Quote
MarkusWelch

The political discussion itself does not belong here, does it?

Perhaps you can start a new thread called 'cults and politics' and I'll be happy to respond, assuming Mr. Ross would allow such a thread to exist on his site.

BTW- You are free to correct Nutrino, who seems to have a false impression of my character.

Hi Markus (of high character and all around stand-up guy),

I just think that any elitist group of people who align themselves with some ideology and then march in lock-step with nary a dissenting opinion to be heard, maintain an aura of secrecy, disavow and disguise their intentions, and embrace some bizarro-regressive-fundamentalist-Xtian-knee-jerk bunch of uneducated fear-mongers (as a cover or front and because they can be counted on to deliver the votes) that they are behaving like a cult. It fits, doesn't it? I mean cults are all about greed and power, after all; that is preserving the privileged position of a few, preserving a large and dumb working class, maintaining the status quo, reinforcing the power structure continually by instilling some fantasy into the proles that they are actually "getting value" for their devotion (or more likely that they might "get value" at some time in the future if they mainain their adherence).

It's no mystery to me that the extreme right have cobbled together a party that includes Reverend Moon and the Xtian fundies. "Strange bedfellows" and all that. It's a strategic manoeuver with cults and cult-like aspects front and center.


Ellen ;)

All of this badinage might be a sideshow and it might not. My central idea is that what began some 40 or 50 years ago as an unstable farrago of sociology, psychotherapy, "shamanism", psychedelia, science fiction, adolescent quests for enlightenment, alternative lifestyle exploration, disorientation.... and whatever else... and has been simmering on the back burner of american consciousness ever since..... went through a burst of militant optimism in the 1970s and early 1980s when these impulses began to coalesce into "branded LGATs", such as the Erhardian products and the many offshoots of Erhardism, or the Divinity based organizations like the Unification Church or Baghwan Rajhneesh's groups, and significantly for the next round, the decline of the traditional church and the rise of the evangelic church with the charismatic minister....

Throughout their ups and downs, these organizations experienced substantial cross pollination...( in one NLP training I attended, a very good one, by the way, we had a large contingent of ministers) ... in the process, the lessons in "what works" in one setting could be closely studied, reshaped to fit the needs of a new setting, and further refined.

There can be no doubt that Sun Myung Moon has had an impact on Washingtonian culture... he did bring The Washington Times into being, expressly as a counterweight to The Washington Post, and the financial burdens of publishing that paper must have been extrordinary... one would have to be obtuse to conclude that Moon's involvement with the political process ended with a publishing venture, considering that he heads up an organization with global reach, no accountability whatsoever, and a rigorously screened, rigorously indoctinated body of followers who serve as his operatives. One would have to be doubly obtuse not to conclude that such an organization might not be of service to certain elements in our public government...

One then must also entertain the possibility that the softer indoctrination methods found in LGAT culture would find application in settings where concepts like "alignment", "getting with the program" ,"being in the game",
"being the source of your own reality" served various institutional agendae, be they massaging a workforce into compliance, getting an overly inquisitve reporter "off of his racket" , or justifying policy in terms of one's capacity to create reality on demand.... [b:15eaae1dde] like homeopathic medicines, the same philosophies that can be energizing in small doses can be toxic (neurotoxic it appears) in higer doses.... [/b:15eaae1dde]

Contemplate this opinion, all political affiliation excised, purely as a study in the form of thought... expressed by a person in the governmental arena... does this sound, vaguely, like the perspective of the Erhardian worldview ? :

"The aide said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who [b:15eaae1dde] 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' [/b:15eaae1dde] " The aide told Mr. Suskind, [b:15eaae1dde] "That's not the way the world really works anymore. We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality." [/b:15eaae1dde]

Ah yes... we create our own reality... where HAVE I heard that one before ?

(as an aside, Ron Suskind has credibility problems of his own, brilliant as he may be, he has been known to invent dialog to suit his purposes... so iI AM taking the above with a healthy grain of salt)...

Now, either Suskind was confabulating outright , which he might have been, or he was giving an accurate description of a specific converstaion, which he might have been, or he might have produced an "illustrative conflation" from several sources, which he might have been...

That said, there is something deeply alarming when (and if) the upper echalons of the policy process are regurgitating Erhardian beliefs as if they are reliable guides to conduct, with no further analysis of the consequences of buying into Erhardism as a model for action...

Edwin Decker offers this small gem:

"The sentence, "You are either part of the solution or part of the problem" is known as a disjunctive syllogism. In a disjunctive syllogism the operative words are Either and Or: To disprove a disjunctive syllogism, one merely need find one exception to the formula. For instance, if the syllogism reads, "You are either part of the cookie or you are part of the typewriter" you could point out that your rectum is part of neither, thus damning the credibility of the entire syllogism. So here's my exception: You are sitting at home alone one night, drinking red wine and cranking on your stereo so loud that you never hear the sounds of a violent assault happening just outside. Here is a case where I was neither part of the problem nor part of the solution. I was just part of the rocking out. There are a thousand more exceptions, but the proof is in the putty. This cliché is wrong and oppressive. It is guilting in nature, insulting by design and not at all productive in the grand scheme of beans"

It **IS** all about the top of the pyramid, after all. That, and the lower levels who aspire to the top. That, and the degree to which the top can fool the lower levels into thinking they have a chance of getting to the top. That, and the degree to which the top can instill fear into the lower levels to keep them in their place; propping them up. That, and the extent to which the top can ~create~ a culture that sustains their position.

It is a game in their minds. It is a game in the minds of the sociopaths who run things. A deadly game, but a game nonetheless.

Here's the kicker:

[www.informationclearinghouse.info]

So glad George Carlin's the one saying it.


Ellen

Carlin is an excellent performer.... I'm somewhat in aggreement with his point of view, somewhat not... that said, here's speaking within the context of performance where we expect oversimplification for dramatic (or comic) effect... his outrage is genuine however... and he's accurate when he asserts that we only want citizens who can think up to a point, but cannot think well beyond that point. Therein lies a potentially damning accusation that could be pointed at the LGAT industry [i:49c994073e] in toto [/i:49c994073e] , allowing for differences up and down the quality ladder... that they have [b:49c994073e] become complicit in this cognitive limitation process [/b:49c994073e] ... in other words, they have been brought on board as corporate consultants, corporate workshop and seminar leaders... and that's where the sweet money is, by the by, and far fewer hassles because you're packaging your goods wholesale instead of having to market them retail... and deal with all the individualized hand holding of the retail business... however, they have been brought on board because they can provide an "independent" patina of legitimacy to cultlike structures in the workplace... I'm sure this varies tremendously from specific business to business and who is running the seminar... I've seen some not-too-bad work being done by NLP based consultants that may well have enhanced group performance, and I've heard some real horror stories too... it's a weird little subculture....

Did anyone see this link on myspace?

[groups.myspace.com]

Quote
nutrino

...Just as often it is a function of the quality of your "technology" ... when most people were not literate, literacy was a high value technology or skill, so I'm strongly thinking now that there is a new kind of literacy required, a survival technology, or not live "perpetually at effect of crafty shit designed to keep you on a short leash" technology , a cognitive Wing Chun Kung Fu that gives you the necessary elasticity, suppleness, perceptivity, and precision to make the matrix work for you... however...

Wow...


Hi Nutrino.


I've had a hard time wrapping my mind around this, and after reading it a few times, it sounds almost as though you suggest a type of social Darwinism in which only those with enough of whateve it takes to get the "survival technology" will live with some autonomy and the rest are doomed to various forms of slavery. I guess one could make the argument we already have this, in the U.S. at least. Have I understood you correctly?

It does fit in with the "viral" or "disease" nature of the whole thing, however. Certainly it might be seen as a similar handicap to all the ways people have found to impose their own wills over animals. It's not much of a stretch that those at the top of the pyramid consider those on the lower levels just so many beasts of burden.

Well, that's been my argument for a good long while. Not the Landmark and all the other Landmarks are so dangerous or so insidious but that their influence has spread the stinking taint outside and across the culture. Unless countered at every turn, these parasites have the ticket to remain in control and do appear to have found a way to pander to the lowest common denominator as a social, intellectual, and political menace.

Funnily enough, and perhaps as slave-owners have discovered over time, they are as utterly dependent on their slaves as they imagine themselves to be in control of them. The expoiters are the real dependents. It's a sick, sorrowful dynamic, more easily seen in a marriage perhaps, when one party is in control and the other is controlled. Both have sacrificed, though I don't know how you'd convince the top dog what part of his soul he had given up.


Ellen

Quote
elena
I've had a hard time wrapping my mind around this, and after reading it a few times, it sounds almost as though you suggest a type of social Darwinism in which only those with enough of whateve it takes to get the "survival technology" will live with some autonomy and the rest are doomed to various forms of slavery. I guess one could make the argument we already have this, in the U.S. at least. Have I understood you correctly?

I guess that metaphor was too Bruce Lee in flavor... my intention was to say that we, collectively, all of us, need well tuned skill sets that allow us to use the potential fullness of our consciousness as well as many of those parts of our minds sometimes labelled "the unconscious" in a fluid, coordinated fashion... this was akin the Milton Erickson's vision of a high state of mental health... much of the cultural stuff we sit down with on a daily basis is hypnotic but vacuous... it relaxes us, distracts us, and teaches us little of enduring value. In some respects it is teaching our "other than conscious" processes to go soft and drift into incompetence.... Erickson had some fascinating ideas about obtaining "unconscious competence" which would work in tandem with conscious awareness... There is a substantial body of literature reagarding Erickson's methods, transcripts of Erickson at work and in discussion with his peers... and unlike so many LGATs which are evasive or opaque when it comes to their sources and evolution of thir beliefs, this rather massive history permits one to approach Erickson in depth, from many angles... in an environment of blindingly fast technological change, which directly produces social and behavioral change, an exceptional skill set will be needed to surf over this tsunami of change rahter than be pushed under it...

Quote
MarkusWelch
I'm not going to debate politics with you here. That is and has been my point Nutrino.

Start a new thread, or email me, or pm me, or go to AFL. My suggestion *again* is that there are other, perhaps better, venues to promote your political views.

Markus, while I understand that not debating can sometimes serve a purpose, in the case of this forum, and in particular, in the case of nutrino - I think if you actually do discuss/debate politics or anything with him w/r/t matters of philosophy, language or matters of general knowledge (save the brain surgery stuff for another forum, rhis is culteducation.com's forum :) ), it will be worth your time. He has convinced me of his analytical qualities. Now all I wanna know about the man is whether he's got some addictions ;).

Anyway... nutrino, hope you're reading this - I just read your reply. Thank you for taking time out. People, it is my opinion, have an innate desire to believe. Try raising children without beliefs, if you don't believe me on this one :). Once you've been "programmed" since childhood to adopt beliefs on an ongoing basis - and achieve, as you said, some success in terms of wealth, occupation, relationships, etc - you seek "more" (of whatever it is). This is the point at which all clever people either succumb to LGAT bullshit (and a lot of smart people are or can be extremely insecure and suffer from a loss of identity even in more advanced age), or, treat it for what it is - a deep, penetrating, self-reflecting experience which hopefully made them re-examine everything about their character/beliefs/etc.......

the bit about the complacency, mediocrity and laziness... man oh man.. if it weren't for the immigrants in this country, I don't know who would be in the graduate engineering/science schools.... :)....

anyway, from where you framed the context with your last post, this can very well turn into an extended discussion about education, philosophy, politics (Markus here preempted me on that), etc. I think the thing that mattered to me the most is to see if there are people on this forum who can be balanced in their pronounciation of what LGATs, or really, anything of similar nature, are... basically, I wanted a genuine analysis of what it is they do, their methods, goals, etc (other than the 'for-profit' aspects). If they can do it - so can I (and so can you, it seems very much so). Thing is, I'd rather not milk people for money like that. Would I use language to capture maybe a woman's imagination :)? Sure - but only insofar as she would perceive a mutual benefit from the relationship..... without which, all the talk would seem empty, meaning, talk would have to be followed by action....... that's about as 'unethical' as I would become with this newly found "power" of b.s.-ing :).... or knowing what makes us tick in a sense... which was always there within us, because we react to it... but aren't necessarily aware of it... like a damn pavlov reflex almost :)... except the bell here is the english language...

oh well... g'nite :), just finished watching Conan OBriend, I'm off to bed.

Quote
pragmatist
Anyway... nutrino, hope you're reading this - I just read your reply. Thank you for taking time out. People, it is my opinion, have an innate desire to believe. Try raising children without beliefs, if you don't believe me on this one :). Once you've been "programmed" since childhood to adopt beliefs on an ongoing basis - and achieve, as you said, some success in terms of wealth, occupation, relationships, etc - you seek "more" (of whatever it is). This is the point at which all clever people either succumb to LGAT bullshit (and a lot of smart people are or can be extremely insecure and suffer from a loss of identity even in more advanced age), or, treat it for what it is - a deep, penetrating, self-reflecting experience which hopefully made them re-examine everything about their character/beliefs/etc.......

A touch of Conan is good for the mind... a friend used to write jokes for him.... so this wildly funny thing happened... I'd be watching Conan delivering his charming schtick and wondering which things he said were her ideas, but he said them so well you'd think he originated them...

An on to your observation... which takes us to a useful distinction about Laziness.... in American culture, which is on the philosophic grid an intensely Doing culture... the accusation of Laziness is akin to pointing the finger of Godlesnness in another century.... we even admire industrious criminals here.... but the hidden truth is that many people ARE exceedingly lazy... they may be superficially busy while they have a great distaste for real thought... observe how many will evidence confusion, irritation, or simply tune you out if you attempt to converse on any subject outside of their life slot....

The LGAT process appears, to my mind, as a positive force for the non-Lazy or the anti-Lazy mind as it can inflict a useful amount of perturbation, bring about reexamination, and hopefully a modicum of "whole being" growth.... the initial condition of the Lively Mind is that it has a instrumentalist view of thought, thought is perceived as a tool, or a set of tools that can be gainfully employed for worthy ends, but thought is never fetishized by this type of person, as concepts and beliefs can be picked up and put down as needed...

The Slothful Mind, on the other hand, has a "terminalist" wiew of thought... a sort of cognitive materialism where thoughts ARE fetishized as "precious things" (the psychologist D.W. Winnicott had much to say on this topic) that should remain in their comfortably static condition.....

IMO... this is the fundamental bifuraction point where those who can exploit the LGAT structure as a "gravity slingshot" to greatly accelerate the expansion of the positive being break away from those who become locked into stable orbits...( for some fascinating mathematical reason, conic sections, no ? )

Some dude named A.M. Lyapunov worked out the math of trajectories, wish I had more time to investigate his thinking:

"If the system is conservative (i.e. there is no dissipation), a volume element of the phase space will stay the same along a trajectory. Thus the sum of all Lyapunov exponents must be zero. If the system is dissipative, the sum of Lyapunov exponents is negative.

If the system is a flow, one exponent is always zero—the Lyapunov exponent corresponding to the eigenvalue of L with an eigenvector in the direction of the flow."

I think all this infighting must be very exciting and satisfying for Myles; after all, it's his thread. I'm sure he's allerting all his cult buddies to come on over and see what's going on here.

I have a suggestion. Instead of bashing each other let's all bash the real enemy: Landmark "Education". Here, I'll give it a kickstart; Landmark, otherwise known as Scam-mark, Scum-mark and Landshark. lol