Re: Kids and Landmark?
Posted by:
rrmoderator
()
Date: May 26, 2008 09:38PM
Lekkie:
Stay on topic.
The topic of this thread is Landmark Education and kids, not me.
Think about how many people attend state universities, private universities and community colleges for education.
Yet I don't receive similar complaints regarding those millions of students as I do the comparatively small number that attend Landmark trainings.
I also don't receive comparable complaints about synagogues or mosques in the US. Yet they account for millions of adherents.
I have no personal interest in Landmark Education, though I did once agree to do Landmark Forum.
But I refused to waive any of my civil rights (e.g. trial by jury in the event of a personal injury claim) through a signed waiver before attending.
After that, Landmark never got back with me.
Stay on topic.
The topic of this thread is Landmark Education and kids, not me.
Think about how many people attend state universities, private universities and community colleges for education.
Yet I don't receive similar complaints regarding those millions of students as I do the comparatively small number that attend Landmark trainings.
I also don't receive comparable complaints about synagogues or mosques in the US. Yet they account for millions of adherents.
I have no personal interest in Landmark Education, though I did once agree to do Landmark Forum.
But I refused to waive any of my civil rights (e.g. trial by jury in the event of a personal injury claim) through a signed waiver before attending.
After that, Landmark never got back with me.
Re: Kids and Landmark?
Posted by:
Europe-girl
()
Date: May 26, 2008 09:47PM
Quote
Lekkie
Lekkie, to avoid any misunderstandings: I have been involved with Landmark for more then 10 years. Held various jobs within the organisation. The usual 'have you done it yourself' does not apply for me.
Aesome! How about I give you my Skype info , I've spent too much time typing about what I experience via the Forum - so why don't we just talk, it's easier for me. I'd like to hear when you did the Forum and why you think the Forum is pop-psychology that a teenager could've taught me... Can you IM me your info on how to contact you verbally instead of via message boards? I am always intrigued by various points of view, including the ones shared on this message board.
[Moderator note: Beware of divulging any personal information through any phone conversation with members of this board. This may be an attempt to gather information, which might potentially be shared with a group or leader concerned about criticism posted on the message board.]
Lekkie, I copy this quote to the Lekkie < > Statistics thread, so we don't have to go further off topic here.
I understand you find it difficult to discuss with moderator since he has not the Forum himself. Would you take the chance and discuss it with me, who has done it?
Re: Kids and Landmark?
Posted by:
Europe-girl
()
Date: May 26, 2008 09:50PM
Quote
Europe-girlQuote
Lekkie
Lekkie, to avoid any misunderstandings: I have been involved with Landmark for more then 10 years. Held various jobs within the organisation. The usual 'have you done it yourself' does not apply for me.
Aesome! How about I give you my Skype info , I've spent too much time typing about what I experience via the Forum - so why don't we just talk, it's easier for me. I'd like to hear when you did the Forum and why you think the Forum is pop-psychology that a teenager could've taught me... Can you IM me your info on how to contact you verbally instead of via message boards? I am always intrigued by various points of view, including the ones shared on this message board.
First of all: I respectfully decline skyping or chatting with you. I'm fine talking here and I appreciate the openess of a discussion where everyone can join in.
Secondly, I never said that the Forum is pop-psychology that a teenager could have taught you. I just didn't find your examples very compelling and wanted to point out to you the relative weight of them in this discussion.
I am rather curious as to your reaction on what I described as you 'sharing your breakthrough' during an introduction event. Also I'm keen to know whether you feel 'rushes' being involved with Landmark and what happens if you haven't had a breakthrough or peak moment (or whatever you call it) for a while.
Please elaborate!
This is right quote LOL. Ignore the other one (gosh I am human :) ). See you at Lekkie < > Statistics.
Re: Kids and Landmark?
Posted by:
elena
()
Date: May 26, 2008 10:58PM
Quote
Lekkie
All you are doing here is pissing on an organization that hasn't done anything to you personally. As I understand it, they even offered that you go through the Forum yourself so that you can see "what it is". You refused. Therefore, at best, you have an approximation of what it might be - and it's anything BUT what you think it is - I can only tell you that much. The word "cult-like" was the furthest from my mind while I attended the Forum. I felt more liberated than EVER before in my life.
Now you can go an mudsling LE all you want... or summon the courage and do it, and then we can talk...
Gee, too bad the Landmark "pitbulls" ("gc" and "Guy") who used to post here aren't around to play your little Landmark ~game.~ They were both deeply involved in Landmark and would tear pikers like you into little shreds. Most of us are too nice and too polite to do what they did to the Landmark promoters who wash up here from time to time. They both knew all the nasty sh*t about Landmark and weren't afraid to expose it. Also, I suggest you pull up Larry Person's old posts on alt.fan.landmark before you enmesh yourself any more tragically in this insidious and evil biz-cult and the personality of Werner Erhard and all his clones bleeds into your own.
Ellen
Re: Kids and Landmark?
Posted by:
elena
()
Date: May 27, 2008 04:19AM
...And just so you know, "Lekkie," we've been down that dismal path before. It's more than thirty years old and fairly well trod by now.
Here's "Guy," a few years back, being nice to an intellectually challenged newish Landmark enthusiast on alt.fan.landmark:
Aug 20 2002, 4:12 am
Newsgroups: alt.fan.landmark
From: Guy <guyfaw...@parlia.com>
John,
I'll write between the lines so that the responses and statements correspond accurately.
I find that this method illustrates and makes clear what we will or will not respond to without any miscommunication.
John wrote:
> Guy,
> Thanks for pointing out the word belief. You are right that is
> usually a religious-oriented word (along with sin). I use that word
> not in the correct sense. How about this - I am confident in
> Landmark's ability to provide me with worthy courses. Yes, at times
> they may use techniques that appear heavy-handed and over the top.
You're welcome. Perhaps not in the correct sense but invariably in the appropriate sense. By virtue of the methodology used by LEC, belief
becomes the underlying operating principle. Statements otherwise do not negate the function. Heavy-handed and over the top are not phrases
that I use in reference to LEC, those are your words. I use hypnosis and mind control techniques. I would be interested in what your relevant
definitions are of heavy-handed and over the top.<not a rhetorical question>
> And yes, I realize the fallacy of using analogies. We so easily want
> to do it. That though is one of the more effective techniques to use
> for description when you are trying to explain something to another
> person that they have not experienced, seen, touched, etc. Even
> looking up words in a dictionary is comparison in that they are using
> other words you know to describe words.
Good, so don't use them. Analogous referrals in regards to LEC will not turn a good leaf.
> Everything (and person) is unique. Landmark is unique. Unique though
> doesn't equal special. That is a personal point of view.
That is not what we said in LEC though. At LEC we are taught that all human beings are essentially the same machine and that we all have
"rackets" and "winning formula's. Hardly a view that corresponds to our uniqueness. Matter of fact it's LEC's understanding of human
mechanization's that gives them the ability to maintain consistent recruitment numbers.
Unique does not equal special....hmmmm....where did that come from?
Landmark is unique is hardly an accurate portrayal considering that you first used argument by analogy to describe it's recruitment function.
With a better grasp of techniques and methods you would see that LEC is hardly unique at all with other organizations using the same ways to
bring people in. Ever had the JW's or the Mormons come to your door?
Ah yes...the "personal point of view" cut them off at the knees line.
Nice try.
Here is where you go undermining me instead of dealing the facts. Argument by defamation. Voila!
I've heard it and used it all before when I worked there John.
It's an inclusive logical loop to silence criticism. "a personal point of view illustrates a position. A position has a right and a wrong to
it, therefore if you use a point of view, you are making them wrong and you right...and what does that leave you with...no possibility"
And of course no one wants to be "no possibility".
I have a question for you...and I wonder if you can answer it with a yes...are you making me wrong?
> Your point of view about Landmark changed. You went to believing that
> they were wholeheartedly in the business of transformation to
> believeing it was mass hypnosis designed to separate people from their
> money and leave them believing transformation happened. Both of your
> point of views were correct, because that is your point of view -- but
> it does not equal the truth. You now post on here looking for
> agreement with your point of view. I post on here looking for
> agreement for my point of view. It is just the way it is.
Firstly, I'm not going down that tunnel with you. Your tunnel not mine. The design of which is to undermine your ability to distinguish
reality.
I hope you're not living your life by that woo woo mysticism.
Your point of view of a moving vehicle running you over will correct any illusions you may have about perceptions of reality.
What I knew about what I was involved with in regards to LEC, altered by time and experience.
You assert that I look for agreement on my "point of view". The only time I sought agreement here was when I asked if anyone else thought that
someone was insulting me personally and responded with "if i think it was an insult it is "or maybe a quip is just a quip". He was pulling
that pov crap that lacks any integrity.
I do not need agreement for facts.
That is the way it is.
I'm just telling you what we did and they continue to do.
If you don't like it, there is nothing I can do about it.
What you do with the information I give you, I have no control over.
The ball is in your court.
> Best to you Guy. It appears that you got a lot more about Landmark
> than you might have been aware. And it is possible that you may come
> back in the Landmark fold. I am sure when you were fully engrossed in
> Landmark you didn't think you would be on the opposite side as well.
Thank John and best to you too.
I don't get the next sentence. I will tell you that I know the their shit pretty darn well. So don't pull their crap on me again.
I am being nice to you, just so you know. So if you would like to wrestle "mind virus" style, you will get hurt because I was trained to lever
grads like you and people who'd never done it before. Grads and staff are much easier to lever. At least that is what the statistics reveal.
They're already primed for pumping.
I know what hooks you. I'm not bragging or threatening you<honest>. I just know how it works and I'm not interested in twisting your brain any
further than they've already done. I'd rather just let you know what is going on and you figure out the rest. Really, really, really. :-)
Back in the fold...yeesh!
No, that will not happen, there are orders with "shoot to kill" in them. ;-) In the immortal words from Jack Nicholson"s character in Terms of
Endearment: "I'd rather stick pins in my eyes".
Once I realized what was going on there was no way I'd allow my integrity to be compromised any further.
> And it is fine that your point of view changes. Because you are only
> standing in the same spot in the same time for that moment. So
> fleeting.
John, stay out of that pov paradigm. There is no cheese down that tunnel. It demeans whomever you're communicating with and it doesn't further
dialogue. It's a minor technique to avoid domination. That is what you are dealing with in communicating with me. You don't want to be
dominated by me and what I have to say.
You have a "point of view" and I have facts. I know it sucks, but that is just the way it is.
There will be little in our conversation for you if you continue to avoid domination. I know that that is one of the wonderful "gifts" of
LECspeak.
Everyone gets some clever words to avoid being dominated and dominate others. That's enrollment!
But really John, spending energy avoiding domination only serves to point to the loci of your current orientation.
You may just want to try on that I know what I'm talking about and glean the gold from my lips.
By making me wrong and avoiding domination you only further entrench yourself into your position.
Take some time to look at what you are resisting when it comes to what I'm saying about LEC.
I know that all of us who participated had something at stake at keeping the truth about LEC unspoken. For one thing they tied it
linguistically to our thoughts by having us repeat "what we got out of the Forum" over and over. If anything good happened after the forum it
was because of the forum. If anything bad happened after the forum it was you "running a racket", doing one of your "winning formula's",
"making something mean something", or "who you are managing the existence of yourself as, is the space of no possibility".
Getting the truth about what LEC did to us, does not take away any of the good things that happened for us. It really just allows us to own it
for ourselves.
Afterall, do you want to spend any more of your life without owning any of the good stuff about who you are and what you do?
Do you really want to spend any more time repeating to family and stranger's: "what I got out of the forum was..."?
I don't think that that is really what you want.
You already were the good person you are.
But there you have it John. So...
Come on out and play.
Dancing in Elegance
Guy
Here's "Guy," a few years back, being nice to an intellectually challenged newish Landmark enthusiast on alt.fan.landmark:
Aug 20 2002, 4:12 am
Newsgroups: alt.fan.landmark
From: Guy <guyfaw...@parlia.com>
John,
I'll write between the lines so that the responses and statements correspond accurately.
I find that this method illustrates and makes clear what we will or will not respond to without any miscommunication.
John wrote:
> Guy,
> Thanks for pointing out the word belief. You are right that is
> usually a religious-oriented word (along with sin). I use that word
> not in the correct sense. How about this - I am confident in
> Landmark's ability to provide me with worthy courses. Yes, at times
> they may use techniques that appear heavy-handed and over the top.
You're welcome. Perhaps not in the correct sense but invariably in the appropriate sense. By virtue of the methodology used by LEC, belief
becomes the underlying operating principle. Statements otherwise do not negate the function. Heavy-handed and over the top are not phrases
that I use in reference to LEC, those are your words. I use hypnosis and mind control techniques. I would be interested in what your relevant
definitions are of heavy-handed and over the top.<not a rhetorical question>
> And yes, I realize the fallacy of using analogies. We so easily want
> to do it. That though is one of the more effective techniques to use
> for description when you are trying to explain something to another
> person that they have not experienced, seen, touched, etc. Even
> looking up words in a dictionary is comparison in that they are using
> other words you know to describe words.
Good, so don't use them. Analogous referrals in regards to LEC will not turn a good leaf.
> Everything (and person) is unique. Landmark is unique. Unique though
> doesn't equal special. That is a personal point of view.
That is not what we said in LEC though. At LEC we are taught that all human beings are essentially the same machine and that we all have
"rackets" and "winning formula's. Hardly a view that corresponds to our uniqueness. Matter of fact it's LEC's understanding of human
mechanization's that gives them the ability to maintain consistent recruitment numbers.
Unique does not equal special....hmmmm....where did that come from?
Landmark is unique is hardly an accurate portrayal considering that you first used argument by analogy to describe it's recruitment function.
With a better grasp of techniques and methods you would see that LEC is hardly unique at all with other organizations using the same ways to
bring people in. Ever had the JW's or the Mormons come to your door?
Ah yes...the "personal point of view" cut them off at the knees line.
Nice try.
Here is where you go undermining me instead of dealing the facts. Argument by defamation. Voila!
I've heard it and used it all before when I worked there John.
It's an inclusive logical loop to silence criticism. "a personal point of view illustrates a position. A position has a right and a wrong to
it, therefore if you use a point of view, you are making them wrong and you right...and what does that leave you with...no possibility"
And of course no one wants to be "no possibility".
I have a question for you...and I wonder if you can answer it with a yes...are you making me wrong?
> Your point of view about Landmark changed. You went to believing that
> they were wholeheartedly in the business of transformation to
> believeing it was mass hypnosis designed to separate people from their
> money and leave them believing transformation happened. Both of your
> point of views were correct, because that is your point of view -- but
> it does not equal the truth. You now post on here looking for
> agreement with your point of view. I post on here looking for
> agreement for my point of view. It is just the way it is.
Firstly, I'm not going down that tunnel with you. Your tunnel not mine. The design of which is to undermine your ability to distinguish
reality.
I hope you're not living your life by that woo woo mysticism.
Your point of view of a moving vehicle running you over will correct any illusions you may have about perceptions of reality.
What I knew about what I was involved with in regards to LEC, altered by time and experience.
You assert that I look for agreement on my "point of view". The only time I sought agreement here was when I asked if anyone else thought that
someone was insulting me personally and responded with "if i think it was an insult it is "or maybe a quip is just a quip". He was pulling
that pov crap that lacks any integrity.
I do not need agreement for facts.
That is the way it is.
I'm just telling you what we did and they continue to do.
If you don't like it, there is nothing I can do about it.
What you do with the information I give you, I have no control over.
The ball is in your court.
> Best to you Guy. It appears that you got a lot more about Landmark
> than you might have been aware. And it is possible that you may come
> back in the Landmark fold. I am sure when you were fully engrossed in
> Landmark you didn't think you would be on the opposite side as well.
Thank John and best to you too.
I don't get the next sentence. I will tell you that I know the their shit pretty darn well. So don't pull their crap on me again.
I am being nice to you, just so you know. So if you would like to wrestle "mind virus" style, you will get hurt because I was trained to lever
grads like you and people who'd never done it before. Grads and staff are much easier to lever. At least that is what the statistics reveal.
They're already primed for pumping.
I know what hooks you. I'm not bragging or threatening you<honest>. I just know how it works and I'm not interested in twisting your brain any
further than they've already done. I'd rather just let you know what is going on and you figure out the rest. Really, really, really. :-)
Back in the fold...yeesh!
No, that will not happen, there are orders with "shoot to kill" in them. ;-) In the immortal words from Jack Nicholson"s character in Terms of
Endearment: "I'd rather stick pins in my eyes".
Once I realized what was going on there was no way I'd allow my integrity to be compromised any further.
> And it is fine that your point of view changes. Because you are only
> standing in the same spot in the same time for that moment. So
> fleeting.
John, stay out of that pov paradigm. There is no cheese down that tunnel. It demeans whomever you're communicating with and it doesn't further
dialogue. It's a minor technique to avoid domination. That is what you are dealing with in communicating with me. You don't want to be
dominated by me and what I have to say.
You have a "point of view" and I have facts. I know it sucks, but that is just the way it is.
There will be little in our conversation for you if you continue to avoid domination. I know that that is one of the wonderful "gifts" of
LECspeak.
Everyone gets some clever words to avoid being dominated and dominate others. That's enrollment!
But really John, spending energy avoiding domination only serves to point to the loci of your current orientation.
You may just want to try on that I know what I'm talking about and glean the gold from my lips.
By making me wrong and avoiding domination you only further entrench yourself into your position.
Take some time to look at what you are resisting when it comes to what I'm saying about LEC.
I know that all of us who participated had something at stake at keeping the truth about LEC unspoken. For one thing they tied it
linguistically to our thoughts by having us repeat "what we got out of the Forum" over and over. If anything good happened after the forum it
was because of the forum. If anything bad happened after the forum it was you "running a racket", doing one of your "winning formula's",
"making something mean something", or "who you are managing the existence of yourself as, is the space of no possibility".
Getting the truth about what LEC did to us, does not take away any of the good things that happened for us. It really just allows us to own it
for ourselves.
Afterall, do you want to spend any more of your life without owning any of the good stuff about who you are and what you do?
Do you really want to spend any more time repeating to family and stranger's: "what I got out of the forum was..."?
I don't think that that is really what you want.
You already were the good person you are.
But there you have it John. So...
Come on out and play.
Dancing in Elegance
Guy
Re: Kids and Landmark?
Posted by:
h_r
()
Date: May 27, 2008 08:39AM
To get back on topic:
I was an est kid. A Forum kid. I "got it" without any sort of say in whether I wanted "it." And "it" has messed me up beyond belief. In relationships of all kinds, with people, with money, with my own spirit (which of course I wasn't allowed to have as a child). And please, no one needs to suggest that I do the Forum in order to investigate my "racket" or "complete" my relationship with est. Thank you very much.
In my opinion, LEC uses dangerous processes and protocols. On adults, that's one thing. I mean, if you want to sign up for the Forum, that's your business. I think it's a waste of time and money and can be damaging, but in the words of Werner, so what?
But on kids...for the love of all that is holy...don't do it! Kids don't have the same kinds of emotional and psychological resources and tools many adults do to deal with what Landmark slings. It's not fair to them. They can wait until they're 18 and then decide if they want to do it.
I was an est kid. A Forum kid. I "got it" without any sort of say in whether I wanted "it." And "it" has messed me up beyond belief. In relationships of all kinds, with people, with money, with my own spirit (which of course I wasn't allowed to have as a child). And please, no one needs to suggest that I do the Forum in order to investigate my "racket" or "complete" my relationship with est. Thank you very much.
In my opinion, LEC uses dangerous processes and protocols. On adults, that's one thing. I mean, if you want to sign up for the Forum, that's your business. I think it's a waste of time and money and can be damaging, but in the words of Werner, so what?
But on kids...for the love of all that is holy...don't do it! Kids don't have the same kinds of emotional and psychological resources and tools many adults do to deal with what Landmark slings. It's not fair to them. They can wait until they're 18 and then decide if they want to do it.
Re: Kids and Landmark?
Posted by:
nettie
()
Date: May 27, 2008 01:47PM
good job everybody - thank you RR! And everyone else who is having a "conversation" with lekkie
nettie/Lars/Nisseberka
nettie/Lars/Nisseberka
Re: Kids and Landmark?
Posted by:
Sulalee
()
Date: May 27, 2008 08:48PM
I would actually love to talk to Guy some day because he, truly, is right on the mark about all of what LM is trying to do. WOW!!!!
Re: Kids and Landmark?
Posted by:
patrick-darcy
()
Date: May 28, 2008 11:13AM
Quote
Lekkie
patrick-darcy -
"there are many people that have been hospitalized because of their involvement in landmark" - there have been a _few_ people hospitalized after the Forum, but it is a mighty bold/brave statement to say that it was because of the Forum. You imply causality, e.g. you _assert_ in your conversation that it is so. Yet - would you be able to prove this somehow? How will you go about proving it too? Please - I request that you don't say "hospitalized because of their involvment with landmark". I was involved with Landmark - I am not hospitalized. Matter of fact, I've never felt better and more lucid in years.
if healthy people take the forum and some of these people, not a great percentage i will give u that, but some
still have had mental breakdowns and had to be hospitalized.
if landmark is supposedly about transformation and i believe people are indeed transformed in some way and
if landmark uses "group think" tactics to get them there and if group thinking and the hypnosis that landmark
uses is a form or mind control techniques then when people have mental breakdowns shortly after their
attendance at landamrk then yes u could say landmark is responsible for what has taken. that
is not to say that landmark is gonna take responsiblity for this. it would be much too expensive.
your response is similar to what landmark grads tells bout divorce. if one of the two take the forum and the
other one doesnt , and refuses to , then it becomes a very big possibility that the two will get divorced.
landmark grads have told me that "whos to say they werent going to get a divorce anyway "
"because u didnt die or have to be hospitalized would it fair to say that " it wasnt the truth for u" - please look up "Truth" on wikipedia.com. Does the length of the article suggest that discussing the concept of 'truth' is somehow simple and uninvolved?
im not talking about a long and drawn out conversation about truth, im talking about rather simple truth.
Or is it something that people attempted to clearly define over the last N thousand years by people much smarter than myself? I don't profess to know the _TRUTH_ about why those people were hospitalized. Could it be that the Forum pushed them? YES. It _COULD BE_. Is that _IT_ then? I _DONT_ know.
have u ever wanted to know what u dont know ?
In my former life, I would've told you - YES, IT IS THE FORUM, because I didn't know where the Forum begins and ends, and where my interpretation of it begins and ends either. Now I know better. I heard what I heard in the Forum and experienced what I experienced.
yes in fact u did. what i find interesting is that i have never met a landmark grad that had any desire to get to
the truth of whether landamark is cause for certain people to have breakdowns. not a single one. that is one
of the reasons that i consider landmark brainwashing.
with as may different types of people that attend landamrk u think that if they werent brainwashed that
some of them would think differently than the others, but that doesnt happen.
What I made it MEAN - is entirely my own interpretation. It is, for all intents and purposes, the TRUTH, as it occurs to me, in my head, while I'm typing this. Is my truth any bigger and better than the truth of the guy who got hospitalized or died (because of WHATEVER)?
i find it fascinating that every single landmark grad i have ever had the please to know will tell u the
exact same thing. every single one of u think exactly the same when it comes to landmark.
is the truth of the person who died or was hospitalized any bigger truth than yours, maybe , maybe not
but it just as sad. some or even one can die. others have breakdowns and have to be hospitalized
while the rest of u just continue on not knowing what u dont know and apparently not caring about it either.
Or vice versa? I don't know - but you seem to think that his truth was more important than mine. You choose to invalidate my experience because I am alive, and he's dead. You choose to diss me, because I didn't die. Had I died, would that have made a difference in your daily routine? Does the person who died made a difference in your daily routine? Please do tell.
when any person attends a cult event and gets sick or dies while the other people feel so good about themselves
while showing lots of brainwashed attitude then i believe it makes a different in all our lives. if u had died we would
probably would be here talking about how it happened shortly after your attendance of the forum or one of the
other shows they put on.
actually im glad u didnt die :) if were dead we wouldnt be having this conversation about nothingness now
would we "
It took the love, commitment and strength of one of those 58 men and women from around the planet to pull the rug from underneath my feet about ALL of my interepretations for 3 days straight to convince me that I am not right about EVERYTHING I hear/do/see/experience/smell/touch/eat/whatever.
if u believe u are not right about everything, then do u believe landmark is ?
[...]
[Personally insulting remaks edited by Moderator]
You tell me.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.