The Rudolf Steiner Archive

3. About the Youth Movement

[ 1 ] Question: What was the youth movement, what is it, and how can one arrive at anthroposophy through it? Those who have been part of the youth movement believe they can find in anthroposophy a continuation of what they sought in the youth movement. They want to hear about the significance of the youth movement from the perspective of spiritual science.

[ 2 ] Rudolf Steiner: The youth movement belongs to an era in which I myself was no longer young; therefore, those who belong to the youth movement must be better informed about it from an external perspective than I am.

[ 3 ] On the surface, the youth movement is not strictly speaking an abstract, unified movement; rather, it brings together people with a wide variety of mental worlds and worldviews. People may come together based on a sense of connection. That is one aspect of the youth movement. It is other forces—not personalities—that hold it together; more fundamental forces than, for example, ideological ones, which are at work within it and keep it cohesive. Within the youth movement, there are many individuals who could not provide a clearly articulated explanation of what they want; they could not consciously articulate their desires.

[ 4 ] The other side of the youth movement is that it has emerged internationally everywhere in such a way that one cannot say, for example, that “the youth movement in Switzerland and the youth movement in Germany have influenced one another”; rather, the youth movement has surged internationally out of fundamental forces. It is a universal human cause. One must carefully consider the characteristics of the youth movement. When one encounters something like this, one has the feeling that it can only be understood from a profound perspective. When one approaches the youth movement with knowledge of the humanities and history, it becomes clear that it is connected to the inner human, historical upheaval that, for the scholar of the humanities, is clearly marked as having occurred at the end of the 19th century. One arrives at this conclusion by closely examining the characteristics that emerge in conversations with those who were still young or children at that time.

[ 5 ] I have examined these moments more closely, and based on my observations, I have come to the conclusion—or rather, the realization—that the youth movement is connected to the great upheaval of the late 19th century and is one of the symptoms pointing to the dawn of a new era at that time. When one is very close to a matter, one does not come to know its full nature; one only comes to know it when one distances oneself from it—just as one can only assess historical contexts from a later historical vantage point. Through the method of the humanities, one can achieve a certain degree of detachment and thereby learn to observe precisely and gain insights into interrelationships. Thus, people will one day come to think and recognize the end of the 19th century in such a way that they see how a significant impulse emerged at that time, one that remains hidden even today.

[ 6 ] This impulse, which is a human one, seems to live on in the minds of those who have turned to the youth movement. In these minds lives a glimmer of the immensely significant turning point at the end of the 19th century. Sometimes it may seem quite unimportant to engage with this in discussion, but it is important to recognize that significant impulses are at work and are felt by those who have joined the youth movement. Spiritual science seeks to consciously grasp what is at work in human development, and it takes the position that without it, one cannot understand the great world catastrophe either. The philistines, who cannot understand a thing, will consider it eccentric and do not realize that they themselves are eccentric. People who have grown old clinging to the ideas of the past can no longer keep up. Decadent minds dwell in those who carry the old ways into the 20th century.

[ 7 ] There is no contradiction in the youth movement finding its way into spiritual science. One can even speak of a certain predestination of the youth movement for spiritual science. The youth movement arises from a sense of what is, more or less consciously, present in spiritual science. We must not become conceited. We must not allow such insights to lead us to say, for example: “The epoch lives within me.” We are partly shaped by the impulse from the end of the 19th century. We must view such things objectively, not in a patriarchal manner like our forefathers. Such an attitude will not serve us well in our own age.

[ 8 ] Question: How does one find the bridge from the youth movement—which includes people who are rebelling against the prevailing worldview—to anthroposophy? One may encounter a certain degree of resistance to anthroposophy. Some people find it a bit off-putting. The path is too strictly prescribed for them. The anthroposophists place too much emphasis on the spiritual for them, while they are striving to find themselves.

[ 9 ] Rudolf Steiner: This is connected to the impulse mentioned earlier. One can view the same question from the opposite perspective. After all, anthroposophy is what can approach certain spiritual matters in our age. People who find their way into anthroposophy are uprooted from the culture that immediately preceded it. One example is Friedrich Nietzsche. He lived in a transitional era; he was condemned by fate to go through all the inner, spiritual sufferings of culture. Nietzsche went through everything one can suffer from in culture. If one considers him during his student years—the era of Wagner and Schopenhauer, the era of positivism—he suffered from what was most uplifting in the culture of that time. One can see how this man first suffered from 19th-century culture and then was consumed by it. He was still deeply immersed in 19th-century culture.

[ 10 ] Individuals were able to carve out their own paths and eventually came to anthroposophy. They found in it something that, at the end of the 19th century, had, so to speak, neither father nor mother; it was something that had to find new ground. Compared to what has passed, anthroposophy stands there abandoned. One is not an anthroposophist merely to have a worldview, but rather one is an anthroposophist with one’s whole being. People who do not wish to develop a relationship with anthroposophy expose themselves to a danger, and if no attempt is made to build a bridge from those who are capable of doing so—those who, coming from the opposite pole, are also without a father or mother—then others might, under certain circumstances, miss the connection to humanity’s development.

[ 11 ] I can certainly understand why such concerns are raised. However, we should strive to find common ground. But if we anxiously avoid doing so, we would expose ourselves entirely to the danger that has just been described, and make no progress at all. The youth movement has recently entered a period of uncertainty. Everywhere, it sought unity; people wanted to find one another and come together. In recent years, this has changed for some; they have sought a certain degree of isolation. This also emerged as a pervasive international trend. The failure to fulfill oneself with spiritual substance leads to the isolation of the individual.

[ 12 ] There are many paths to anthroposophy. One should move beyond taking offense at the character of individual people who wish to be anthroposophists and should try to truly experience anthroposophy. At present, anthroposophy is actually the only approach that does not resort to dogmatism and is not eager to present things in a very specific way, but rather strives to view them from various perspectives. The essence of anthroposophy lies in life, not in form. Of course, if one wishes to be understood, one is compelled to use forms that are currently in common use.

[ 13 ] An American once asked me: “I’ve read your writings, including your social ones. Do you believe they will still be relevant in the ages to come?” I replied: “They are structured in such a way that they can undergo a metamorphosis, and then conclusions for the future may emerge that are quite different from those for the present. What matters is that life finds life.

[ 14 ] A participant: We need to find a way to bridge the gap with young people by applying the teachings to real life in ways that directly concern them. Young people can’t relate to the teachings as they are. Teachers, for example, who came out of the youth movement, have long been fighting for what happens in Waldorf schools; that’s where bridges could be built. Even what was intellectually introduced through the various courses on anthroposophy had already been unconsciously experienced in the youth movement.

[ 15 ] Rudolf Steiner: One must bear in mind that in our age, the individual must find a connection to general development through thought; he must go through thought. It is entirely possible to introduce anthroposophy to young people and even to children. Of course, one must not adopt the perspective of the older generation in doing so. For example, if one wants to teach a child the idea of the immortality of the soul, one uses the example of the butterfly and the chrysalis. The child will be able to understand what this is about, for it is a truth. Nature itself, in the emergence of the butterfly from the chrysalis, presents on a lower level the very same thing that, on a higher level, is the immortality of the soul. If one starts from the standpoint that the child is “stupid” and “I am smart,” then the child will never learn anything properly, especially if, on top of that, one does not even believe what one is teaching the child. Herein lies the opportunity to introduce children to everything in anthroposophy. In history lessons, what is active as life within history must be presented to the children in a way that truly relates to their own lives.

[ 16 ] Question: Today, a large part of the youth movement has shifted over to the philistine camp. The youth movement is very strongly emotionally oriented. It seeks a rich life in nature and emotion, and as a result, people are led to rebel against much of what has been the norm until now. People wanted to live out their own sense of right and wrong; they could not move beyond the emotional realm; they were unable to recognize that a life based on inner truth can only truly bear fruit if it is thoroughly thought through. This is why they fail to think things through to their conclusion. If one recognizes the significance of anthroposophy for young people, one can demonstrate to them, from an ideological or philosophical standpoint, that they must turn to anthroposophy—that anthroposophy seeks nothing more than what they themselves desire, but in a more conscious way. The solution to the gender issue has so far been sought in three ways: Kurella’s “body-soul,” asceticism, and early marriage. However, none of these three approaches has yielded a real solution.

[ 17 ] Rudolf Steiner: In these three paths, an attempt is made to solve a new problem facing humanity using old, dogmatic thinking. The essence of the free human being cannot be fully captured in mere thought.

[ 18 ] In anthroposophy, I see something that is alive, something capable of transforming a human being into a different kind of being than he or she was before. Through this substantial element, the human being becomes free; he or she becomes a truly free person in the course of a brief process of development. One cannot intellectually resolve a question posed by life itself. The question will resolve itself through the practice of life when it is approached from the standpoint of freedom. One need not worry that this will result in something antisocial. Imagine if one day we wanted to determine exactly how conception must be arranged so that a male or female being is born. If this were made a matter of intellect, there certainly would not be as many men as women in the world. Although this takes place only on an entirely individual level, a social reality nevertheless emerges through inner laws. [Rudolf Steiner refers to his book The Philosophy of Freedom and continues:] One cannot arrive at a new way of life in a single leap, and certainly not through programs. One is prepared for this when one has a free spirit as a foundation. This problem must be solved individually by each person. Youth literature is quite dogmatic when it comes to gender issues.

[ 19 ] Question: The youth movement was quite romantic at first. People recognized something in what they encountered out in nature. They realized that the divine cannot be grasped by the intellect alone. Anthroposophy seeks to bring everything into consciousness. It is based on a striving for knowledge. Most people cannot find the bridge between these two, nor can they find it.

[ 20 ] Rudolf Steiner: People think too selfishly in this regard; they do not consider how to connect with the development of humanity as a whole. Imagination and conceptual thinking are coming to the fore in this age. Today we experience the world through imagination. It is necessary to rise above the dullness of feeling and, through thinking, arrive at a luminous imagination. After all, it is through thinking that we truly become human. Our emotional life is transformed by thinking, and we become more fully human through what thinking brings forth within us. People strive for a life centered on feeling because they shy away from clarity. Feeling can be very intense when it passes through thinking. “Life in nature” is so often understood with an undertone, as if one were striving for something special. One must realize that this does not bring anything new, but merely regains something that was lost in the past. Modern people must, after all, harbor this longing. They were given too little by the past; they must acquire something for themselves. It is recommended to read Schiller’s essay “On Naive and Sentimental Poetry.” “The Philosophy of Freedom” is built upon a natural relationship with nature.

[ 21 ] Question: There is a divide between older and younger youth. The youth currently in middle school are different from the youth of the youth movement. The spirit of the middle-school youth from which the youth movement grew has been characterized by the catchphrase “romanticism of rebellion.” The spirit of today’s middle-school youth could be described as “resignation to reconstruction.” Everything that was a profound experience for members of the youth movement—nighttime drives, campfires, aimless wandering—seems like Bolshevism to today’s youth. They reject it and long for boundaries they can adhere to, for authority figures. Is this merely a temporary reaction, or does it signal the dawn of a new era for youth?

[ 22 ] Rudolf Steiner: It was a difficult era that was endured by the people who are now between the ages of thirty-five and fifty. The last years of the 19th century and the first years of the 20th century were a difficult time; spiritually, it was focused on the material. The good, the spiritual life of the 1850s and 1860s, has been buried. The people who are influential today have grown too old; most of those who are making a difference in the world are at least fifty years old. And the young people who have plans to do something are not being allowed to participate. Standing between the two is a generation that is inwardly inactive, and these are the fathers of today’s high school students. These fathers have gained a harmful influence over the youth, who look up to them as their leaders. Authority is all well and good, but it depends on the kind of personalities to which it is attached. And what kind of ideals are those held by the generation between thirty-five and fifty, which are being passed on to their sons? One can only feel pity for this youth.

[ 23 ] Question: Does Dr. Steiner consider it desirable for something like an organization to form among youth activists who are also anthroposophists?

[ 24 ] Rudolf Steiner: Well, I don’t think much of “organization.” You see, in my “Key Points” I deliberately spoke of the social organism, not of “organization.” We’ve been thoroughly overfed with this sort of thing in recent years.

[ 25 ] Question: The intention was to ask whether there would be common tasks for young people in the anthroposophical movement, or whether each person has their own individual task.

[ 26 ] Rudolf Steiner: In the future, it will be the case that all the tasks an individual has will be tasks of the community, and that everyone must make the tasks of the community their own. There is no other way. But something like this cannot be organized; it can only be brought about through association.