Scholé News – June 2026

Dear friends of Scholé

The omnipresent discussions about evil people (Putin, Trump, the mullahs, Netanyahu) or even evil peoples or ethnic groups (foreigners, Germans, Palestinians) annoy me more and more, because they lead nowhere and are therefore a pointless waste of time. If there really were people or even peoples who were thoroughly evil, removing them from the planet that they supposedly harm by their mere existence would be the only conceivable solution. But this recipe has never worked. And who are the all-knowing and all-powerful whom we could trust to carry out this judgement justly and reliably?

“Please don’t get drawn into ideological disputes, but insist on concrete evidence: an informed decision is only possible on the basis of solid data and facts, in whatever field.”

Alexandra Terzic-Auer

So what is really of interest to the general public are only the GOOD deeds whose traces and effects shape our lives. Who wants to know about the many failed attempts in developing a technical invention? All that matters is the one successful attempt to which we owe the new machine, the new process. In the past, art and literature had the task of celebrating good deeds and anchoring them in the memory of posterity. Inspiration and encouragement can still be drawn from these sources today when we have had enough of the victim cult and the anti-heroes of contemporary culture…

By definition, only the Creator himself is all-knowing and all-powerful. Because of their short lifespan, human beings have limited experiences and can at best acquire a tiny fraction of universal knowledge. Their freedom lies in deciding again and again whether they want to do good or evil DEEDS. All religions and ethical teachings are aimed at training people’s conscience to enable them to consciously choose the good, which always requires a certain effort, whereas without deliberate effort things usually tend to go downhill.

“By their fruits ye shall know them”, says the Bible – a thoroughly sensible, pragmatic approach that urgently needs reviving so that we can find our way out of the moral dead end into which the increasing ideologisation of recent decades has led us: “We, the good, against the others, the evil!” This attitude is nothing but a guarantee of arrogance, strife and war. It leads to the pointless discussions mentioned above, because whatever the good may do, it is always interpreted as good, and whatever the evil may do, it is bad in any case. Good or evil DEEDS, by contrast, can be distinguished by their effects through verifiable and comparable FACTS. It is in keeping with naturally solution-oriented human reason to collect facts and figures, analyse them precisely and discuss them in detail in order to gain clarity and orientation from them.

This also applies to technical solutions: fossil fuels are not evil in themselves; it depends on how they are used. Nor are wind turbines good in themselves – only when all the facts relating to their manufacture, installation, operation, undesirable side effects, costs and actual efficiency have been precisely gathered and weighed against each other can one decide case by case whether a wind turbine should be erected or whether it would be more expedient to look for another solution at that location.

Ideology-free decisions would be even more urgent in medicine, especially for vaccines given millions of times to healthy children. It is an outrageous scandal that there are no carefully and correctly conducted studies with genuine placebo control groups (saline solution) for a single one of the vaccines currently in use! When complaints about undesirable side effects mounted, the manufacturers were even exempted from product liability in 1986! From then on, the pharmaceutical companies could bring ever new vaccinations onto the market without any worries, and of course made ample use of this opportunity. Only with the Covid jabs did so much finally go wrong that the dogma of life-saving, safe and effective vaccines was seriously shaken for the first time. Why? Only because so many courageous doctors and researchers would not be deterred from researching and publishing data and facts, even though they were punished with persecution and social ostracism.

I have read a great many of these critical studies and analyses – none of them, however, convinced me as much as the large comparative study between vaccinated and completely unvaccinated, so to speak natural, children that was kept under wraps for eight years: it is no longer about risk of infection, side effects and more or less severe courses of illness, but about an incorruptible weighing of harm and benefit on the basis of long-term consequences. The health of unvaccinated young people is far better in every respect, the study showed: they have hardly any allergies, far fewer infectious diseases, need fewer operations and suffer from neither ADHD nor autism. Anyone who has experienced at close quarters what it means to care for children with severe neurological disorders knows how important it would be to spread this information among the brainwashed population. Incidentally, any paediatrician who looks after both vaccinated and unvaccinated children can confirm these study results, if they are honest.

For now, however, the ideological camp is unfortunately still holding its ground. The film VAXXED Part 3, which deals with the striking differences between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated, and the film “An Inconvenient Study” continue to be suppressed as much as possible; the filmmakers have been persecuted and punished. Nevertheless, it seems to me that the call for factual evidence is now being heard more and more often from the public, and that people are no longer so easily fobbed off with expert knowledge that may not be questioned. Each of us should support this movement instead of falling for ideologically motivated promises.

The same applies to our education system, which is in the process of destroying itself and is only kept going by the compulsory enforcement of the dogma of compulsory schooling. If it were about data and facts, we would long since have freedom of education, but so far the authorities still steadfastly refuse even to take note of the well-being and achievements of children who have been allowed free educational paths, let alone to measure them by the same standard as those of school leavers.

Please don’t get drawn into ideological disputes, but insist on concrete evidence: an informed decision is only possible on the basis of solid data and facts, in whatever field.

As far as ethics is concerned, peaceful coexistence among people would be assured if we simply kept, as well as we can, to the pragmatic old truism: “Do not do to others what you would not want done to you!” For everyone knows very well from their own experience the effects of good and bad words, of loving and unloving behaviour. And for those who care about ecology, I am convinced there is no better role model than the brilliant Styrian water researcher Viktor Schauberger, whose motto was: UNDERSTAND NATURE AND COPY IT!

Finally, a very personal request today: the son of a Chinese friend became autistic at the age of one and a half (for genetic reasons, it is said). I would be very grateful for information about alternative treatment options that have proven themselves in practice.

Many thanks! Alexandra

More Scholé news

2nd edition of “Lernen ist wie Atmen” (Learning is like breathing)

The 2nd edition of our book meets a completely changed readership.

In 2017, the idea that learning outside school was possible at all was considered the eccentric notion of a few outsiders. Since then, all parents, whether they wanted to or not, have had to deal with forms of learning outside school.

The number of children withdrawn from school has exploded since then, and alternative learning projects are springing up like mushrooms.

Buy the book (2nd ed., German)

Download eBook (1st ed., German)

Scholé website