friend went to Landmark Forum meeting. Should I worry?
Date: May 30, 2006 11:33PM
annnnd some more.... note the appearance of one [b:e3bd4b6f92] Fernando Flores [/b:e3bd4b6f92] :
BTW, and if I may say so myself, [b:e3bd4b6f92] Holy Shitte !!! [/b:e3bd4b6f92] ... why does it not surprise me that the ESTmark organization [i:e3bd4b6f92] "is in the converstaion of not being in the conversation about this conversation" [/i:e3bd4b6f92] ??? :
Have at it, Carol
"In the Fall of 1985, Forbes' writer, Richard Behar, began an
investigation of The Hunger Project and Werner Erhard. [b:e3bd4b6f92] He reported
that The Hunger Project retained one of New York's fanciest law firms
to attempt to bully and to intimidate him and another reporter into
permitting them to censor the story. [/b:e3bd4b6f92] In his article, Behar pursued a
lawsuit concerning a $15 million low-interest loan from Wolfgang
Somary of Zurich to Erhard that was not repaid. The entangled loan
plan involved a Costa Rican foundation, The Fundacion Soberana Orden
de San Juan de Jerusalem that served as intermediary for the loan and
the 2% interest rate. This Costa Rican group had been set up by an
Erhard friend just several days before the transfer and stood to
benefit by receiving a major portion of the interest payments.
Strangely enough, Behar reported, The Hunger Project co-funded a
project with Save The Children to award one of its grants (a $1
million 5-year development grant) in Costa Rica. According to The
Hunger Project's own barometer (IMR of less than 50), Costa Rica is
not considered a hungry country. The person who put the deal together?
[b:e3bd4b6f92] None other than Fernando Flores-Banuet, the same individual whose
charity served as the conduit for the $15 million Zurich loan to
Erhard in 1981. [/b:e3bd4b6f92] *27 (Note: Flores-Banuet was also on the Advisory
Council of The Hunger Project. The President of Save The Children,
David Guyer, (now deceased) had also served on the Board of Directors
of The Hunger Project.)
The McGill Daily reports that CUSA, Oxfam International; the Peace
Corps and other respected hunger organizations have dissociated
themselves from The Hunger Project.*28 [b:e3bd4b6f92] On May 30, 1981, the national
board of directors of Oxfam, Canada passed a resolution that they will
not endorse or support any activities or programs sponsored by The
Hunger Project nor will they accept any funds from the Project. [/b:e3bd4b6f92]
It seems The Hunger Project has turned to the threat of legal action
when it learns of the possibility of critical exposures by the media.
Both the McGill Daily and the Canadian Broadcasting Corp's The Fifth
Estate were threatened with suits. The Hunger Project followed through
in the case of The London Sunday Times, which published an article
raising issues regarding how The Hunger Project spent its money and
the possibility that people who give money to The Hunger Project
believe that they are actually feeding people.(29) It also questioned
whether Hunger Project people were recruited to take est. They quoted
a Hunger Project volunteer as boasting of connections between Live Aid
and Sport Aid and that they were "very much a partnership" with
Geldof's efforts in those events.
Canadian newspapers The Ottawa Citizen and Toronto Star pointed out
that The Hunger Project's "Ending Hunger Briefing" program was barred
from Metro [Toronto] schools and from Ottawa and Carleton schools
because of the controversial nature of The Hunger Project.
On October 23, 1986, the Canadian Broadcasting Corp.'s current affair
program, The Fifth Estate, (similar in format to 20/20 or 60 Minutes)
aired[b:e3bd4b6f92] a documentary on The Hunger Project in which Joan Holmes denied
any connection, either philosophical or otherwise, with est. [/b:e3bd4b6f92] Herein
lies the heart of the on-going controversy. Denial. Deception. People
being enrolled into The Hunger Project and being asked for
contributions were not fully informed. Volunteers, most of whom were
est graduates, were kept so busy doing the work of The Hunger Project
and immersing themselves in the "principles and abstractions" that
they very often could not see that there was a vast difference between
what they were told to say to the general public and what actually was
being said to those inside the organization regarding its ideology.
Personal Experience And Opinion:
For the five years that I was a full time volunteer, I denied even my
most nagging doubts. What happens to a person to produce such denials
-- to ignore one's own questioning? My critical thinking was bypassed
by focusing only on the positive aspects: surely God would want hunger
to end, for His children to be fed. For me, this was "the end
justifies the means." I thought it was absolutely true that education
about hunger was needed in order for hunger to become a priority
issue. But what was this nagging question within me? Why did I cringe
every time I met a "Werner hater" while out enrolling people in The
Hunger Project or making a public presentation?[b:e3bd4b6f92] Why was I being asked
to deny the association between est/Erhard and The Hunger Project? [/b:e3bd4b6f92] Was
this not deceiving people? Why did I feel disloyal if I even allowed
myself to ask these questions of myself?
I see these controversial issues as questions worthy of an honest
answer. I go even further than these questions to reveal what I see as
a hidden agenda of The Hunger Project: what it does not say to the
public. The hidden agenda of The Hunger Project is to transform the
world according to the "principles and abstractions" (technology of
transformation) of Werner Erhard. Yes, they want to end hunger. The
fervent staff members and volunteers have committed their lives to
that end. But, hunger is just the vehicle. It could be any issue:
peace, disarmament, prejudice--you name it. Hunger is an issue that
most people would agree needs our attention. After all, who wouldn't
want hunger to end? How can you fault an organization with such a
noble purpose?
When we were enrolling people in The Hunger Project -- at flea
markets, on the beach, at concerts, railroad stations, on the street
corners -- it was fairly easy to get a person to agree that they
wanted hunger to end. From that agreement, more times than not, we
could get them to sign an enrollment card saying that they were
willing to be responsible for making the end of starvation an idea
whose time has come. Think of what it would imply if an individual did
not sign the enrollment card -- that they must not want hunger to end.
[b:e3bd4b6f92] This, in itself, is an unethical emotional manipulation.[/b:e3bd4b6f92] Because one
does not want to support a particular organization does not mean that
one does not want to see hunger end.
The Hunger Project uses its noble purpose to deflect criticism and to
shame anyone who might criticize a "noble" organization which has such
a noble purpose. This implies that a noble purpose protects an
organization from deceptive behaviors and hidden agendas on the part
of its volunteers, staff and the organization's founders.
And noble we were. We were the warriors, living on the cutting edge of
transformation. We believed the world was deceived regarding the
conditions contributing to hunger and was unaware of the technology
available to end it. The world operates under false assumptions about
hunger that actually serve to keep it in place. The world is denying
its responsibility for the cause of hunger and has not taken
responsibility for ending hunger -- we lack the simple commitment to
end hunger in the world. Here we were, The Hunger Project volunteers
and staff, vowing to tell the truth about hunger in the world,
committing ourselves to raising the commitment to end hunger in the
world. We were being totally responsible. How could we possibly think
that we were perhaps being deceived ourselves -- let alone that we
were deceiving the public? How could we possibly entertain the idea
that we were the ones in denial? After all, we were the warriors
against deception and denial which keeps hunger in place. We are the
embodiment of truth, courage and total commitment that is creating the
end of hunger and starvation on our planet as an idea whose time has
come.
Werner Erhard wrote the "principles and abstractions" of The Hunger
Project found in the "Source Document." Yet, The Hunger Project says
it has no philosophy. [b:e3bd4b6f92] Likewise, Erhard says that the est training and
The Forum have no philosophy. According to Erhard, it is nothing to be
believed, since "the truth believed is a lie." [/b:e3bd4b6f92] Regardless, these
principles and abstractions remain the backbone of The Hunger Project.
Through the years, the terminology in Erhard's programs and their
predecessors has changed. Not surprisingly, so has The Hunger
Project's.
Marty Leaf, a Hunger Project volunteer and one time partner in the law
firm of Leaf, Duell, Drogin & Kramer in New York City, wrote: "True
satisfaction comes from the transformation of Self realized by
maintaining the integrity of Werner Erhard's abstractions and
generating principles."*30 His partner, Ellis Duell, has served as
the Chairman of the Board of Directors of The Hunger Project.*31 In
The Hunger Project's 1988 Periodic Report [Form CT--2] to the State of
California, it is interesting to note fees for legal services of
"Leaf, Sternkler ET AL" in the amount of $108,399. Also of note in
that report are fees for video production services in the amount of
$35,602 paid to Johnathan S. Duell (son of Ellis Duell).
The Inside Story:
The Hunger Project had over 6 million people who have signed an
enrollment card, committing themselves to the end of hunger. Consider
that amazing result. Consider, also, the fact that many well-known
politicians and respected hunger organizations have either aligned
themselves with The Hunger Project or, at the very least, are not
suspicious.
Isn't it silly to get people to sign a little white card to "commit
themselves to the end of hunger?" Not so silly when you ponder how
effective it would be to say to your congresspersons or other
politicians that over 6 million people stand behind your organization.
Wouldn't it tend to open some doors which otherwise might not have
been open?
I have no issue with drawing attention to the problem of hunger or
educating the public regarding hunger. My issue lies with The Hunger
Project's underlying philosophy and the methodology used to have the
volunteers produce these amazing results.
There are other organizations dealing with the issue of hunger that
have clearly stated agendas, i.e., Bread for the World indicates that
it is a Christian lobbying and education group. Yet, The Hunger
Project finds it necessary to deny a philosophy. In my experience as a
full-time volunteer, it became clear and intolerable that the image
being presented to the public and the reality working within the
organization are two entirely different things.
The network of thousands of volunteers who produce the work of The
Hunger Project (Werner's "work") is managed by the paid staff and by
other volunteers who take on a managerial role. Most of the employees
and volunteers have taken the est training or The Forum or other
Erhard programs. Managing tools consisted of communications
(telephone) calls, lengthy conference calls, conferences, Briefing
Leader's training weekends, written communications, audiotapes, etc.
It is from these arenas that the volunteer is brought to commit to the
goals, the ideas and work of The Hunger Project.
The fundamental ideas of The Hunger Project are revealed in "The
Source Document," which was written by Werner Erhard. Among those are:
The Principles and Abstractions of The Hunger Project:
Individual and Personal Responsibility
Alignment of Wholes
Create a Context
Transformation (32)
Definition of Responsibility (33)
"Responsibility starts with the willingness to experience yourSelf as
cause. It starts with the willingness to have the experience of
yourSelf as cause in the matter.
Responsibility is not burden, fault, praise, blame, credit, shame or
guilt. All these include judgments and evaluations of good and bad,
right and wrong or better and worse. They are not responsibility. They
are derived from a ground of being in which Self in considered to be a
thing or an object rather than context.
Responsibility starts with the willingness to deal with the situation
from and with the point of view, whether at the moment realized or
not, that you are the source of what you are, what you do and what you
have. This point of view extends to include even what is done to you
and, ultimately, what another does to another.
Ultimately, responsibility is a context, a context of Self as source
for the content, i.e. for what is.
Volunteers were instructed to read the Source Document. In fact,
Briefing Leaders made an agreement to "stay grounded" in the
principles and abstractions by rereading the Source Document a minimum
of once each quarter.(34) [b:e3bd4b6f92] We were told that if volunteers live their
lives according to the principles and abstractions, hunger will end in
the world. [/b:e3bd4b6f92]
In addressing the question of "What is The Hunger Project?" at a
volunteer conference, Joan Holmes said:
"The Hunger Project has a set of generating principles, the expression
of which out into the world, is The Hunger Project. The Hunger Project
is about locating in the fabric of Self the end of hunger and
starvation, so that [it] can show up there. It is our sense that when
that is done to any appreciable degree, that we can have the end of
hunger...what we stand for is having the end of hunger and starvation
be a natural expression of who someone is: a Self."(35)
Erhard's explanation of Self (as preferable to operating in the Mind
State) is:
"Where one realizes that one is the context of all contexts; that one
is not your mind, your belief system, ideologies, traditions and
identifications." [b:e3bd4b6f92] "The Self is the unsubmitting, unresisting, unformed
matrix in which all forms, all processes and all metaphors exist." [/b:e3bd4b6f92] (36)
In the est training, trainees were led to believe that "the mind" was
a negative concept. If an individual was in their "mind state," they
were being rooted in their past rather than being in this moment.
Erhard and his trained leaders claim the authority to determine
whether a member's actions or statements were arising out of the "Mind
state" or the "Self", depending on whether those actions or statements
agree or disagree with him or the goals of the group. These concepts
set an individual up in a constant state of self-examination and
vigilance -- am I operating from the state of Mind or Self?
Similarly, we were taught in the est training and seminar programs
that the Self, being the context of all things, means ultimately that
we are all One. [b:e3bd4b6f92] There is no one outside ourselves but projections of
ourselves and no reality that we have not created and for which we are
not responsible. Since we are all really One in being, it is out of
relationship with each other that hunger will end. [/b:e3bd4b6f92] Joan Holmes speaks
to volunteers on this concept:
"Now in a larger sense, you are all One. But you express yourself
individually...and our relationships with Self is the space in which
hunger will end...the original sin or lie, as I can determine it, is
that I said I wasn't you. It's to pretend we're separate is the
original lie. . .if the Self won out over that one, then the Mind
would have no control over that person . . [b:e3bd4b6f92] .see, Werner knows who he
is because he is everything and everyone. And so the Mind has really
no control over him." [/b:e3bd4b6f92] (37)
Holmes continued illustrating the concept of the battle our minds has
for control of us by addressing what happens when one realizes that
they are Self:
"...that is the last barrier. And the Mind will do anything because
once you recognize that [you are Self], the Mind has lost its survival
battle . . .the last hold that the Mind has on us is to say that we're
separate and not connected. So when you have things like enrollment
and money [targets] and all those things to confront, the Mind will
pick what it can to get you to think we're not connected."(38)
This basic philosophy that if we all knew we were all Self, there
would be no more hunger, is very different from the image The Hunger
Project presents to the public: that The Hunger Project is about
education and information. In a quotation from the Assistant Executive
Director, Lynne Twist, a further understanding is revealed:
"Our relationship with each other, our relationship with Joan
[Holmes], our relationship with Werner [Erhard] is really why we're
doing all this work."(39)
[b:e3bd4b6f92] The constant reminder that we are the hungry people of the world and
the emotionalism used at conferences and on audiotapes, influenced the
volunteers to recommit themselves to more and more work. Often, Joan
Holmes spoke in tears, with her voice cracking. Emotional manipulation
at conferences got volunteers reinspired and rededicated, which led up
to the point when the new campaign targets were promised. [/b:e3bd4b6f92] A conference
day began with acknowledging the quality, dedication, courage and
commitment of volunteers. There usually followed a time that was
called in est a "clearing." ("Clearing" is a term coined by L. Ron
Hubbard in his Dianectics/Scientology technology) In this "clearing,"
a person introduced themselves and said whatever they need to say (to
clear what's going on in their mind and to be present in the room to
hear what they need to hear). After this process, volunteers were told
what results have been produced in The Hunger Project so far and what
results were produced during the last campaign. Each volunteer was
"acknowledged" for having produced all those miracles, every single
volunteer created that happening. Then the new campaign was
introduced. "