Cult Leader Pathology 101
Eldonbraun
the more I recognize that virtually all of them fall somewhere on the
high end of Dr. Robert Hare's psychopathy scale. Hare is the author of
the books ~Snakes in Suits~ and ~Without Conscience~. The titles are
self-explanatory
Sometimes it's called narcissism or sociopathy or in busines, "serial
bullying." But whatever the term used, it makes sense that attracting a
group of "religious" followers provides the perfect cover for
manipulation, abuse and the predatory accumulation of wealth --
meanwhile receiving massive doses of adulation. Hubbard and Moon are
probably the two most successful examples of spiritual dictators during
the 20th century. Hubbard's "suppressive person" doctrine was quite
appropriate -- if taken as projection.
Reading the posts of Ellen, Estie and Glam, it seems pretty clear to me
that they share a profound sense of betrayal. Isn't that the word?
Well, they weren't betrayed by some abstraction called est or Landmark.
A single individual (perhaps with the nelp of a few willing
syncophants) set up the whole shebang, and his name is Werner. I'm sure
he's pretty clever, but I'll bet some people who bought used cars from
him got pretty pissed off a few months later.
Rex recently posted about how the new guard began "lightening up" the
trainings shortly after Werner left in 1991. Suddenly there was a board
of directors who realized they had a mess to clean up. Maybe it wasn't
a clean sweep, but they at least tidied up a bit. Cody points out the
Catholic Church as being a sort of shadow government, which contains
some truth; however, the RCC of today at least has a system of election
with a few checks and balances. Same principle.
Ironically, as I've mentioned before, it appears that Scientology may
have inadvertantly saved the organization with its smear job on Werner.
According to credible accounts of his behavior, he was well into the
sadistic phase of his personal devolvement. Just like L. Ron Hubbard a
decade earlier when he went into exile.
Probably the most hopeful sign on the horizon is the growing
recognition that some people are just plain lacking in empathy, moral
restraint and remorse. Psycopathy and "Narcissistic Personality
Disorder" are recognized, related mental illnesses defined by a
measurable set of traits. There has been a spate of books on the
subject in recent years. Here's an explanatory article:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=3525698
"These are essentially people with a lack of conscience," Hare says.
"They intellectually work out how you feel, but really they have no
idea of emotion at all. They're a colour-blind person trying to
understand colour."
"We're going to smoke them out," he grins. He points to Andrew Fastow,
the former head of Enron, and the destruction he and other CEOs caused
through their cold-blooded greed. "We could probably have prevented
most of that if they had been screened beforehand."
http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/psychology/robert_hare/index.html
Too many people hold the idea that psychopaths are essentially killers
or convicts. The general public hasn't been educated to see beyond
the social stereotypes to understand that psychopaths can be
entrepreneurs, politicians, CEOs and other successful individuals who
may never see the inside of a prison and who don't commit violent
crimes. However, they do often commit violations of another sort:
They exploit people and leave them depleted and much the worse for the
encounter. They prove to be treacherous employees, conniving
businessmen, or immoral officials who use their position to victimize
people and enrich themselves.
Plus an article about Eric Harris, the mastermind of the Columbine
shooting, and his depressive, dependent partner:
http://www.slate.com/id/2099203/
The Depressive and the Psychopath
At last we know why the Columbine killers did it.
By Dave Cullen
Fuselier [a shrink consulting with the FBI] was finally convinced of
his diagnosis when he read Harris' response to being punished after
being caught breaking into a van. Klebold and Harris had avoided
prosecution for the robbery by participating in a "diversion program"
that involved counseling and community service. Both killers feigned
regret to obtain an early release, but Harris had relished the
opportunity to perform. He wrote an ingratiating letter to his victim
offering empathy, rather than just apologies. Fuselier remembers that
it was packed with statements like 'Jeez, I understand now how you feel
and I understand what this did to you.'
"But he wrote that strictly for effect," Fuselier said. "That was
complete manipulation. At almost the exact same time, he wrote down his
real feelings in his journal: 'Isn't America supposed to be the land of
the free? How come, if I'm free, I can't deprive a stupid f---ing
dumbshit from his possessions if he leaves them sitting in the front
seat of his f---ing van out in plain sight and in the middle of f---ing
nowhere on a Frif---ingday night. NATURAL SELECTION. F---er should be
shot.' "
None of his victims means anything to the psychopath. He recognizes
other people only as means to obtain what he desires. Not only does he
feel no guilt for destroying their lives, he doesn't grasp what they
feel. The truly hard-core psychopath doesn't quite comprehend emotions
like love or hate or fear, because he has never experienced them
directly.
"Because of their inability to appreciate the feelings of others, some
psychopaths are capable of behavior that normal people find not only
horrific but baffling," Hare writes. "For example, they can torture and
mutilate their victims with about the same sense of concern that we
feel when we carve a turkey for Thanksgiving dinner."
elle...@hotmail.com
Eldonbraun wrote:
> The more I read about the behavior of cult leaders "behind the scenes,"
> the more I recognize that virtually all of them fall somewhere on the
> high end of Dr. Robert Hare's psychopathy scale. Hare is the author of
> the books ~Snakes in Suits~ and ~Without Conscience~. The titles are
Sociopaths usually make themselves more than obvious by the trail of
victims they leave. They do feel emotions, however, just not the
same ones or in the same way as most of us. And though they don't feel
the normal emotions, they often pride themselves on their ability to
mimic them. The cagier ones are consumate actors (liars) who get some
kind of charge when they get away with something or fool someone.
Mostly, and when they are not jacked by "scoring" some points of
humiliation, intimidation, or dominance over a victim, their emotional
life consists of envy in an extreme form, arrogance, and paranoia. It
is almost as though their only escape from the negative emotions is the
type of anti-social act of winning one over on someone. And, as Hare
and others have pointed out, most of them are quite happy in corporate
life where they can exercise their "skill set" in varying ways
beneficial to themselves and their shareholders.
It should be obvious, but it's not, that those "graduates" of Landmark
and similar programs are too often reflections of the man who designed
the "programming." For all their touting of "improved relationships,"
what they really mean is their own improved ability to manipulate and
use people. It's all so phoney and contrived. It's all pretense.
It's all designed to mimic Werner Erhard's ability to read people and
take advantage of them. That's why the "programs" have been referred
to as "catnip for the conceited."
Ellen
Glam
Eldonbraun wrote:
> Reading the posts of Ellen, Estie and Glam, it seems pretty clear to me
> that they share a profound sense of betrayal. Isn't that the word?
> Well, they weren't betrayed by some abstraction called est or Landmark.
> A single individual (perhaps with the nelp of a few willing
> syncophants) set up the whole shebang, and his name is Werner. I'm sure
> he's pretty clever, but I'll bet some people who bought used cars from
> him got pretty pissed off a few months later.
Well, I'm not sure about Estie or Ellen, but I wouldn't say I feel a
sense of betrayal. I haven't been betrayed by anyone. I haven't given
Weenie a dime, for example, and my friend was unable to convince me
that Landmark had any value whatsoever, so it's not like I bought into
something and then found out later I'd been scammed.
What I feel is concern -- I felt big concern for my friend when he was
involved because it seemed to be consuming his life and his wallet,
much to his detriment. And I feel anger, anger that sociopaths like
Hubbard and Rosenberg have no empathy for people and feel free to
victimize them just to make a buck and garner false adulation for
themselves.
And I feel amazement, that after thousands of years of sociopaths
starting various and sundry cults and followings, many humans still get
taken in by the same old shell games.
And I feel fascination, that the human animal is able to have his mind
controlled by other humans through a little manipulation, starvation
and stress, and I wonder why our species has evolved with this ability
(or disability). Not that it's exclusive to humans -- Pavlov discovered
a similar thing in dogs as well. I'm sure it's found in a number of
species.
Glam
Eldonbraun
> Well, I'm not sure about Estie or Ellen, but I wouldn't say I feel a
> sense of betrayal. I haven't been betrayed by anyone. I haven't given
> Weenie a dime, for example, and my friend was unable to convince me
> that Landmark had any value whatsoever, so it's not like I bought into
> something and then found out later I'd been scammed.
>
> What I feel is concern -- I felt big concern for my friend when he was
> involved because it seemed to be consuming his life and his wallet,
> much to his detriment.
But, but.... That is called VICARIOUS, empathetic betrayal. Isn't it?
Concern is an emotional identity thing. Isn't it?
OK, so it was secondhand. But nice that you noticed and got pissed off
in the best interests of humanity. Oh, excuse me. I mean the mammalian
kind. There is a reptilian gene remnant still amongst us. I refer to
serial killers and cult leaders, not to mention certain politicians.
In the metaphorical sense, I think David Icke has a point about the
reptilian mentality -- even though he expresses himself literally and
probably doesn't know how to butcher or properly fry a chicken anyway.
Rattlesnake filets fry up real nicely too. I'm sure Tex has sampled
some of that tasty treat. Then there's those Rocky Mountain Oyster
slices in beer batter....
> And I feel anger, anger that sociopaths like
> Hubbard and Rosenberg have no empathy for people and feel free to
> victimize them just to make a buck and garner false adulation for
> themselves.
Helps to cut off their balls at a young age. At least they become more
tender that way. Steers them bulls in a manner of speaking.
HAPPYsamurai
> And I feel fascination, that the human animal is able to have his mind
> controlled by other humans through a little manipulation, starvation
> and stress, and I wonder why our species has evolved with this ability
> (or disability). Not that it's exclusive to humans -- Pavlov discovered
> a similar thing in dogs as well. I'm sure it's found in a number of
> species.
it seemed to balance out when we lived in small communities.... he
earned the name honest abe for wrestling the town bully --
but citys allowed an asshole to move on to another group within the
city and get away....
the corporation being a legal entity without a conscience allows
further dehumanisation and i would suggest some people now "model"
themselves on a corporation, rather than a human role model with a
conscience and an experiential ethical history.... we "brand" ourselves
to others... and any personal growth we have is another piece of
branding [ like the character "dear old mom" in futurama ]
we have had many years of genetic grooming to be mamals but now some
seem to want to be insects with specialised hierachies mimicing food
chain status... still all the phony stuff would go out the window on a
desert island, but that's not real life anymore....
i was talking to a dog trainer
you can breed / train a wild dog to be domesticated... but if a
domestic dog goes wild [again] that's it, it is no longer safe to be
around... it has seen both sides of the game... it has no code
HAPPYsamurai
> Helps to cut off their balls at a young age. At least they become more
> tender that way. Steers them bulls in a manner of speaking.
old school china
the higher your political ambitions... the more you were offered, so
long as you became a eunich...many were willing to pay the price for
their ambition
the flaw in the system was when a very clever woman held powerful
ambitions
see dowager empress
and wu chao who smothered her own baby to frame one of her rivals
now what a corporate leader she would have made
HAPPYsamurai
G.T. TYSON
(schnip)
>
> Reading the posts of Ellen, Estie and Glam, it seems pretty clear to me
> that they share a profound sense of betrayal. Isn't that the word?
> Well, they weren't betrayed by some abstraction called est or Landmark.
> A single individual (perhaps with the nelp of a few willing
> syncophants) set up the whole shebang, and his name is Werner. I'm sure
> he's pretty clever, but I'll bet some people who bought used cars from
> him got pretty pissed off a few months later.
You can add me to that group. Werner's brain police completely messed
up the best relationship I had ever had in my life up to that point and
left me with a dogma-spouting zombie.
>
> Rex recently posted about how the new guard began "lightening up" the
> trainings shortly after Werner left in 1991. Suddenly there was a board
> of directors who realized they had a mess to clean up. Maybe it wasn't
> a clean sweep, but they at least tidied up a bit. Cody points out the
> Catholic Church as being a sort of shadow government, which contains
> some truth; however, the RCC of today at least has a system of election
> with a few checks and balances. Same principle.
I wish you could have seen the Area Center in NYC circa 1983-84. I
found the same mind-set that turned me off organized religion some years
earlier: "we're better than you, and if you want to be like us you must
go through this ritual, then your life will be perfect like ours.
>
> Ironically, as I've mentioned before, it appears that Scientology may
> have inadvertantly saved the organization with its smear job on Werner.
> According to credible accounts of his behavior, he was well into the
> sadistic phase of his personal devolvement. Just like L. Ron Hubbard a
> decade earlier when he went into exile.
What worries me now is how Werner has been out of the public eye long
enough for the TV-attention-span generation to think of Landmark as a
whole new thing.
>
> Probably the most hopeful sign on the horizon is the growing
> recognition that some people are just plain lacking in empathy, moral
> restraint and remorse. Psycopathy and "Narcissistic Personality
> Disorder" are recognized, related mental illnesses defined by a
> measurable set of traits. There has been a spate of books on the
> subject in recent years. Here's an explanatory article:
> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=3525698
You ain't kidding. Maybe it was the way I was raised, but I find a
life completely devoted to I/me/mine/myself to be rather lacking.
>
> "These are essentially people with a lack of conscience," Hare says.
> "They intellectually work out how you feel, but really they have no
> idea of emotion at all. They're a colour-blind person trying to
> understand colour."
I don't see that situation improving anytime soon.
>
> "We're going to smoke them out," he grins. He points to Andrew Fastow,
> the former head of Enron, and the destruction he and other CEOs caused
> through their cold-blooded greed. "We could probably have prevented
> most of that if they had been screened beforehand."
>
> http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/psychology/robert_hare/index.html
>
Why is it that most est/Forum/Landmark people are usually highly
educated professional people? The ones you'd think would see right
through the bullshit are the ones who most eagerly embrace it. I know
that was the case with my former girlfriend. Even though I've gotten
married and raised two outstanding kids since then, I find myself
thinking about her and hoping she is well and happy. She won't respond
to any communication, so I don't know. I *do* know the last time we
talked three years ago she was vaguely embarrassed about that entire
chapter of her life and changed the subject rather quickly.
GTTyson
Estie
Eldonbraun wrote:
> Reading the posts of Ellen, Estie and Glam, it seems pretty clear to me
> that they share a profound sense of betrayal. Isn't that the word?
I think it would apply more to me, computer user, Larry, those of us
who had high expectations, who really put our hearts into the
organization and what it (supposedly) stood for. I most definitely
felt deeply betrayed.
My last letter from Werner said "I understand how you feel." I was
asking him for change to the organization, not understanding how I
felt. It was a non-sequitur. If he'd understood how I felt, he
wouldn't have hesitated to do everything he could to have those
wonderful people treated with more respect and dignity. I really don't
think he was capable of understanding how I felt.
You're right. If Co$ hadn't driven him off, Werner would have
continued his hold, and it's hard to imagine how things would be by
now. I've wondered if Landmark is deliberately avoiding having another
clear leader during Werner's lifetime. I've noticed some frustration
in the "lack of source" of the organization from the loyal. It's sick
that they miss having a cult leader, but they only saw what he wanted
them to see.
Estie
Real-Tex
<big snip>
>
> I wish you could have seen the Area Center in NYC circa 1983-84. I
> found the same mind-set that turned me off organized religion some years
> earlier: "we're better than you, and if you want to be like us you must
I was at the NYC Center for my GSLP weekend, but mostly at the Boston
Area Center.
I agree, I found a certain dogmatic mindset that I likened to "newage"
religion.
Although I never saw anyone pretending their lives were perfect. In
fact, people were often "proud" of parading out their "discovered"
rackets and attempting to "peel away the oinion" with introspection and
yes-- more seminars! An endless attempt at imperfect self-discovery. It
was their religion for sure.
It was not a monolithic mindset though. There were a handful of
"enrollment machines," some casual observers that took a seminar or
two, and then those that were highly guarded and suspicious but still
seeking to get something out of it.
Not everyone spoke jargon, but I guess people need to feel like they
belong to something. Perhaps that was the biggest "hook" for some.
I deliberately avoided using and joked about the jargon, as did many
others I knew.
I often "decided" on things. In fact, eliminating or "killing off" the
alternative was a good way get things done. The choice/decision
distinction as jargon seech was silly. The and/but distinction was
equally silly.
Reminds me of the movie the "Life of Brian" when someone heard Blessed
are the peacemakers and thought he said lessed are the cheesemakers.
Same thing, different religion.
Dakota
Glam wrote:
> Eldonbraun wrote:
>
> > Reading the posts of Ellen, Estie and Glam, it seems pretty clear to me
> > that they share a profound sense of betrayal. Isn't that the word?
> > Well, they weren't betrayed by some abstraction called est or Landmark.
> > A single individual (perhaps with the nelp of a few willing
> > syncophants) set up the whole shebang, and his name is Werner. I'm sure
> > he's pretty clever, but I'll bet some people who bought used cars from
> > him got pretty pissed off a few months later.
>
> Well, I'm not sure about Estie or Ellen, but I wouldn't say I feel a
> sense of betrayal. I haven't been betrayed by anyone. I haven't given
> Weenie a dime, for example, and my friend was unable to convince me
> that Landmark had any value whatsoever, so it's not like I bought into
> something and then found out later I'd been scammed.
>
> What I feel is concern -- I felt big concern for my friend when he was
> involved because it seemed to be consuming his life and his wallet,
> much to his detriment. And I feel anger, anger that sociopaths like
> Hubbard and Rosenberg have no empathy for people and feel free to
> victimize them just to make a buck and garner false adulation for
> themselves.
>
> And I feel amazement, that after thousands of years of sociopaths
> starting various and sundry cults and followings, many humans still get
> taken in by the same old shell games.
There is one theory that sociopathy has strong survival value; the
sociopathic male is more likely to spread seed and reproduce;
sociopaths don't starve because they are more cunning; etc.
> And I feel fascination, that the human animal is able to have his mind
> controlled by other humans through a little manipulation, starvation
> and stress, and I wonder why our species has evolved with this ability
> (or disability). Not that it's exclusive to humans -- Pavlov discovered
> a similar thing in dogs as well. I'm sure it's found in a number of
> species.
Gullibility obviously had/has very strong survival value. Cultures
worldwide developed hierarchies with some sort of spiritual/shamanistic
leadership; we have periods of chaos when things go haywire, and then
very charismatic and/or frightening people take control and people seem
to calm down and accept them as leaders.
And how quickly it happens! Think of U.S.-Japanese relations
immediately following WWII and then look at them today. And the U.S.'s
new "old bud" Kadaffi...
It starts early, with kids believing anything they hear from their
parents, teachers, etc., and some of them never question any of what
they are taught. Even what many people value (even here on this group)
started off when people who sought power determined they could take
some useful practices or body of knowledge of value and combine them in
a way that gave them personal power at the same time.
Cody
Dakota
Real-Tex wrote:
> <big snip>
> >
> > I wish you could have seen the Area Center in NYC circa 1983-84. I
> > found the same mind-set that turned me off organized religion some years
> > earlier: "we're better than you, and if you want to be like us you must
> > go through this ritual, then your life will be perfect like ours.<end snip>
>
> I was at the NYC Center for my GSLP weekend, but mostly at the Boston
> Area Center.
> I agree, I found a certain dogmatic mindset that I likened to "newage"
> religion.
I think the NYC Center may have just seemed extreme because of New
Yorkers! I worked in NYC for a short time filling in for someone else
for a large firm, and the firm invited me to make a permanent position
in NYC for a promotion. I said thanks, but no thanks--I just didn't
fit in with New York culture--it's a nice place to visit...
I always recognized there are zealots in any organization with
something that people value highly, so I just saw the enrollment hawks
as gnats to brush out of my face. In fact, I remember thinking that I
was *not* going to be like that because it was important to me that
people *not* sign up for anything where self-awareness is a goal if
they had a major issue with it. I didn't see it as something everyone
would find comfortable doing.
I have to say that the Saturdy Satellite Seminar Series was where I was
primarily exposed to Werner Erhard, so I never had to deal with his
seedy side. And he was a business executive many more years than he
sold used cars. Plenty of studies show that manipulators head lots of
organizations.
Cody
Real-Tex
He also sold new cars, and he did that in his early 20s. He was a VP of
a Fortune 500 company before age 30, and while still on the lamb for
abandoning his wife and family.
For me, Werner was one of the things least attractive about est.
What "newager" wants a cigar smoking, poker playing, race car driving
bigamist as their "guru?" {:~D
I will give him lots of credit for hiring people that were better both
in pedigree, substance and style than him.
I liked est inspite of Werner. Seeing his "training" videos during GSLP
help seal the deal for me. I didn't want to be salesman in order to
lead seminars. And that's how it was set up. I always wondered if
people like Dr. Art Scheuller, Dr. Joe Dimaggio, Roger Armstrong etc.
had a fast track to becoming Trainers, or did they start out trying to
get their "stats" to move on to the next level?
HAPPYsamurai
> There is one theory that sociopathy has strong survival value; the
> sociopathic male is more likely to spread seed and reproduce;
> sociopaths don't starve because they are more cunning; etc.
theory is fun til someone loses an eye
like the day the the gantling boys came calling and took turns with
becky
then eldons mountain oyster recipe looks like a good preventitive
therapy
its all very well to make excuses for people to be assholes, but then
to hassle people for wanting to protect others
the problem is bringing the law of the jungle out of the jungle into
so-called civilised society -- back in the jungle the reality is non
sociopaths would band together and stone the sociopath
is it just as easy to defend EEG for their instinctual or EVELDED
behaviour... is that also in the Libertarian repertoire
still its all theory til one of these people actively impacts on your
life...
you don't have to be a sociopath to be cunning
you don't have to be a sociopath to have strong survival value
Eldonbraun
Well, depends on the genetic code of the breed itself. It's not so
likely that a Cocker Spaniel ~could~ go wild and survive. But the ones
that are closer to wolves do have interesting instincts just under the
surface. I was dogsitting a Husky a few years ago. Walking him was like
running a vacuum cleaner along the gutter. One day I put a bowl of
water down next to his food bowl as he was eating, and he snapped my
hand hard enough to draw blood -- and then immediately cowered in
apology for making such a rude mistake.
Occasionally back in Kansas, people would raise a coyote pup whose
mother they'd shot -- a pretty cruel thing to do, since they had to be
kept tied up or fenced in. They were really impossible to domesticate
beyond a certain level. I don't think a hyena would turn out very
cuddly either
HAPPYsamurai
equilibrium [ physics and the golden rule] and of course the prisoners
dillema -- where the sociopaths survival instinct works against
itself... still again its more "head' stuff
the best way to experience sociopaths is to live with them non
judgementally and not let yourself get fucked over or seduced or
overstressed... you'll soon learn to appreciate the company of non
sociopaths
Eldonbraun
I have a theory that there are two reasons.
Some might recognize that they are overly cerebral and feel they are
lacking something. Much of conventional education favors what we call
the "left brain" or the computational/rational way of dealing with life
over the "right brain" emotive/intuitional way. Back to the typical
elementary classroom environment vs. the Montessori model. This is what
Bruno and Tex are talking about, I think, or pretty close.
Or they might want to learn to operate more effectively in sociopath
mode. Disappear or "discreate" the ol' moral values mommy tried to
teach them and take mental notes on how the group leader manipulates
people for future reference. Then maybe they can start their own cult
someday. You don't think Werner did Mind Dynamics and Scientology just
for the ~experience~ do you? Another example is Harry Palmer, the
Avatar guru, who used to go around the Scientology mission he ran
saying "If Ron could do it, I can do it too!"
Eldonbraun
> Eldonbraun wrote:
> > Reading the posts of Ellen, Estie and Glam, it seems pretty clear to me
> > that they share a profound sense of betrayal. Isn't that the word?
>
> I think it would apply more to me, computer user, Larry, those of us
> who had high expectations, who really put our hearts into the
> organization and what it (supposedly) stood for. I most definitely
> felt deeply betrayed.
>
> My last letter from Werner said "I understand how you feel." I was
> asking him for change to the organization, not understanding how I
> felt. It was a non-sequitur. If he'd understood how I felt, he
> wouldn't have hesitated to do everything he could to have those
> wonderful people treated with more respect and dignity. I really don't
> think he was capable of understanding how I felt.
A little more about Dr. Robert Hare's findings:
http://www.hare.org/links/saturday.html
Three decades of these studies, by Hare and others, has confirmed that
psychopaths' brains work differently from ours, especially when
processing emotion and language. Hare once illustrated this for Nicole
Kidman, who had invited him to Hollywood to help her prepare for a role
as a psychopath in Malice. How, she wondered, could she show the
audience there was something fundamentally wrong with her character?
"I said, 'Here's a scene that you can use,' " Hare says. " 'You're
walking down a street and there's an accident. A car has hit a child in
the crosswalk. A crowd of people gather round. You walk up, the child's
lying on the ground and there's blood running all over the place. You
get a little blood on your shoes and you look down and say, "Oh shit."
You look over at the child, kind of interested, but you're not repelled
or horrified. You're just interested. Then you look at the mother, and
you're really fascinated by the mother, who's emoting, crying out,
doing all these different things. After a few minutes you turn away and
go back to your house. You go into the bathroom and practice mimicking
the facial expressions of the mother.' " He then pauses and says,
"That's the psychopath: somebody who doesn't understand what's going on
emotionally, but understands that something important has happened."
Serena Nordstrup
Dakota wrote:
<snip>
> Gullibility obviously had/has very strong survival value. Cultures
> worldwide developed hierarchies with some sort of spiritual/shamanistic
> leadership; we have periods of chaos when things go haywire, and then
> very charismatic and/or frightening people take control and people seem
> to calm down and accept them as leaders.
They may "seem" to calm down and accept... But I wonder whether your
examples show the survival-value of conformity (or apparent conformity)
rather than the survival-value of gullibility.
And talking leadership, Stalin scores fairly low on SSQ (the
spiritual/shamanistic quotient), for all his seminary background and
effective hierarchy-building...
Simpatice
Serena
Serena Nordstrup
Dakota wrote:
<snip>
> I have to say that the Saturdy Satellite Seminar Series was where I was
> primarily exposed to Werner Erhard, so I never had to deal with his
> seedy side.
<offtopic>
> And he was a business executive many more years than he
> sold used cars.
</offtopic>
Sellers of cars count as executing business too.
> Plenty of studies show that manipulators head lots of
> organizations.
They renamed "manipulation" as "management".
(I almost tolerated business and management before I encountered
rosenbergism. Marvellous what exposure to the concept and demonstration
of cynicism can achieve...)
Simpatice
Serena
Glam
Dakota wrote:
>
> I think the NYC Center may have just seemed extreme because of New
> Yorkers! I worked in NYC for a short time filling in for someone else
> for a large firm, and the firm invited me to make a permanent position
> in NYC for a promotion. I said thanks, but no thanks--I just didn't
> fit in with New York culture--it's a nice place to visit...
FU too!
Welcome to New York! Now get out!
I guess some people just don't get it. ;-)
Glam
Glam
Real-Tex wrote:
> while still on the lamb
Now that's a funny picture.
Werner on a lamb. I guess he preferred them to full-grown sheep? Well,
if a daughter isn't handy for poking, I suppose a lamb will do...
Glamb
Eldonbraun
> And talking leadership, Stalin scores fairly low on SSQ (the
> spiritual/shamanistic quotient), for all his seminary background and
> effective hierarchy-building...
We could toss FDR, Churchill, deGaulle, Franco and Tito in there with
Stalin too. Each had his own variety of command charisma. Of course,
they all "won" in one way or another. The only clear losers were
Hitler, Mussolini and the somewhat nebulous Japanese leadership
apparatus.
Did you ever read Hirohito's surrender speech?
http://web.jjay.cuny.edu/jobrien/reference/ob101.html
Here's the Royal We capper:
Let the entire nation continue as one family from generation to
generation, ever firm in its faith in the imperishableness of its
divine land, and mindful of its heavy burden of responsibilities, and
the long road before it. Unite your total strength to be devoted to the
construction for the future. Cultivate the ways of rectitude, nobility
of spirit, and work with resolution so that you may enhance the innate
glory of the Imperial State and keep pace with the progress of the
world.
All you, our subjects, we command you to act in accordance with our
wishes.
-- Hirohito
Eldonbraun
OMG, you New Yorkers are so snide and sarcastic. Maybe that's because
Woody Allen is your guru. Have any idea when he plans to start filming
his remake of "Brokeback Mountain"?
>
> Glamb
HAPPYsamurai
> Serena Nordstrup wrote:
> > And talking leadership, Stalin scores fairly low on SSQ (the
> > spiritual/shamanistic quotient), for all his seminary background and
> > effective hierarchy-building...
where we all born with a tub of vaseline speaking the first words "take
me to my leader"...
are there any leaders here... somebody tell me what to think...
thank you mr stalin I'd love to help build a cannal
slavery enjoyment pills, get your slavery enjoyment pills here
don't fight it... think of it as an enlightened way to semantically
deny solipsis...
you're here for the bosses benefit... see you need never need worry
about being selfish again
now I've fucked up and I need some one who really loves me to take tha
blame... a sacrificial fall guy... and you know its ok cos my survival
streak is bigger than yours... that's why you felt so empowered while
hanging out with me....
you've still got the vasoline that you got at your induction
cue to leader of the PACK vrm vrm
or maybe gary gltter.. do ya wanna be in my gang my gang my gang [oops]
Glam
Hey, maybe Weenie was Woody's guru. They both poked a "daughter."
And from now on, please refer to me as...
Glamb
(Silent "B," of course.)
elle...@hotmail.com
Real-Tex wrote:
> For me, Werner was one of the things least attractive about est.
> What "newager" wants a cigar smoking, poker playing, race car driving
> bigamist as their "guru?"
Why not call a spade a spade, "Tex?"
What "newager," or any other "self-improvement" or "awareness-seeker"
wants an oily, lying, cheating, wife-abusing, child-molester as the
"guru?"
Ellen
Eldonbraun
> Hey, maybe Weenie was Woody's guru. They both poked a "daughter."
Hey Glamb,
At least Woody Allen did sort of make an honest woman of his
"daughter." I was thinking of that slapstick movie, "Everything You
Always Wanted to Know About Sex..." made in 1972.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068555/
Did you see that one? Great scene where Gene Wilder, (a psychiatrist as
I recall) falls in love with a sheep that wears a garter belt... but
eventually winds up in the gutter swigging from a bottle of Woolite ;-)
HAPPYsamurai
> Glam wrote:
> > Hey, maybe Weenie was Woody's guru. They both poked a "daughter."
>
child abuse because all the babies would end up on the rubbish heap
you guys need to embrace the BIG picture
Estie
Glam wrote:
> Dakota wrote:
> >
> > I think the NYC Center may have just seemed extreme because of New
> > Yorkers! I worked in NYC for a short time filling in for someone else
> > for a large firm, and the firm invited me to make a permanent position
> > in NYC for a promotion. I said thanks, but no thanks--I just didn't
> > fit in with New York culture--it's a nice place to visit...
>
> FU too!
LOL!
I lived in NYC for a short time. It was the least "warm and fuzzy"
place I've ever lived. But I also had to say New Yawkers were very
honest, just cut to the chase. A lot of "warm and fuzziness" is just
BS.
Estie
Estie
OMG! Did you see the porno-night at the Six-Day?
Estieb
Serena Nordstrup
HAPPYsamurai wrote:
> Eldonbraun wrote:
> > Serena Nordstrup wrote:
> > > And talking leadership, Stalin scores fairly low on SSQ (the
> > > spiritual/shamanistic quotient), for all his seminary background and
> > > effective hierarchy-building...
> what happenned to the concept of a union of free men /people
>
> where we all born with a tub of vaseline speaking the first words "take
> me to my leader"...
>
> are there any leaders here... somebody tell me what to think...
No, you think for yourself, do you hear/obey?
Just a suggestion: the concept ~leadership~ does not exist. -- now we
just need to pension off the leader-cadres.
Eldonbraun
> No, you think for yourself, do you hear/obey?
>
> Just a suggestion: the concept ~leadership~ does not exist. -- now we
> just need to pension off the leader-cadres.
Sticy wicket there. The American professor W. Edwards Deming is revered
for having produced the postwar Japanese industrial miracle, in a
country that already had ancient traditions of loyalty and consensus.
(See Hirohito's commands posted above.) It worked so well there that
lots of US companies then imitated the Japanese by restructuring
themselves more horizontally, and got way into the team
buildling/qualitiy circles/localized profit center fad -- which didn't
work so well in some cases.
The concepts of autocracy and dictatorship certainly exist. I would
agree with the idea of pensioning off a great many individual
"leaders," some preferably in prison. I'm not so sure how many levels
down the cadre pyramid one wants to go -- unless the goal is to get rid
of large organizations altogether. Seems like the US dismantled the
structure excessively in Iraq by banning former Baath party honchos
entirely.
Within the context of Landmark possibilities -- as Landmarians are wont
to say -- some here wish it had just collapsed long ago. Others say it
has at least evolved and improved somewhat since Werner's ouster.
Others say whatever problems might have existed have long since been
fixed. I wonder if anyone believes Werner wasn't the worst problem.
Real-Tex
He always referred to himself as a "friend" not a guru. {;-)
I'm still surprised at how well Landmark Education has done since
Werner's "departure."
I thought for sure they would close up shop shortly there.
Go figure.
>
>
>
> Ellen
Estie
Eldonbraun wrote:
> Within the context of Landmark possibilities -- as Landmarians are wont
> to say -- some here wish it had just collapsed long ago. Others say it
> has at least evolved and improved somewhat since Werner's ouster.
> Others say whatever problems might have existed have long since been
> fixed. I wonder if anyone believes Werner wasn't the worst problem.
Well, duh! Werner was ~Source~. Werner created the whole thang. He
decided what to put in the training. He decided how the training
should be delivered. He trained the trainers. There was nothing that
happened that wasn't the way he wanted it. Even all that lining the
chairs up on measured tape marks and picking up every microscopic nit
off the floor, lining the cards and pencils up in neat rows, etc. was
Werner's anal retentiveness.
Landmark only began "trying" to distance themselves from Werner when he
became a public liability. But, like so many things about Landmark,
it's more PR spin than substance. Landmark is still very, very much
"Werner's baby." And Harry is protecting Werner's legacy. I'm sure
there's hope that one day Werner will be vindicated.
I just had an "AHA!"
You know, I think Cody knows more than she's letting on. When she
thought the "anti-cultists" were going to use LE ~technology~, said
"they can't have it if we won't let them", she was genuinely afraid a
LE technology deprogramming would be a serious threat to Landmark. At
a gut level, she knows if you put people into a controlled room for
three days, you can pretty much make them believe anything you want.
But her interest is in protecting Landmark, not in the truth, not in
the genuine welfare of the people Landmark affects.
Culty and others know that people have been deprogrammed. Most seem to
believe it's something forced, which isn't true. BUT, that also says
they believe people *can* be forced to change their beliefs. They just
aren't willing to admit that it's Landmark that's doing the forcing.
Estie
G.T. TYSON
> elle...@hotmail.com wrote:
> He always referred to himself as a "friend" not a guru. {;-)
> I'm still surprised at how well Landmark Education has done since
> Werner's "departure."
> I thought for sure they would close up shop shortly there.
> Go figure.
Do you honestly think Werner is totally out of the loop with Landmark?
Come on now. I would not hesitate to bet big money he's in contact with
the organization in some way nearly every day.
Manure by any other name still stinks.
gtt
G.T. Tyson
> elle...@hotmail.com wrote:
> He always referred to himself as a "friend" not a guru. {;-)
> I'm still surprised at how well Landmark Education has done since
> Werner's "departure."
> I thought for sure they would close up shop shortly there.
> Go figure.
Do you honestly think Werner is totally out of the loop with Landmark?
Real-Tex
G.T. Tyson wrote:
> Real-Tex wrote:
>
> > elle...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > He always referred to himself as a "friend" not a guru. {;-)
> > I'm still surprised at how well Landmark Education has done since
> > Werner's "departure."
> > I thought for sure they would close up shop shortly there.
> > Go figure.
>
>Do you honestly think Werner is totally out of the loop with Landmark?
I have no idea. Haven't thought much about it.
I was staying at a hotel in Connecticut on business in the mid-90s and
low and behold what did I see, a bunch of "seminarians" with nametags.
One of them was standing behind me in a line at the front desk. I asked
him what was going on and he told me it was a Landmark seminar. I told
him I was an old "Estie" and asked him what the story was on Werner.
He gave me a long story about how the story was retracted and
Scientology was trying to smear Werner etc.
My only comment to him was that if the allegations weren't true then
Werner sure had a lousy relationship with his children. That wiped the
bullshit-enlightenment-look right off the poor guy's face. He did have
that glassy-eyed stare about him. It didn't make me feel like I was
missing anything. I was thinking of dropping in on the seminar until I
talked to this guy, who was assisting that night. After talking to him,
I said to myself NAAAAAHH!
I don't think Werner is mentioned anymore, but perhaps he's still
"lurking." ;-D
Eldonbraun
> G.T. Tyson wrote:
> > > I'm still surprised at how well Landmark Education has done since
> > > Werner's "departure."
> > > I thought for sure they would close up shop shortly there.
> > > Go figure.
So did I. So did a few supporters of the org I knew in San Francisco
when all the stuff about Werner came crashing down. It was skilfully
orchestrated smear PR, and so was the damage control I think. Neither
of which has much to do with the truth, of course.
> >Do you honestly think Werner is totally out of the loop with Landmark?
>
<snip>
> I told
> him I was an old "Estie" and asked him what the story was on Werner.
> He gave me a long story about how the story was retracted and
> Scientology was trying to smear Werner etc.
>
> My only comment to him was that if the allegations weren't true then
> Werner sure had a lousy relationship with his children. That wiped the
> bullshit-enlightenment-look right off the poor guy's face.
Good response. I doubt we'll ever know what the specific facts were.
Certainly there are ways to convince people to retract truthful
statements. Just ask...oh, let's see... Eddie Murphy? John Travolta?
Paul Barresi? Michael Jackson? What do those names somehow have in
common?
I see Rex just mentioned on another thread that Werner still receives
small and dwindling royalty peyments. I bet we'll never know anything
specific about what those have amounted to over the years either. I bet
Rex couldn't find out if he wanted to know (which he doesn't).
Any takers? I thought not.
HAPPYsamurai
> He always referred to himself as a "friend" not a guru. {;-)
pay me and call me friend
not quite the definition of friendship in pioneer cultures
oh I was just chatting werner over coffee ... yes he's coming roungd to
help re tyle the kitchen on the weekend
i know he's so kind... I'll buy him some of that imported tobacco he
likes...
Eldonbraun
How nice of him. L. Ron Hubbard once described himself thusly in the
third person: "Mankind has no greater friend...."
You gotta watch out for those statements people make ABOUT themselves,
and question the questions they ask when they interview themselves in
fake mag articles.
I was just channeling LRH from that other galaxy on that other plane. I
asked if he would drop by to help me repaint a room or two. He demanded
Rum & Coke, non-filter Kools, some benzedrine (injectable), mescaline,
hash, and various other mood-altering drugs. Many are easily obtainable
in Paris, but others are not. I explained the situation and informed
him that various brands of Absinthe can still be obtained, though
they're not as potent as the old-fashioned kind. But that wasn't a
sufficient incentive, so he declined the invitation.
HAPPYsamurai
> You gotta watch out for those statements people make ABOUT themselves,
> and question the questions they ask when they interview themselves in
> fake mag articles.
info-mercials
info-tainment
advertorial
the news is what they don't want you to know... the rest is advertising
come into my parlour said the spider to the fly
just call me dear old mom
why what big teeth you have grandmama
Eldonbraun
> Eldonbraun wrote:
>
> > You gotta watch out for those statements people make ABOUT themselves,
> > and question the questions they ask when they interview themselves in
> > fake mag articles.
>
> info-mercials
> info-tainment
> advertorial
>
> the news is what they don't want you to know... the rest is advertising
>
> come into my parlour said the spider to the fly
Well Hap, I would say that overall we have bided our time well here,
being infinitely patient, and thus philosophically tenderized them for
membership in our anti-cult cult. The cult-basher bashers are losing
little by little.
It will soon be time for the big roundup (if you get my drift) and the
exhilarating drive to the great Chicago stockyards and meat markets.
Maybe a few strays will be left behind, but so what?
First, however, we need to have a conference call and discuss our
contractual interests ;-)
HAPPYsamurai
>
> First, however, we need to have a conference call and discuss our
> contractual interests ;-)
i think it's time we use the anti cult lear jet
its important for the followers to feel our success and share in it as
their own
Eldonbraun
> Eldonbraun wrote:
>
> >
> > First, however, we need to have a conference call and discuss our
> > contractual interests ;-)
>
> i think it's time we use the anti cult lear jet
Naw, that's old hat to me. I grew up in Wichita, Kansas, known as "The
aircraft capital of the world" where Learjets were manufactured. Also
the hometown manufacturing center of Boeing, Cessna and Beech.
I wanna rent Betsy for the roundup. She'll outrun any supercharged
Duesenberg ever built.
http://www.stanleysteamers.com/doble1.htm
http://www.stanleysteamers.com/phorum-3.3/read.php4?f=1&i=3317&t=3317&v=f
Tex
"Eldonbraun" <Eldo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1150009490....@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Real-Tex wrote:
>> G.T. Tyson wrote:
>> > > I'm still surprised at how well Landmark Education has done since
>> > > Werner's "departure."
>> > > I thought for sure they would close up shop shortly there.
>> > > Go figure.
>
> So did I. So did a few supporters of the org I knew in San Francisco
> when all the stuff about Werner came crashing down. It was skilfully
> orchestrated smear PR, and so was the damage control I think. Neither
> of which has much to do with the truth, of course.
>
>> >Do you honestly think Werner is totally out of the loop with Landmark?
>>
> <snip>
>> I told
>> him I was an old "Estie" and asked him what the story was on Werner.
>> He gave me a long story about how the story was retracted and
>> Scientology was trying to smear Werner etc.
>>
>> My only comment to him was that if the allegations weren't true then
>> Werner sure had a lousy relationship with his children. That wiped the
>> bullshit-enlightenment-look right off the poor guy's face.
>
> Good response. I doubt we'll ever know what the specific facts were.
> Certainly there are ways to convince people to retract truthful
> statements. Just ask...oh, let's see... Eddie Murphy? John Travolta?
> Paul Barresi? Michael Jackson? What do those names somehow have in common?
I'll bite.
What do they have in common?
>
> I see Rex just mentioned on another thread that Werner still receives
> small and dwindling royalty peyments. I bet we'll never know anything
> specific about what those have amounted to over the years either. I bet
> Rex couldn't find out if he wanted to know (which he doesn't).
>
> Any takers? I thought not.
Don't know.
Really don't care.
Werner is passé now.
Except on this backwater newsgroup. :-)
>
Tex
"HAPPYsamurai" <profst...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1150011386.7...@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Real-Tex wrote:
>
>> He always referred to himself as a "friend" not a guru. {;-)
>
> pay me and call me friend
Where do I send the check? ;-D
Eldonbraun
I don't want to get sued, so I'll let Google take the rap on that ;-)
But here's a hint: try "Paul Baressi" in combination with most of the
other names. Try "Scientology" in combination with all except "Eddie
Murphy." Ah, and here's a link to Mark Ebner's site for his book,
Hollywood Interrupted.
http://www.hollywoodinterrupted.com/
Serena Nordstrup
Eldonbraun wrote:
> Serena Nordstrup wrote:
> > No, you think for yourself, do you hear/obey?
> >
> > Just a suggestion: the concept ~leadership~ does not exist. -- now we
> > just need to pension off the leader-cadres.
>
> Sticy wicket there.
A mere suggestion.
> The American professor W. Edwards Deming is revered
> for having produced the postwar Japanese industrial miracle, in a
> country that already had ancient traditions of loyalty and consensus.
> (See Hirohito's commands posted above.) It worked so well there that
> lots of US companies then imitated the Japanese by restructuring
> themselves more horizontally, and got way into the team
> buildling/qualitiy circles/localized profit center fad -- which didn't
> work so well in some cases.
I detect residual traces of belief in leaders lurking in your
analysis...
> The concepts of autocracy and dictatorship certainly exist.
So it seems...
> I would
> agree with the idea of pensioning off a great many individual
> "leaders," some preferably in prison. I'm not so sure how many levels
> down the cadre pyramid one wants to go -- unless the goal is to get rid
> of large organizations altogether.
Root out the lot of them: or the idea will survive and little leaders
will fancy themselves as big leaders. - And some conditions in the
modern setup favor smaller organizations, surely.
> Seems like the US dismantled the
> structure excessively in Iraq by banning former Baath party honchos
> entirely.
Now that analysis definitely assumes that leadership has its virtues.
Anyone can read or recite the Koran and revere their family: who needs
leaders?
> Within the context of Landmark possibilities -- as Landmarians are wont
> to say -- some here wish it had just collapsed long ago. Others say it
> has at least evolved and improved somewhat since Werner's ouster.
> Others say whatever problems might have existed have long since been
> fixed. I wonder if anyone believes Werner wasn't the worst problem.
Hmm - it may depend on one's perception of a cult's need for a central
figure. -- Transformational Anarchy: a ~possibility~ whose time has
come...
Simpatice
Serena
HAPPYsamurai
> Hmm - it may depend on one's perception of a cult's need for a central
> figure. -- Transformational Anarchy: a ~possibility~ whose time has
> come...
>
> Simpatice
> Serena
u might like this one from Edward Abbey
Anarchism is founded on the observation that since few men are wise
enough to rule themselves, even fewer are wise enough to rule others.
Eldonbraun
> > Seems like the US dismantled the
> > structure excessively in Iraq by banning former Baath party honchos
> > entirely.
>
> Now that analysis definitely assumes that leadership has its virtues.
> Anyone can read or recite the Koran and revere their family: who needs
> leaders?
A big problem problem being that Islam is so vehemently schismatic in
the mideast. Both major branches read the Koran in a shared language,
but that doesn't stop them from hating each other. Iraq's dictatorship
apparatus was certainly not virtuous, but it maintained a semblance of
order. The current guerilla civil war doesn't seem like the smoothest
possible transition.
>
> Hmm - it may depend on one's perception of a cult's need for a central
> figure. --
That isn't a need. It's a primary ~definition~ of "cult" -- which might
describe some very embedded genetic and cult-ural traits. Of course,
some say a cult doesn't necessarily have a central figure. But I
suspect they all started that way.
Transformational Anarchy: a ~possibility~ whose time has
> come...
Or anarchistic transformation? There's another possibilty that's been
tried after various revolutions. Didn't last long though.
Tex
Thanks.
Good point.
jim_...@my-dejanews.com
Eldonbraun wrote:
> Estie wrote:
> > Eldonbraun wrote:
> > > Reading the posts of Ellen, Estie and Glam, it seems pretty clear to me
> > > that they share a profound sense of betrayal. Isn't that the word?
> >
> > I think it would apply more to me, computer user, Larry, those of us
> > who had high expectations, who really put our hearts into the
> > organization and what it (supposedly) stood for. I most definitely
> > felt deeply betrayed.
> >
> > My last letter from Werner said "I understand how you feel." I was
> > asking him for change to the organization, not understanding how I
> > felt. It was a non-sequitur. If he'd understood how I felt, he
> > wouldn't have hesitated to do everything he could to have those
> > wonderful people treated with more respect and dignity. I really don't
> > think he was capable of understanding how I felt.
>
> A little more about Dr. Robert Hare's findings:
> http://www.hare.org/links/saturday.html
>
> Three decades of these studies, by Hare and others, has confirmed that
> psychopaths' brains work differently from ours, especially when
> processing emotion and language. Hare once illustrated this for Nicole
> Kidman, who had invited him to Hollywood to help her prepare for a role
> as a psychopath in Malice. How, she wondered, could she show the
> audience there was something fundamentally wrong with her character?
>
> "I said, 'Here's a scene that you can use,' " Hare says. " 'You're
> walking down a street and there's an accident. A car has hit a child in
> the crosswalk. A crowd of people gather round. You walk up, the child's
> lying on the ground and there's blood running all over the place. You
> get a little blood on your shoes and you look down and say, "Oh shit."
> You look over at the child, kind of interested, but you're not repelled
> or horrified. You're just interested. Then you look at the mother, and
> you're really fascinated by the mother, who's emoting, crying out,
> doing all these different things. After a few minutes you turn away and
> go back to your house. You go into the bathroom and practice mimicking
> the facial expressions of the mother.' " He then pauses and says,
> "That's the psychopath: somebody who doesn't understand what's going on
> emotionally, but understands that something important has happened."
Very interesting thread overall, Eldon. What I find most interesting
is not the nature of sociopathology (which in itself is interesting),
which I'm fairly certain does exist in various encarnations and
societal levels throughout our world (Scott Peck wrote a rather
disturbing book called 'People of the lie') but rather 'what there is
to do', on a personal level, regarding this phenomena.
It is recognition (through education and observation) of this and other
'not normal' dynamics that is key, IMO. It is that recognition, early
on, among other things that I think aided me in avoiding much of the
purported negative outcomes related to LEC (none of which I happen to
put in the 'sociopathology bucket').
A rather quick example: I had reason, during one of the 'trainings',
to chat with one of the 'back office' people at the local center. I
asked a question and got a response that I didn't understand, I
explained that to the guy. He repeated verbatim what he had just said.
I found it interesting that he didn't paraphrase or otherwise use
'different' words/sentences to respond. I told him that I was abit
perplexed by his 'rote' response, which generated a bit of puzzlement
on his part and finally recognition.
This and a number of other specific examples of 'overinvolved' people
tended to confirm for me that there was something going on within the
'overinvolved' community (similar to what has been discussed here
regarding conformance etc) that I thought (and continue to think) may
be specific to this segment of the LEC 'community' (the overinvovled
segment that is).
I'm still of the opinion that, excluding acute reactions, that many of
the negative outcomes are the result of ongoing and excessive
invovlvment. Of course this is something of a double edged sword for
LEC. They are ultimately responsible for encouraging this ongoing and
excessive involvement, yet their current model sort of 'requires'
same. This is clearly something that LEC needs to deal with.
Bottom line for me is that there are all manner of 'traps'/'potholes'
that we all navigate as we go through our lives. It is important, IMO,
that each and every person recognize (parental influence should focus
on this area) that observation and critical thinking take place on an
ongoing and regular basis in order to minimize these sorts of problems.
In the case of LEC I'd say that observing the behaviour of the
'overinvolved' just might raise a 'red flag' to some and thereby reduce
the risk of negative outcomes IF LEC's 'business model' does not
change.
> >
> > You're right. If Co$ hadn't driven him off, Werner would have
> > continued his hold, and it's hard to imagine how things would be by
> > now. I've wondered if Landmark is deliberately avoiding having another
> > clear leader during Werner's lifetime. I've noticed some frustration
> > in the "lack of source" of the organization from the loyal. It's sick
> > that they miss having a cult leader, but they only saw what he wanted
> > them to see.
> >
> > Estie
Tex
<jim_...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
news:1150124119....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Very well said Jim.
I think this is exactly what happens.
People latch on to "answers" and then want to believe it is the "way" so
badly that they will discard trust in themselves.
In this way Landmark is a religion to some.
Blind faith brings comfort to some.
elle...@hotmail.com
jim_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In the case of LEC I'd say that observing the behaviour of the
> 'overinvolved' just might raise a 'red flag' to some and thereby reduce
> the risk of negative outcomes IF LEC's 'business model' does not
> change.
Un-fucking-believable, Jim.
After how (?) many years and how (?) many thoughtful, concerned people
who have patiently responded to your queries, you still grasp this
sorry bit of crap and hold it to your chest as the holy grail, and by
that I mean: LEC has some "problems" with its "business model," A
*few* nutjobs tend to get overly involved and then have "problems," and
once in a very great while someone goes off the deep end for which
there is probably some explanation involving a personal failing,
weakness, or undisclosed history of mental illness. Not once, not one
single reference, not one tiny bit of recognition that there are fatal
flaws in the IDEOLOGY of the stupid thing. Above and beyond any single
anecdote or individual tragedy, it is a philosophical edifice
constructed on shifting sand, quicksand, swamp gas, or the putrifying
mass of bogus "mind-cure" hogwash that started a hundred years ago.
I highly recommend you go back and reread every one of Gingertigger's
posts, though she obviously has no interest in any futher
correspondance with you.
Ellen
Eldonbraun
> This and a number of other specific examples of 'overinvolved' people
> tended to confirm for me that there was something going on within the
> 'overinvolved' community (similar to what has been discussed here
> regarding conformance etc) that I thought (and continue to think) may
> be specific to this segment of the LEC 'community' (the overinvovled
> segment that is).
Jim, this is where I differ. Sure, I think there is a segment of the
general populace made up of people who are susceptible and vulnerable
to becoming overinvolved. Call it "addictive personality disorder" or
whattever you wish. However, I don't think this is a double-edged sword
for LEC and similar groups at all. It's their target audience. The
programs are purposely designed to attract, ensnare and enslave these
people. Others who can take the indoctrination with a grain of salt and
walk away tend to underestimate the danger, I think. Back to blaming
the victim.
Cults don't just enourage this excessive involvement, they nurture it
and require it-- ideologically and socially. That's how cult leaders
set things up, and that's why I think they're more dangerous than you
do. Sociopathy is to some extent contagious. If you're immune or just
got a sniffle, congratulations.
Estie
> u might like this one from Edward Abbey
>
> Anarchism is founded on the observation that since few men are wise
> enough to rule themselves, even fewer are wise enough to rule others.
I like that one. :)
I don't think anarchy is workable, though. You need some kind of
"leadership" structure just as a way of getting things done. "Decision
by committee" is almost impossible. I think what we need is a better
system of accountability from our "leaders".
Estie
Eldonbraun
> HAPPYsamurai wrote:
> > u might like this one from Edward Abbey
> >
> > Anarchism is founded on the observation that since few men are wise
> > enough to rule themselves, even fewer are wise enough to rule others.
>
> I like that one. :)
Have you read much Edward Abbey? Mind-twisting stuff. His background is
interesting. His parents were controversial socialists in Pennsylvania.
http://www.wilderness.net/index.cfm?fuse=feature0406
"Much of his writing was so controversial that even some groups of
environmentalists rebuked his stance. Abbey was known to throw beer
cans from his car because the highway he was traveling had already
ruined the landscape surrounding it. He wrote essays degrading western
farming and ranching methods and yet he was a proponent of the National
Rifle Association."
HAPPYsamurai
> Blind faith brings comfort to some.
the purpose of a hospital is to fix people up and send them on their
way not farm them for money
Dakota
And it's not limited to insight-type organizations. This behavior can
be seen in newly-minted MBAs who believe they have "answers" to bring
to business, new teachers who seek to "shape children's minds," and so
forth. It's that same "something" operating, where people come to feel
new knowledge will enable them to make a difference in the world.
Eldon spreads data to the world through his reporting, and I spread it
through my research. Some people continue to see value in LEC and have
worked in the organization for many years, just as some people become
public servants and do the same. Say what you will about the U.S.
president, but he obviously has his backers--51% of voters in the last
election--while 49% would like to run him out of town on a rail. It
reminds me of the "pro-LE" and "anti-LE" *sides.*
Cody
Eldonbraun
> And it's not limited to insight-type organizations. This behavior can
> be seen in newly-minted MBAs who believe they have "answers" to bring
> to business, new teachers who seek to "shape children's minds," and so
> forth. It's that same "something" operating, where people come to feel
> new knowledge will enable them to make a difference in the world.
> Eldon spreads data to the world through his reporting, and I spread it
> through my research. Some people continue to see value in LEC and have
> worked in the organization for many years, just as some people become
> public servants and do the same. Say what you will about the U.S.
> president, but he obviously has his backers--51% of voters in the last
> election--while 49% would like to run him out of town on a rail. It
> reminds me of the "pro-LE" and "anti-LE" *sides.*
Oh, thanks for reminding me of that distinction, Cody. It's important.
In politics, the dollar vote puts someone in office for four to eight
years or more (terms may vary). Inpeachment unlikely, and you can
pardon your buddies if you have to resign.
But if I can diminsh the gross revenues of certain insight-type
organizations or similar predatory crime corporations by 49% --
Whoooopie! Gotcha, kiddos.
See, one has to talk to them in their own language. Follow the money
and all that. It's sorta like weight reduction. A certain degree of
starvation is involved, and hopefully the healthier cells may survive.
But if not, Sayonara on the karmic astral plane anyway as they say,
mothafuckas.
Estie
jim_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> This and a number of other specific examples of 'overinvolved' people
> tended to confirm for me that there was something going on within the
> 'overinvolved' community (similar to what has been discussed here
> regarding conformance etc) that I thought (and continue to think) may
> be specific to this segment of the LEC 'community' (the overinvovled
> segment that is).
>
> I'm still of the opinion that, excluding acute reactions, that many of
> the negative outcomes are the result of ongoing and excessive
> invovlvment. Of course this is something of a double edged sword for
> LEC. They are ultimately responsible for encouraging this ongoing and
> excessive involvement, yet their current model sort of 'requires'
> same. This is clearly something that LEC needs to deal with.
There are a number of variations going on here that "maybe those people
were brainwashed (or something like it), but *NOT ME*".
Estie
Glam
LOL.
And it was their own fault, those brainwashed people, because they had
some sort of predisposition to go overboard...not like me, because *I*
quit/got tossed out/ after 2 years/10 years/5 years/1.34 years/doing
GSLP/doing SELP/getting involved in the enrollment game/getting
involved in the assisting game/completing my research/joining another
cult/checking out the e-meter/becoming obsessed with big pharma/turning
my attention to endlessly defending LEC online.
Yup, I sure wasn't brainwashed!
Glam
Tex
> jim_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>> This and a number of other specific examples of 'overinvolved' people
>> tended to confirm for me that there was something going on within the
>> 'overinvolved' community (similar to what has been discussed here
>> regarding conformance etc) that I thought (and continue to think) may
>> be specific to this segment of the LEC 'community' (the overinvovled
>> segment that is).
>
> Jim, this is where I differ. Sure, I think there is a segment of the
> general populace made up of people who are susceptible and vulnerable
> to becoming overinvolved. Call it "addictive personality disorder" or
> whattever you wish. However, I don't think this is a double-edged sword
> for LEC and similar groups at all. It's their target audience. The
> programs are purposely designed to attract, ensnare and enslave these
> people. Others who can take the indoctrination with a grain of salt and
> walk away tend to underestimate the danger, I think. Back to blaming the
> victim.
I think you are probably right here. I don't know if the intent is evil or
just a business taking the easy road out.
I'm sure they make a huge amount of their profit on the repeat customers.
On another newsgroup people have suggested I review the Forum and take the
Advanced course.
I never understood why people who "got it" and found out "all that mystical
stuff was just what's so""would need to review and review and review at a an
additional cost.
I simply saw them as "seminar junkies." Perhaps I was being to harsh. {:~D
Tex
"Estie" <old_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1150160668....@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Talking about ADDING something that's not there.
>
> Estie
>
Markus Welch
This is exactly where the reader should stop 'his listening bucket' to use
your idiotic terms. The alarms go off there, for your information.
The objective audience does not care what you happen to put in the
'sociopathological bucket' ~graduate~. That ~fact~ of your putting
anything into a bucket is not a fact at all. Are you figuring that out yet,
or are you going to defend your experience and higher level of consciousness
thanks to the ~training~ here for another 25 years? Nonsense!!! What
garbage!!!!
<Snipped the rest of the bullshit>
Eldonbraun
> LOL.
>
> And it was their own fault, those brainwashed people, because they had
> some sort of predisposition to go overboard...not like me, because *I*
> quit/got tossed out/ after 2 years/10 years/5 years/1.34 years/doing
> GSLP/doing SELP/getting involved in the enrollment game/getting
> involved in the assisting game/completing my research/joining another
> cult/checking out the e-meter/becoming obsessed with big pharma/turning
> my attention to endlessly defending LEC online.
>
> Yup, I sure wasn't brainwashed!
Miss Manners just contacted me telepathically, and specifically
requested that I congratulate you on your tact. Yes, you were perhaps
more susceptible by nature, and yet may have been unduly manipulated.
As you may have noticed, Tex has admitted that there might be a bit of
unwarranted beguilement hanky-panky by certain people. Jim may be
thinking, thinking, thinking about it. We have to deprogram them
gradually you see.
However, Miss Manners says you were too abrasive, Markus. Try, try
again. Maybe Ayn Rand can help you with that ;-)
Meanwhile, as a FREE! Bonus Offer, I will include a large bottle of
bleach when I receive Bruno's order for that drum of industrial grade
silicone and the slightly used syringes. Bruno, let's have a conference
call and I'm sure we can work out a deal that will be mutually
beneficial.
Want me to e-mail the testimonial from Carol Doda? No problema. She now
runs a lingerie shop on Union Street in San Francisco, BTW. At one time
she did newscast announcements for a Bay Area UHF (read telepathic,
sort of ) TV station, that called itself "The Perfect 36."
Then again, I once came up with what I thought was a masterful jingle
to save the failing Oakland Tribune newspaper, in conjunction with a
major music chameleon named Ed Bogas. The punch line, following a
march-music recitation of various suburban municipalities, was:
"We... read... YOU !" No shit. I thought that was pretty good,
actually.
Dakota
People frame everything based on their own perceptions, interests, and
perspectives. I work in a position where continuing to learn is
rewarded, so the more classes, workshops, seminars, degrees,
certifications, etc. one has, the more one is valued and consulted for
certain activities. Maybe it takes an "education addict" to be
successful in such an environment. "Leadership addicts" continully
seek new opportunities to "demonstrate leadership," "disease addicts"
endlessly research diseases, etc. In their jobs, being an "addict" of
a certain kind is just the ticket, or at least that's what the
"management addicts" (who tirelessly implement performance measures,
count the beans, etc.) think!
So I wouldn't consider you too harsh. You were just referring to one
instance of "addict" (from your perspective).
Cody
Tex
"Markus Welch" <mar...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:u2tjg.114388$dW3.1...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
Where did Jim or Eldon use the term "listening bucket" Markus?
> The alarms go off there, for your information.
>
> The objective audience does not care what you happen to put in the
> 'sociopathological bucket' ~graduate~. That ~fact~ of your putting
> anything into a bucket is not a fact at all. Are you figuring that out
> yet, or are you going to defend your experience and higher level of
> consciousness thanks to the ~training~ here for another 25 years?
> Nonsense!!! What garbage!!!!
Ferrous Cranus strikes again!!!!
http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm
Eldonbraun
> "Markus Welch" <mar...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:u2tjg.114388$dW3.1...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
> >
> > <jim_...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
> > news:1150124119....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >> Eldonbraun wrote:
> >>> Estie wrote:
> >>> > Eldonbraun wrote:
> >>> > > Reading the posts of Ellen, Estie and Glam, it seems pretty clear to
> >>> > > me
> >>> > > that they share a profound sense of betrayal. Isn't that the word?
> >>> >
> >>> > I think it would apply more to me, computer user, Larry, those of us
> >>> > who had high expectations, who really put our hearts into the
> >>> > organization and what it (supposedly) stood for. I most definitely
> >>> > felt deeply betrayed.
> >>> >
> >>> > My last letter from Werner said "I understand how you feel."
Er, let's back up just a bit to:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060609/tc_afp/franceushealth
This article is about a recent tech conference demo of an EEG skullcap
scanner that enables the wearer, without physical movement, to select
letters on a keyboard X-Y coordinate style, and type on a computer
through a software interface. Nice invention, but I don't see any
quadraplegics floating past the window yet. Maybe a Feng Shui
consultant could help with that.
Note the reference to "Elle Magazine editor Jean-Dominique Bauby [who],
after suffering a massive stroke, painstakingly 'dictated' a beautiful
and moving memoir by blinking his left eyelid.
"'The Diving Bell and the Butterfly,' published two days before he
died, became an international bestseller."
elle...@hotmail.com
Eldonbraun wrote:
> "'The Diving Bell and the Butterfly,' published two days before he
> died, became an international bestseller."
Wonderful book and one that should be read by everyone.
Ellen
jim_...@my-dejanews.com
elle...@hotmail.com wrote:
> jim_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > In the case of LEC I'd say that observing the behaviour of the
> > 'overinvolved' just might raise a 'red flag' to some and thereby reduce
> > the risk of negative outcomes IF LEC's 'business model' does not
> > change.
>
>
> Un-fucking-believable, Jim.
What is unbelievable is your attempt at revising what I am saying in
order to acheive what ever goals you have in mind. Your reply (below)
is your, admittedly clever, attempt at doing so.
>
> After how (?) many years and how (?) many thoughtful, concerned people
> who have patiently responded to your queries
you still grasp this
> sorry bit of crap and hold it to your chest as the holy grail, and by
> that I mean: LEC has some "problems" with its "business model,"
What I'm suggesting is that if 'participation' was limited to avoid
'overinvolvement' that perhaps (just perhaps) many of the problems
enumerated here and elsewhere would be eliminated. That observation
was made in an attempt to 'solve' a problem, not defend LEC (which
I've said ad nauseum is not my intent).
I find that potential solution to be much more likely to have a postive
impact on the issue of damage avoidance then anything I've seen thus
far. Of course 'putting out of business' all the various encarnations
of LGATs is a way, but I assert that the 'odds' of that are quite
small. But, heck, knock yourself out. I truly wish you luck in your
quest. You see, I actually couldn't 'give a rats ass' about LEC and
it's future, whether you 'believe' that or not.
I've suggested in the past that regulating LGAT activities is another
path to follow. I found little 'support' for that idea. If you know
anything about this option what you'd find out is that the mere threat
of impending regulations would go a long way toward having reforms done
'within an industry'. There is ample evidence that this 'works'.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<insert break for convenience>>>>>>>>>>>
A
> *few* nutjobs tend to get overly involved and then have "problems,"
Case in point. I NEVER said this AND YOU KNOW IT. Your formula
appears to be "Make the person with the opposing views look like an
insensitive and uncaring individual". That then creates a hostile view
in the reader, which strengthens the opposing arguement.
Other pseudo ad hominen attacks such as 'You're blaming the victum' are
likewise also used in a similar way.
LGAT apparently don't have a monopoly on attempts at influence
(coercive or otherwise).
> once in a very great while someone goes off the deep end for which
> there is probably some explanation involving a personal failing,
> weakness, or undisclosed history of mental illness.
More of the same.......
Not once, not one
> single reference, not one tiny bit of recognition that there are fatal
> flaws in the IDEOLOGY of the stupid thing. Above and beyond any single
> anecdote or individual tragedy, it is a philosophical edifice
> constructed on shifting sand, quicksand, swamp gas, or the putrifying
> mass of bogus "mind-cure" hogwash that started a hundred years ago.
Perhaps.
>
> I highly recommend you go back and reread every one of Gingertigger's
> posts, though she obviously has no interest in any futher
> correspondance with you.
Ah, Gingertigger. As I recall she 'was warned' about me and cut off
communications. I wonder who might have provided her with such a
warning (as if the I don't know)? Do you think that she was
'influenced' in that decision (to cut off communication)in any way by
the highly empathetic and unbiased people that frequent this newsgroup.
I understand and accept others views, including yours.
>
>
> Ellen>
Tex
<snip
>
>
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<insert break for convenience>>>>>>>>>>>
>
> A
>> *few* nutjobs tend to get overly involved and then have "problems,"
>
> Case in point. I NEVER said this AND YOU KNOW IT. Your formula
> appears to be "Make the person with the opposing views look like an
> insensitive and uncaring individual". That then creates a hostile view
> in the reader, which strengthens the opposing arguement.
>
> Other pseudo ad hominen attacks such as 'You're blaming the victum' are
> likewise also used in a similar way.
Welcome to our course entitled;
Strawman 101
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~lilyth/strawman.html
Let's take the following position: "Evolution has been the main engine of
speciation throughout natural history."
A person using a Straw Man against that position will intentionally make a
ridiculous caricature of evolution, one that only the most ignorant might
believe. These are the steps they might use to try to "disprove evolution".
Steps used in creating and using a straw man argument:
Step 1: Build the Straw Man: "Evolution is false! How could a mouse evolve
into an elephant!?"
Step 2: Knock down the Straw Man by any means necessary: "How could a mouse
evolve into an elephant? There would have to be billions of changes for that
to occur, and nobody has ever seen speciation anyway!"
Step 3: Connect the original position to the Straw Man:"So it's silly...who
has ever seen a mouse evolve into an elephant? Nobody!!"
Step 4: Claim to negate the opposing position by the connection in 3.
"Therefore, evolution must be false!"
HAPPYsamurai
> elle...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> What I'm suggesting is that if 'participation' was limited to avoid
> 'overinvolvement' that perhaps (just perhaps) many of the problems
> enumerated here and elsewhere would be eliminated. That observation
> was made in an attempt to 'solve' a problem, not defend LEC (which
> I've said ad nauseum is not my intent).
its a band aid
the problem runs deep in humanity
1... natural leaders need to be parented by everyone, to ensure their
ethical / character development
2.... the purpose of a charismatic group should be to teach people to
overcome their need for charismatic groups...
3 ....those "vulnerable" to these groups are as important members of
society as the natural leaders... they are an important peice of the
human ecosystem... and we do ourselves a disservice by not keeping them
safe from assholes
4... there are scam artists that take a REAL art or principle in life
and mix it with sales hype and hey presto... state of the art
whatsit.... bull... the road from child hood to adulthood is natural...
yes it is good to have groups that nuture adulthood and personal
evolution... but it is a natural process and putting the nurturing in
the hands of salesmen is not as good as several other options [which I
won't mention here]
5 yeh try and save this format if you like... but I would suggest its
built on rotten root stock
why not start from scratch and do it properly yourself?
6 my biggest regret is there are people here who are in a perfect
position to put together a really good self development course, because
they've seen the pitfalls...and yet they have been conditioned thru an
unsavoury experience to have a distaste for it
people who have done the apprenticeship, come up against their
conscience, seen how the potential power over others has to be balanced
be a REAL ethically developed state of being...
yet you contribute in other ways...
so again why fix the old one why not start again?
what a waste?
your living in the past... these days waste is considered good for the
economy
Estie
"overinvolvement" is the problem, you are defending Landmark. You're
saying that Landmark is okay. It's only the *people* who become
overinvolved who are the problem.
But, hey, I'm easy. I'll agree with you. Overinvolvement is the
problem. I'd say anyone who doesn't walk out of the Intro after the
first fifteen minues is "overinvolved". :)
I think people have thought this through more than you give them credit
for. Mandate regulations, take away the mind control elements, and
there wouldn't be enough left for anyone to pay attention to. Really.
If that had been a viable option, people would have proposed it long
ago.
Still looking for that ample evidence that Landmark "works."
Estie
Markus Welch
> Ummm, Jim, I think Ellen did get what you said. By saying that
> "overinvolvement" is the problem, you are defending Landmark. You're
> saying that Landmark is okay. It's only the *people* who become
> overinvolved who are the problem.
>
> But, hey, I'm easy. I'll agree with you. Overinvolvement is the
> problem. I'd say anyone who doesn't walk out of the Intro after the
> first fifteen minues is "overinvolved". :)
>
> I think people have thought this through more than you give them credit
> for. Mandate regulations, take away the mind control elements, and
> there wouldn't be enough left for anyone to pay attention to. Really.
> If that had been a viable option, people would have proposed it long
> ago.
>
> Still looking for that ample evidence that Landmark "works."
>
> Estie
Exactly Estie. He is an apologist who claims he is neutral, and implies
that neutrality is a superior position.
I might take that position if I were a former cult member and did not want
to admit it.
Estie
HAPPYsamurai wrote:
>
> 6 my biggest regret is there are people here who are in a perfect
> position to put together a really good self development course, because
> they've seen the pitfalls...and yet they have been conditioned thru an
> unsavoury experience to have a distaste for it
Slap Hap,
There already are legit self-improvement workshops offered locally in
large cities, usually by licensed clinical psychotherapists (MSW's).
Can't really get any better than that.
That's not what Jim (et al) wants. He wants TRANFORMATION!!! and
ENLIGHTENMENT!!! in one weekend! He wants his socks knocked off!
Estie
HAPPYsamurai
> Slap Hap,
>
> There already are legit self-improvement workshops offered locally in
> large cities, usually by licensed clinical psychotherapists (MSW's).
> Can't really get any better than that.
sheesh you cirty folks get awl thu gud stuff
>
> That's not what Jim (et al) wants. He wants TRANFORMATION!!! and
> ENLIGHTENMENT!!! in one weekend! He wants his socks knocked off!
be careful what you wish for....
the price of transformation is
transformation
the price of enlightenment is
enlightenment
the price of motherhood is
motherhood
the price of fatherhood is
fatherhood
the price [and reward] of growing up is
growing up
ooops i was gonna get more specific but I realised I could make money
out of it....
Eldonbraun
> 4... there are scam artists that take a REAL art or principle in life
> and mix it with sales hype and hey presto... state of the art
> whatsit.... bull... the road from child hood to adulthood is natural...
> yes it is good to have groups that nuture adulthood and personal
> evolution... but it is a natural process and putting the nurturing in
> the hands of salesmen is not as good as several other options [which I
> won't mention here]
>
> 5 yeh try and save this format if you like... but I would suggest its
> built on rotten root stock
> why not start from scratch and do it properly yourself?
Is that oleander root stock you're talking about? Hemlock? Poison ivy?
Anyway, I have to say I agree with you, Hap (and others).. It is a
structural problem that's pretty endemic within these organizations.
HAPPYsamurai
> Anyway, I have to say I agree with you, Hap (and others).. It is a
> structural problem that's pretty endemic within these organizations.
you'll be happy to know we'll solve ALL these problems on American Top
Cult TM and American Cult Idol TM
we're in this for the kids not just the ratings and the sensationalism
any cult that appears on one of my shows will be advised in the best
ways to overcome these problems [for the sake of ratings and the kids]
and the winning cult is bound to get my personal seal of approval
and you can take that to the bank
to quote kylie and robbie
And we'll paint by numbers
Till something sticks
Don't mind doing it for the kids
So come on
Jump on board
Take a ride, yeah
(You'll be doin' it alright)
Jump on board
Feel the high, yeah
'Cause the kids are alright
http://www.lyrics007.com/Kylie%20Minogue%20Lyrics/Kids%20(With%20Robbie%20Williams)%20Lyrics.html
Eldonbraun
> you'll be happy to know we'll solve ALL these problems on American Top
> Cult TM and American Cult Idol TM
>
> we're in this for the kids not just the ratings and the sensationalism
>
> any cult that appears on one of my shows will be advised in the best
> ways to overcome these problems [for the sake of ratings and the kids]
>
> and the winning cult is bound to get my personal seal of approval
This is why I think it's time for yet another website. There are so
many, but there's always room for one more. I think maybe a blog format
would be nice. There's quite a big of video stuff to link to after all.
I do take to heart Arianna Huffington's recent 5-word byte at the
Webbies -- "Dahling, make blogs, not war." I think that was it.
I mean, blogs do combine some good features of both regular sites and
discussion boards. Rick ross uses his "news" thing pretty much as a
link collection. Useful and all, but not interactive.
This seal of approval bit would be good. We could also have a "Name
that cult" contest with bits of obscure trivia about the teachings.
This cult leader's first wife was named...." Stuff like that.
As for the kids, the Avatar group still has a site up, but it looks
like nothing has been done to it for almost three years now.
http://www.resurfacingined.com/
Tex
>
> "Estie" <old_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1150349442....@r2g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> Ummm, Jim, I think Ellen did get what you said. By saying that
>> "overinvolvement" is the problem, you are defending Landmark. You're
>> saying that Landmark is okay. It's only the *people* who become
>> overinvolved who are the problem.
>>
>> But, hey, I'm easy. I'll agree with you. Overinvolvement is the
>> problem. I'd say anyone who doesn't walk out of the Intro after the
>> first fifteen minues is "overinvolved". :)
>>
>> I think people have thought this through more than you give them credit
>> for. Mandate regulations, take away the mind control elements, and
>> there wouldn't be enough left for anyone to pay attention to. Really.
>> If that had been a viable option, people would have proposed it long
>> ago.
>>
>> Still looking for that ample evidence that Landmark "works."
>>
>> Estie
>
> Exactly Estie. He is an apologist who claims he is neutral, and implies
> that neutrality is a superior position.
>
> I might take that position if I were a former cult member and did not want
> to admit it.
That explains you position on Ayn Rand then.
http://www.opencourtbooks.com/books_n/ayn_rand_cult.htm
The Ayn Rand Cult
Jeffrey Walker
In this daring debunking of Ayn Rand and her inner circle, Jeff Walker looks
at the woman behind The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged. He follows the
Objectivist movement from its beginnings in the 1940s, through its scandals
and schisms caused by Rand's volatile and domineering personality, to what
remains of it today. Shattering many myths about Rand, Walker exposes
Objectivism as a classic cult, unusual in its emphasis on self-interest,
rationality, and atheism, but typical of cults in its guru worship, thought
control, trial and excommunication of deviants, and hostility to the outside
world.
"Devastating. . . a useful corrective to the Rand mystique."
-Publishers Weekly
"Conveys vividly the frightful mess that was Ayn Rand."
-Kirkus Reviews
"An absorbing portrait of the still-thriving Rand movement. Walker provides
some striking glimpses of the Randians [who] take themselves so seriously
that they will never be in danger of understanding how amusing the rest of
the world finds them."
-Robert Fulford, Globe & Mail
"A valuable and original contribution to Rand studies He analyzes the
Objectivist movement, Rand's leadership role, and the politics of her inner
circle in terms of the cult dynamic. This analytical perspective avoids the
common extremes of hagiography and vilification that mark many accounts of
Rand's schismatic movement. A solid contribution to 20th-century
intellectual history."
-Library Journal
elle...@hotmail.com
jim_...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
(snip)
> Ah, Gingertigger. As I recall she 'was warned' about me and cut off
> communications. I wonder who might have provided her with such a
> warning (as if the I don't know)? Do you think that she was
> 'influenced' in that decision (to cut off communication)in any way by
> the highly empathetic and unbiased people that frequent this newsgroup.
It wasn't me who dropped the dime on you, Jim. I was much too
interested and curious to see if she would be able to reach you. She
was as patient, as polite, and as courteous as humanly possible. It
seemed she just didn't want to get into it with another LEC-head as
she'd already done enough of that.
>
> I understand and accept others views, including yours.
No you don't, Jim. Quit kidding yourself. You do somersaults and turn
yourself into a pretzel to protect something that involves your own ego
which has been covertly fused with the Landmark brand. Please read
"Attacks on Peripheral versus Central Elements of Self and the Impact
of Thought Reform" if you haven't already done so.
Ellen
Eldonbraun
> > that neutrality is a superior position.
> >
> > I might take that position if I were a former cult member and did not want
> > to admit it.
>
> That explains you position on Ayn Rand then.
Well, I read some of Ayn Rand's stuff back in college. I find it easy
to see why, as a Jewish girl whose family was persecuted by the
Bolsheviks, she was perturbed by Russian communism and all that. So she
wanted to make her point loud and clear.
However, I must say that calling Emmanuel Kant a "monster" who totally
perverted modern civilization might have been seen as a bit
temperamental. But there I go sounding like Kant again, dammit! ;-)
Tex
LOL!!!
You have just made yourself the "enemy" of all Objectivists on this message
board. {:~D
>