Rudolf Steiner's Ahriman

I haven't looked into Bruce Charlton's brand of reactionary thought in some years now. So [h/t Vox Day], here's his typology of evil.

Charlton discredits his overall project by repeatedly lying - yes, lying - about the motivations of CoVID restrictors. Charlton claims those who would enforce masking and distancing cannot explain why they do it. We do, of course, explain why we do it: to slow down the spread of a hospital-clogging illness. "Hospitalisation" means, "you die if you don't go". Clogging hospitals raises the death rate. We can all debate whether my side of "we" is right, but we can't debate whether we have reasons. Charlton is not telling the truth about how much time the disease takes away from us, either; I must assume, deliberately. So, there's no real need to spend more time on his site than you must.

I should also point out that Charlton is intuitive at best on "human evil", which our modern world would medicalise as personality-traits. Recently we heard about a victimhood trait. It's probably always been among us; it may, however, be something we've been selecting for, since the Second World War. I suspect it inspired Tolkien in how he filled out the Gollum character. But that's an aside.

I'll give more of a hearing about how Charlton classifies evil. Partly because he'd know best, being diabolical himself; but more because it comes from Rudolf Steiner.

Steiner had mused on Milton's Lucifer (also more-or-less identical with Tolkien's Melkor). Milton in him had proposed a courageous antihero. Lucifer would usurp lawful authority to interpose himself. But Lucifer hasn't the necessary wisdom or empathy, so ends up corrupting the Good. Finally Lucifer just goes in for corruption for its own sake: partly because he's learnt to be effective at that, partly because he resents his betters. Milton proposed to break this all out in stages; Steiner broke them out as contrasting impulses. Charlton brings them together: Lucifer is succeeded, by Ahriman.

Charlton sees Lucifer as Hitler or Lenin - Milton would say, as Cromwell. Lucifer still has virtues, however Nietzschean. He is active and brave. He may even still have empathy - for his own allies. He remains, in a sense, an angel. Ahriman by contrast is materialism: passive in aggression. Steiner posited that minerals, vegetables, animals and finally man have animistic spirits. Steiner said that Ahriman's work is to deny the sublimity of Creation. (In Steiner's footsteps see now Tapscott.) If we're re-writing the Music Of The Ainur, this is where Melkor loses his empathy. Ahriman is Jenseits von Gut und Böse.

Steiner thought we all need a bit of Lucifer and Ahriman within us. Charlton (implies he) himself denies this. He points out that at least Lucifer "had an ethos", as it were; Ahriman having lost his soul will still yearn for purpose. As a progression, Ahriman is unstable on his throne. Where Ahriman cannot submit to God nor even to another Lucifer, he yields his right to Sorath - the mindless force of destruction. The deus Asmo, if we're sticking with Middle Persian.

I think, if the twentieth century is a guide, our mid-century Lucifers were not doomed to fall to technocratic Ahriman. Hitler could have won. Or Mao could have won. Or it could all be cyclical and a new heroic dictator might arise. Maybe that's Trump. Vox Day prefers Lucifer to Ahriman so, in his eyes, the God Emperor would be a restoration.

I also don't see Steiner's Ahriman as evil. To be fair to Steiner: he mightn't have, either. Ahriman is a techie. The evil comes when we worship Ahriman. Which worship Ahriman himself doesn't want.

In short, I don't think Steiner's model works at explaining Where We Went Wrong. I don't think technocratic governance is (necessarily) evil, either: it demonstrably saves lives, in the face of the present epidemic. It could (and probably will) become evil, but presently there are greater evils afoot - starting with the American Conservative base at present. And an appreciation of scientody may be autistic but linking the tendency to the Angra Mainyu is a slander.