Powerful vs. Pitfall when Introducing Reform
Here are some notes on reactions to be aware of when sharing the reform conversation.
As the reform conversation is outside of many agreements that are commonly held in the active Landmark community, a reform advocate will sometimes find themselves in communication with someone who is upset about the conversation.
Be aware of the following features of some of the agreement around Landmark:
1) The agreement is unconscious.
Those in agreement believe the agreement is “what is so” and do not get that it’s just their story about what is so.
2) There is emotional attachment to the agreement.
Many people are in love with the Landmark that they have created inside the story of their agreement, and people often fall out of possibility when their loved ones are called into question (even when you both want what’s best for them). Even if you do nothing to “challenge” anyone, some people will feel that their views have been challenged.
3) Agreement is always backed up by a plausible story. As such, demonstrating that the agreement does not necessarily reflect reality requires dialog and a degree of openness from the person in agreement.
4) Because skeptics and questioners tend to drop out over time, the deeper the level of involvement in Landmark, the greater the level of agreement that is likely to be present. By the nature of the program, ILP participants overall seem to have a higher degree of attachment to Landmark story and agreement.
People often fall out of possibility and react negatively when something they are attached to is called into question. A “something is wrong” feeling is triggered in the person with attachment to their agreement, and coming from “something is wrong” has them outside of power and possibility. The person then seeks to restore the agreement by neutralizing that which is out of agreement. This shows up as people questioning you personally or making you wrong and/or feeling compelled to counter with nice stories about Landmark.
Here is an example from a dialog that I once had.
A former introduction leader had read one of my essays on reform and we began a dialog. As the conversation continued with little progress, I was informed that all questioning or resistance to Landmark (not just mine, but everyone’s, every time) is being right with an already always listening, frequently exacerbated by a strong suit. I was also informed that the entire Reformers Yahoo Group (maybe 60 members at that time) was machinery, operating entirely in blind spot and inauthenticity, not from power and possibility. My counterpart was completely out of possibility in the conversation, made all the grads wrong, and had no listening for the possibilities of reform.
Among those immersed in the Landmark community, there is an observable pattern of otherwise generous and powerful people dropping completely out of possibility upon exposure to the reform conversation.
Common out-of-possibility reactions to reform include:
1) Citing unsubstantiated stories to back up the agreement.
2) Making the reformer wrong through question or accusation.
3) Citing superior inside knowledge (i.e. if you knew or did X, you would not support reform)
4) Dismissing reform as "fixing" or "changing" or "making Landmark wrong."
5) Dismissing the graduate-led aspect of reform (i.e. that one must rely on Landmark leadership to get anything done or that Landmark is already dealing powerfully with every issue of concern).
6) Dismissing reform as something that many people have tried before and failed.
7) A last resort of those out of possibility in terms of reform is to simply say that the conversation is not inspiring and to discontinue the dialog.
Patience is a virtue in a reformer, for we have many years of machinery and many layers of defense to break through. Do not be attached to the outcome of introducing reform or hold expectations that everything will go smoothly, for this is a recipe for upset.
Powerful and positive communication of reform requires that we not follow others out of possibility. If someone makes you wrong for suggesting reform or attempts to change the conversation with story, ask if you can return the conversation to the substance of reform.
Please share your experiences of where you see out-of-possibility resistance to the reform conversation as well as what works for powerfully communicating our possibilities.
Labels: Landmark Education
posted by ML @ 7:08 AM
18 Comments:
I just got out of landmark and i feel free. i start to get my brain back. it was pure brainwahing and it is painful to see what they have done to me and what they are still doing to my friends that are still inside.
There is no reform landmark could take. It has to stop. it has to disappear. people are entlited to freedom. they are entitled to their brains. to their thoughts. to critical thinking. to opinions. to evaluation. and they should be respected for that. their opinion should be respected, not trashed as 'something they made up'.
You are up to thought reform, not possibility reform. What is going on in landmark is horrible. but as landmark people always say, can a fish see the water?
I am not saying this to upset you. only to show you my point of view. and i am proud of the ability to formulate opinions. i don't see logic and intelligence as a machinery.
if this does upset you, don't worry. As soon as you finish reading this, you'll remember it's all a racket. you'll remember it's all a story. you'll remember transformation IS possible. you'll remember that my saying 'it is a brainwashing' is only a story. you'll invent a new possibility, and you'll feel touched, moved and inspired. and right as rain.
and you'll pity me for being 'out of possibility'. but that's ok.
no hard feelings.
it's not you. you're innocent like all the others. and i still love you all. and i pray i get out of that evil corporation.
all the best.
I wish i could sign with my name. now i am proud of it again. but i wouldn't like a cease and desist letter.
an ex-grad.
Dear Ex-Grad: Please contact me off line. I would like to discuss if we can channel your passion in a positive direction. Reformers are not upset by comments such as yours. Indeed, that feelings such as yours are common is the impetus for reform. Also, you needn't be concerned about cease and desist letters for expressing your opinion as you have, and in any case, I will keep any e-mail address or related information confidential.
thank you for your offer.
but i refuse to be channeled any longer.
i am in a positive direction. is outside of landmark.
i am going back to the people i love. i am not gonna bring them in a cult-ish group.
i am not going to hard sell ready-to-eat happyness.
i am not gonna be put in controlled environments with perfect rows and everything clean.
i am not gonna adopt a loaded language to limit my mental process.
i am not gonna swear blind obedience to manipulators.
i am not gonna suffer group pressure, the cult of confession, the sacred science, the doctrine over person and all the other tools of coercive persuasion/thought reform.
i am really sorry but i can't.
it's a price far way too high for a happiness that is just a short illusion created by a piloted resolution of a cognitive dissonance.
it's a price far way too high for a power that is only a behavioural programming.
it's a price i can't pay.
this is not jargon. i'm not using the big words above to show off. i just re-realised that knowledge IS power. access to the things-you-don't-know-and-you-don't-know-that-you-don't-know, that's the access to being a puppet. a zealot.
i am not writing this in rage. i am writing this in bitterness. i am writing this in sadness.
now i wanna move on and take back my real life.
i am sorry, but i cannot contact you. it would be a pleasure, but i can't. someday a leader will break you down and you'll confess your inauthenticity and pass my name to the landmark lawyers. they'll humiliate you, if they need these names. they'll bully you until they'll have them. and then, it will be YOUR fault, YOUR racket, and you'll drop it, and give them my name, and thank them for the breakthrough, and be happy for the possility that they'll open up for me when they find me. They'll do it. If you don't have my name, you'll be fine and i'll be safe.
Leave landmark. Right now. Freedom is out. I can't post anymore. i'll draw the attention of the rosenbergs. they have their 'assistants' monitoring all these messages. And they don't spare anyone. i can't afford a lawyer.
I repeat: leave landmark right now.
Good luck. it's been a pleasure.
ex-grad
Your effort to reform Landmark is to be commended and is one of the most reasonable voices on the net. I just do not understand why you would not start your own teaching instead of continuing to be attached to Landmark. I will draw a parallel to learning a language. Regardless of how you learned a language, your ultimate aim is to speak it and communicate; and where you learned it from would be irrelevant when you are having a conversation with someone. Landmark is not the only school of knowledge that will develop one self - to limit yourself to be attached to their school of thoughts or teachings when you have already "learned" it is, in Landmark's terms, taking yourself out of possibilities.
TP
TP,
Thank you for your comments. I am not attached to Landmark for my personal growth, and indeed, that is one of the points of reform...to clarify for all that Landmark is not THE answer. I have chosen to work for the reform of Landmark, for I fealt that a voice ("reasonable" if you will) has been missing from the conversation and I believe we can make a difference. Stay in touch.
personally I loved Landmark. I tool it few years ago and absolutely loved it! There is nothing negative about it, you can take it as far as you personally want to!
What has resulted from the petition. Have any of the points been significantly implemented by Landmark Education? Are LE Reformers still looking to implement the petition?
Thanks,
Enric
I support the mission of this blog.
My impression of Landmark, after involvement in several programs (Forum, Advanced Course, SELP, coaching the SELP, and assisting with a Forum):
1) It works. People who do the work transform their lives, and achieve breakthrough results in their way of being with their families and other loved ones.
2) It pushes sales too hard, turning off many people who would otherwise achieve transformation.
3) Some forum leaders abuse their authority to promote their political beliefs, which are generally leftward. While I sympathize with some of these beliefs, I think it's out of integrity to promote them in this context.
Michael James
Seattle, WA
USA
(posting from London)
ML
Like most on-line people who talk like you do , your words don't match your actions. You talk out of both sides of your face in an attempt to play both sides.
"ML said...
".....I am not attached to Landmark for my personal growth, and indeed, that is one of the points of reform...to clarify for all that Landmark is not THE answer....."
What is blatantly clear here is that you are attached to Landmark (or were, this is an old blog). In 2010 there are an untold number of options of where people can seek their training and development and spend their $. You have a choice. The only reason you would entrench yourself to one , like a woman who stays in a relationship she claims to not be happy in, is to be self righteous and ride a high horse or a victim horse. Staying trying to change the man is folly and every one knows it.
You could look for a community that operates EXACTLY the way you want and you will probably find it.
If you stick around, yes, you are running a infantile number on others all the while claiming the opposite.
If I am not happy with my PC, I will wish Bill gates well and switch to Apple, not dedicate my life to lobbying and bullying and manipulating Microsoft to change their computer and services to make me happy.
Landmark is ok just the way it is. If it was another way then it would be another way and it would not be Landmark. Go on staff and become a Landmark executive and get on the board of directors and you will capture my attention. Only then would I respect your voice on this subject and watch you bring about "reforms" and go along with you for the ride. Otherwise you are just a yapper with a grudge and a bored underused intellect and a keyboard and some distorted idea about the importance of your "brilliant opinions".
what would be remarkable ML, , would be to have YOU be made the CEO of Landmark Education worldwide today. To have YOU be solely accountable for all the training and developing of all staff, of all assistants, of the finances, of the delivery of every tiny facet of every single program, of all the graduates and all customers concerns and interests and the future of the company.
It would be interesting to hear your your point of view after you have been in that seat for 24 hours.
I predict you would get very quiet and never casually utter another word about Landmark Education.
It's hard to find possibility in the recent anonymous comments. When Landmark defenders are reactive and upset, it demonstrates the case for reform.
For over a year there's been a few, maybe just one or two persons posting on YouTube with different accounts that harass in comments anyone critical of Landmark. Their method of harassing questions has shown up under Anonymous posts on other sites questioning Landmark like http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.landmark, the comments on http://www.eastbayexpress.com/eastbay/i-am-annoyed-and-disappointed/Content?oid=1370662, comments on http://shambook.blogspot.com/2010/03/landmark-forum-in-largely-its-own-words_05.html and other sites critical. When engaged the responses are circular, repetitive and harassing.
This harassment appears to be a softer method of the lawyer notices to journalist articles and DMCA notices on videos critical of Landmark.
Another characteristic of the Anonymous poster is removing their harassing comments after about a week. This was the response Anonymous put up to my post and removed some days later:
"Enric, why do you frame dissenting views that choose to question your 20+ year campaign to malign and invalidate est, Werner Erhard and Landmark Education, as "harassment"? Why are you so desperate to silence critics of your sacred point of view? "
These responses seem to not be for others to read. They're usually filled with false accusations as this one is. But just to attack the critical poster.
Enric, I removed a couple of the anonymous posts that I found to be unproductive venting or lashing out by someone upset by this conversation. I have never received a legal notice from Landmark over years of posting. Perhaps because I aim to be constructive and precise in my overall approach and criticisms, or perhaps due to the remarks of the Landmark CEO thanking us for our commitment. I have received a lot of nasty messages from active Landmark participants who are upset by the reform approach. On the surface, the odd things to me about these messages are:
1) They completely violate numerous Landmark ideas, such as the cautions against making others wrong or acting as though the story in your head is reality and so on. Ironically, the inherent hypocrisy sheds doubt about the benefits of Landmark that such people are seeking to defend.
2) Given these clear violations, it's odd to me that other 'grads' don't speak up about it (i.e. to say, "You and I may not agree with ML, but let's be responsible about our upset or disagreement; can we pass judgement on another person's possibility?"). Below the surface, such negative reactions are very normal defensive sorts of expressions, which could be found in discussions of just about any group about which people are passionate.
ML,
Thanks for updating me on the status of Anonymous' messages.
Best,
Enric
ML, your take on what landmark is and isn't, seems quite different from mine and most people I know.
"...1) They completely violate numerous Landmark ideas, such as the cautions against...."
"...2) Given these clear violations,...."
Landmark does not provide nor espouse rules nor dogma nor "cautions" for living that can be "violated" or followed. And thank goodness for that. When related to in the way you are suggesting, one is left with yet one more ideology that when it appears to fail is now a thing to blame for not being true. A pitfall of transformation that you seem to have fallen into. "Distinctions" are for invention and self application only, when one chooses for oneself to pick up a point of view, and they are NOT true, NOT correct and NOT real. No graduate is obligated to burden themselves with some new religious code of conduct as your comments suggest. People get what they get and do what they do with what they get from Landmark, and your opinion of that is of no consequence to me or to most people. Graduates are free to use what they get or dont get from Landmark in any way they choose.
I agree that we are free to do with Landmark what we wish. At the same time, we know that Landmark cautions ("mentions numerous times", if you prefer) that making wrong or making up stories are ways of avoiding responsibility or communicating without power. That you choose to do such things in this conversation and the manner in which you do them is revealing and instructive (i.e. as an example of Power vs. Pitfall). What's the impact of many Landmark grads (certainly not you alone) choosing to be insulting and dismissive of others in public forums? Does it make one feel the power and possibility of transformation? Does it protect the image of Landmark? Is it just a drag? Or does it contradict and take away from what the Landmark community could be about? Choose wisely.
Post a Comment
<< Home