Quote
JF

Quote
Savernake

Quote
JF
One of the 'rules' of Landmark is that anyone who hasnt done the Forum does have a racket, winning formula or story.

Why is that?

I gather than a "racket" is essentially self-deception. Is it not possible for a person to become enlightened or self-aware other than through Landmark?

A racket is a persistant complaint you have about something, someone, yourself, etc.

I think what they mean by saying that someone doesnt have a racket unless they have done the Forum ....

Ah -- first time you said "does" -- I can see now that you meant "doesn't" (I do that all the time when I write, leave out a "not" or put one in where it doesn't belong).

This idea, that people who haven't done the forum don't have "rackets", seems contrary to what my Landmark friend peddles. And to everything I read on the internet.

I can't tell you whether or not Landmark has affected you badly. I can imagine that for a [i:64a215c821]small minority [/i:64a215c821]of people, Landmark might offer more good than harm. My own experience growing up with the philosophy (and EST is pretty much the same as Landmark), I think it's pretty negative and blinkered overall -- but, then again, talking to my Landmark friend, the impression that I got is that, if you aren't in any way an introspective person, Landmark [i:64a215c821]might [/i:64a215c821]allow you to look at things in a new way. I doubt that many people are so lacking in powers of introspection though, which makes me think that the rest who think they've learned something new must be being brainwashed.

In any case, can I ask what's up with calling Landmark a "technology"? I might as well refer to a spectrophotometer as a "philosophy", or an X-ray machine as "literature". I suspect that Landmark likes to use confusing terminology, to undermine people's use of language and thus impair their ability to make effective use of reasoned argument... but I'm prepared to be convinced otherwise (it has to be a good argument though, not just Landmark doublespeak ;) )

Quote
glam

Quote

Seriously, its only from reading some of the stuff on here that I began to wonder. I have no other reasons to think it has affected me in a negative way or in ways I hadnt realised.

What brought you here?

I was reading an article about Rick Ross and his 'deprograming' activities and it mentioned a link to this site so I thought I'd see if Landmark was on here as I'm interested to know what people think about it and I knew it has been likened to a cult.

Quote
Acid Reindeer
I have a number of questions about this goal.

how many people have to have done LEC?

just some vaguely defined "critical number" or an actual figure?

you know that Werner Erhard tried this game before.

in 1977 he annouced a group called the Hunger Project which set promised to end world hunger by 1997. if enough people understood that hunger would end, it would end. sort of like Landmark no courses. just assisting. recruiting and assisting and donations. making money. get up those stats. RickRoss.com has some information on the Hunger Project in the archives.
also at "Hunger Project: Inside Out".

sounds a bit dodgy lol

I don't really know much about 2020, just that I heard someone mention it was the organisations possibility to have it happen. I'm not that interested in its details to the honest.

Quote
Savernake
Ah -- first time you said "does" -- I can see now that you meant "doesn't" (I do that all the time when I write, leave out a "not" or put one in where it doesn't belong).

doh my bad!

Quote

This idea, that people who haven't done the forum don't have "rackets", seems contrary to what my Landmark friend peddles. And to everything I read on the internet.

Maybe its not they don't its just that you shouldnt tell them if you think they have as they didnt ask you too so dont upset/bore them by going on about it all the time.

Quote

I can't tell you whether or not Landmark has affected you badly. I can imagine that for a [i:0759d29dc4]small minority [/i:0759d29dc4]of people, Landmark might offer more good than harm. My own experience growing up with the philosophy (and EST is pretty much the same as Landmark), I think it's pretty negative and blinkered overall -- but, then again, talking to my Landmark friend, the impression that I got is that, if you aren't in any way an introspective person, Landmark [i:0759d29dc4]might [/i:0759d29dc4]allow you to look at things in a new way. I doubt that many people are so lacking in powers of introspection though, which makes me think that the rest who think they've learned something new must be being brainwashed.

I have to disagree with that ;-)
I think its just different ways of looking at things, giving them names and explaining them to you in a short amount of time so they become familiar.

I really don't understand the brainwashing thing.

Quote

In any case, can I ask what's up with calling Landmark a "technology"?

Just to make it sound cooler I guess or give it an air of importance.

Thanks for the replies people.

I have a few questions for the group.

I get the impression people think that LE is corrupt or just a money spinning scam. If so who is in on this? Is it the Forum leaders themselves or the Advanced Forum leaders? Or is there a 'board' at the very top who control the whole thing and everyone else has been brainwashed into beleiving they are doing this to provide a service and transform the world?

Who are the bad guys?

Also do you guys seperate the different courses offered by LE - Forum, Adv, SELP etc - or do you lump them together when talking about the bad points of LE? Do you consider the sinister brainwashing to start right from your first introducion to the Forum or does it come later once you have started to progress through the courses?

Thanks

For and understanding of brainwashing see the following:

[www.culteducation.com]

[www.culteducation.com]

[www.culteducation.com]

[www.culteducation.com]

Note the patternapparently repeated in some ways through mass marathon training.

See [www.culteducation.com]

brainwashed people dont understand the brainwash, its
because they are the ones tha have been brainwashed.

u need to remember your belief system which to u makes
u feel good is deception. there is no real belief system
in deception. its just nothingness.

I noticed something in JF posts, when he replies to questions asked about Landmark, he constantly writes "I think" - "I guess". Just found it odd of the incapacity of giving a direct or definate answer, on an organization that he is taking part of. Just wondering if this is just the way he is or if this is a Landmarkian trait.

I thought this quote (which I've copied below) from Cruisader was very interesting.

JF, how many of the following statements do you agree with? It might give you a clue to how you've been affected (negatively or positively) by Landmark

Quote

Main things for me to deprogram after Landmark I think are:

- Impulsive choices. It is good to think about stuff carefully and be aware of the implications before you choose. Nothing wrong with basing yourself upon a reason

- You can change your mind. Don't have to always be your word.

- Feeling 'you are right' is OK, not something to suppress. I think the racket concept is one of the most clever ways to get Landmarkers to do anything without complaining (like when assisting)

- Stop thinking in possibilities always. Face the facts and do what needs doing. Instead of escaping into the fantasy of a new possiblity that will solve everything (in your head, it detaches from reality!)

- It is fine to not always say what's on your mind. Don't have to always be open.

- Discussion, stories, opinions and reasons matter!

and btw Cruisader, if you read this, I totally agree with you and think you've made some good insights here.

The thing also about not always saying what's on your mind, I doubt if Landmarkians always [i:91feff8130]do [/i:91feff8130]say what's on their mind. I'm sure my Landmark friend was thinking "How do I get Savernake's husband alone to sell Landmark to him?" (he knew from our previously discussions that I would argue against it if he said anything in front of me), but he never expressed that openly. Instead he kept quiet about Landmark and waited until he was alone with hub to try to make his pitch. The second they were alone together he was pitching Landmark, so I'm pretty sure he was just waiting for his chance -- I think by Landmark rules of openness he should have said, "Savernake, I've given up on selling Landmark to you, but I still think I have a shot with your husband -- do you mind if I have a few moments alone with him so that I can make my pitch without you coming up with some really good arguments for why the Landmark philosophy is crap and the organisation exploitative?"

Quote
Montreal
I noticed something in JF posts, when he replies to questions asked about Landmark, he constantly writes "I think" - "I guess". Just found it odd of the incapacity of giving a direct or definate answer, on an organization that he is taking part of. Just wondering if this is just the way he is or if this is a Landmarkian trait.

I don't think its a landmark trait, more likely due to the fact I didnt know the answer for sure. I'm not part of Landmark now and I only went up to the SELP (3rd course) so I'm no expert. I just didnt want to make my views seem like facts when they are mostly my recolections.