kdag,
What I see in your posts and those of so many others who have reported on their Landmark experience is:
1) behavior (of leaders) that is characterized by secrecy and subterfuge -- what you see, or what you are told,is NOT what you get.
2) covert agendas, and the manipulation of the agendas of individual participants, meaning the 'promise' is that participants will attain their goals, but these individual agendas are subtly directed and coerced such that they align with Landmark's larger vision.
3) on a larger organizational front, Landmark (or est before it) seems to create or involve itself in large-scale 'global' transformation projects, e.g. The Hunger Project, or in conjunction with an ecumenical religious group, The Mastery Project. Individual participation in Landmark seems to 'need' to escalate into participation in these large-scale agendas, and I suspect there are many.
So,one has to imagine that these 'visions' are being cooked at the higher rungs of the ladder, and in the context of closely guarded 'meetings' and 'trainings'. Individuals leaders of these agendas would have to fully indoctrinated, under total control of Landmark. The would be its 'actors'.
In writing this, I am thinking back to individuals I have known who simply wanted to develop coaching skills (a professional development agenda), and within six months of participation in a 'coaching school', were describing to me, with great urgency, their need to participate in some socio-political mission in a foreign country, or, describing some dramatic change in their political or religious/spiritual worldview.
So, it seems to start with a personal agenda, a reasonable/doable one, and escalate to a socio/political/spiritual agenda of grandiose proportions.
At this point, I can almost gauge the level of indoctrination according to the level of grandiosity of vision.
e.g.,
As a coach, I might wish to focus on a research or community project that will bring more light and understanding regarding the challenges of women working in a certain environment; the goal being to facilitate some reasonable change...
For the indoctrinated, the mission would sound like, "I am working to liberate women GLOBALLY"...(always intangible, always vague, always grandiose)
bakkagirl
What I see in your posts and those of so many others who have reported on their Landmark experience is:
1) behavior (of leaders) that is characterized by secrecy and subterfuge -- what you see, or what you are told,is NOT what you get.
2) covert agendas, and the manipulation of the agendas of individual participants, meaning the 'promise' is that participants will attain their goals, but these individual agendas are subtly directed and coerced such that they align with Landmark's larger vision.
3) on a larger organizational front, Landmark (or est before it) seems to create or involve itself in large-scale 'global' transformation projects, e.g. The Hunger Project, or in conjunction with an ecumenical religious group, The Mastery Project. Individual participation in Landmark seems to 'need' to escalate into participation in these large-scale agendas, and I suspect there are many.
So,one has to imagine that these 'visions' are being cooked at the higher rungs of the ladder, and in the context of closely guarded 'meetings' and 'trainings'. Individuals leaders of these agendas would have to fully indoctrinated, under total control of Landmark. The would be its 'actors'.
In writing this, I am thinking back to individuals I have known who simply wanted to develop coaching skills (a professional development agenda), and within six months of participation in a 'coaching school', were describing to me, with great urgency, their need to participate in some socio-political mission in a foreign country, or, describing some dramatic change in their political or religious/spiritual worldview.
So, it seems to start with a personal agenda, a reasonable/doable one, and escalate to a socio/political/spiritual agenda of grandiose proportions.
At this point, I can almost gauge the level of indoctrination according to the level of grandiosity of vision.
e.g.,
As a coach, I might wish to focus on a research or community project that will bring more light and understanding regarding the challenges of women working in a certain environment; the goal being to facilitate some reasonable change...
For the indoctrinated, the mission would sound like, "I am working to liberate women GLOBALLY"...(always intangible, always vague, always grandiose)
bakkagirl
