Hitler’s Mystic Triangle
The theft of Rudolf Steiner’s Threefold Order
1. Table Talk
“Nothing is more dangerous in spiritual life than half-truths. An outright lie is relatively harmless because it is recognized; a half-truth creeps in unnoticed and does the greatest harm.” – Rudolf Steiner, The Karma of Untruthfulness, 17 December 1916.
Some years back in our local library, I found a first edition of Hermann Rauschning’s book Hitler Speaks, his account of his conversations with the Führer over 1932–1934, the critical years as Hitler ascended to power.
Rauschning was President of the Senate in the free port of Danzig at the time. Hitler had considered going into exile in Danzig if he ran into trouble, and in their first meeting asked Rauschning whether the enclave had an extradition treaty with Germany. This confidential conversation apparently set the tone for a number of revealing interactions.
While he joined the Nazi party for a short time, Rauschning left it in 1934 and went into exile in France, then England, and ultimately the USA. He published the book in 1939 as a warning to the world as to Hitler’s real intentions.
There have been claims that Rauschning exaggerated the number of meetings he had with Hitler and invented much of the reported dialogue. These claims came largely from a far-right holocaust denial group in the 1980s, which alleged that Rauschning’s accounts of Hitler’s grandiose plans were largely concocted propaganda.
However, these claims need to be contrasted with the publication in 1953 of Hitler’s Table Talk 1941–1944, consisting of verbatim records of Hitler’s conversations with various people, as taken down by professional stenographers. These discourses show a very clear congruence with Rauschning’s reports of the earlier conversations.
Hugh Trevor-Roper said in his original introduction to Hitler’s Table Talk:
Hitler’s own table-talk in the crucial years of 1932–34, as briefly recorded by Hermann Rauschning, so startled the world (which could not even in 1939 credit him with either such ruthlessness or such ambitions) that it was for long regarded as spurious. It is now, I think, accepted. If any still doubt its genuineness, they will hardly do so after reading the volume now published. For here is the official, authentic record of Hitler’s Table-Talk almost exactly ten years after the conversations recorded by Rauschning.
For the third edition in 2000, Trevor-Roper wrote: “Rauschning may have yielded at times to journalistic temptations, but he had opportunities to record Hitler’s conversations and the general tenor of his record too exactly foretells Hitler’s later utterances to be dismissed as fabrication.”
We therefore have a very tricky situation with Rauschning’s story – some of it is certainly true, while some of it is certainly false. As Rudolf Steiner says repeatedly throughout his works, the half-truth is much more dangerous than the outright lie; indeed, nothing in spiritual life is more dangerous.
In reading the book, there was one short passage that nearly saw me fall off my chair in surprise. In my whole life, I’ve seldom been so startled by something I’ve read. The whole of this essay is solely about this excerpt.
I am going to argue that there is every sign that this particular conversation was in fact real and was accurately recorded.
I am also going to argue that it contains one of the greatest secrets of the Third Reich: the fact that Adolf Hitler stole and perverted Rudolf Steiner’s proposal for social renewal, the Threefold Social Order, in order to consolidate and exercise power, not least by having a semi-mystical line of argument with which to convince his officials of his superior insights.
2. The Threefold Social Order and the Nazis
We need to outline very briefly what the Threefold Social Order (TSO) is all about, and then note that the only recorded statement Adolf Hitler ever made about Rudolf Steiner specifically entailed an attack on the TSO.
From the end of World War I until 1922, Rudolf Steiner advocated for a social structure which he said would overcome the contradictions that were tearing Germany apart. The TSO involved a radical separation of powers: instead of a unitary state, there would be three entirely autonomous realms. Each realm would be governed according to a different principle.
The political or Rights State would be based on equality. The Rights State is concerned purely with the drafting and implementation of laws that apply equally to everyone. The police force and army fall under the Rights State.
The Cultural and Educational Parliament would be based on freedom. This body would oversee all religious, educational, cultural and spiritual affairs, ensuring that everyone is able to attend the school of their choice and that there is maximum liberty in the cultural domain generally.
The Economic Parliament would be based on fraternity and association. Workers, entrepreneurs, managers, consumers, environmentalists – everyone directly concerned with the economy – would work together to plan and oversee the production and distribution of all goods and services. This administration would be completely separate from the political state. The various trade associations would research the needs of society and ensure that they were met, if necessary by diverting workers from one field of manufacture or service to another.
Steiner pointed out that these three watchwords – liberty, equality, fraternity – were the slogan of the French Revolution, but were mutually contradictory in a unitary state. Complete liberty clashes with complete equality, for example. Each of these principles applies only within the appropriate domain. What is required, said Steiner, is a threefold state with every citizen participating fully within each of these three separate realms.
Steiner pointed to the evolution of society over the ages: first came spiritual institutions, such as the Egyptian rule of pharaohs; then came political administration, with written laws and the notion of human rights, as under Roman rule; and in our time, a rising world economy with its own dynamics that now needs to be administered completely autonomously and separately from political and cultural affairs.
Steiner’s main concern at the time was the flood tide of militant Marxism. He strongly challenged the idea that once the means of production had been seized by the proletariat, everything else – political and cultural issues – would automatically also fall into place, insisting that these realms needed their own autonomous administrations.
Steiner at first worked behind the scenes to influence major statesmen. According to a fascinating recent history of the events, he very nearly succeeded in having the TSO established in Germany. However, social revolution, fainthearted politicians, the fall of the monarchy and the imposition of Woodrow Wilson’s utopian doctrines doomed his efforts.
He then worked publicly to “get the threefold idea into as many human heads as possible”, publishing books and newspapers on the subject, giving innumerable lectures and training speakers to go out and “agitate” for the TSO. This was Steiner’s only foray into the politics of the day.
These efforts earned Steiner the enmity of every political grouping in existence at the time, from left to right, Catholic, Marxist, socialist, they all condemned his meddling in their affairs. He in turn dismissed all party programmes as worthless in solving the problems the nation was facing.
In particular, this movement led to the only public statement Hitler is ever known to have made about Steiner, in the Völkische Beobachter newspaper on March 15, 1921. In an attack on Walter Simons, the Foreign Minister, Hitler said:
It is not only appropriate but also quite necessary to inspect somewhat closer this Mr. Minister – the intimate friend of the Gnostic, Anthroposophist Rudolf Steiner himself the adherent of the Threefold Social Order which is one of the many completely Jewish methods of destroying the peoples’ normal state of mind – to see whether his mindless face, mindless according to the opinion of Lloyd George, is really only the result of the lack of spirit or whether it is the larva behind which something else is concealed…
This was all a bit mysterious, as there seemed to be no significant link between Steiner and Minister Simons. Nonetheless, we see Hitler in a signed article attacking Steiner and saying that “the Threefold Social Order ... is one of the many completely Jewish methods of destroying the people’s normal state of mind.”
3. ‘He Said It Made Everything Quite Clear’
We come now to the passage in Hitler Speaks that so surprised me. It is immediately noteworthy that it involves two other senior Nazis. Robert Ley was head of the German Labour Front (DAF) and to the end of the war held the position of Reichsleiter, the second-highest rank in the party. Albert Forster was the Gauleiter of Danzig, a convinced and brutal Nazi who was hung after the war for the mass murder of Poles and Jews.
Rauschning and Forster had extensive connections, since both were senior Nazi politicians in Danzig at the time.
The passage comes after the heading “The Mystic Triangle” on p. 188 of Rauschning’s book. He begins this section by asking of the revelations he heard directly from Hitler:
Could I make use of anything I had just heard in my daily struggle with the small minds of the party? Hitler had given me to understand that he regarded me as worthy of being admitted to his innermost thoughts – such as he had not disclosed even to his Gauleiter, who had shown himself incapable of understanding them. (…) Or, on the other hand, was this appearance of confidence a mere deception, one of Hitler’s many tricks by means of which he kept people subservient?
It is interesting that Rauschning asks himself these overarching questions at this very point. He is clearly signalling that some particularly important “innermost thoughts” are about to be revealed here.
Then follows the passage in question:
I asked Hitler the meaning of the triangle he had drawn for Ley, of the Labour Front, and a number of Gauleiter, in order to make the future social order clear to them. Evidently Hitler did not remember. Forster had not been able fully to explain it to me, I told him, but had been much impressed by it nevertheless. He said it made everything quite clear.
“Oh, yes, I remember,” Hitler replied. “This is what you mean: one side of the triangle is the ‘Labour Front’, the social community, the classless community in which each man helps his neighbour. Everyone feels secure here, each one gets assistance, advice and occupation for his leisure time. All are equal here.
“The second side is the professional class. Here each individual is separate, graded, according to his ability and quality, to work for the general good. Knowledge is the criterion here. Each is worth as much as he accomplishes.
“The third side represents the party, which, in one or other of its many branches, embraces every German who has not been found unworthy. Each one in the party shares the privilege of leading the nation. Here the decisive factors are devotion and resolution. All are equal as party comrades, but each man must submit to a grading of ranks that is inviolable.”
This, I agreed, was roughly what Forster had tried to explain to me, but he had been only partially successful. There had been some mystic significance as well, the first side at the same time representing the will in man, the second, what is usually called the heart, and the third, the intelligence.
Hitler laughed at this. There was no need to labour the comparison, he remarked. He had only meant to show how each individual, in all his feelings and activities, must be included in some section of the party.
“The party takes over the function of what has been society – that is what I wanted them to understand. The party is all-embracing. It rules our lives in all their breadth and depth. We must therefore develop branches of the party in which the whole of individual life will be reflected. Each activity and each need of the individual will thereby be regulated by the party as the representative of the general good. There will be no license, no free space, in which the individual belongs to himself. This is Socialism …”
It is crucial to note that Hitler was giving this explanation to Robert Ley in the first place and begins by talking about the “labour front”. He is explicitly describing “the future social order” to them, thus outlining his deep philosophy and vision of how Germany will be run.
The chaos and confusion of these times can barely be comprehended at this distance, but it is quite clear in Rauschning’s descriptions. To quote an earlier passage (p. 177):
Soon after the party’s accession to power, the wildest plans were set afoot to “order” the country’s economy. (…) Did this mean the corporative state? Did it mean totalitarian planned economy? Or was it state socialism? The first necessity was to act. The aim would then gradually define itself.
So Forster’s comment about this mystical triangle, that it “made everything quite clear”, is highly significant. Nothing at all seemed clear to anyone at this point, including Hitler much of the time, and it seems that this threefold argument made a big impression on its audience.
Obviously, the scheme that Hitler outlined is by no means identical to the Threefold Social Order. Given that the TSO had been widely publicized across Germany, and that Hitler had personally railed against it, any possible connection with Steiner’s conception would be very carefully hidden. The aims for which it was being employed were also the exact opposite of the TSO’s real intentions, so there are bound to be significant differences.
However, the labour front “in which each man helps his neighbour” is a clear analogue to the economic realm in the TSO. The point about the economy is that we all need each other in order to survive, the division of labour in society being essential to ensure that everyone has access to the necessities of life. The notion of each person helping their neighbour is a clear appeal to fraternity.
Hitler says “all are equal here”, which would be more in line with the political realm. The real point about the economic realm is that we are all interdependent – in order to survive, we need the goods and services we provide for each other. “Everyone feels secure here, each one gets assistance” – again, this is a clear appeal to fraternity.
The second side of the triangle is the “professional class”, with “knowledge” as the criterion. This is actually the biggest deviation from the true notion of the threefold order. Clearly what is being referred to is an educational and cultural elite. Steiner stresses that the threefold order absolutely does not comprise three separate groups of people, like workers, intellectuals and party members, as Hitler seems to be implying. The whole point of the TSO is that each and every person participates fully in each realm, each person essentially threefolds themselves.
However, in this second domain people are “separate” and ranked according to “ability” and “knowledge”, so this is a clear reference to the development of individual talents, as in the TSO’s cultural realm.
The third side of the mystic triangle is “the party”, which is clearly the political domain. Here “all are equal as party comrades”, so equality is a watchword, although there is a strict ranking within the party that is “inviolable”. And: “The party is all-embracing. It rules our lives in all their breadth and depth.”
4. The Heart of the Matter
We then come to another decisive connection with the TSO. Forster had remembered that the three sides of the triangle respectively represented the will, the heart and the intelligence of man. This is where a very loud bell rings saying “anthroposophy”. The threefold division of human consciousness into thinking, feeling and willing is right at the core of Steiner’s spiritual science.
However, in Steiner’s original book on the Threefold State, he does not directly link these types of consciousness to the three realms of society. He looks rather at the three autonomous systems that make up the physical body – the nervous system, the rhythmic system (breath and heart), and the metabolic system, including the limbs. He argues that although these systems are separate and relatively autonomous, they are completely dependent on each other and have to function as a unit.
He stresses that he is not trying make a hard-and-fast connection between these biological structures and the social structures. He draws attention to the resemblance so that people “may be able to apply this mode of perception to the body social”.
The link can then be made from these three biological systems to thinking, feeling and willing. Interestingly, I could not find a direct Steiner quote where he does this with the TSO, but this is quite conventional in the literature on the subject. For example, the author Gary Lamb says:
Whereas cultural life is anchored in the development of thinking, economic activity – producing goods and services for others – is rooted in the soul element of will. (...) The establishing of rights is related to the soul function of feeling.
The single most interesting part of this entire story for me is the fact that Hitler laughs when Rauschning raises the “mystic” connections of society’s divisions with the mind, will and heart. Don’t labour the comparison, the Führer says.
At one level, I am personally certain that he is playing down these mystical connotations in order to distance himself from any possible connection with the well-known mystic Rudolf Steiner. Hitler pretends at first not to remember about the triangle, yet a moment later he has it clearly in mind. He has to be pushed to reveal this information. Why is he being cagey? Hitler was not generally shy to expound on his grand conceptions.
At another level, however, he is actually directly reflecting Steiner in saying don’t labour the comparison. Steiner talks disparagingly about people who make complicated connections between social and biological structures, and says, “With all this sort of thing, this juggling with analogies, what is here intended has nothing whatever to do.”
It is worth repeating Hitler’s chilling words, however, to understand what a complete perversion he made of the Threefold Social Order: “Each activity and each need of the individual will thereby be regulated by the party as the representative of the general good. There will be no license, no free space, in which the individual belongs to himself. This is Socialism …”
My emphasis. The entire point of the TSO is to create structures within which people can develop in complete freedom, while working cooperatively with others to create the necessities of life and relating as equals in the political sphere.
How did Hitler turn a beaten and depressed nation into a power ready to fight the world within a few years? Apart from setting up a state-sanctioned off-the-books Ponzi scheme to fund the rearmament in secret?
When push came to shove, when Adolf Hitler was trying to convince his senior officials that he really knew what he was doing and had a long-term vision, he fell back on something that looks a lot like the Threefold Social Order, even drawing on its “mystical” aspects.
The extent to which some kind of threefolding as a divide-and-rule policy might have applied behind the scenes is beyond the scope of this article. Hitler was clearly in charge of the political dimension. Goebbels was certainly given vast powers in the educational and cultural domain. Goering had immense influence over the entire command economy. All worker/employer issues fell under Robert Ley and the Trustees of Labour. Whether this was just pragmatic, or a deliberate policy based on some notion of threefolding, is impossible to prove.
Nonetheless, on the basis of Rauschning’s account, I am certain that the Threefold Social Order had a definite hidden role in the Third Reich, in a completely inverted and perverted form.
5. Whither Threefolding?
By 1922, Rudolf Steiner had abandoned the effort to publicize and promote the Threefold Order. In Oxford in August 1922 he made his last public statement on the subject, saying that the threefold movement was being temporarily suspended in Central Europe due to hyperinflation, but could continue in Russia and the West.
This followed a major disruption to one of his lectures in Munich on May 15, 1922. There is controversy as to whether this was an assassination attempt. It is clear that a mob tried to attack Steiner, who only escaped just in time, and that weapons including knives and firearms were in evidence. Armbands with swastikas were also seen, so this was an overt Nazi attack.
The lecture was held at the Four Seasons Hotel, apparently a well-known right-wing venue. Why did Steiner choose this for such a controversial event? They knew there was going to be trouble and even prepared and trained bodyguards for the day, who actually prevailed and managed to protect Steiner. A follower of his called Hans Büchenbacher became aware that Steiner was on a death list and organized the protection.
My guess about the choice of venue is based on the fact the disruption started with the lights in the auditorium being sabotaged. Steiner may have felt that the hooligans were less likely to trash one of their own venues than a more neutral one. It’s one reason for keeping your enemies close.
When the lights went out, only a lamp next to the lectern remained lit. Steiner continued giving the lecture unperturbed.
Whether an assassination was planned or not, Steiner sent a telegram to his supporter Edith Maryon saying simply “Survived Munich. Steiner.” He crossed the border into Switzerland and never set foot in Munich again.
There’s actually proof that Adolf Hitler was in Munich that day. A site called www.socialthreefold.org, which seems to have gone down, did an investigation. This was what they reported:
Paul Bruppacher, a chronicler of Hitler’s life, was contacted in the hope that he could more definitely pinpoint Hitler’s whereabouts on the 15th. Here is a translation of Mr. Bruppacher’s reply:
Thank you for your inquiry.
On 14 May 1922 Hitler was in Munich. Activity unknown.
On 15 May 1922 Hitler was in Munich. Activity unknown.
On 16 May 1922 Hitler rides by car via Nürnberg and Bayreuth to Berneck.
On 17 May 1922 Hitler rides by car from Berneck via Leipzig to Berlin.
This information comes from the just published Hitler: The Itinerary, Volume 1, by Harald Sandner.
Hitler’s known residence in Munich at the time was about six blocks from the Four Seasons Hotel. There’s no evidence that Hitler was involved in the attack, but he was right on the scene at the time and left the next day.
Later in 1922, Steiner’s magnificent Goetheanum building was burned to the ground by arsonists. Then at the 1923 Christmas Conference in Dornach, Switzerland, Steiner was poisoned, according to the eyewitness Ilona Schubert, although this fact was concealed. He died in March 1925.
There is no doubt that his propagation of the Threefold Social Order led directly to at least some of these attacks on him. Did they succeed in scuppering the TSO forever?
According to the very interesting recent German video referenced previously, Steiner maintained that humanity was going to get three opportunities to implement threefolding. The first was the French Revolution, which failed, because it tried to articulate the three principles in a unitary state.
The second attempt was Steiner’s effort after the Great War.
The third and last chance for humanity would come 100 years later – right now. I’m very encouraged to hear the makers of this video saying they are working to try see the TSO finally implemented in Europe by 2030. This is not impossible, although it will require around half a dozen miracles.
If we don’t get it right, Steiner warned, the world will just descend into chaos. Look around you right now and you’ll see exactly what he was talking about. There is, in fact, a way of structuring society so that the right people are in the right place at the right time to make the right decisions for the right reasons. It is not so hard when you completely separate politics from economics.
6. The Lost Prophecy
I suffered an unusually severe attack of chatbot hallucinations when I tried to investigate a particular issue, this being whether Steiner’s eminent student, Walter Johannes Stein, who is supposed to have give Winston Churchill insights into Hitler’s occult motives, ever hinted that the Third Reich actually stole and perverted the TSO.
I was given direct and potent quotes to this effect by Grok, for example, none of which turned out to be true. Do not trust Grok when it says “These are word-for-word from the text—no alterations.” It subsequently told me that all the quotes were made up and apologized for wasting my time. I had already planned a whole section around this word-for-word text.
If anyone has information on Stein and the TSO in the Third Reich, I would be very interested. Nothing seems to be available online. Walter Johannes Stein pushed threefolding for the rest of his life and we know that he had very deep insight into the motivations of Adolf Hitler. If anyone were to make the connection, it would be he.
However, there is one quote that I have had clearly in mind for years, where Steiner himself actually made an implicit suggestion along these lines. I have searched high and low, and I just cannot find this quote now, so I am relying on memory. If anyone can confirm it, I will be delighted.
I know that this quote was dated 1922 and was in response to a personal question, this was not given in a formal lecture. Someone asked Steiner when the Threefold Order would come about. His answer was, “In twenty years it will be here, but in conditions of such chaos that no one will recognize it.”
The reason I am so sure it was 1922 is that I clearly remember adding twenty years, getting 1942 and thinking – Germany was indeed in such chaos by that point that no one would have noticed anything like this, if it had been secretly implemented.
Did Steiner have some kind of premonition that his ideas would be stolen and used in perverse fashion? The fact that he said that no one would recognize it indicates that he was not anticipating this being done openly under the banner of the TSO.
If anyone can confirm this anecdote I would be very interested.
There are shadows of the threefold order in Germany today, if you look. Workers sit with employers on company boards, much in line with TSO principles. This is one reason Germany suffered much less labour agitation than countries like Britain. Strikes are extremely destructive events in society.
To close, I want to look at the only other threefold scheme I have found to compare with the TSO. This has mythical connections with Tibet. The Nazis supported a German scientific expedition to Tibet over 1938–1939 with the personal approval of Heinrich Himmler. Their objectives included contacting the Regent of Tibet and visiting sacred cities including Lhasa. They also allegedly obtained documents on the origin of the Aryan race.
This other threefold scheme is known as synarchy, propounded by Marquis Saint-Yves d’Alveydre (1842–1909), a highly eccentric French occultist. There’s a very good account of his life in Alec McLellan’s book The Lost World of Agharti: The Mystery of Vril Power. He says:
The Marquis also proposed a new socio-political system called Synarchy, which advocated that society should be regarded as a living organism like that of the human body. Defining this, he said: “The first function corresponds to nutrition and that is economics. The second can be defined as the will, and that is legislation and politics. Finally, the third corresponds to the spirit and that includes science and religion.”
While this is not exactly the TSO, it is close enough. Interestingly, he associates politics with willing, rather than feeling.
D’Alveydre published these ideas in 1886 in a book called The Mission of India in Europe, in which he claimed that much of its information came from an emissary from the “King of the World” in subterranean Tibet, the mythical city of Agharti (or Agartha).
According to McLennan, “The truth of the matter is that Saint-Yves had come into contact with a Hindu Brahmin priest who had fled from his native country after a revolt and settled in France.”
The Brahmin told d’Alveydre that Agartha was the great initiatory centre of Asia and had a population that ran into millions. It was ruled by twelve members of the “Supreme Initiation” and the “King of the World”, who “directs the life of the planet in a discreet and unseen way”.
Saint-Yves said it was from Agartha that great spiritual leaders came. He stated: “Supported by the history of the world, I have demonstrated that Synarchy, government by trinitarian arbitration, drawn from the depths of the initiation of Moses and Jesus, is the promise of the Israelites as it is ours.”
Strangely, having produced this magnum opus, d’Alveydre then promptly had it destroyed. Only a few copies survived. Why did he do this? McLennan has an interesting perspective:
What we do know for a fact is that just as the book was to be published another Indian came to Paris looking for the Marquis. This mysterious figure, about whom very little is known, according to the occult authority Paul Chacornac is said to have been angry with Saint-Yves because he had used the information passed on to to him “not as traditional information to be received and assimilated, but as elements destined to be integrated into his personal system”. The man said that “The King of the World” looked with displeasure on any denigrating of Agartha by association with Synarchy.
It seems that a rebuke from the King of the World may have been sufficient to scare even d’Alveydre, who was “never afraid of expressing his opinions”.
Rudolf Steiner insists that the threefold order is actually the way the world runs already, only we are doing it unconsciously and continually confuse the realms and muddle their functions. So it is interesting to note that a threefold scheme is allegedly used to rule this planet from subterranean realms.
It’s not impossible that Hitler got wind of threefolding from synarchy and the legends of Tibet. I highly doubt it. However, I think it is worth telling this story, to show just how deeply the threefold concept is embedded. Synarchy was overtly opposed to the equality proposed by the French revolution, proposing a hierarchical society with an enlightened ruling elite. In this way, it’s a lot closer to what Hitler outlined with his mystic triangle than is the TSO.
I’ve listened to a lot of Rudolf Steiner lectures on audio, but some of the most interesting and powerful ones I’ve ever heard were those he gave to speakers who were going to go out and give lectures and presentations on the TSO. He stresses that there are two prerequisites for this task. One is that we exclude “any kind of scepticism in our hearts towards the impulse of threefolding”. The other is that we do this out of love for humanity.
The special thing about threefolding is that it doesn’t actually require any new institutions or organizations to start. All it requires is consciousness. Steiner says every child should be schooled in these principles. By expressing their equal voices in politics, by being helpful and cooperative co-workers, and by developing their own culture and following their own faiths in perfect freedom, people can create their own threefold social order, even within a family.
It is worth looking at places that get it exactly wrong. South Africa is the standout example for me. They have used the education system overtly to push for “equality”. The result has been the greatest disaster in that country’s education system ever. They have stopped participating in international benchmarking exercises, because South Africa comes in so far below its much poorer neighbours.
On the other hand, the date of the first democratic election in 1994, April 27, is now a public holiday known as “Freedom Day”. Many citizens of that country are wondering exactly what this freedom amounts to, with soaring poverty, crime, inequality and corruption. The expectations would have been entirely different if April 27 were known as “Equality Day”.
For me, there is no doubt. I am certain that the Threefold Social Order is the only way we can rescue society from its current mess, a mess that prevails right around the world. The historical perspective, showing the evolution of threefolding over thousands of years, eliminates the slightest trace of scepticism in my mind.
As for love of humanity, I feel mostly pity for all of us, trapped in this hell of posturing politicians and demented tech billionaires who display not a trace of care for the ordinary citizen. This planet deserves better governance, much better.
---