I think I know the best way to prove an LGAT is bad
Date: May 19, 2017 08:54AM
I've tried to convince so many people that Landmark is not good, but because Landmark is so good with its psychological tricks, it's hard to find one solid reason why it's not good. For example, abuse? Rip off? Scam? Unsustained progress?
Sounds like regular psycho-therapy to me. Of course, there's one predominantly crucial difference between therapy and LGAT seminars.
Look at the structure of the company. Examine who gets paid, how the employee strata works. See how the employees are treated. Ask them what their tasks are. How much control do they have over their ideas? Are they paid well with traditional standards?
What I'm trying to say is that a regular company acts like a regular company. It values capitalism, sometimes exploits employees but generally follows the law. That's not to say that a regular company is the correct way to be ran. But that's like saying capitalism isn't necessarily better than communism.
I only have experience with Landmark, and I can say the company structure is not normal. Far too much volunteer work with the illusion of employment. My guess is the top people in Landmark have some sort of anti-capitalist agenda. It's not just to make a ton of money. Landmark could theoretically restructure into a normal business and probably still make money.
Instead, they choose to remain alien, pretending their slaves are getting something more valuable than money. That's what truly makes Landmark and possibly other LGATs bad. It's not just a scam. It's a virus. It's a sick new form of thought meant to literally transform you out of traditional thinking and into a new form of thinking that in large numbers can be used to destroy the very fabric of society.