding question, perhaps in a utopian way, which it should certainly not be. If such a movement is to be carried forward fruitfully, it must be carried forward with constant consideration of the circumstances, the narrower and the broader, that is, the German and foreign world conditions in general. One must try to have an open eye for what is going on.

And here I would like to put together two apergus, two points, through which I would actually like to say what I have to say. Yesterday, an attempt was made to do something in a conference with a smaller group, where the question arose in different countries – it was thought that this was the right thing to do – of turning to people who, as they say, have a name, so that a certain part of our movement could be propagated by something like this. One would have to be convinced of the fact that when one raises such a question today, one should find personalities who have a name, when one raises such a question today, that such a question presents itself quite differently than if one had raised it eight years ago. Eight years ago, all sorts of people came to mind – and rightly so. Today, no one comes to mind, because the people who could be named over the last six or eight years have been completely used up; they are no longer names. Out of habit, people still cling to the belief that this or that person has a name; just take a closer look, for example, at today's newspapers, people who speak as politicians: either you keep finding Stresemann or Helfferich over and over again, or someone who really can't say or do anything other than a person in the position in question who is not entirely inferior, like the current chancellor – isn't he, I believe he is – so there is no way today to deal with the same issues as they were dealt with eight years ago, as soon as one addresses the specific circumstances, and such a movement must address the specific circumstances, it cannot just have a programmatic effect.

Now, in connection with this aperçu that I have just mentioned, I would like to mention another. You see, it is, I believe, a very concrete fact that the Anthroposophical Congress began here on August 28, 1921, and will close tomorrow; for us here, I believe, it is first and foremost a very concrete fact. This Anthroposophical Congress has – and this evening you saw from an announcement how the space situation looks – so it has attracted a whole range of people here to Stuttgart.

To our great satisfaction, they are working in this field. Yes, what better can you do as a contemporary worker than to use the most concrete conditions? You have to start from facts, once they have been created. Now I would like to say what I want to say illustratively, as an example, so to speak. Please do not take my choice of two examples as implying that the others are not also all examples. However, just because someone is not named does not mean that they should not be named, but I have to choose some examples.

You see, this afternoon we heard a lecture about Wilbrandt's “economy”. First of all, it was a link to Wilbrandt's economy. But this lecture is such an event that, if it is exploited, if it is really needed as it can be needed, it can have tremendous significance and be an enormous means of agitation. If this lecture had been given at some economic congress or professors' congress or somewhere, not only would a detailed report of it have appeared in every major newspaper, but it would have been discussed for weeks, column after column. It could be that there are Anthroposophists and threefolders who leave this congress and do not tell the other members, who were not there, about this lecture at home as something they have experienced. Yes, that means that, firstly, we have few people who are already working productively today, but on the other hand, that tremendous work simply falls by the wayside, is not utilized. We do not yet know how to use the concrete facts from day to day; we think about how to hold introductory courses and so on, and so on; that's all very well, but of course we were already talking about that twenty years ago. For us, the things that are happening must really happen, that's the important thing, my dear friends.

The other example I would like to mention is a lecture given by Dr. von Heydebrand, who was also present as a member of the teaching staff. This lecture is so radically critical of something that is, in the most eminent sense, culturally damaging and destructive that, with yesterday's lecture, we have once again made an epoch-making statement. Just imagine if this lecture had been given at some teachers' meeting, the furor it would have caused among the teaching staff. Just as university economics in its entirety has been exposed as hollow and void, has been exposed, yesterday the whole folly of experimental psychology and experimental pedagogy was presented in such an interesting and humorous way that this is something that must be exploited.

Yes, my dear friends, we have just experienced since the revolution that endless work is simply left unused, is ignored; we must learn to make full use of our things. We must keep a watchful eye on things, for we may experience epoch-making things here in the realm of education and economics, and that these will be taken for granted by our people. Yes, that is how it has been with the Dornach School of Spiritual Science to this day. There is an enormous amount of work in it, but it is taken for granted, and it is also taken for granted that a few people should go to all this trouble and do an enormous amount of work. People listen to it, but it has no effect.

Isn't it true that it has rightly been discussed how tired people are and how hard it is for them to take it, but we don't tell them anything about it! They would take things on board if we presented it to people with an open mind for what is happening and from an open heart, there would be understanding if we put the current, the immediately concrete thing in front of people.

What is all the talk of the Stresemanns, the Wirths and so on, compared to what has been said here at this congress? If no one says anything else, it must be said; it must occur to someone to continually lose sight of the full significance of this movement and to think about abstract programs, how should we best hold introductory courses, but to have no heart or mind for what is actually going on among us. That is what hurts so much and what could be different; the threefolding newspaper, what an endless task the threefolding newspaper is! I have spoken about these things before. Not only has the threefolding newspaper been ignored in its significance, but now it is even being reduced. So it's not true, the things I say are not to nag, truly not to nag, but only to draw attention to the fact that we in our movement have a serious obligation to appreciate the things people do and to present them to the people in a truly appreciated way. And what would be the result of making use of what is being achieved here again in the Dornach School Courses if it were utilized in a timely manner! What material there would be to work with!

This is what must be emphasized, and it goes through our entire movement. See, to give an example: It was really something striking that an essay on threefolding appeared in the Hibbert Journal in the first place; that in itself has a significance, but think if the friends take it up directly and make use of it, then it can achieve twenty-five times what it achieves in the Hibbert Journal; it is the most respected journal of English intellectuals. And I could demonstrate such things in all fields. And what I dared to say on Sunday, this lively interaction, this lively interest of each individual in the whole movement, is something we must adhere to very closely.

How many members know how well organized, how tightly organized our opponents are, how much we need to keep a watchful eye on them and act energetically in relation to this organization of opponents? And here I would like to say one more thing: As far as I know, there is a lively exchange of ideas between Dornach and London; many letters are written with all kinds of gossip from Dornach. I mentioned these facts at a recent conference in Dornach and said: But when something like a performance of eurythmy, as happened in Baden-Baden, is besmirched, which is a most important social matter, then no one complains, no one takes any notice of it, it is not really considered as a concrete current event. I was then told that they had not known about this in London, even though it had been discussed in the Basler Nachrichten, if one had not happened to find a copy of the Basler Nachrichten in the dirt on Oxford (or Regent) Street, and there one would have learned about this fact.

So you see, there is a lot of sense in what I am saying, that it is necessary for everyone to make the affairs of the entire organization their own affairs and to have a sense of what is really being achieved in the organization. Just think what it would mean if something equivalent to what you have just heard about from the congress in two examples had happened out in the world. One must appreciate these things and do not you think that the local groups can really be interested if they are reported in this up-to-date way about what has been experienced here in Stuttgart?

My dear friends, I mean what one finds again and again, and that is - as Rector Bartsch emphasized with a certain correctness - the follow-up work, the processing. But these are the real highlights of the movement, and they are what we need. For example, we need to ensure that the following happens: it is no small thing that 1600 people have gathered here for a congress and that the things that have been discussed here have actually been discussed, that all of this has happened, that the little eurythmy rehearsals have been so well received and so on, and so on, we really must not sit here with sleepy heads and go home with sleepy heads, but actually make a living movement out of the whole thing. Temperament in the souls, enthusiasm in the hearts, then what is needed in the details will be found. Again, one cannot give programmatic advice, but one must appeal to temperament, humor, enthusiasm, fire.

Build up a great deal of fire by lighting it in an enthusiastic way out of the facts, and then the threefolding newspaper will not be neglected, this congress will not be neglected as the Dornach School of Spiritual Science has been, and so on and so forth. Instead, this fire will be of use for something.

[In the introduction, the employee representatives from the various enterprises report on grievances and discrepancies between the ideal of threefolding and the reality in the enterprises. In response to a question from Rudolf Steiner, the example of an incompetent foreman is mentioned. The works councils are not sufficiently involved in operational decisions. A discussion about internal company issues is broken off at the request of Rudolf Steiner, since this is the wrong place for such a discussion.]

Rudolf Steiner says that much of what has been said is justified, but that the ideas of the “key points” can only be fully realized when we are further along. In these matters, it must be borne in mind that honest intentions are there, but one must come together and overcome the tremendous difficulties through discussion, not by talking past each other. From the point of view of real practice, we are all in a dilemma. We can only have proper business managers if they grow out of practice. The different views are a multiple obstacle to understanding, and can only be overcome through a certain liberality. Often enough, the intolerance of the trade unions prevents reasonable cooperation. The institutions cannot be changed overnight, just as the entrepreneur has certain obligations to fulfill in relation to his organization. At the building site in Dornach, reasonable cooperation was possible because the building could only be constructed through a willingness to make sacrifices. Since 1918, mutual understanding has become very difficult. It is not fantasizing on both sides that leads to understanding, but bridges must be found through loving engagement with one another. We have to come to that. We should understand each other. On both sides, everything is justified, but it is difficult to find an understanding. The education of the workers does not prevent this, because in my opinion it has been abundant. It would be necessary for them to believe us and for people to meet us halfway. It is still the case today that we recognize damage and mistakes, but that it is difficult to overcome some of them due to the existing obstacles, because the necessary understanding is lacking.

[Further discussion: about mutual understanding, the demand for a minimum subsistence level, about piecework.]

Rudolf Steiner then takes the floor for his closing remarks. He repeatedly emphasizes that it is absolutely necessary for the people united in the enterprises of the “Coming Day” to build the bridge through trust and mutual understanding that will make the transition from the old rotten conditions to the new and healthy ones possible.

He expresses his pleasure that the discussion with the works councils has taken place and hopes that such discussions will take place in the future.

Rudolf Steiner said something like the following: Propaganda for the threefold social order is fundamental because it can be seen as a way out of the plight. The opinion that the threefold social order has not been grasped by the proletariat as a result of inadequate schooling is not correct. The idea has been properly understood in certain broad circles of the proletariat. But instead of now pursuing the idea to its ultimate consequences, the workers turned to the old leaders and in the end abandoned the threefold order. It is only possible to make progress if one turns to the workers as a human being. The path to understanding was there, but the leadership stabbed us in the back.

The “Kommende Tag” is actually only a surrogate today. It was not founded to hold the ideas of threefolding, but to have a center from which further work could be done. Today, the “Kommende Tag” cannot yet satisfy many needs; but as a starting point, it has its great significance. If the threefold social order had been implemented in 1918, then something different from what the “Day to Come” represents today would have emerged from it. It would be necessary for associative life to develop out of the understanding of individuals for such a thing. Today, the will for it must become as strong as possible. But we also have to talk quite differently, and the consequences must be drawn in view of what is necessary in the future. The establishment of the “Day to Come” has actually boycotted those entrepreneurs who have joined forces with the “Day to Come”. Nevertheless, work must continue, and it must be expected that a widespread boycott will ensue. Now we should have common ground where we can orientate ourselves from person to person according to broad principles. Individual grievances must be treated separately from the big issues. There are healthy ideas in many minds, but many people today talk nonsense and do not realize that we are now entering the great crises, which will be much more terrible than those that have occurred. Everyone has social impulses, but they say things that awaken hopes, or they remain silent. Trust must be sought from person to person. Only with trust can we move forward. In many cases, trust cannot be established because an intermediary makes it impossible to achieve a good outcome.

We need to find a way to deal with the issues properly. We should communicate, so to speak, without talking. We have failed with the threefold order and now we are left with no alternative. In the earlier study evenings, we should have dealt with current issues on the basis of the “key points”, and not discussed the key points themselves. It would be necessary to continue these study evenings in the right way today.

The one who is supposed to eliminate the damage and does not do so sees the same much more clearly. Nothing will change if the working class does not take the “day to come” seriously and closes ranks. We have to find a way to unite our working class, and the others will find each other and agree to work. We can only reach our goal together. What is the minimum subsistence level? You have to tackle the issue on a large scale. If a company introduces the minimum subsistence level, that company will go under and the workers will be out on the street. It is not possible for an individual company to introduce full satisfaction. The proletariat can prevent us from falling into the capitalist system. The working class must support us to such an extent that a solid organization develops from our ranks, to which people cling with the same tenacity with which they still cling to the trade unions in some cases today. Such an organization must come into being. The way to achieve this must be found so that the workers unite to form such a new association. It is only through mutual trust that this union can be achieved, and the workers must take the initiative to do so.

Asking the proletariat to leave the trade unions is not something that can be done overnight, nor is it my intention. However, the trade unions must not be allowed to stand in the way of associative coexistence. Unless as many healthy ideas as possible are introduced into as many minds as possible, nothing will improve.

on the occasion of the introduction of Emil Leinhas as general director

Rudolf Steiner: My dear friends! The development of conditions in the “Coming Day” makes changes necessary at this present moment in time, which, in my opinion, are of far-reaching significance. First of all, I will take the liberty of presenting these changes to you, so to speak, from their historical necessity, and then I will take the liberty of linking some remarks to them. The conditions in an association such as the “Coming Day” is supposed to be are, by their very nature, initially such that they can only gradually take on a permanent form, that is, a permanent form such that one can count on very firm conditions. And so it has become more and more apparent in recent days that changes are necessary at the present time.

You are aware that some time ago the del Monte company joined the “Coming Day”. At the time, del Monte's affiliation with “Der Coming Day” was associated with extraordinary sacrifices on the part of that company. The previous general director of “Der Coming Day,” Mr. Benkendörfer, was one of the driving forces behind del Monte's undertaking at the time, and it was a huge sacrifice, both personally and professionally, for the remaining associates of the del Monte company and for Mr. Benkendörfer himself, to bring about the constellation that was necessary for the takeover of the general management of the “Coming Day” by Mr. Benkendörfer.

Now, over time, it has become clear that the del Monte company, which of course is absolutely calculating – and of course this can only be in the interest of the “Coming Day” – is calculating with an extraordinary expansion. It has become necessary for the del Monte company to approach the supervisory board of the “day to come” and make it that Mr. Benkendörfer is absolutely necessary for the future expansion of the del Monte enterprise, which is of course now an integral part of the “Coming Day”; not only for today's circumstances, but because it is in the most vital interest of the “Coming Day” that the necessary and promising expansion of the former del Monte company can take place. The supervisory board of “The Coming Day” could not ignore the fact that this urgent request on the part of the del Monte company must be accommodated; and we found ourselves in the painful position of having to grant Mr. Benkendörfer, who We were painfully obliged to grant Mr. Benkendörfer his resignation as managing director of “Coming Day” and to continue to provide his valuable services to the del Monte company. Mr. Benkendörfer will therefore turn his labor toward del Monte within the framework of the “Coming Day,” in which the del Monte company will certainly remain.

Thus, my dear friends, after a relatively short time, we were obliged to fill the post of managing director again, and it must be emphasized that this appointment was only possible under conditions that would have been unthinkable some time ago, for the post of general manager of “Kommender Tag” is one of the most difficult positions imaginable, given the position that “Coming Day” occupies in the world among supporters and opponents. It was only because Mr. Molt could see the possibility of now having to lead Waldorf-Astoria alone under the current circumstances and to do without something that he could not have done without a short time ago - namely, the valuable cooperation of Mr. Leinhas - that it was possible to fill the position of our managing director with an appropriate personality again. And I therefore expressly take this opportunity to emphasize that Mr. Molt, in a far-sighted recognition of the overall interests of “Coming Day”, decided to take on the responsibility of managing the Waldorf-Astoria, thereby giving the supervisory board of “Coming Day” the opportunity to make any progress at all under the current circumstances. So we had the necessity and therefore also the opportunity to fill the position of managing director, and at this moment I am able to introduce Mr. Emil Leinhas, who is well known to all of you, as the future managing director. Well, that is the first far-reaching change that is taking place here in the constitution of the “Day to Come”.

And now allow me to tie a few remarks to this presentation of the historical circumstances.

The first thing I have to say – and you will believe that it comes from the bottom of my heart – is that I also have to express to you how much all of us, the supervisory board, the board of directors and the entire staff of “The Coming Day” have reason to feel from the bottom of our hearts our sense of gratitude for what Mr. Benkendörfer has done for “The Coming Day” during the time of his general management, and at great personal sacrifice. Mr. Benkendörfer not only took over the “Coming Day” as general director at great sacrifice, but also took it over at an extraordinarily difficult time for the “Coming Day”, and his tasks were such that one can say of them, especially in these months in which Mr. Benkendörfer presided over the “Coming Day”, the tasks were such that they had to weigh heavily on the shoulders of a personality.

My dear friends, the person who works in a company, especially one like “Kommender Tag”, often has no idea what worries live in the soul of the person who now has to pull the numerous strings from the inside out, who has to ensure the prosperity, the prosperity and the development of such an undertaking . Mr. Benkendörfer has taken on all these difficult tasks, and I can tell you with the utmost conviction that Mr. Benkendörfer has done something for the whole “Coming Day” that cannot be overestimated, and you will understand that this deeply felt gratitude, of which I have spoken, is also expressed here. I expressed it yesterday at the supervisory board of “The Coming Day”, and it was approved by the entire supervisory and management board of “The Coming Day” in the broadest, most undivided way. It is incumbent upon me to say, following on from this, that it was a matter of course that the connection that Mr. Benkendörfer had with the “Coming Day” through the general management developed a connection that must remain; therefore, the supervisory board of “The Coming Day” felt compelled to ask Mr. Benkendörfer to join the supervisory board – a matter that the next general assembly will have to consolidate. Mr. Benkendörfer will thus continue to work in the bosom of the supervisory board itself, also belong to the board of directors and, as a delegate of the board of directors, take care of the work at del Monte. Thus, to the greatest extent, Mr. Benkendörfer's valuable labor will continue to benefit the “Coming Day.” I have asked that, by decision of the Supervisory Board, all thanks and expressions of hope be incorporated into the minutes of the Supervisory Board of the “Coming Day” as a historical fact.

And now, my dear friends, I come to the second part. This is the part that relates to the future. Allow me to make a few remarks about it. The point is that the last few weeks in particular have shown the importance that has been given in the world to that which has grown out of the anthroposophical movement in the most diverse ways. We held an anthroposophical congress in Stuttgart from the end of August to the beginning of September; this anthroposophical congress was attended by 1600 people and went in such a way that any unbiased person must say: Something has happened here that is not happening anywhere else in the world in the same way, and it is precisely one of the signs of the decline of our time that such a fact is not being pointed out to the greatest possible extent in a fitting and appropriate way, that people are not paying attention, that it is being taken for granted in our time, which so urgently needs the opposite. It may be said that, within the framework of this Anthroposophical Congress, what the Anthroposophical movement has been representing in a thoroughgoing way for decades has gone through a kind of fiery trial. At this congress, spiritual achievements were accomplished which, I am firmly convinced, are among those that cannot be found elsewhere at the present time. From the sum of these spiritual achievements, I would like to highlight two that are characteristic of what is happening within the framework of our Anthroposophical Movement – this movement that is so vilified in the world. I do not want to shy away from saying what I believe, because not speaking one's mind is something that many people today already consider their mission. But we will not make any progress if we do not speak the truth, express honest conviction, even where it takes a little courage to do so, and say it where it is needed.

There is much that could be said about this conference, my dear friends. What I have emphasized as an example should not be taken as implying that nothing similar could be said about anything else. Perhaps others will do so. It seems to me appropriate to emphasize some examples from the whole range of spiritual achievements of our Anthroposophical Congress. We may say that what actually emerged from the underground of the Anthroposophical Movement is, first and foremost, the Waldorf School, founded years ago by Mr. Emil Molt. The outside world may think what it will of this school, but the fact remains that a large part of the world looks to this school and another part gasps at the impossibility of founding similar schools all over the world. The spirit of the Waldorf school is longed for in the widest circles. I would like to say that in the field of inner work, this spirit of the Waldorf School was also expressed at the congress. We experienced that a teacher at the Waldorf School, Miss Caroline von Heydebrand, gave a lecture on something that is extremely popular in our time and that plays an extraordinary role in today's school system with the well-known name “experimental psychology and pedagogy”. But for anyone who really understands schooling and teaching, the development of this method in the context of human development means nothing other than that it shows how alien the inner human being has actually become to the human being, the educator to the child. At the conference, Fräulein von Heydebrand provided a detailed critique of this modern education system – or, one might say, this modern aberration. She showed that from a higher perspective, it is possible to carry the essence and spirit of education and teaching out into the world from the very field of the Waldorf School. It was a pedagogical and didactic act of the very first order that happened as a result, and as I said, today we must find the courage to say what needs to be said, where judgments are not made about the value of human achievements, to say what must be said without reserve: that here something has been achieved that has a significance for our time and that can only arise from this spirit.

It must be mentioned in this circle, because much depends on the progress of the “Coming Day”, that one realizes how human achievements that want to prepare themselves to produce rising forces in the face of the forces of decline must be valued. We must not pass by asleep, otherwise we will be trampled underfoot in world history, no matter how much we want to found. What matters is human judgment. We must be able to understand how to put people in the right place, then the right thing will also happen in social relationships.

Now I would like to speak of the second thing. Today we are all obliged to develop a thorough sense of what is to become social. Everything connected with the name of the threefold social organism is based on such a feeling. Most of you will know, my dear friends, that from April 1919 onwards an attempt has been made to make it clear to the world that it is this threefold social organism that can really lead the great social questions of the present to a solution appropriate to our time. It has been tried. What we have experienced is among the most tragic imaginable; we have experienced that what was attempted at that time has reached into the very soul of the proletarian and the depths of the heart. It may have been as imperfect as possible in the beginning - the effect has penetrated into the hearts of the proletarians. We have been able to see that, even if it was imperfect in the beginning, effective forces could gradually develop if all people who are involved - and all people are involved - if all people would work together. In the past, the matter failed in the way it was propagated by us in the most diverse ways, and this word “it has failed” is what should be written in our hearts. In particular, the cause has failed in the proletarian world, and I cannot but mention it truthfully. Now some people come straight from proletarian circles and say: Yes, it was bound to fail because our school education was not such that we could fully grasp the matter. This is a great mistake; the school education would have been quite sufficient; it has also been shown that it was sufficient. What happened at the time was that the terribly domineering proletarian leaders, those who could not or would not understand what it was all about, broke the tip off the whole movement of threefolding. And it will not do to try to overlook, with our inadequate schooling, what is not there, to overlook what could not be broken, the sense of authority towards the established leaders. It is my profound conviction that much of what belongs to the forces of misfortune in the present has arisen from this. And it is likely that precisely those people who have already understood something about the matter will have to feel it deeply and painfully that certain insightful people did not approach the matter more energetically at the time.

What is needed in social life today is not to be alone in the individual company, not only to be able to manage the individual company; what is needed is an overview of the economic situation of the whole world. In the last third of the nineteenth century, the idea of world trade was transformed into world economy, and today the world economy is what we need in economic terms, despite the fact that war has created such terrible, insurmountable boundaries that should not actually exist. Nevertheless, the world economy stands as a challenge that cannot be ignored. And basically, no one can work on a large scale – and it must be – on the smallest scale, who does not have an overview of what the world economy requires.

Now, university science, often based on minds that are so far removed from life and can only theorize, and political economy, are trying to establish all kinds of things from social events, from which one can know what one should actually do in economic practice. And the work of university professors and their followers over long periods in this field has also given rise to the popular theories — you can check this in my “Key Points” — with which people want to reform the world today and which are nothing more than unworldly theories that have grown out of the ivory towers of professors.

Now, at our anthroposophical congress, the following also happened: Mr. Leinhas gave a lecture that ties in with the recently published book of an extremely amiable and, among his colleagues, extremely outstanding university professor of economics. It can be said that the book, in addition to having the various computational and other speculative properties of economics, is one of the most appealing phenomena in the social sphere today because it also has a certain human character. It was therefore extraordinarily fortunate that Mr. Leinhas took this book as his starting point and showed in a very thorough way during his lecture how this book, which has grown out of academic scientific thinking, makes it clear that the whole of university science is of no use in economic life. It can also be of no use if the various party secretaries distill their knowledge from the books of university professors. This does not make the theories applicable to life, so that individual party secretaries can write them down and color them somewhat party-wise, which thrives in the unworldly university rooms of the economists, because that is how things are in this field. Mr. Leinhas' lecture, based on a thorough knowledge of the economic conditions of the present, has torn the mask off the face of all this hustle and bustle, and the achievement of the lecture is that university science with all its offshoots will have to lie on the ground precisely because of the further expansion of what is given in the lecture, and we have shown that in this field one will have to work from a completely different angle.

My dear friends, if today, out of unprejudiced human judgment, one were to carry out that which is carried out from the oldest prejudices that still remain today, then the judgments that go out into the world today would be different. Dr. von Heydebrand's lecture on experimental pedagogy and psychology would have to be discussed for a long time in all teachers' circles and at all teachers' conferences as the one that addresses the burning question of the present. What Mr. Leinhas presented would be discussed for weeks in all the most important newspapers, filling entire columns with what was shown. It would be discussed back and forth, pro and contra, in order to evaluate the spiritual results of our time. A different tone must be adopted if one is to characterize the untruthfulness of the world today on the basis of truth. And one would like to hope that among you, my dear friends, there are receptive hearts and minds that are not in a position to have to take out the oldest grist and grain from those people who are supposed to drive the various carts forward. We have indeed had to learn from yesterday to today how, in order to fill one of the most important posts, one of the oldest personalities, who had long since been “dealt with”, had to be resorted to. These are only symptomatic phenomena, because people do not want to form their own judgment about things that are originally created out of life, and then they seek the corresponding positions because they cannot come to any other judgment, out of the oldest prejudices.

We must get away from these things if we want to understand how to evaluate things today; and we evaluate them correctly if we say at this moment: It is one of the greatest blessings that the “Coming Day” can have, that in the personality of Mr. Emil Leinhas, who has shown so extraordinarily what he is capable of, that he gets a corresponding leadership in this personality. And I believe it is the duty of everyone who lives and works in the “Coming Day” to be aware of this fact.

That is what matters, that we are able to measure true human value. If we are not able to do so, then we will not escape the forces of decline. Mr. Leinhas is not a scholar; he knows the practice of life in all its ramifications, he knows it from reality. And such a personality was needed to criticize what grows out of the party leaders' theories, which are divorced from reality. What is close to my heart today is to tell you that all those who understand something of the tasks of “The Coming Day” must consider it a very special piece of luck that a personality who must now be considered an authority in the field of economics thanks to her achievements during the congress is being placed at the head of the board of directors of “The Coming Day”.

In saying this, I am hinting at something, and what I am hinting at is based on my heartfelt feeling that I have to say that the “Day to Come” still has a long way to go before it can achieve the level it needs to reach if it is to emulate the success of the congress held from the end of August to the beginning of September. It is absolutely a matter of discovering a kind of “Columbus' Egg” for the “Coming Day”. Today we are in a position where it is our task to ensure that the whole spirit of our movement can really be brought directly into practical life; and of course we do not achieve that - you must not hold it against me - not by the fact that after all, serious concerns could arise from the inner life of 17 Champignystraße. What is really at issue here is that each and every one of us here be imbued with the new spirit to the very depths of our hearts; and for that we need one thing above all, and I have to say it three times, because these days we have to say things three times: we all need trust, trust, trust among ourselves!

And now I ask you, my dear friends, all of you who are present, whether this trust has been present in the necessary way from each person to each person. I ask you most sincerely to develop this out of a full sense of responsibility: Ask a little less whether this trust is present in the right way in the other person or whether you can place it in the other. Try to approach it from the opposite pole; try to ask yourself more often whether trust can be placed in you, whether it can be justified for each individual, but then as he really is, and whether each person is endeavoring to translate this trust into life in the appropriate way. There is no other way of doing it, my dear friends.

You can't always see life's circumstances so clearly when you're caught up in today's judgments, which are so superficial. Circumstances are very interrelated and very complicated, and if you really want to develop the trust that is so necessary in business and economic life, then the other thing that I have been talking to you about for a few minutes is also important: the envious recognition of human value, not in order to show it to others, but because you are interested in things moving forward.

That this spirit may truly take hold at 17 Champignystraße, that a pure, honest, humane spirit of trust may truly prevail here, which seeks to learn to perceive the value of the human being, depends on whether we can continue to work fruitfully with the “Kommenden Tag” at all, my dear friends. We cannot work today as we are accustomed to working in external matters; we must make progress, even if it is slow. To do that, we need to develop two things: trust and envious recognition of the human value of the person who works alongside us. This can be said to you by someone who was willing to study the circumstances and who knows that we have entered into great social need because, on a large scale throughout the world, trust has gradually been lost. Today we have to say to ourselves: I want, I want, I want to join in trust with the person whom I know can do this or that.

I would not speak to you sincerely and honestly if I had not also given you this speech, which some may feel is an epistle; it is meant to be nothing more than truly heartfelt, friendly advice that, if you consider what I have outlined, can be of great significance for the progress of the “Coming Day”. I am convinced that it contains something of the spirit we need and that it was not superfluous to talk about the most fundamental things during this important, most important change in the “Coming Day”. If we try to develop this trust, if we try to recognize the value of the people living beside us, then the “Coming Day” will gradually become something that can be placed in a healthy way next to what has not yet been achieved to perfection, but at least in its beginnings; we have achieved something after all : we have achieved in the general anthroposophical movement that we were able to organize this substantial congress with 1600 visitors, and we have achieved something in the Waldorf school, where after only two years of activity, something of what I just wanted to express with the two main spiritual forces in human nature has been established. There is something in the Waldorf School among the teaching staff that works out of the trust that one has in the other, and there is also something of the recognition of the value of the personality working alongside one. And for this reason it can be said that especially in the Waldorf school, this extraordinarily commendable creation that Mr. Emil Molt has brought into the world, we can see something of what we need in all areas of our lives, my dear friends.

At this solemn moment, one would like to express the heartfelt wish that the “day to come” could gradually become what was achieved at the congress from the end of August to the beginning of September, what was achieved in the Waldorf school and what is noticeable there to a certain extent. It is difficult to achieve something like this in economic life, but I can say one thing: we must achieve it through human cooperation. Those who work here, and especially Mr. Leinhas, who has a thorough knowledge of the conditions of economic and business and the people associated with it, you will always find a friend who has an open ear for everything that legitimately comes from the bosom of any part of “The Coming Day” in general or from any individual part of “The Coming Day”. We just need the right feeling in working together, then it will work. For myself, the personality of Mr. Leinhas guarantees that.

But I also have something else to say: even the most valuable personality cannot achieve anything if it does not find the appropriate collaborators in the world. One must be able to judge human value, but one must also know that the most valuable personality cannot achieve anything if it does not find the appropriate collaborators. Let me also express the heartfelt wish that all of you may find Mr. Leinha's right co-workers at 17 Champignystraße! The latter is a basic condition; then, at Champignystraße, one will at least be able to try everything that is necessary for prosperity and further development – otherwise not, my dear friends. Otherwise, if this condition is not met by the energetic and willing staff, Champignystraße will gradually degenerate into some backwater that only “quacks” about associative life without being able to carry out the story.

I have only given you a rough outline of the conditions necessary for the prosperity of the “Day to Come”. I would like to entrust this to you, now in this solemn moment, when I stand before you as Chairman of the Supervisory Board not only out of duty but also out of the innermost desire of my heart to express my heartfelt thanks to the outgoing General Director, which those who know Mr. Benkendörfer will certainly want to join in.

Thank you very much for everything you have done for the “Coming Day”, and rest assured that we hope to see your efforts bear fruit for us in a different field in the future. And you, my dear friend Emil Leinhas, I hereby transfer the office of General Director of “The Coming Day” to you in front of the assembled staff of “The Coming Day”. I have said how I rely on you, and I believe that I can rely on you with the utmost conviction. I am convinced that if you find the appropriate support here from the staff, we will have in you the personalities that we so urgently need for the management of the “day to come”. So, good luck to you and all your staff! May the most blessed things within the “day to come” arise from your work!

And so, my dear friends, I have come to the end of my remarks, which were intended to inform you of the changes that have become necessary for the “coming day”.

[Emil Molt also gives a speech, after which Rudolf Steiner takes the floor again.

Rudolf Steiner: My dear friends! I would like to take this opportunity to express my heartfelt thanks for the expression of trust that the second chairman of the supervisory board has just expressed, and I may well take this opportunity to say that I am deeply convinced that I can only achieve everything I do with my limited strength if I truly have the trust of each and every colleague. In view of this, please allow me to say a few more words.

I would now like to address the members of the Supervisory Board, the co-chairman Mr. Emil Molt, and thank you in particular for the trust you have shown me in so many ways, but most of all I would like to address my dear friend Mr. Uehli, who is so closely connected with all that happens here at Champignystraße 17 in his work. Mr. Uehli, my dear friends, also took over his position here in a leading role at a time when the most difficult tasks imaginable had to be placed on his shoulders. It is only thanks to his subtle and at the same time energetic zeal for everything that the anthroposophical movement stands for – a zeal that, precisely because of its nature, it is so easy for colleagues to join and all that is striven for by this zeal —, my dear friends, it is precisely this zeal that must be attributed in the first place to a large extent to the fact that the Anthroposophical Congress in Stuttgart took the course that I have indicated. Therefore, at this moment, I may still say that it is my most heartfelt wish, but also my hope, that the most beautiful collegial relationship will develop between friend Leinhas and friend Uehli here in these rooms. But that will develop, because it has the very best foundations; it will develop, it has been developing for a long time and we can build on it. This cooperative relationship is there, but such things also bear fruit when they are understood. May it be well understood what can develop from the interaction of two such personalities here at 17 Champignystraße, and therefore let me also say my greeting at last to what fills me with very special joy and satisfaction: the prospect of the cooperative interaction of the two friends!

[Short speeches by Ernst Uehli, Eugen Benkendörfer and Emil Leinhas follow, and finally a word of thanks from the employees at the headquarters at 17 Champignystraße.]

Rudolf Steiner opens the meeting by saying that it was no longer possible for him to attend the works council meeting in person; however, he asks that everything that is deemed necessary be brought forward at this moment.

[The question of the rights and duties of the works councils within the “coming day” is raised and Rudolf Steiner is asked to clarify this.]

Rudolf Steiner remarks that it is indeed very important and very good to bring about such discussions, and it will always be very good. He would also be willing, as far as possible, to accept such invitations to discuss, only it would be necessary to be able to determine what the subject of the discussion actually is.

He says: I believe you are still suffering to a great extent from the assumption that the “Coming Day” could somehow be a realization of what was expressed as an idea in the lectures back then. I can only say that the idea that was expressed has, of course, not been realized in the slightest today. Just consider what would have been needed to realize this idea: in those days, it would have taken a united labor force – without that, nothing could have been done – and that did not materialize. And one can only say: the idea that was expressed has basically been dropped for the time being. And today, we must be particularly sorry about that, because in reality, we are now in a position in German economic life that we can say: what is present in German economic life today is actually only an illusion, a sham.

The world today can no longer exist as anything other than a unified economic entity. There must be unified economic entities that combine to form a distinct world economy. The artificial borders of national and state economies today make it all the more clear that it is no longer possible to manage without a world economy. In today's world economy, which nevertheless exists, the situation is such that basically the whole of economic life today is based on appearances. Take the following: we still have a wage economy today; it finds its opposite pole, as does the capitalist economy in general, in that idea which I tried to propagate at the time. As long as we have a pure wage economy, the whole economy is dependent on the wage economy. Wages are, so to speak, a barometer of what is happening in the economy as a whole.

You see, the working class is pretty much the largest number of people on earth, as far as economic life is concerned. If you convert today, for example – and somehow you have to convert – if you convert wages today according to the value of the Swedish krona, the American worker receives a daily wage of about 120 to 123 Swedish kronor, the German worker 19 to 21 Swedish kronor. This is roughly true, even though some small changes have occurred in recent weeks. The workers of all other countries or states fall between these two limits. Now, I ask you: the American worker receives a wage six times higher than the German worker, although it has been proven that he does not produce more than the German worker if he works accordingly.

In this way, it is impossible to speak of being within economic life; all this is conceived under the assumption that we have a world economy, because the fact that we still have a country or state economy should mean nothing at all, since a large part of the available values circulates throughout the world. It is clear that major disruptions must occur as a result.

We are living today in impossible economic conditions, in Central Europe in the most impossible of all. And one can feel sorry when one considers that our ideas were propagated at that time out of this realization. These ideas have actually fallen by the wayside to this day, because, as you will understand, the “Coming Day” cannot be much different from any other undertaking, as capitalist as all other undertakings are. We can only plan to be there for a future where something can perhaps be done, to intervene, so that a number of people are together who can intervene. As long as conditions remain as they are now, the economic principle itself will not allow the “Day to Come” to bring about many changes.

The whole world is curious to see how the “Day to Come” will cope with the very idea of how the working class can work in the “Day to Come”. Basically, no information can be given yet, nothing essential can be shown. And so I thought we could very well talk about what your individual complaints are, what could be different in detail. Realized what was propagated as ideas back then – I would not want this misunderstanding to arise, as if it were said of me that the “Coming Day” [had] realized something of the ideas of threefolding: That is nonsense! We should talk about what is bothering you, because there seem to be some pressing shoes that could cause discomfort. But if we talk about what is bothering you, then I also want everything to come out and nothing to remain closed. And so, before I say anything, I would like the gentlemen to speak freely.

[They do not want to raise complaints, but to discuss whether “statutory” works councils should be elected, since the existing works councils had been elected from the threefold social order movement before the Works Councils Act came into force. If these do not work to satisfaction, new ones would have to be elected.

Rudolf Steiner means the same. The question is whether the employees of Waldorf-Astoria at the time the law came into force agreed to the continued existence of the old, previously elected works council. But this was the case here.

[Further comments on this.]

Rudolf Steiner: Today it is certainly difficult to ask the question of whether statutory works councils should be introduced or not, because the Works Councils Act simply prescribes works councils that are elected in accordance with the law. As long as this law is not changed, no works councils as envisaged by the idea of threefolding can actually be considered, because this would then only be a corporate body that exists alongside a statutory corporate body. We would then have to resume the whole threefolding movement in the first place, because basically we no longer have an actual threefolding movement. If we want to elect works councils based on the idea of threefolding, then we also have to assign them a task, because in the current economic life these works councils have or would have no task to fulfill.

[Further discussion and expressions of dissatisfaction to the effect that the works councils are not taken seriously enough by the plant managers.

Rudolf Steiner points out that it depends on the degree to which the employees are convinced that things can go better with the “Coming Day” than with any other undertaking, and says: I myself am not an entrepreneur myself and therefore cannot take the entrepreneurial point of view in my personality, but on the other hand, when questions arise, I have to take a position on them so that what is said is really meaningful. What I mean is that if you are arguing, if you are arguing about something, then you have to know what you are arguing about, because for me it is not the argument that is important, but what we are arguing about. If I am to speak about the rights and duties of the workers' councils, I cannot do so in general terms, about any workers' councils that may be on the moon. I would have to do it for the workers' councils that are in the 'coming day'. And I can only do that based on very real circumstances. And here it is urgently necessary that we talk about it today, because you will have been informed about how you feel that the “dawning day” cannot do anything in the coming economic struggles and that the workers in our individual companies will therefore be forced to proceed with the rest of the working class. Then you will get a real character. Before that, it is of course something that cannot be said one way or the other – I will tell you later why I think so, one can look at it that way. We can talk about it today in such a way that none of the labor-friendly ideas of the “Coming Day” have been realized, even though the general attitude is benevolent. But as long as we don't go into individual things, nothing comes of it. And I would therefore like to see it as a condition for me to speak, that you present very specific, concrete complaints, which I will then address. Without knowing what your concerns are, I will not be able to say anything about them.

[Further comments to the effect that people wonder whether the “coming day” could give the working class a secure existence, that the works council is not trusted enough, that one is only seen as a worker, not as an equal human being.

Rudolf Steiner: Yes, my dear friends, that is the feeling I meant; I wanted to be aware of it before I go into the question raised in more detail.

[Further discussion about this and about trade union issues.]

Rudolf Steiner: So you meant that we should establish tangible, fixed sentences about the rights and duties of the works councils. This would certainly not be so difficult if we just had the good will to draft such a paragraph, in which we say that these are the rights and these are the duties of our works councils. Unfortunately, however, that is not the case. I believe that if we really managed to create such an ideal paragraph, all employees would agree with it – and not only that, they would also be highly satisfied with it. But in such a short time, conditions will not have changed and the mood will not have changed either. The point is not to take measures, one should have these and these rights and duties. But the point is to achieve something at such meetings that also corresponds to the conditions outside. To give you an idea of my way of thinking, I would like to share the following with you.

Since we last met here, I myself had to initiate a matter that arose from the needs in Dornach. I have also spoken here about lectures, and these have been given in Dornach [to the workers on the Goetheanum building site] by a prominent person. Not much has come of this, except that after we held works council meetings, we realized that the people in Dornach have a strong need to hear something about economic life. I then decided that I would give these myself. You have to bear in mind the circumstances, as I have already described them, at the Dornach building. The Dornach building is not what an economic-capitalist enterprise is. The Dornach building is a prime example of a non-capitalist enterprise and cannot be compared as such with the 'Kommenden Tag' or the 'Futurum AG' in Basel or with any other similar association. The Dornach Building belongs to no one; there is no entrepreneur there. Therefore, everything that is processed in it is transformed into wages for those who work there. Is it not the case that what still comes into consideration at the Dornach Building is that present-day economic life reaches into it from two sides; but there it is “refracted”. On the one hand, it is this: It has to be built with the capital that is made available. If the Dornach building exploits anyone, it is the capitalists, because they have to provide the capital. I would almost like to say that a large part of it goes 'perdu', as a large part of it never gets returned. In any case, the workers can see clearly there, and that is the one side where capital shines in and refracts: capital ceases to be capital as soon as it comes to Dornach.

Secondly, our workers belong to trade unions. And you will admit that, for example, if you yourself have the sense to give our workers 2/3 more wages by exploiting capital even more, it would make no sense in the economy as a whole and would be most strongly opposed by the trade unions. They would then say: There is the Dornach building, it does not want to be characterized as a capitalist enterprise, it wants to realize something of what is present in the idea of threefold social order. So you can see that this cannot be a question of wages or capital, but rather the question of price, as the conditions here protrude from two sides. People would think we were crazy if we paid wages that we were not forced to pay.

But what makes things easier, especially during the lectures, is something that is of course child's play to see: this is not a capitalist enterprise. This kind of mistrust that you have towards the “Kommenden Tag” – and that cannot be denied – cannot exist in the Dornach building. It makes no sense for the workers there to be mistrustful, and the workers there speak out in good faith. Some who are not entirely objective would like to think differently, but this trust is already there; it makes it possible to speak freely. That is why I have – the lectures have only been given recently, in the meantime I also had the trip to Norway, and something like that cannot be done very quickly if you want to achieve something – but the main emphasis is on the workers in Dornach learning about the reality of economic life. I must confess that it gives me the greatest satisfaction to see how more and more people are beginning to understand that we have all been misjudging economic life.

When faced with the task of educating laypeople, one is aware of the current situation. Let us assume, and it would be very interesting if later on a person would like to touch on this point by asking a question, let us assume we have the workers of some company, they draw up some guidelines about the rights and duties of the workers of this company, the management can approve the question or not. I say it is right, and I believe that any honest person must say this: Whatever the employers say, it has no value at all; they can say, 'We agree to everything', or 'We agree to nothing' – the way today's economic life is, the economic structure is nonsense. No entrepreneur today knows how profitable his business is or how it is doing; he does not know what he can promise and what not if he wants to be honest. That is the situation, and if economic struggles are imminent today, then an entrepreneur cannot say whether or not he can offer his workers a guarantee, because he cannot know, because economic life has been ridden into the dirt.

As soon as someone concretely tackles economic life as it is today and addresses such things, something comes out that is tremendously instructive. Imagine someone thinking about calculation and writing an essay about it, which in and of itself is extremely instructive. The content of this essay must, of course, be to assess economic life, but at the end of this essay, there is the very significant question, the conclusion to which he has come by thinking about calculation: Can we calculate or can we not? Does something come of it? — We cannot cope with today's conditions. That is what can be read in the essay, and it is the confirmation of what I have observed for ten years: that we have arrived at a complete deadlock in economic life. In this context, it seems to me to be of little importance whether one can say today that we must reach an agreement with the eight million organized workers if we do not want to be marginalized, or because we cannot reach an agreement and be left hanging in the air.

I tell you that when you understand the nonsense of today's economy, you can say: When the next economic struggles come and go as they will, the eight million organized workers are united, then nothing will happen but that our economic life will be led or pushed even further down its slippery slope and that all the bankrupt enterprises will collapse as a house of cards. The organizations, which comprise eight million people, cannot believe that under the present conditions they can achieve anything at all that needs to be achieved; there is no question of that. Economic life will be destroyed even more.

What is needed first today is to be able to do business at all, because in the business itself, one has really come to the “non-sense” today: There is really no sense to what is being done in economic life, because nothing is in context: we are faced with a brick wall. This can be seen, and the Dornach workers have also seen this; they have gained an appreciation that we have entered into 'non-sense' in economic life. If you look at a business enterprise today, do you think you will find anyone who has any sense of the word when you talk sensibly about economic life? If you take an economist with whom you want to talk about a company, he will point you to the bookkeeping, because everything is in there. In reality, however, nothing is in it; it is nonsense to believe that anything can be seen from the accounting about the course of a business.

These things have become very clear to me through my observations over the last few years, and it is not so easy to talk about them. Take a balance sheet, the result is nonsense. It is similar to that famous Prussian privy councillor who calculated that if you invested the actually small amount of 300,000 marks for three hundred years in interest and compound interest, you could then pay off the entire debt of the Prussian state. You can do the math if you want, but the reality is that after three hundred years you won't find a button made out of the money. Because it is not enough to believe that you can keep adding interest to the accumulated capital; after all, the money cannot come from anywhere other than from economic life, from production, from working with capital, and by then not only the banks that are entrusted with the safekeeping of the money, but also the money itself will have perished. Reality is therefore quite different from the calculation.

Today, the will to such nonsense is present in the whole of economic life; reality wears it down and shatters it. What goes on in a factory today is something completely different in economic life than what is written in the books. No one wants to go into it, no one wants to be bothered with a real insight into economic life, which is needed today. That was also why the idea of the works council had not been maintained at the time. You just have to start from the beginning, but I don't want to talk about how the matter was settled back then. I actually presented it as the most important question.

But now we should talk about the rights and duties of the workers' councils. The important thing here is the standpoint that arises from the circumstances. That is precisely the one that says: the way things are going now, they cannot go on like this anyway. The workers will therefore have to remain in the organizations; you cannot tell them to leave because you cannot help them if they leave; the circumstances are not there for that. You cannot look at the movement that has been there for about 25 years, because you won't get anywhere; but you have to look at it that way, and that is what I have to keep drawing your attention to.

Once, as a very young boy, I was standing at the window of our apartment in Neudörfl, near Wiener Neustadt, when a small group of Lassalleans, who at that time still held their meetings in relative secrecy, , because we have to bear in mind that this was at a time when there was nothing of the trade union life that exists today; so there were only a few people. Meanwhile, however, everything that is in this movement in Austria and Germany today has come about. We can say that it has progressed relatively slowly from this small group. We cannot say that the conditions were against our movement, as they were then. It was not that the conditions were against it; the conditions were in favor of it, in that large masses were open to the threefold order. What was against it was the slight deception practised by the labor leaders, and it is certain that the eight million will not do anything either – they cannot do anything. My opinion is this: Regardless of whether we are in the unions or not, it is not a matter of leaving the union, but rather of uniting, however small, in a reasonable way within all those who participate in the “Kommenden Tag”. It would set an example, and we must work towards such examples. I believe that there is something positive in this idea, and this can best be shown if, quite independently of the union principle, the workers of all the companies that belong to “The Coming Day” can do something sensible on their own initiative. But for that, unity is necessary, as well as a real insight into the “non-sense” of the current economic system. A reasonable economic life must be rebuilt, because nothing can be made out of today's economic life.

And so I think – no, I would like to say – you say: Rights and duties of the works councils should be established. If I now say: No, rights and duties can only be granted by someone who has rights and duties to do so. If you were to ask me what rights and duties I have in the “coming day,” I would have to say that I know nothing about it, any more than you do; it also depends entirely on the circumstances. Actually, everyone should have as many rights and duties as they can assert, and that would indeed come about. But if you want to set up paragraphs, if you want to have insights into the course of production, that doesn't have much content, and not much comes of it either. Isn't it true that the point of the course of production is that the person who regulates it also knows how the wind blows – not to keep some secret. First of all, it must be made possible for all those who want to work together to know something about economic life.

You see, if I disregard the “day after tomorrow”, where the most insightful people are – we cannot take our examples from the “day after tomorrow”, but you can take any other company. There you just have to have the insight to be able to have a say in production. I am convinced that if you wanted to ask questions in your way, the people concerned would not be able to provide any insight because they don't have any themselves. Today's economic life is a game of chance, and that is precisely what makes it difficult. Here we come to realize that it is much more important to discuss with the workers, so that we can understand what we are supposed to do in economic life, which is so dependent on the state.

I would also like to remind you of something: [the entrepreneur] Stinnes. When we started the threefold order, Stinnes was not yet there. I did not make light of the threefold order. Stinnes only came about because the threefold order fell through; the whole Stinnes movement is based on that. Stinnes is a really ingenious fellow. I wouldn't want to say that he is a crook; he is just a “seedling” of entrepreneurship, but in any case he has much greater insight than others. Stinnes once said: Yes, we can manage things that way. But if you want to do things the way German workers want to do them, you won't get anywhere. He knows that the workers cannot manage, and this should create insight. They debate all sorts of things, but not production. And so he continued: We can wait until the workers are at our doors begging for work. Stinnes is counting on the workers being at the doors begging for work.

With regard to the rights and duties of works councils, it is certainly true that they can have the most extensive rights; and as soon as something really positive can be put forward here, we can always express ourselves here when the opportunity arises; it can be discussed here. But to set a paragraph about this, in my opinion, is of no use at all, because we are doing it in an economic life in which we have arrived at “positive nonsense”. We live from hand to mouth today; after all, no one can do more than is already being done. But that will soon burst. What the employers are counting on today is the disunity of the workers, and the employers will always have ways and means to maintain the disunity of the workers and ensure its continued existence. Even if there were no economic chaos, the German labor force could only hope to achieve partial success by acting in unison, but something substantial could still be done. However, if things continue as they have done so far – strikes here and there – it will only weaken the labor force, not strengthen it. This non-uniform approach is something that significantly worsens the position of the workers. I don't think much of the fact that there could be fear of the eight million.

Something that could have prospects is if the workers of our companies in Stuttgart really came together, that they could come together and talk sensibly about economic life for once. In my opinion, this is the greatest task that needs to be accomplished. And it cannot be done by finding the lectures a little better or a little worse. Because anyone who wants to talk about economic life today really has to be an experienced person who can see into the circumstances. Today, this experience cannot be drawn from all kinds of writings, because of all the sciences that are practiced today, the one that is presented as political economy is the most “mindless”.

Mr. Leinhas, in his lecture at our anthroposophical congress, did an exemplary job of 'killing off' Robert Wilbrandt, at least in scientific terms. But Wilbrandt is still a perfectly decent guy. If we were to name just one of our other clients, however, we would come up with something much worse. And this is only because we have no economics, no knowledge, and today it must necessarily be formed out of experience. Almost nothing that is said in this field is useful; apart from the individual flashes of light that appear on the basis of the threefold social order. But the possibility should be created for a large number of people to see how things actually are in economic life.

When I gave my lectures here at the beginning, the wife of a socialist minister told me that she could not understand why so many people came to my lectures, that I did not promise people anything and only ever told them what they had to do. And that is how it is, dear attendees. You cannot define the rights and duties of the workers' councils if the circumstances are simply not right. If we really want to start from a center to determine what is worth doing, then this is it: that all of you can help to achieve something from here, how best to operate, by preparing the ground. We can promise ourselves that the matter may have an immense practical value in a year's time, if the working class unites in unity, independently of the trade union question, in order to achieve something. We have seen that in Dornach, for example, it is necessary to first agree on insights. If one were to examine the conditions of economic life independently of whether one is a worker or an entrepreneur, then one would be able to make progress. Then one might also be able to cut Stinnes off at the source. It will depend on whether you come to an agreement with 'Der Kommende Tag'; then perhaps the day will come for 'Der Kommende Tag' when Stinnes takes it over. Such are the circumstances. If you can create something positive by joining forces, then we can talk about the question, then there must be agreement. The managers of our operations are striving to make progress in social relations. The managers of the individual operations are also sighing. But if the workers of the individual operations join forces, then there is a core that can make progress.

[In the following comments, reference is made to the difficult situation that also makes it difficult for the plant managers to gain insight into production. Reference is made to the efforts to set up a company health insurance fund and a pension fund and to provide food from the agricultural enterprises of “The Coming Day” to the workers.

Rudolf Steiner: The question of setting up a pension fund and of utilizing the agricultural operations for the workforce is very interesting and can certainly be fruitfully discussed, but it must be ensured that the right people are put in charge.

[It is reported that the company health insurance fund is as good as certain thanks to the benevolent support of the government. With regard to the deliveries of agricultural produce, it should be borne in mind that such things can drive people apart.

Rudolf Steiner expresses his hope that these institutions, which are in preparation and have often been beneficial in other companies, will be well developed here as well. He also mentions, with regard to the company health insurance fund, that it is very desirable in our efforts to achieve a rational art of healing that something be done in this area in particular. With regard to agricultural enterprises and their utilization for the workforce, he points to an example that occurred in the Anthroposophical Society.

He was the owner of a mill and also a baker who baked excellent bread. The circumstances forced the man to make his bread more expensive, and it was clear that no one had the will to make just a small sacrifice to help the cause. On the contrary, they said, “Yes, the bread is so good, you eat so much of it.” And if I take the other bread, you don't use nearly as much.” Now, of course, precisely this bread distribution had to be stopped due to the war conditions; otherwise, however, the attitude would have been the same.

Rudolf Steiner continues by saying that an article had recently appeared in an English newspaper about a businessman who owned a large farm and wanted to prove that it was no longer possible to make a profit. He calculated all the profits that the business could bring him in a year and then came to the conclusion that only 17 pence would remain for him at the end of the year.

[Emil Leinhas adds another example. It is hoped that the works councils will now be able to work productively after these explanations, which Rudolf Steiner confirms.

Rudolf Steiner: You see, Mr. Biehler was right to speak of the tax issue, which the workers must oppose. But now, you have woven in a small sentence, to which I must actually attach a little significance. You said: If the workers unite, then the eight million organized people will achieve something from the government. I must say that today the government basically does not care what it taxes; it just wants to have taxes. Only through this senselessness has the entire economy come to where it is today, by simply caring about how something is done. As long as this government lasts, it is also out of the question that the working class will achieve even a fraction of what it really needs.

The most important question today is the question of unemployment, and a lot has been said about it, but ultimately no one has yet considered that unemployment as it exists today cannot exist at all in a regulated economic life. Isn't it true that people who work for each other, everyone works for the other. So if unemployment were justified, so many people would no longer need anything at once. On the other hand, there is no correction at all from the current circumstances; one cannot say that unemployment exists to the extent that it exists in Switzerland, at the Entente and so on for this and that reason. The atrocious conditions we are facing can only be appreciated when you consider that so many people have been killed by the terrible war. But unemployment cannot be a consequence of this war, because if so many people are dead, it should only lead to unemployment becoming less and less.

Recently there was an economic meeting; there was talk that there are a number of recipes for remedies that are available to us. Isn't it true that the utilization of these remedies will one day be productive, but today they are just a thought. And then someone came up with the idea that you could simply copy the recipes and include them in the assets of a company. This item would be honestly meant under certain circumstances, because you could really bring it out. On the other hand, however, if no one can be found to support the matter, it is of no value at all.

But there is a way in which it can be safely included in the books, and that is to take out patents for it and pay for them, and then you can put it in the books at that value. After all, that is not what happened here with the recipes for the remedies, and yet a way is provided to exploit the value of the recipes. When someone earns a lot or a little money, they don't want to distribute profits right away, so they make write-offs or set aside reserves. With us, what can be raised under certain circumstances goes into real reserves, which can then, at a time when many of the things being produced today will have collapsed, can then support many things again.

[Words of thanks to Rudolf Steiner for his remarks and emphasis on the will of the workers' council to penetrate the economy.

Rudolf Steiner once again briefly refers to the already mentioned desirable union of all workers in the “coming day” and that something truly valuable for economic life could certainly arise from it in the not too distant future, if everyone has the will to work together in the right way. We must always be mindful of the “non-sense” of our present economic life; this would provide the right incentive for the right work. He would be happy to accept the invitation of the workers again as soon as the opportunity arose, in order to support them with any advice.

Speeches by Rudolf Steiner at the preliminary meeting of the fourth ordinary general assembly of “Futurum A.G.”

Emil Leinhas greets the members of the Anthroposophical Society who are present and who represent about 80% of the share capital of “The Coming Day”, and asks Dr. Steiner to take the chair.

Rudolf Steiner: My dear friends! Today we will probably have to hold the most sober and uninspiring meeting possible within the Anthroposophical Society, and therefore we may well ask that pure reason alone prevail in today's meeting, otherwise we will hardly be able to cope.

The point is that today we have to talk to each other in a certain way about the fate of the “Coming Day”, which is connected with many ideals that members of the Anthroposophical Society have embraced in recent years. We have in the “Coming Day” an institution that emerged, so to speak, as the last major institution from the once emerging threefold social order movement, and it is only with a certain pain that we can turn our attention to the fact that this “Coming Day” is now in a truly serious crisis that absolutely must be resolved. Above all, it is important to see things as soberly as possible.

The hopes have not been fulfilled that the things connected with the “Coming Day” could proceed as one had wanted, that the Central European economic crisis, so to speak, would pass by the “Coming Day”, but the “Coming Day” is now just as any other business, fully participating in what the declining economic life offers. The “Coming Day” is not doing better today, but also not worse than any other Central European business.

The crisis has come about in the following way: if, [after the currency was converted to gold marks], the “Coming Day” had cash today, the possibility of continuing its economic and intellectual operations with cash, if it could count on being able to take out loans, then it would be able to continue working, just as other businesses are truly not working under better conditions today. However, the “Coming Day” does not have any cash, and so it cannot continue its economic and spiritual activities as they have existed up to now. The material value of the “Coming Day” is - and this must be emphasized again and again - such that if cash were available or could be raised, there would be no objection to simply letting the leadership go. Of course, there may be other reasons why “The Coming Day” is unable to find cash at the moment, but the main reason is that German economic life has taken on forms that make it impossible for the “Coming Day” to continue as other commercial enterprises do, because to do so it would have been necessary for the “Coming Day” to be treated with the same goodwill from outside as other commercial enterprises have been. That did not happen. A large part of the reasons why the “Coming Day” is in this crisis due to the lack of any cash funds - soberly this cannot be put differently than this: a large part of the blame lies in the way the “Coming Day” was vilified in the world. A project that is presented to the world in this way could only continue to function if it had a core of people who would take financial responsibility for it. But if only what has happened so far within the Anthroposophical Society is continued, the only thing that can be counted on, this is not the case either, and so today we can do no other than objectively present the situation of the “Coming Day” as it is. Therefore, I will take the liberty of organizing today's agenda in such a way that I will first ask Mr. Leinhas to present the situation of the “Coming Day” objectively to you, and as the second point on the agenda, I will make the proposals that need to be made in view of the serious situation. So I ask Mr. Leinhas to give an objective presentation of the situation of the “Coming Day” as a prerequisite for our further negotiations.

[Emil Leinhas describes the situation on the basis of the balance sheet. The situation is such that the economic enterprises can no longer support the spiritual ones.

Rudolf Steiner: My dear friends! You have listened to the description of the situation of the “Coming Day”, and I will now take the liberty, with a heavy heart but purely rationally, as I ask you to take it, of discussing the only way we can get over this crisis of the “Coming Day” in my opinion.

The essential thing here is that, in view of the description of the situation that has just been given to us, we now have to divide the “Coming Day” into two parts: one comprising purely economic enterprises and the other comprising spiritual enterprises. If we draw the conclusion from what has just been said, it is actually the case that we, who, as anthroposophists, have to reflect on the situation, have to say that The “Coming Day” is no longer able to provide any cash for the spiritual activities, which essentially include the Waldorf School, the Clinical Therapeutic Institute, the Research Institute and the publishing house. Therefore, the question is – since the prerequisite that I believed I had to make, that the purely economic operations had to be organized first, has failed due to the impossibility of somehow managing today with the sale of these operations or the like – how we manage to separate the spiritual operations of “Coming Day” in a certain way. But this can only be done through extremely difficult measures that require heavy sacrifices on the part of our anthroposophical friends. It is not possible in any other way. You must bear in mind that these spiritual enterprises are now in a situation in which they have no possibility of being continued in any way out of the situation of the “Coming Day”. They have, so to speak, been abandoned, not by any decision, but by the facts.

The question arises: how do we get out of this situation? We have to consider the following: the “Coming Day” has issued 109,000 shares. Let us do the math based on the number of shares. If we make an estimate, but probably a fairly accurate one, of the share capital underlying these 109,000 shares, and divide it between the purely economic and the spiritual enterprises, then 74,000 shares are accounted for by the economic and agricultural enterprises and 35,000 by the spiritual enterprises. So, we have possessions for the spiritual enterprises, which correspond to 35,000 shares of “Tomorrow”.

Now, my dear friends, how can these enterprises, these spiritual enterprises, be continued? That is the fundamental question. And however you may look at it, these spiritual enterprises cannot remain as they are in the face of the situation of the “Coming Day”. For what would then have to happen? Then the “Coming Day” would have to proceed in the same way as other enterprises have to proceed today. The holdings would have to be consolidated, and the total mass of shareholders of the “Coming Day” would be faced with exactly the same situation, only with a significantly reduced number of shares. Perhaps this would somewhat increase their creditworthiness, but it is something that cannot be done, given all the prospects that have to be considered.

But if this cannot be done, what can be done? There is nothing else to be done – and I am now saying what I have to say with the greatest reluctance, but it must be said because of the situation, and if I were to present the matter to you in a long-winded way, it would not be any better: the only thing that can be done is to get rid of the 35,000 shares that correspond to the ownership of the spiritual enterprises. But this is only possible if enough people of influence can be found within the Anthroposophical Society who are willing to simply renounce their shareholdings in favor of the most important spiritual enterprises, so that the spiritual enterprises receive the 35,000 shares as a gift. It is just as if spiritual enterprises were to be founded and if a number of self-sacrificing personalities could be found who would contribute the sum corresponding to these 35,000 shares.

So, my dear friends, is it possible that the owners of 35,000 “Kommenden-Tag” shares renounce ownership of their shares? Then the 35,000 shares of Coming Day stock that are being given away could be left to the German Goetheanum fund, which would then have to be at my free disposal. This would give me free rein to run the spiritual enterprises. I see no other possibility for any other solution to the problem we are facing now than for this measure to be taken. You will understand that it is extremely difficult for me, one year after I myself resigned from the supervisory board of “Kommender Tag”, to have to make this enormous demand on the shareholders of “Kommender Tag” today: Give me 35,000 shares so that the spiritual activities can be continued in the way I will explain in a moment.

So if today there are shareholders willing to make this donation, then the matter is such that the “Coming Day” as such will continue to exist as an association of purely economic enterprises. How this continuation is envisaged will be discussed later. This continuation would correspond to a shareholding of 74,000 shares. We can discuss the matter in this area later. At this moment, I consider it my task to explain what can happen to the spiritual enterprises if the 35,000 shares are donated to the German Goetheanum Fund. It would then be clear that this willingness to make a sacrifice would at least express an anthroposophical attitude. The donors would say to themselves: Of course we are making a sacrifice, but we are doing so out of the anthroposophical spirit. There are shareholders in the “Coming Day” who will be able to make such a donation. Since they can, of course, only be placed in a position to make such a gift voluntarily, one can only say: Those who will give will also be able to give. It will be a group of shareholders who can give. On the other hand, there are shareholders of the “Coming Day” who cannot renounce their shareholdings; they are referred to purely economic enterprises. They would be in no different a position than other shareholders. And in order to preserve the full ownership of the 74,000 shares, it would be necessary for the spiritual enterprises to have no influence whatsoever on the economic administration of the “Coming Day”. If this condition were to be fulfilled today, that 35,000 shares of stock be made available to the German Goetheanum fund, and the economic enterprises were to be thought of separately, then the following would emerge:

First of all, the Waldorf School has 300,000 German Marks booked in the “Coming Day”. What the Waldorf School needs cannot really be covered by any kind of equivalent value. As you all know, the Waldorf School is entirely dependent on school fees and voluntary donations for its cash resources. Therefore, if the situation is to be rectified, the Waldorf School cannot be provided with the equipment it needs unless it receives a gift of the full amount. What corresponds to the Waldorf School [in terms of land, buildings and facilities], which is therefore listed in the “Coming Day” with 300,000 marks, must be donated outright.

The following then remains: the Clinical Therapeutic Institute, which is currently linked to the sale of remedies, that is, to the pharmaceutical laboratory. I will discuss the Clinical-Therapeutic Institute later. Regarding the sale of remedies, the balance sheet shows that it can be said that there is every prospect of it no longer requiring any significant sacrifices from today onwards. It is self-financing. However, cash will still be needed in the near future. And because it is a solid economic asset, it will be taken into account as such, and it must also be possible to buy it. Now it occurs to me that the Internationale Laboratorien A.G. in Arlesheim also handles the sale of remedies for all those countries in the world that have not even been ceded to the Stuttgart laboratory in a treaty, that this Internationale Laboratorien A.G. Arlesheim handles the sale of these remedies for the world. It is a joint-stock company. And in view of the balance of the local sales of remedies and in view of the general circumstances relating to our sales of remedies, which are extremely favorable in ideal terms, the International Laboratories A.G. Arlesheim will be persuaded to take over the sale of remedies and carry out the purchase of the laboratory. But again, given the circumstances there in Arlesheim, I cannot imagine that the purchase price could exceed 50,000 francs. These 50,000 francs will of course have to be added to the Goetheanum fund, since if the spiritual enterprises are now independent, if they are given as a gift, but the donation does not receive any cash, so that there could actually be no question of this purchase having the consequence that compensation - which would in any case be quite minimal - could be paid to the donating shareholders.

Regarding the publishing house, I would like to say the following: I can only feel an obligation to the publishing house to save from it the anthroposophical books that I have written myself, the books that are the result of the extraordinary and meritorious research of Dr. and Mrs. Kolisko, the two brochures and another book by Dr. Wachsmuth, a member of the Executive Council at the Goetheanum, which is currently being published. That would make a total of books that could be worth between 25,000 and 30,000 francs. This is something that should be acquired and the income from it should go to the Philosophical-Anthroposophical Press. The other mass of books is such that, speaking purely financially and from the point of view of the Coming Day, I not only cannot feel any obligation towards it, but must not feel any obligation towards it. In the case of this mass of books in particular, it occurs to me that despite all the objections I raised at the time when this book publishing house was founded, this publishing house has only behaved over time in such a way that it has essentially counted on the consumers of the Philosophical-Anthroposophical Publishing House within the Anthroposophical Society; that basically those who at the time created a competing company for the Philosophisch-Anthroposophischer Verlag with the “Coming Day” publishing house with an alleged enthusiasm that was actually foolishness, could easily be taken to task for this. Therefore, I do not feel morally obliged in any way to take care of the remaining book stock of the “Coming Day” publishing house.

This remaining book stock brings me to another thought. In the future, I will have to work hard to ensure that no anthroposophical funds flow into economic enterprises that have nothing to do with the Anthroposophical Society as such. In this regard, there was a time when we gave in, but today it is imperative that no economic enterprises be fed anthroposophical funds in the future. Therefore, it was also necessary for me to ensure that in the future, the entire sale of remedies worldwide would not be based on capital that comes from anthroposophical pockets, but on capital from people who want to manage their own assets with these things, in other words, only by people who do not give the money for anthroposophical reasons, but only out of consideration for those who consider the sale of remedies profitable, without taking into account that this has anything to do with anthroposophy. In the future, these matters can only be dealt with from this point of view. The sale of remedies can be organized in such a way that, if it is also managed commercially in the future, it can become a profitable business in a purely commercial sense, given the great recognition that even those remedies find in the world that I myself have only, I would say, half-hoped for. But it can only be managed with funds that are given for the risk involved in selling the remedies. So I can also recommend to the Internationale Laboratorien A.G. Arlesheim, which will be based on the above principles in the future, the purchase of the sale of remedies here.

That leaves the Clinical Therapeutic Institute in Stuttgart, my dear friends. Although its finances are quite healthy at present, it cannot be thought of as needing any other kind of leadership than that provided by cash. In accordance with the intentions that emerged from the Christmas Conference in Dornach, the Clinical Therapeutic Institute in Arlesheim can no longer be a member of the International Laboratories A.G. in Arlesheim, but only the local laboratory and the sale of remedies. In the future, a spiritual institute cannot be associated with purely economic enterprises. For this reason, the Clinical-Therapeutic Institute in Arlesheim has also been separated from the International Laboratories A.G. in Arlesheim and has become an integral part of the Goetheanum. The same cannot be said for the ClinicalTherapeutic Institute in Stuttgart, because the Goetheanum could not guarantee or take on the risk of a penny subsidy. So the situation of the Clinical Therapeutic Institute in Stuttgart is such that it cannot be connected to the International Laboratories A.G. in Arlesheim, nor can it be connected to the Goetheanum for the simple reason that the Goetheanum cannot take on any risk. The only way to set up the Clinical Therapeutic Institute in Stuttgart is to make it a financially independent enterprise that can be taken over by a doctor or non-doctor who, if subsidies are needed, will take them on at their own risk. On the other hand, if subsidies are not needed, anyone with a little business sense can take them on at their own risk. But if subsidies are necessary, then the Goetheanum certainly cannot take them on. So there is no other option for the clinic than to make it an independent enterprise. As for Gmünd, I do not count it among the enterprises for which I am responsible; the “Coming Day” will have to continue to take care of it and find a way to make it profitable.

What remains, my dear friends, is the scientific research institute, which is almost heartbreaking when you have to talk about it in this situation. But as things stand, the fact is, on the one hand, that the “Coming Day” has no cash for this institute, that the Goetheanum in Dornach is in no position to take on any obligation for this scientific research institute, not even a single penny , so that there is no other possibility — not out of any wish or anything like that, but purely out of the economic situation — than, if no enthusiast can be found to take over and finance the scientific research institute, to dissolve it, to dissolve it completely. We may be burying the idea that we had in mind as one of the most sacred, I would say, to establish economic enterprises to serve the spiritual life. But the possibility of continuing this does not exist.

So the following situation would arise for the spiritual enterprises: the Waldorf School will be supported by donations. The Clinical Therapeutic Institute in Stuttgart will become independent and will be made into a separate enterprise; Gmünd will remain in the care of the “Coming Day”. The scientific research institute will have to be dissolved if no individual or consortium can be found to maintain it. My books and the others mentioned will be removed from the publishing house and it will be ensured that these books fall to the Philosophical-Anthroposophical Publishing House for further distribution. The rest of the book inventory must be sold on the open market to outside publishers. I would consider it inadmissible if any steps were taken within the Anthroposophical Society itself to sell the rest of this book stock and to found anything further on what lies within the Anthroposophical Society, because that would create competition for the Philosophisch-Anthroposophischer Verlag, and no one can demand that what the Philosophisch-Anthroposophischer Verlag is doing should also be undermined by further competition.

That, my dear friends, is the stark and sober truth, which is the only thing that is necessary in the current situation. If we succeed in appealing to the willingness to make sacrifices of so many shareholders in the “Coming Day” today, so that 35,000 shares of stock for the spiritual enterprises are freely available and allocated to the Goetheanum fund, then we can undertake the reorganization of these spiritual enterprises in the way I have described. I would advocate for the order itself and then the remaining 74,000 shares would have to be dealt with for the further operation of the purely economic enterprises that are part of the “coming day”.

Do you believe, my dear friends, that what I have just presented to you briefly, soberly and dryly has really caused me the most serious concerns for weeks, has led to the most difficult struggles. But when Mr. Leinhas came to me at the Goetheanum in Dornach a few weeks ago and told me that the last of the economic enterprises with which the “Coming Day” still had to reckon, which, in a spirit of complete sacrifice, had actually raised the lion's share of the subsidies up to that point, it was clear that this enterprise would no longer be able to raise these subsidies either. Then it was clear: this would mean the end of the possibility of continuing the “Coming Day” in its old form. Then, despite its material assets, the “Coming Day” would be without the possibility of creating cash; then a reorganization would have to take place at all costs. Since that time, the whole matter has been a great concern to me. As long as there was hope that the economic enterprises could be sold first, and the spiritual enterprises would remain as a kind of rump of the “Coming Day”, one could think that what remains could be organized in some way. But now that things have progressed so far that we are standing before the General Assembly and have asked you to come together beforehand in confidence, it is not possible for me to put anything other than what I have just said before you as a proposal.

That is the point at which I would like to open the discussion. I therefore ask friends who want to participate to speak up. We can then, after the things that have been presented have been discussed, move on to discussing what possibilities can be considered for the continuation of the purely economic enterprises. I should also mention that one shareholder, who owns the corresponding number of shares, has made available to me the amount that the Waldorf School in “Kommender Tag” is currently worth. It can also be assumed that a number of others will definitely give it. So it will be possible for the shareholders who are willing to transfer their shares in the way described to add their number of shares to a list that is being passed around.

During the discussion, Emil Kühn asks whether it would not be possible for the shareholders who are donating today to participate in some way in the real values of the spiritual institutions.

Rudolf Steiner: As far as the economic enterprises are concerned, I myself would certainly be open to discussing the question that Dr. Kühn has just touched on. But as far as the spiritual enterprises are concerned, I would like to say the following: If the experiences that have been made in the economic management within the Anthroposophical Society in recent years are taken as a basis, then I can only say that I myself would not participate in the reorganization of the spiritual enterprises differently than if, in every respect, such conditions were created that would only make possible an administration in the spiritual sense for these enterprises.

As far as the Waldorf School is concerned, I would not be able to participate in a reorganization if, in any way, an economic administration were to be associated with this reorganization; and that would be the case if, in some way, the current shareholders of the Waldorf School were to participate. The Waldorf School can only obtain its operating funds from school fees and voluntary contributions, as I said before. And even if the property were there to begin with, it would always have to mean something quite imaginary for those who participate in it. The only healthy relationship is when the Waldorf School itself has this property, when it is given to it. On this condition alone, the spiritual enterprises of “Coming Day” can be detached from my proposal. I can say that I would only participate if a sufficient number of people were to give up their shares as a free gift - and this can only be done of their own free will - in order to find a solution. I myself would not participate in this solution if it were tied to the condition that gifts be made on condition that there should still be a participation. For that, financial administration would be necessary again, and I do not want to be associated with that. So I ask only those friends to sign up who are able to make their donations unconditionally, who want to place these spiritual enterprises on purely spiritual ground.

As you have seen, I have only made the proposals with a heavy heart. The proposal that has now been made is the most obvious one and has also been well considered. Otherwise it would be a matter of issuing bonds that would only represent an imaginary ownership. I want to keep away from anything imaginary. If the Waldorf School is not detached from an economic connection with the “Coming Day”, then I also don't know how the question can be solved, that I could remain the spiritual director of the Waldorf School. So I can't say what influence it would have on my own decisions if such a reorganization, as it has been suggested, were to take place. I have not appealed to a decision by you, but to the willingness of individual anthroposophical friends to make sacrifices. We do not have to bring about a decision if 35,000 shares are donated to the German Goetheanum fund as a gift – if Gmünd is dropped, it is only 29,000 shares – if 29,000 shares are donated to the German Goetheanum fund as a gift. I am not appealing to a decision, but only to the willingness to sacrifice in order to finance the spiritual enterprises in a certain way à fond perdu.

[Further discussion of the donation of shares to save the spiritual enterprises, which would also relieve the economic enterprises. These should become independent and, if possible, be taken over again by their former owners.

Rudolf Steiner: My dear friends! The words contained in my proposal have, I am deeply moved to say, fallen on extraordinarily fertile ground. I do not wish to miss this opportunity to emphasize what seems to me to be important and significant, namely that despite the unfortunate circumstances that have arisen within the Anthroposophical Society as a result of various foundations - I have often spoken about this over the past few years - it has become apparent that the trust in the general anthroposophical movement is so great that we can only look on with the deepest satisfaction that this trust is so great that it has hardly been weakened at all in recent years, despite all the unfortunate measures that have been taken and that were intended to accommodate those who had the faith that such measures could do anything for the anthroposophical cause. I have already emphasized in various places how the reliance on purely anthroposophical ground since the Christmas Conference has been shown everywhere in the most energetic way, that trust in the actual anthroposophical cause has not diminished in recent months, but has become much greater. So that within Anthroposophy we can look with the deepest satisfaction at what is alive among us in this direction.

I must say that today, with an extraordinarily sad and worried heart, I set about making the proposal that I once had to make to you, my dear friends, after becoming aware of the situation of “Kommendes Tag”. And I could have well understood if this proposal had been rejected in the broadest sense. I must say that it is deeply touching and heart-warming that this did not happen, but that we can see that right from the outset, in the first hour, friends have agreed to donate 20,700 shares to the Goetheanum Fund. I cannot tell you how grateful I am for this very beautiful result, that we can look at this result, that the indicated number of 20,700 shares has been made available, so that in the very near future we will be able to achieve full financial recovery of the spiritual enterprises in this direction, as far as possible, and thus also be able to contribute indirectly to the recovery of the “Coming Day”.

This is an extraordinarily distressing result, and we can only look back on the proceedings of this meeting with the deepest emotion. I thank all those who were able to donate and did so, truly from the bottom of my heart for what you have done, which means an extraordinarily significant deed not only for the “Coming Day”, but especially for our anthroposophical movement. For if this willingness to make sacrifices is now being shown in spite of the failures of recent years within anthroposophical circles in such a way, we will nevertheless be able to achieve what needs to be achieved on our main path in the near future. And what needs to be achieved is what can be done through anthroposophy in spiritual terms for humanity and for modern civilization. Even if our material undertakings have not had the desired success, even if everything that has emerged from the threefold social order movement has basically fallen through today, we still have the opportunity – and this is solely due to the unlimited trust that our anthroposophists have in anthroposophy – to make further progress in the spiritual realm.

This, however, also imposes an obligation on me to continue in the way I have tried to make the Christmas Conference fruitful so far, by making the Anthroposophical Society ever more esoteric and esoteric, in an active way. It is precisely from what our friends have done today that I feel how strong the obligation is to continue in this direction in the most energetic way. If we stick together in this way, each doing what he can do, we will make progress on the appropriate path.

You see, my dear friends, there is still work to be done: the threefolding movement was founded here years ago. Individual enterprises have emerged from it. The part of the threefolding movement that should have been carried out in a purely practical way, for which practical collaboration would have been necessary, did not initially prove itself. On the other hand, far beyond the borders of Europe, especially in America, there is a great deal of interest in these impulses. Let me use this word, which has been so much maligned: These are realities of the threefold social order. It is becoming apparent that these impulses are nevertheless being taken up with a certain understanding more and more. And perhaps it will be good for these impulses in particular if we do not try to translate them into unsuitable practice in a hasty manner, but instead follow what I have often said at the beginning of our explanations of our magazine Anthroposophie: Threefolding can only take effect when it has entered as many minds as possible. We have seen the failure of applying threefolding to the outer practice of people's lives, but it will make its way into the world as something that is, after all, on anthroposophical ground. All indications show that our strength must be applied in the anthroposophical-spiritual field. And in this sense, I would like to tell you that I feel it is my duty and my gratitude to do everything in my power to further and advance the esoteric-spiritual character of our anthroposophical movement. If we succeed, and we must succeed, because the spiritual does not encounter obstacles in the same way as external material things, then the friends who have shown this willingness to make sacrifices will feel even more closely connected to our life in the Anthroposophical Movement in a renewed way.

Since it is already late, we may perhaps close today's meeting with this.

Fragment of an essay, 1920

The obvious objection is that a relatively small company like “Der Kommende Tag” is not only unable to do anything positive in the face of a general economic collapse, but must also collapse itself. But this objection is not valid. The economic system which is being aimed at here should show, on the one hand, how enterprises can maintain themselves through their inner life if they break with the practices of the present economic way of thinking, which has led to destruction.

In the exemplary way of cooperation between all employees striven for by the “Kommenden Tag”, it will be possible to guide the companies through severe crises. If the workers are kept in such a way that they feel bound to the entire company in terms of their interests, they will have justified goals to achieve not through disruption but precisely through the maintenance of operations.

On the other hand, this type of economy should enable the managed companies to produce goods that, in terms of quality and quantity, secure us the foreign market.

In our case, all of this guarantees that the investors will see their assets preserved even beyond the catastrophic period until the reconstruction, in which companies like ours must play a significant role.

Flyer, late May 1919

For centuries, our cultural life (schools, science, art and religion) served the state and the economy. Legal paragraphs and regulations turned us into uninspired, dependent beings. Tied into the one-sided economic life, there was high and low. A politically untrained people - that's how the world war catastrophe hit us. The result was collapse. The lack of social insight on the part of the ruling class overlooked the needs of the proletariat, which had no property of its own and only received the crumbs of cultural achievements, while otherwise wasting itself in the struggle for existence. The proletariat hoped that the revolution would liberate it from the soul-destroying effects of capitalism. Within the economic sphere, it sought its salvation only in economic betterment.

In reality, however, the urge for human dignity is striving to break through.

The great goal can only be achieved in the cultural sphere through schooling and education of the mind. There is a looming and frightening danger that cultural life will be enslaved again, with intellectual products being stamped as commodities.

This must not be allowed to happen if human culture is not to perish.

The entire spiritual life must become independent and self-governing. Only in this way can it beneficially stimulate economic and political life. Only in this way will it be possible to truly educate the truly capable.

Just as economic life is administered by the works council, so intellectual life must be administered by a cultural council. This council must bring together all those who are seriously willing, each in his own position, to renew intellectual life and to work towards it, free from the influences of the state and the interests of the economy, so that it can follow its own laws.

A spiritual worker is anyone who strives for true humanity.

Their workplace is in the cultural council. Whether they were active in the old order in the political, economic or cultural field, whether they were proletarians or non-proletarians, everyone should join immediately before it is too late! The time is serious!

The League for

Threefolding the Social Organism

Office: Champignystraße 17

Leaflet, second edition, June 1919

Printed matter

Last version, June 1920

The appeal “To the German People and to the Cultural World” written by Dr. Rudolf Steiner proposes the threefold social order. He calls for:

1. The complete independence of spiritual life, including the education and school system. He points out the spiritual inability of our time, insofar as it has its causes in the state's exploitation of spiritual culture. He demands the complete self-administration of this culture from a purely objective and general human point of view.

2. The restriction of state life to all those circumstances in which all people are equal before each other. On this basis, and with the strictest democracy, the current privately capitalist ownership and wage labor conditions can be transformed, especially to achieve such a general human right that the worker can stand as a completely free personality in relation to the labor manager, who is only a spiritual worker.

3. An economic life in which the worker confronts the labor manager in such a way that a free social relationship can come about between the two through a contract for services, so that the wage relationship ceases altogether. For this, the complete socialization of economic life is necessary. Only from the appropriate formation of corresponding cooperatives, which arise from the professions on the one hand and the needs of consumers and producers on the other, can a value regulation of goods emerge that ensures a dignified existence for all people.

Large sections of the German people, who have taken up the proposals of Dr. Rudolf Steiner, are imbued with the realization that at the present time of deepest need, the world-historical task of the German people is, by taking up this impulse, not only to save themselves from the fall into the abyss from which the leading circles, through their lack of understanding of the demands of modern times, have brought it to the brink, but that it can also lay the foundation for the liberation of all people from the oppression of the all-devouring economic policy and the imperialist states that serve it.

The broad masses of the working people have been plunged into physical and mental hardship as a result of being completely absorbed into the economic life of soul-destroying capitalism. They therefore expect a betterment of their situation from a purely economic revolution. They are raising the demand for the socialization of economic life. However, a one-sided socialization of economic life would only be a sham socialization. In it, the previous dictatorship of capitalism would be replaced by a bureaucracy that levels everything and inhibits all free human development, which would lead to a complete mechanization of all human activity and thus to a dehumanization of the human being. This danger can only be counteracted by simultaneously liberating intellectual life from state paternalism and economic dependence. An independent intellectual life, through the cultivation of all human talents and abilities, will be able to constantly supply new constructive forces to economic life, which would otherwise have to consume itself.

Until the outbreak of the world war catastrophe, the German people were proud of their intellectual life. And yet, despite all its much-vaunted achievements, this intellectual life was neither able to provide the ideas for a social order at home that could have met the newer demands of humanity, nor could it fulfill its task abroad. The fact that Germany has not been able to set herself a world-historical mission in the last five decades has driven her into the catastrophe of the World War; the lack of consciousness of such a mission during the World War was bound to result in her defeat in it. The Russian East could have received form and expression for its spiritual yearning from German intellectual life. Instead, it received the “peace” of Brest-Litovsk, which emerged from completely different than intellectual foundations. Germany could not counter the imperialist capitalism that was advancing from the West with its own political will - it capitulated to Wilson's abstract Fourteen Points.

Through the threefold social organism, the German people could have offered the West the example of a healthy socialization of economic life, and the East a strong spiritual life, independent and free from mystical obscurity.

In our time of deepest distress, the German people should finally awaken to the realization of their spiritual task. They should find their way to the pioneers of a free German intellectual life, to Herder, Lessing, Schiller, Goethe, to the great creator of the plan of the ideal university, Fichte, to the glorifier of the true academic essence, Schelling, and to Hegel. It would have to show understanding for the demands of humanity in modern times and recognize that, even if the demands of the revolution are initially asserted in the consciousness of the broad masses in a one-sided way in the economic sphere, their driving forces in the depths of the soul are nevertheless aimed at recognition of human rights and human dignity. It would have to recognize that the soul impulse for freedom lives in them. Then it would realize that true human welfare can only arise when the spiritual life is based on individual human freedom in the most comprehensive sense, and that it is the task of the German spirit to realize the freedom of the spiritual life.^{1The philosophical basis for this demand is given in Rudolf Steiner's “Philosophy of Freedom», which appeared in a new edition in 1918, Philosophisch-Anthroposophischer Verlag, Berlin W, Motzstraße [note in the appeal]} Therefore, it must now be demanded that the state release spiritual culture and that the entire spiritual life create its free self-government from a purely objective and general human point of view. This applies first and foremost to the education and school system. One will only educate properly when the question, “How do you educate all people to become true, capable human beings?” is no longer open to anyone except those who, only from human nature itself, set their goals for education and teaching. Then schools will no longer see their task as training young people for specific, externally prescribed purposes, but rather as forming fully developed, free human beings. These will then naturally develop a lively relationship to their duties in the service of the community. In an independent intellectual life, all schools will be free institutions of the spiritual member of the social organism, whose members will be supported by the trust of the general public. The funds for education and teaching will no longer be raised indirectly through the state; rather, the spiritual organism will itself be a member of the economic system, as far as its economic circumstances are concerned, and will draw its means of existence directly from it, without the spiritual organism becoming dependent on economic interests as a result.

The first result in the field of education will be the emergence of a primary school that will be a unified school built from the same point of view for all people, a true psychological anthropology. In the sense of a pedagogical economy, this school will be built on a true understanding of the developing human being. It will educate the thinking, feeling and willing faculties in such a way that a strong personality develops, whose soul unfolds a sustaining power for the whole of life. In this free school, truly human arts and skills will also be cultivated that the state does not cultivate because it has no interest in them. All artistic exercises will have an outstanding effect on the development of the will. Such a primary school will provide a useful educational foundation for all physical and mental workers. The secondary modern school will build on the primary school, on the one hand, and the intermediate technical schools, on the other. These will develop a living relationship with the professions for which they prepare, through a constant back and forth of teachers between their work in the subject taught and the practice of a practical profession. Such a practice will also become established for the universities.

The liberation of intellectual life will have a decisive impact on the university system. The autonomy of the universities will be restored. The state system of qualifications and all state examinations will be discontinued. Instead, in future the certificates of the free schools and colleges will be statements of the abilities and knowledge that students have acquired by graduating from them. Independently of intellectual life, the state will be able to test those it wishes to employ within state political life on its own soil for their suitability for the positions it awards.

All state or economic influence on the teaching content of the individual sciences themselves will cease. Science and its teaching will be truly free.

The following basic requirements arise from what has been said, and their fulfillment is possible in the threefold social organism:

1. The liberation of teaching from all state supervision. The organization of primary education according to pedagogical and didactic principles, and its administration only by personalities who are part of the self-governing cultural community.

2. The abolition of state authorization for middle and vocational schools.

3. The autonomy of universities.

We hereby put these questions up for public discussion. We appeal to all those who care about culture in the broadest sense of the word, especially to the representatives of science and art, of education and teaching, and in particular to parents and, not least, to the academic youth. We also appeal to Germans living abroad, who, in their advanced positions, have always found the unhealthy mixing of cultural life with state and economic interests particularly painful. We call on all those who are willing to work towards the emancipation of intellectual life to join us in

formation of a community whose task it will be to restructure the entire teaching and education system in the sense of the above characterization. We are filled with the hope that through the joint work of such a free association of people, who are active in the most diverse

fields of intellectual life and who are imbued with the realization that the liberation of intellectual culture is the highest necessity of life, it will be possible to lay the foundation stone for the organization of a free, self-reliant spiritual life.

Stuttgart, Whitsun 1919
Champignystraße 17
The Working Committee of the Federation for
Threefolding of the Social Organism.

[179 signatures follow]

A kind of nightmare-like oppression can weigh on the soul of anyone observing the current cultural life of humanity, a kind of contraction of the tortured heart, when one realizes that there are still relatively few people who want to see with an unbiased eye how we are on a slippery slope with regard to the most important branches of our cultural life. This downward slide has become sufficiently apparent through the events of recent years, through everything that has befallen people. But we still often find today that people are of the opinion that, unless drastic action is taken, things must remain at least as chaotic as they have become, and that we can continue to work from what is already there; the rest will take care of itself. Over the years, I have repeatedly had to speak out against these feelings of temporariness and point out the necessity of relearning and rethinking in order to find the inclination to think about a real renewal of our public affairs and public life from the deepest foundations of our intellectual and cultural life. And even though there are already a small number of people today who have become aware of this, and all signs indicate that without such decisive action the downward spiral will have to be continued and continued, even these few people will find little understanding for what is necessary for a new metamorphosis of the human spirit to emerge from the ice, in order to lead to a recovery, to a healing of many an ill, who are living out their lives on the slippery slope of our cultural life.

Three phenomena stand out, from which the most important for understanding our time and what is necessary in it can be seen. The first I would call the main defect of our time. For decades, the lectures on spiritual science have endeavored to point out this main defect and also to point out the many things that must follow from this main defect of insufficient knowledge and insight into spiritual life itself for the development of humanity in the present and the near future. The second thing that speaks loudly and clearly from the facts of the present, I would call the main demand. And this main demand has been sounding in many hearts for more than a century, since Schiller, in his “Don Carlos”, had the words spoken: “Give freedom of thought!” Those who look more deeply into the social and spiritual life of our time will be able to see how, behind many of today's consciously formulated social demands, the demand for free activity of the innermost human being, of human thought, is actually hidden. Many people sigh under the compulsion of their thought life, which comes either from old existing institutions or from the new economic conditions. They find themselves either officially existing beliefs or the constraints of economic life in their free development of thought inhibited. What actually lives in the soul, remains largely unconscious, but what rises to consciousness, comes in the fact that one can not be satisfied with anything, there is something that does not let people openly and freely confess before himself: I may lead a dignified human existence. And so the most diverse programs arise, which contain very beautiful things, but do not reach down to the bottom of the soul to see what is actually living there. If one searches for what is living there: it is the longing for the freest activity of the innermost human being, for what could be summarized with the expression of the time's demand for freedom of thought. And one need only utter the words “social forces” – and it can be felt how this indicates that modern intellectual, modern legal and political, and modern economic conditions have brought us to an age in which the productive forces of life operate in a complicated way, and how we are not able are unable, from what we have intellectually mastered, from what we want to process programmatically, to organize these social forces, in which human beings are interwoven, in such a way that within this organization the individual human being, who has come to the awareness of his humanity, can satisfactorily answer the question: Do I lead a dignified existence?

I may assume that the majority of the listeners gathered here today have been able to gather from the lectures and the writings, which further elaborate on the content of these lectures and which I have published, over the course of many years, what the inner meaning and spirit of the spiritual science referred to here is. This spiritual science believes that it must, out of a sense of the necessity of the times, place itself in the present-day cultural life. Today, since I can refer to the numerous lectures already given here, I will only need to touch on some fundamental points. Above all, however, I would like to touch on one introductory point again, which has already been discussed in the most diverse forms.

When spiritual science is mentioned, the outside world often associates it with all kinds of complicated mysticism, complicated theosophy, and so on. Although spiritual science does what it can to educate people about its true meaning, it is still spoken of in such a way in the broadest circles that it represents the exact opposite of what this spiritual science actually wants to be. First and foremost, the representatives of this spiritual science feel that for three to four centuries a way of thinking has emerged within humanity that dominates our entire lives and that has found its most significant expression in the way of thinking of modern natural science. Please do not misunderstand me on this point. I do not want to awaken the belief that I assume that only those people who have undergone some kind of scientific education are imbued with that school of thought. It is not like that. People from the widest circles, right down to those with a very primitive culture and education, who today want to be enlightened about the nature of man, about the nature of social life, and about the nature of the universe, think in such a way, they present in such a direction as it has been expressed mainly by natural science. And it is no wonder that this is so, because our whole life, which surrounds us and in which we are interwoven throughout the day, is basically a result of this scientific way of thinking.

Those who have heard me speak often know that I do not underestimate this scientific way of thinking, and that I recognize its great triumphs. But it has achieved these triumphs precisely because it has been able to take hold of part of our practical life in such a magnificent way, because over the last three to four centuries it has become magnificently one-sided. Everything that people think in this direction is based on an understanding of inanimate nature, of the physical and chemical, which then passes into technology, into everything that underlies our life institutions, and which, for example, is also incorporated into our healing methods, that is, into those insights that are intended to help human life from a certain point of view. But anyone who recognizes, without prejudice, the tremendous progress that has been made in the biological, physical and chemical aspects of the natural sciences, and who is able to appreciate the significance of what conscientious methodology has achieved in this respect, is precisely the person who, at the same time, is also able to fully grasp the limitations of this natural scientific way of thinking. I have explained this countless times here, and I would now like to summarize it in the words: Those who penetrate more deeply into what we today call genuine natural science will find that this natural science provides excellent insights into inanimate nature and into that in the living that, I might say, consists of inclusions in this inanimate nature. But there is one thing that we must stop at when we survey the scope of knowledge of the natural scientific way of thinking: We must stop before the actual essence of man. There is no way, if one does not want to indulge in self-deception, to believe that these views, which have led us so deeply into the inanimate, which have “brought us so gloriously far” in our technical achievements, that these views can provide any insight into the essence of man. This knowledge of the human being – that can be known by the one who does not cling to that fable convenue, which is not history but is called history – this knowledge of the human being was something instinctive for man up to three to four centuries ago. A certain knowledge of the human being lived out of an original, elementary instinct of humanity. However, just as the individual human being undergoes a development, so does all of humanity. And no matter how much we are deceived into claiming the opposite, humanity has now reached a point in its development where it can no longer judge the human essence from mere instinct. It is necessary for man to penetrate consciously into the essence of man himself, just as he must consciously penetrate into the phenomena of the outer life of nature, as Copernicus and Galileo did. When we come to the decisive point, where science and research must stop short before the insight into the human being, there is nothing left but to turn to what I have often mentioned: the intellectual modesty that is necessary for the human being, which can only provide the basis for the pursuit of true human development.

Those who cannot develop this intellectual modesty out of a genuine desire for knowledge will not be able to arrive at a true understanding of the human being. You have to be able to say to yourself: I see a five-year-old child, and I give him a volume of Goethe's lyrical poems. He looks at it and may well tear the book apart. He is going through the same process that an adult who has undergone development also goes through, so that he can really find what is meant to speak to him from this volume of poems. But just as one must admit that the child must first develop in order to relate to what is happening to him in the right way, so today one must also say: just as the human being is placed in existence by nature, he stands before human life itself like a five-year-old child before a volume of Goethe's poetry, if he does not have the will to guide his development beyond what is usually considered the only possible method today. One must take one's development into one's own hands. But then it becomes apparent that there are hidden forces in the human being that can be awakened and that give an equally rigorous scientific insight as only a natural science can give, but which go beyond the knowledge of the external world, the world of the senses, and lead into the supersensible, and only then lead to a true understanding of the human being. We must be able to admit: we cannot approach the human being with the ordinary powers that are sufficient for the knowledge of nature. We can only do so if we bring out the powers of knowledge that otherwise lie dormant in us, as the powers of understanding do in a five-year-old child, from the depths of the human soul.

And so the spiritual science referred to here represents the view that it is possible, from the standpoint that is sufficient to recognize external inanimate nature, to lead people to points of view of knowledge from which one can penetrate into the human being. This spiritual science does not want to be an idle brooding in inner mysticism; this spiritual science also does not want to handle any outer machinations to advance to the spirit, but wants to be something that builds so strictly on that for which the human being is really capable of developing, as, for example, the mathematician builds on the development of those abilities that are also brought forth entirely from within the human being. This spiritual science does not want to be as strictly logical as any other branch of science, but it does want to apply this logic only to what arises as a spiritual vision when what lies dormant within the human being is truly awakened in a natural way. In my book “How to Know Higher Worlds” I have pointed out that it is entirely through inward, soul-spiritual methods that this development of inner, spiritual-soul forces is brought about in man, and how, through this, , to use Goethe's words, a spiritual eye, a soul ear, a spirit ear, so that he can see and hear the spiritual and soul realm, for which we basically only have words today. It is pointed out that it is important to cultivate a certain strengthening of our thinking life. I have emphasized the necessity of a certain self-discipline, of taking our development into our own hands, for otherwise we simply abandon ourselves to life, so that the spiritual eye and the spiritual ear are closed.

Most people today are still quite hostile to anything that comes from this side. And yet, one need only point out how, in our time, when social demands are springing up everywhere, the most anti-social instincts prevail. Where do these come from? They come from the fact that people actually pass each other by without understanding and that they do not comprehend one another. And why do they not understand one another? Because their knowledge, what they call knowledge, does not engage the whole person, because it remains in the head, because it is limited to the mere intellect. The peculiar thing about the spiritual science meant here is that the knowledge it provides through the developed forces engages the whole person, that it not only speaks to the intellect, not only to the intellect, but that they imbue feeling and will, that they infuse understanding of human nature, understanding of all that lives and moves beside and beyond us, that they pulsate with ethics, with morals, with a social attitude that simultaneously impacts directly on practical life.

This spiritual science does not know the unfortunate division that is discussed on every street corner today, the division into mental and manual labor. After all, what is our manual labor? It is nothing more than the use of the bodily tools at our disposal in the service of our will. But when we are clear about the fact - and I have often spoken of it - that this will, as a spiritual force, pulses through everything we do as a whole human being, and in turn radiates back to the intellect in our head, - when we really have the whole human being in mind, only then will we understand the innermost impulse of this spiritual science.

Please excuse me for mentioning something personal on this occasion. But in this case, the personal will serve to clarify the matter. The spiritual science that is being discussed here is to be served on the Dornach hill in northwestern Switzerland, a piece of Jura, the Goetheanum built there, which is intended as a university for spiritual science. When the time came to found this School of Spiritual Science and to dedicate the outer structure to it, it was not a matter of going to someone who, based on old architectural or artistic ideas, would have built a structure into which one would then have moved in order to pursue this spiritual science. No, it had to be something else. From the very beginning, this spiritual science was conceived in such a fruitful way that it can intervene in the whole of external cultural life, that it can truly infuse anew that which has become old in our art, in our architecture, in our life, in our work. So one could not simply give someone the commission: Build me a building in the Greek, Romanesque, Gothic or some other architectural style. Rather, out of this spiritual science itself, just as out of the other thoughts of life, just as out of the other impulses of life, so too did the architectural thoughts arise, which suggested: this is how this building must be in every line, in every single form. And so the building was undertaken that in every single form, even the smallest, it will indeed be the external crystallization of what underlies this spiritual science as a way of thinking, as an attitude.

And so perhaps I may say the following about myself: It was in the fall of 1913 and in the winter of 1914 that I myself worked out the model of this building, the whole building in miniature. Now that I have worked out the model, I ask about which even the architectural drawings are made: Was what I worked out in manual labor, was it manual labor or mental work? It was something where both came together and worked as one. I know this because I just did the thing. Then again, there is hardly anything about this building where I, like every single worker, did not lend a hand here and there. And for anyone who might be interested, I would like to say: we are working as the central figure of this building, a nine-and-a-half-meter-high wooden group, which is supposed to represent the human enigma of our time, but in an artistic way. The task was to create a sculpted woodwork. Although the work is artistic, it is, if I may use the expression, a wood-chopping, and I could show the calluses on my fingers, which provide evidence that here mental work in direct manual labor from morning to evening itself is executed.

Recently, we had to decide on a certain financial matter; we needed to make the chairs. We got the cost estimate. The price was outrageous. So we made the model of a chair ourselves in our artistic studio, working together with a worker who is indeed extraordinarily skilled. When the model was finished – the chair will cost only two-fifths of what it would have cost according to the other proposal – again, one could not tell where the intellectual work ended and the manual labor began.

One may even say: in the way we work together in social life with our co-workers, who are made up of friends of our movement on the one hand and workers on the other, there is actually only one obstacle without which it would become apparent that mental work and manual work flow together everywhere. For example, we have a lady who is a certified medical assistant and who sharpens knives for our sculptors from morning till evening. And we can ask: What prevents what the wit, who are called spiritual workers, do, from simply flowing into what the workers do, to the complete satisfaction of both sides, to the most completely satisfying social collaboration? Yes, I do understand everything that has come about as social phenomena. Nevertheless, I must say that if I am to speak of the only obstacle that makes it impossible to hand over both manual labor and mental work to the manual laborer, it is the fact that the workers are organized and view everything that comes from the intellectual workers with mistrust, even though they are actually doing the same thing.

Why is it that today there is such a deep abyss between what lies in our art, in our science, in short, in our spiritual life and also in the spiritual direction of our social life, and in the external work that the proletarian movement in particular is dealing with today? This gulf has come about because what concerns the whole human being has fled from our way of thinking. A recovery for this lies only in spiritual science, not in a one-sided, complicated mysticism or theosophy, which idle people may pursue in their little rooms, without any momentum. The healing power of this spiritual science lies in the fact that it engages the whole human being. And I have said this now in order to make the following comment: I know that the insights that I am presenting to the world today with full responsibility would not have come to me if I had only worked with my head, if I had not had to devote my whole life to something that is usually called manual labor; because this also has a certain effect on a person. What is only the so-called brainwork, what only engages the intellect, does not reach to the spirit. And something that will seem highly paradoxical to many people today, I would like to mention here. Today, out there in practical life, we say: manual labor, practice; inside, from the intellect: intellectual work! Oh no, it is not at all as these words would lead us to believe. We have the separation between outer life practice and the so-called spiritual life because the spirit has fled from both, because today we are caught in the mechanical treadmill of technology, because the worker stands at the machine and merely performs mechanical tasks according to the instructions of the intellect, and because, on the other hand, those who are educated for an intellectual life are not sufficiently involved in real practical work. Our practical life is spiritless, and so is our intellectualized spiritual life. Only when the full activity of the human being in the world flows back into our heads, into our thinking, which can only arise from the harmonious activity of the whole human being, only when we do not only think with our heads, but think as one thinks when one has once formed something with one's hand and felt how it radiates back into the head, only then will the thought be so fully saturated with reality that there is spirit in it. That which is merely thought out is just as spiritless as that which is spiritlessly worked on a machine.

The spiritual science referred to here should not practise mysticism that is alien to life. It should arise from full engagement with life and should be much more saturated with reality than what is usually meant by intellectual life today. Or is what is meant today as spiritual life saturated with reality? Do we not see how powerless science is to really grasp the spirit? People who are generally immersed in our modern culture believe that they are doing unprejudiced natural science. But how did this unprejudiced natural science actually come about? Through the fact that for many centuries everything that people longed to know about soul and spirit, about that which extends beyond birth and death, was dependent on what the confessions monopolized, due to social circumstances. When the spirit of modern science arose, what did social life actually look like? Everything that people were allowed to know about soul and spirit was monopolized in the dogmas of the confessional societies. One was not allowed to think about soul and spirit, one was only allowed to think about the external world of the senses. And in this, people who have pursued natural science have found themselves. They got into the habit of thinking and researching only about the external world of the senses because research into spirit and soul had been forbidden for centuries. They translated this into certain ideas, they only pursued external sensory science. Then, through a grandiose self-deception, this has become the belief that exact science can only decide something about the external world of the senses, and that research into soul and spirit lies beyond the boundaries of knowledge. But this is also rooted in the soul life of modern man and permeates all life. One can gain fruitful thoughts about nature with such a view. But as soon as one wants to penetrate into social life, this way of thinking is not enough. There it is necessary, for the foundation of a real people's science, a real social science, that we imbue ourselves with a view of the whole human being. And that is lacking because the influences I have characterized prevented it.

So it has come about that people have said: Spirit and soul is something that has been established by dogmas for centuries. It cannot be researched. It is something that only through human will moves like smoke and fog over real life, and there, as the real thing, one forms nothing other than the economic forces themselves. Unbelief arose: the spiritual reigns in what the external economic forces are. And out of unbelief arose what has fatally taken hold in the hearts and minds of men. The belief arose that spiritual life could develop out of economic forces by itself, if only these were organized in a certain way. There is no realization that everything that has arisen economically is originally the result of intellectual life, but that our intellectual life has become unworldly, that there is an abyss between it and the outer life, and that for a recovery of our life we need a real spiritual science that penetrates into the essence of man, that penetrates man just as outer natural science penetrates the machine, but that must be built on the developed powers of human nature. In short, it is extraordinarily difficult to realize that spiritual science must become the basis for the understanding and mastering of social life. That is what the representative of spiritual science believes he recognizes: that the human intellect does not have enough impact, not even where it pulsates in today's social life, to immerse itself in real life, and that the latter must increasingly end in chaos if the impulses that reach into feeling and will, that can place human being next to human being in such a way that social forces can be organized, are not enlivened. No matter what natural scientific methods you take from the exact natural science that has reached its zenith in our time, you cannot establish a social science with them. The ideas that one gains without spiritual science behave in relation to social science in the same way as a color that one wants to paint on an oily surface. Just as the oily surface rejects the color, so life rejects what merely rules among us as intellectual science.

Thus external life cries out for the kind of depth that spiritual science provides. Spiritual science will have to provide the foundations for what people unconsciously express in their social demands today, what they cannot formulate clearly because the power of thought is not available. It is therefore necessary to understand this spiritual science not as something that one could devote a few thoughts to on the side, but as something that is among the most necessary conditions for the recovery of our lives. I know full well — for I truly do not believe I am an impractical person — that people say: We have our professions, we cannot devote ourselves to this spiritual science, which is quite extensive after all. Should not a little more thought also enter into the hearts and souls of people: Doesn't the present downward path on which we are walking show us — however much we are still in our profession — that we are only helping to shape the path into chaos? And shouldn't we consider it necessary to devote every hour that we can spare to such views, which now really and radically raise the question of recovery?

And what is meant here as spiritual science is intimately connected with that call in our time, which, as I have explained, is far older than a century, with that call, which I would like to describe as the call for freedom of thought. But this call is actually the call for social freedom. It is remarkable that when one tries to see through to what is rising to the surface in the waves of the so-called social demands in our present time, one repeatedly encounters the necessity to recognize how it actually relates to human freedom, to that impulse that expresses itself in one form or another as the impulse of human freedom. That this is an important point was recognized even by the man whom I consider the most unfortunate among the so-called outstanding people of our time who have gained influence over the shaping of conditions – even Woodrow Wilson recognized this. Since I never spoke differently about Woodrow Wilson even in neutral foreign countries during the war, while he was so adored by all sides, I may also speak about Woodrow Wilson today as I always have. There are numerous passages in his writings in which he points out that a recovery of the situation - he is primarily familiar with the American situation - can only come about if people's striving for freedom is truly taken into account.

But what is human freedom for Woodrow Wilson?

This brings us to a very, very interesting chapter in contemporary human thought - for Woodrow Wilson is, after all, a kind of representative thinker - where you will find the following view in his writing about freedom: You can form the concept of freedom by looking at a machine and how a gear wheel is attached. If it is attached in such a way that the mechanical device can move without hindrance, then one says that the gear wheel runs freely. When he looks at a ship, he says that the ship must be constructed in such a way that the machinery engages with the swell, so that it is not hindered, so that it moves with the swell, so to speak, is adapted to it, runs freely in the swell. Woodrow Wilson compares what the impulse of human freedom should really be to what a cogwheel in a machine or a ship in the waves of the sea is. He says: A person is free when he functions more or less like a wheel in a machine, when he functions freely in his external circumstances, so that he moves within them, so that he engages with his powers in what is going on around him, so that he is not hindered.

Now, I think it is very interesting that this peculiar view of human freedom can arise from the present-day scientific way of thinking and attitude. For is it not the opposite of freedom when one is so adapted to circumstances that one can only move in their sense? Does not freedom demand that one be able to stand up to external circumstances if necessary? Would not what lives as freedom have to be compared to what could, if necessary, behave in such a way that the ship turns against the waves and stops?

Where does this strange view come from, from which a healthy, statesmanlike insight can never arise, but at most the 14 abstract points of Wilson's pronouncements, which unfortunately were also admired here to some extent at a certain time? Hence it is that in our time it is not realized how one must go back to the human idea itself, to that idea which is conceived as an idea and which, if one really speaks of freedom, can provide the only real free impulse for human life. This is what I tried to present more than thirty years ago in my Philosophy of Freedom, a new edition of which has recently been published with corresponding additions. There, however, I tried to understand this impulse for freedom in a different way than it is currently being done. I tried to show how the question about human freedom has been wrongly formulated. The question is: Is man free or is he not free? Is man a free being who can make decisions out of his soul with real responsibility, or is he harnessed into a natural or spiritual necessity like a natural being? This question has been asked for thousands of years, and it is still being asked. This question alone is the great error.

One cannot ask the question in this way. Rather, the question of freedom is a question of human development, of a human development such that in the course of his youth or perhaps his later life, man develops powers within himself that he does not simply have by nature. One cannot ask: Is man free? By nature he is not, but he can make himself more and more free by awakening forces that lie dormant in him and that nature does not awaken. Man can become more and more free. One cannot ask: Is man free or unfree, but only: Is there a way for man to achieve freedom? And this way exists. As I said, thirty years ago I tried to show that when man develops an inner life within himself, so that he grasps the moral impulses for his actions in pure thoughts, he can really base his actions on thought impulses, not just instinctive emotions – thoughts that merge into external reality as the lover into the beloved. Then man approaches his freedom. Freedom is just as much a child of the thought, which is grasped in spiritual clairvoyance - not under an external compulsion - as it is a child of

of true devoted love, love for the object of our activity. What German spiritual life strove for in Schiller, when he confronted Kant and sensed something of such a concept of freedom, befits us to further develop in the present. But then it became clear to me that one can only speak of that which underlies moral actions – even if it remains unconscious in people, it is still there – and that one must call it intuition. And so in my “Philosophy of Freedom” I spoke of a moral intuition.

But this also provided the starting point for everything I later attempted to achieve in the field of spiritual science. Do not think that I now have an immodest opinion of these things. I know very well that this 'Philosophy of Freedom', which I conceived more than thirty years ago as a young man, has, to a certain extent, all the teething troubles of the intellectual life that emerged during the 19th century. But I also know that out of this intellectual life has sprung what is a leading up of the intellectual life into the truly spiritual. So that I can say to myself: When man rises to the moral impulses in moral intuition and represents a truly free being, then he is already, if I may use the frowned-upon word, “clairvoyant” with regard to his moral intuitions. In that which lies beyond all sensuality lie the impulses of all morality. Fundamentally, the truly moral commandments are the results of human clairvoyance. Therefore, there was a straight path from that “philosophy of freedom” to what I mean today by spiritual science. Freedom arises in man only when man develops. But he can develop further so that what is already the basis of freedom also drives him to become independent of all sensuality and to rise freely into the realms of the spirit.

Thus, freedom is connected with the development of human thinking. Freedom is basically always freedom of thought, and especially when we look at such representative people as Woodrow Wilson, we have to say: because such people have never grasped what the thought of something truly spiritual is, how it must be rooted in the spiritual if it is not to be abstract, that is why they can invent such paradoxical definitions as Woodrow Wilson has invented for freedom. From such things we see the inadequacy of the present spiritual life, the main defect of which is that it does not recognize the spiritual nature of man. We see what the main demand is: freedom of thought, and what the main need is: the mastering of social forces, if this life is to develop into the basis for these three great demands in the present for the near future. Thus, what is a truly original impulse in man does not depend on what can be achieved in man through scientific thinking, but on what can only be achieved through spiritual contemplation.

So much has been argued about freedom because people want to decide on it without entering the ground on which the knowledge of the immortality of the human soul arises. And no one who does not approach the question of the realization of human immortality, of the eternal in man, in an unbiased way is able to understand the essence of human freedom. If one does not seek the essence of this freedom in the flashing forth of the thought that is not merely given by nature, then one does not find this essence of freedom. But only when it has been found does it permeate and pulsate through the human being in such a way that he can become a truly social being, for it carries him alongside other human beings into the social order in such a way that social forces can be released from within. And we need this sense of social forces.

I mentioned earlier that in Dornach, where we are building, we are able to place people who have even reached certain heights in spiritual training and who do the most ordinary, dirty work, which in fact is in no way inferior to that of those who are usually called manual laborers. In social terms, however, the construction of Dornach is based on foundations that are not necessarily the same as those of an enterprise geared towards material gain. But if you take on board what I have set out in my “Key Points of the Social Question” and in the lectures on threefolding, you will find that it is possible to create similar foundations for the whole of life as those that have been created in Dornach for the building that is to represent our spiritual scientific movement. It is a pity that many people in other countries cannot visit this building today, because unfortunately we have come to a point where crossing national borders has become almost impossible.

But why is it possible, after all, to release social energies in such a way that the ideal of the proletarian movement is fulfilled, albeit differently than one dreams? Because everything that is done there is based on the conception of life, on this whole-hearted attack on life, which results from the impulses of spiritual science, because every single thing is done on the basis of spiritual science. What is done on a small scale on the basis of spiritual science can also be done on a large scale in social life on the basis of a spiritual-scientific understanding of life. Every factory, every bank, every external undertaking can be organized in a way that only someone who is able to think about practical life with a science that descends so deeply into the human being that it grasps not abstract thoughts and natural laws but living facts can organize. These living facts can be found if one only descends deeply enough into the human being through the indicated methods. It is not an abstract mysticism that is sought, but the facts of life through which the human being stands in reality. And by recognizing the human being, one finds at the same time through this spiritual science that which can bring the social forces into the corresponding organization, so that the people living in this organization can answer the question satisfactorily: Is human life worthy of a human being?

So the three things are connected: social forces, freedom of thought and spiritual science. Spiritual science is truly the opposite of what it is often portrayed as. A life of leisure, people think, the dream of idle people. No, spiritual science wants to be a way of life, precisely the way of life that our time lacks most. It wants to immerse itself in life, to master life in science and practice, because it wants to immerse itself in the reality of the human being, not just in the humanly conceived life. There are well-meaning people today who say: the mere mind, the mere intellect, which has developed over the past centuries and into our time, is no longer good for the recovery of our lives. But when asked what is useful, they give general answers: a re-fertilization of the soul through the 'spirit'. When it comes to true spiritual science, they reject it because they are still afraid of it, or use the strangest excuses. So you will always find people saying: Not everyone can become a spiritual researcher. Certainly, not everyone can do it, I have emphasized this again and again here. For although one can take those first steps into the spiritual worlds, into the supersensible existence, as I have described them in my book “How to Know Higher Worlds” and in the second part of my “Secret Science” , anyone can do them at any time, but the advance to those questions that deal with the beings of the supersensible worlds in a deeper sense is indeed tied to a variety of experiences that not everyone is ready for today. Those who want to look into the spiritual world, who want to become spiritual researchers in the truest sense, must undergo many struggles. You need only consider that at the moment when you really enter into a realization that does not make use of the senses, at the moment when you enter into a body-free cognition and the familiar outer world is no longer there, - that you are then in a world that presents all sorts of unfamiliar things: All the things that usually support you, the secure external experience, the ordinary intellect, have to give way to other, inner powers of judgment. You are like over an abyss and have to hold on by the center of gravity of your own being. Many people have an unconscious or subconscious fear of this, which they then express in logic when it comes to spiritual science. You may hear the most beautiful arguments; but in truth it is only the fear of the unknown.

But then you must also bear in mind that you, as you are as a human being, are not adapted to the spiritual world, that you are only adapted to the outer world of the senses. You enter into a completely different world for which you have not developed any habits of life. When one penetrates deeper, this causes those terribly painful experiences that must be overcome in real spiritual knowledge. Then, when they are overcome, insights follow from the innermost part of our being that provide information about what is eternal in human nature, what the spiritual is that underlies the world. Not all people can go through this path to such an extent. But I also had to assert time and again that it is not necessary to go through this path, but that all that is needed is common sense. For this common sense, if it is not misled by the prejudices of external views, can distinguish whether the one who presents himself as a spiritual researcher and speaks of initially unknown worlds speaks logically or like a spiritualist or otherwise. Logic is at hand, and one can judge whether the person in question is speaking logically and in such a way that the way he speaks indicates that the experiences he is talking about are being undergone in full mental health.

If one repeatedly objects: Yes, everyone can convince themselves of what external science says, that is correct. One need only discuss laboratory methods to be able to do so. But one can also say: Everyone can convince himself that what is described in my books “How to Know Higher Worlds” and “Theosophy” is correct; one can deduce the inner value of the knowledge from the nature of the spiritual researcher. Then these insights are as valuable for life as they are in the soul of the spiritual researcher himself. The researcher is checked in external science by the external facts; the insights are checked by the way of speaking, the way they are clothed, the way the spiritual researcher has to say. He can be checked by common sense.

Consider what social forces will be unleashed when more and more people emerge as witnesses for the spiritual forces that can only be found in the supersensible, and which other people who cannot be spiritual researchers themselves – not everyone can be a chemist or a physicist – accept out of their common sense and trust, which is based on common sense. What kind of social life arises from this evaluation of the human being is precisely one of the most important points for awakening social forces of trust. They are undermined in our time, when everyone, without taking their development into their own hands, wants to judge everything as soon as they come of age. And that this spiritual science can really provide practical impulses in social life, we have tried to do so here with the establishment of the Waldorf school, which we owe to our dear Mr. Molt, in which the school system is to be built on true knowledge. We want to solve a social question in the right way; because we want a human being to grow in every child, who receives that guiding force for later life, so that social forces are developed in a fruitful way from the human being, not from a dull, inadequate knowledge, as it often dominates social thinking in our time. We really want to develop social thinking that is built on human trust, on the secure foundations of the human soul. And by seeing the developing human being in every child who attends this school, by trying to develop him or her through insights that can enliven the pedagogical foundations, we see something that is necessary, as in everything we try to bring out of this spiritual science.

Of course, I can only describe this spiritual science as a necessary requirement for present and future development from a few points of view. Thus it happens that antagonisms arise from such one-sided allusions because one does not see the whole picture. But now, at the end, I would like to come back to the beginning and point out how heavy the heart can become when one sees how few people there are who appreciate the downward slide; how one does not look for the foundations for a new structure of our spiritual, moral and other cultural life.

This can be seen from many things. Let me give you a few examples in conclusion. Even people who are thought to be firmly established in the external life, what view have they come to based on the facts? The words written by the Austrian statesman Czernin in his latest book deserve to be heeded:

"The war continues, albeit in a different form. I believe that future generations will not call the great drama that has dominated the world for five years the World War at all, but the World Revolution, and will know that this World Revolution only began with the World War. Neither the Peace of Versailles nor St-Germain will create a lasting work. In this peace lies the disintegrating seed of death. The struggles that are shaking Europe are not yet diminishing. Like a violent earthquake, the subterranean rumblings continue. Soon the earth will open here and there, hurling fire against the sky. Again and again, events of elemental force will sweep devastatingly across the lands until everything that reminds us of the madness of this war is swept away. Slowly, with unspeakable sacrifice, a new world will be born. Future generations will look back on our time as if it were a long, evil dream. But day always follows the darkest night. Generations have sunk into the grave, murdered, starved, succumbed to disease. Millions have died in the pursuit of annihilation and destruction, hatred and murder in their hearts. But other generations will arise, and with them a new spirit. They will build up what war and revolution have destroyed. Every winter is followed by spring. That, too, is an eternal law in the cycle of life, that resurrection follows death. Blessed are those who will be called upon to help build the new world as soldiers of labor.

Now, here too there is talk of the new spirit; I know that if one were to speak to this Czernin about the new spirit, he would shrink back, would consider it a fantasy. In abstracto people speak of the new spirit, they know that it must come. But they run for dear life when faced with the concrete spirit. But it is a serious matter to look at the concrete path of this new spirit. There are many today, for example, who attack spiritual science from the standpoint of their supposed Christianity, who do not want to recognize how this spiritual science provides the most vital foundations for a revival of Christianity; how Christianity will live into the future precisely because spiritual science will again teach the living Christ and the event of Golgotha as a historical fact from spiritual scientific research. A large number of theologians have come to the point of no longer teaching this Christ as the actual meaning of the earth, but rather to make him the “simple man of Nazareth”. Spiritual Christianity will be re-established through spiritual science. But those who are afraid today, precisely because of the Christian foundations, should be told: Christianity is built on such firm foundations that there is no need to fear it in the face of spiritual science, any more than there is need to fear the discovery of the air pump and other things — and thus also not the teaching of repeated earthly lives or the doctrine of fate, as spiritual science presents them. Christianity is so strong that it can absorb everything that comes from spiritual science. But whether all of today's 'bearers of the Christian faiths are so strong is another question, but also a serious one.

We have to think in global terms, that's what this so-called world war has drummed into us. Many people think similarly about our Europe and its culture as a Japanese diplomat, whose words I would like to share with you. This Japanese diplomat, who is an educated man, said:

One may think of this content as one wants: This is how one thinks in the world, and we have every reason to look at these thoughts as at facts. It is truly most unfortunate when, on the part of those who ought to be familiar with the conditions of spiritual life – allow me to characterize them – the objections that have been so often and repeatedly described keep coming up, for example, the objection: You can't check what the spiritual researcher says. For example, a booklet was recently published by a gentleman who lives not far from here: 'Rudolf Steiner as Philosopher and Theosophist'. I would just like to point out one aspect of the spirit and logic that prevails there. There is a nice sentence: 'I may have to become a historian, physicist or chemist in order to be able to check things independently. But I cannot verify the theosophical truths unless I am clairvoyant'. That is, he says, historians, physicists and chemists claim all sorts of things; if you want to check these, you just have to become a historian, physicist or chemist. I say: if you want to check spiritual-scientific things, you have to become a spiritual scientist. What does the gentleman say? “I just might have to become a historian, physicist or chemist in order to be able to check things independently. But I cannot verify the theosophical truths unless I am a seer.” Of course! I cannot verify the results of chemical research either unless I become a chemist. But one can become a chemist. But one does not want to become a spiritual scientist. So one says something very strange: I must be able to test, but to be able to test without somehow getting involved in the methods of testing. The question for this gentleman, as he himself says, as you will soon hear, is not whether one can decide when one has appropriated the reasons for the decision, but: “The question is whether they have been or can be verified by me, and that, apart from the formal logical criticism, I must deny.” Well, I readily admit that he must deny it. But just as I admit that one must become a chemist in order to be able to verify the results of chemical research, so everyone must set out on the path of spiritual research in order to verify spiritual scientific truths. But that man rejects that. His whole writing is actually characterized by this logic. And much of the distorting influence brought to bear on spiritual science is based on this logic. There really are better things to do than to concern oneself with such objections.

But it would be particularly fitting for this German nation, this sorely tried German nation, to think about how it should relate to the very foundations of intellectual life. I can point to a few sentences that P. Terman Grimm, the brilliant art historian, wrote in 1858 in his essay on Schiller and Goethe. He wrote more than 60 years ago: “The true history of Germany is the history of the intellectual movements in the nation. Only where enthusiasm for a great idea has stirred the nation and set the frozen forces in motion, are deeds done that are great and luminous.” Should we not be able to take such words to heart today? Or the words that Herman Grimm - certainly no revolutionary - wrote in 1858: ”The names of German emperors and kings are... not milestones for the progress of the people.” He meant that the milestones for the progress of the people are the deeds in the field of thought, of thought that goes into the spiritual.

Never has the German been more in need of adhering to this than in this time of hardship and trial. And that is why we can ask our contemporaries today to look to their great ancestors so that we can become their worthy descendants. Should the beliefs of the German people's ancestors, which they expressed in their spiritual life, not apply to the present day? Should we not continue to develop this spiritual striving instead of stopping at mere words and quoting them? Those who merely quote Goethe today do not understand him; only those who develop him further understand him. Those who merely quote Johann Gottlieb Fichte are doing something nonsensical if they do not develop him further in the spiritual life. You have heard how the world speaks about European intellectual life. In the world, one must learn to recognize that the German, in turn, has the will to look at the actual milestones of the progress of his people. In this world our ancestors, the great pillars of German intellectual life, were often called dreamers. They were misunderstood, just as today what speaks of the spirit is described as fantasy or something else. But there were still people who knew how what was striven for in the spirit was based in reality. And at an important moment, Johann Gottlieb Fichte said to the people: What the others say, that ideas cannot directly intervene in practical life, we idealists know that as well, perhaps better than the others; but that life must be oriented towards them, we know that in advance. - He pointed to the practice of life and said: Those who do not understand this belong to those who are not included in the plan of the world. So may these people be granted sunshine and rain in due course and a good digestion and, if possible, some good thoughts.

It depends on the spirit in which one looks up to the spiritual life of the great bearers of the German spirit. Reality, not abstract judgment, will decide this. If the descendants of these German ancestors have a sense of the true practice of the spirit, then the people who preceded us in this practice of the spirit will not have been dreamers. But if we fail to penetrate into the realities of the practice of the spirit, then they will not become dreamers through themselves, but through us or through our descendants, who want to know nothing of the true German spirit. Let the German people beware lest they make their great ancestors, of whom the world has so often said that they were dreamers, into dreamers through our fault, through our lack of appreciation for the spirit that has been invoked and conjured up in German intellectual life! May he gain followers! This is the last word I wish to speak to you in the context of my current disputes.