>> It almost sounds as though they are copying from some manual. <<

When I was in landmark's leadership program, they had a phone script for getting people to join. Primerica had huge binders of "recruiting" scripts. (Ackk! a LGAT and a MLMS ---- what was my problem :rolleyes: )

So yes they do have manuals or scripts or "think this only" words you must recite.

Plus I don't see Anna323 coming up with any rebuttals. Doubt, she's even returned to the site since she posted …… or the moderators had to axe her/his responses! :twisted:

Primerica the Citicorp subsidiary???

Whats an MLMS?
Sorry, I missed the connection here.

Hi Alexis,

>>When I was in landmark's leadership program, they had a phone >>script for getting people to join. Primerica had huge binders >>of "recruiting" scripts. (Ackk! a LGAT and a MLMS ---- what was my >>problem )

>So yes they do have manuals or scripts or "think this only" words you >>must recite.>>>


Yes. Figures. I don't think some of the people even think about what they are saying or the words they are using, it becomes so automatic. I guess that's why so many people describe them as "robotic."

What is the most ironic is that this is a group that teaches, or purports to teach, the power of language, semantics, rhetoric, ontology, and epistomology but its leaders and followers go around using god-awful jargon, kindergarten logic, low grade or no academic support, and lots and lots of profanity when they can't prevail or get their way.

Welcome, by the way.


Ellen

Warytraveller2,

MLMS is multi-level marketing scam, and yes primerica is a subsidiary of Citicorp. No one said the MLMSs didn't make money for the corporations that owned them. :) Ok, a small select few are successful. There are the highly annoying who talk at their conventions and get paid millions of dollars a year, according to them. I also knew people who made all their money through sales because they didn't like the idea of recruiting. But right before I left, the leaders asked those who were not going to recruit to leave. So I think it's pretty obvious what they're really all about. Mainly telling you that you're a mean, selfish, nasty person for not sharing the "gold mine" opportunity. They just didn't tell you who the gold mine was for because it certainly wasn't for me.

Ah yes, the MLMS. Yes there is a similar manipulation going on there also. There is a lot of money to be made in the "disingenuous" buisness.

Y'all are reminding me why I didn't stick around after taking the Est Training eons ago. It did surprise me how much I didn't like about what I saw after the Training. As I have stated earlier, I really liked and enjoyed Est. Then I saw all the crap later. But my girlfriend had forewarned me. She told me that the Est Training was good but stay away from "asssisting" or getting sucked into spending mucho dinero on the advanced programs. Good advice.

Why did a meat and potatoes guy like me do a new age, touchy feely, share your guts out seminar? Well, women can get us to do lots of things we normally wouldn't do. And she was so hot!!!!

:roll: hello friends, Socrates here. Have enjoyed the discussion so far in spite of my limited contribution.
What can I say ? The more things change the more they stay the same. This is an ancient mythic story that captures the essence of the problem:

"Procrustes was a host who adjusted his guests to their bed. Procrustes, whose name means "he who stretches", was arguably the most interesting of Theseus's challenges on the way to becoming a hero. He kept a house by the side of the road where he offered hospitality to passing strangers, who were invited in for a pleasant meal and a night's rest in his very special bed. Procrustes described it as having the unique property that its length exactly matched whomsoever lay down upon it. What Procrustes didn't volunteer was the method by which this "one-size-fits-all" was achieved, namely as soon as the guest lay down Procrustes went to work upon him, stretching him on the rack if he was too short for the bed and chopping off his legs if he was too long. Theseus turned the tables on Procrustes, fatally adjusting him to fit his own bed. "

That's exactly what I've gone through with my experiences in EST, a dab of scientology, to a certain extent true of the NLP models as well. The central problem is rigidity. To grasp the matter, you have to have a good mental model of what *rigidity* is, what it sounds like, walks like, what rigid theories and worldviews do to thought processes and forms of life.

Rigid thinking systems can have value. Unstable and poorly formed, or chaotic personalities may require highly structured enviromnents to function. A good friend of mine with many life problems became a devoted adherent of Nicheren Daishonen (nam myoho renge kyo) Buddhism. It served him well. I don't think he could have gotten through life without the tight discipline of his church, even if it did select his wife for him....

That obviously wouln't be appropiate or bearable for the majority of us. When you've grown to the maximum capacity of the rigid thought system is becomes cramping at first then potentially crippling if you stay with it for too long.

The red flag should be if you feel an instinctive need to grow but the group or the leader or some combination of them askes you to deny this instinct for the sake of whatever.

hi everyone,

i have to say i'm kind of flattered that my one little sentence spurned such an avalanche. i have to say that maybe was partially my intention now that i look at it, although it was no where near being mean and coniving as some of you supposed. elena you have a pretty good nose, although it would be really on-point if you would just remove that angry veil. My comment wasn't a spitball - just food for thought. The tone of my comment was friendly and not biting - i know that doesn't necessarily translate all that well on screen. I should have put a winky face next to it or something.

i'm sorry for those of you that were upset by it. I do not mean to be insensitive to the people out there who have had horrendous and hurtful consequences as a result of these types of Landmark groups. Personally, I have participated in Landmark courses - but hold your fire - i'm not out to get you. I feel no solidarity with any organization, religion, or even country on this planet. I do like life, and I do like people. I'm not afraid of either, but that doesn't mean I'm not cauteous. And whoever said I must have not had the horrible consequences of these groups to call this site just "useful" is right. I didn't. So for me, it is extremely useful to have access to all these varied accounts out there. It significantly deepens my perspective and I appreciate that. I also appreciate the service provided here and the evident commitment to taking care of people. But, as I have fortunately not been at the affect of some of these horrendous negative things, this is not healing for me. So again, I'm sorry if me calling this site useful was insensitive to those of you for whom its been much more, and far more valuable.

While I thought there were some very "useful" things about some of the stuff in Landmark courses, I think that their organizational structure is completely moronic and retarded and completey ruins any value that may exist in the actual material or product they provide. Not only that, but as proven on this forum and many others, it also causes a lot of pain and suffering and harm and simply does not work, and I think they should throw out the whole model all together.

I am a branding expert and have worked for several large business in the country and I have to say that looking at it from a business perspective, their branding is horrendous. In my opinion (this is JUST MY OPINION) its their awful business model and moronic, archaic marketing system that is at the source of much of the pain and suffering out there. I think that if they just operated like a normal business (which is what they call themselves) and grew their business through advertising instead of relying on their customers and constantly "enrolling" their customers to "enroll" more customers, a lot of the damage they've caused would have been avoided. Then people could just relate to their product as they do to any other product and take it or leave it, without having their friends and family bug them about it, and without the poor friends and family feeling like its their duty to bug them about it because there's no other way for anyone to find out about it.

And I agree with whomever said that nothing is black and white. (I'm sorry i'm not looking up any of your names or doing that quoting thing, I'm just too lazy to do it right now.) I am from the former Yugoslavia, and this country bombed my family. While that's horrendous and awful, and most of my family cannot stand this country because of the pain it inflicted on them, it does not prevent me from seeing the benefits and value that do exist in this system and society. I am not blinded from seeing what works.
I feel the same way about everything. When I am over there, I try to share with them that this place is not all black and try to provide some of the value from here. When I am over here, I like to educate people on some of the benefits and some of the good concepts that existed in that communist society - even though so much about it didn't work.

I like to pull out the gems from everything and I like to be continuosly expanding my self and my perspective. So that's just what I was doing here - just being myself. For those of you that get any value out of it great, and for those of you that don't, you don't. :wink:

All the best,
Ana

Excellent post. Your right. Things just aren't all black or white. I found the same with the previous incarnation of EST before Landmark.

I agree that the organization did not seem to reflect the product. But I took what I learned and moved on. I was never a big fan of the touchy feely openess I saw. I don't think it's healthy for everyone. It could just be a "guy" thing. But it wasn't for me.

Glad you weighed in on this thread.

Ana,

Your remarks for and against Landmark are noted but have you considered that putting a positive spin (forgive the wording) on Landmark or communism may not be the best course of action? This is much different than being an optimist or using "positive thinking" techniques. For example, communism may just be bad, lacking a good side, especially for those who think there are better forms of government. The question here is: are the essential differences between forms of government merely matters of "positive" or "negative" perspective?

Regards,

Markus

Markus wrote:

"For example, communism may just be bad, lacking a good side, especially for those who think there are better forms of government"

Exactly her point. If you view things as simply black or white there can not be any shades of gray. Let's make it contempory.

Bush or Kerry.

The Republicans will contend that Kerry has 2 stances for every issue, was a subversive war protester, and will lead the economy to ruin.

Democrats will paint Bush as a war mongering nit-wit that was AWOL for National Guard duty during the Vietnam War. And in bed with the House of Saud for his oilmen buddies.

Maybe there are 2 sides to every story. I've met people from the former USSR, Yogoslavia, Poland, and Czechoslovakia who told me it wasn't all bad. Do I tell them they must be wrong. Or maybe they just know something I don't?

If you view things as simply black or white are you not simply a victim of someones propaganda, Thought-reform?