Landmark Education Corporation. Started in 1985 with the old est "technology". Headed up by Harry Rosenberg, who is the brother of est founder Werner Erhard. This particular group was originally known as Landmark Forum, which is now just the name of the initial (and most popular) training course they offer. In other countries (USA, Australia, Netherlands) Landmark Education has made a name for itself for suing those who publish information about it. Landmark Education competes with Neuro-linguistic Programming. Landmark enthusiasts claim that the courses are non-religions but The Watchman Expositor comments: "For those unaware of EST (Erhard Seminar Training), known to the business world as "The Forum," it is one of many New Age organizations based on hard-core pantheism." Landmark Education's strongly New Age beliefs can be recognised in some of its teachings – for example:

You are God in your universe. You caused it. You pretended not to cause it so that you could play in it, and you can remember you caused it any time you want to.

This report from a Landmark researcher:

Landmark borrows very heavily on a large number of other very successful and well-proven [albeit often erroneous] ideas and beliefs putting then all into one package. The ideas they borrow come from diverse fields such as Zen Buddhism, Dale Carnegie, the New Age, Scientology and L Ron Hubbard, etc.

Their courses are hideously overpriced. Basically you are placed in a classroom setting for up to 14 hours per day over three and a half days being subjected to intense peer pressure from "volunteer landmark workers" – they call them coaches. During this 14 hour day (yes 14 hours) you WILL NOT be provided with any written material at all (take your own notes), neither will Landmark supply you with any refreshments (except water) at all. Not bad considering you paid them NZ$500, is it?

Landmark Corporation is a dubious organisation that preys on the vulnerable people in society (people with personal issues mainly – eg, I don’t love myself, or my parents, or my partner).

Landmark does absolutely no discernable marketing in New Zealand via any of the main stream media (radio, television, print). Their primary way of marketing is via pyramid selling of attendees signing people up for for what is called the communication course.

Do not be fooled at all, the communication course curriculum from Landmark states quite clearly that the object of your communication is to phone as many people as possible and get them to sign up for a Landmark course. This is all cleverly disguised as getting you to communicate better and is backed up by occasional short classroom sessions.

Due to a slightly secretive nature (they certainly would not respond to any of my queries), it is very hard to gauge how large they are, but they are certainly very active in Christchurch, Wellington, Hamilton and Auckland.

It's possible that Landmark's various courses are run slightly differently. For example, the matter of written notes appears to be up for debate – in contrast to the above report, a correspondent claims no note taking at all is allowed in the beginner courses: "Participants are provided with a written Syllabus, and it is a strict ground rule of the Forum is that they do not take any notes. However, in all subsequent courses they run, including the Advanced Course, note taking is permitted." Prices also vary; one correspondent reported he paid $575 for a course in Melbourne (presumably Australian dollars). He also mentioned the course was "12 hours per day for three days and one needs to be present for that whole time to benefit from it." Similarly, Laura McClure says her course (US$500) was allowed "just one meal break per 13-hour session," and it and the shorter toilet breaks each had its own assignment to complete. Seminar attendees are allowed very little time to think for themselves and attendees are mocked and ridiculed if they stop out of line. The objective of the introductory course is to replace an attendee's individuality with Landmark's thought patterns. Jargon abounds. Time control, personality replacement, loaded language, deception, and fear, guilt and intimidation as used in the introductory courses (as indicated in Laura McClure's report or Milla Goldenberg's report) are classic mind control techniques.

For examples of some of Landmark Education's nonsensical, religious and self refuting teachings see this article. For more information and some great examples of how badly Landmark Education takes criticism, see the Landmark Education article at Apologetics Index, or the Skeptic's Dictionary Landmark article which points out "Those in need of psychotherapy should not participate in LGAT [Large Group Awareness Training] programs. They may be too intense for the emotionally fragile." A correspondent who did a course in about 2004 says "By the way you are discouraged from participating even if you’ve been to the doctor once claiming to be depressed." That's good to know, and they may have been getting even stricter; another correspondent who did her first course in 2009 writes "people sign a legal waiver regarding their mental health and their participation in the Forum in the registration forms." This is confirmed in an article by Laura McClure, which explains in more detail just what is agreed to:

I signed a six-page disclaimer in which I declared that I understood that after attending the Forum, people with no history of mental or emotional problems had experienced "brief, temporary episodes of emotional upset ranging from heightened activity...to mild psychotic-like behavior."

Remember, that's Landmark Education themselves saying that. Landmark Education well deserves its Danger rating.

	Danger: The group/person or belief/practice is considered dangerous due to mind control or particularly bad doctrine. These groups (or people) have a strong tendency to damage their members/followers.
	Hot Topic: The group/person or belief/practice has recently featured in the secular news media, has generated notable correspondence, is a popular conversation topic, etc. Note that this rating has nothing to do with the "cultishness" of a group.

Printed on 20 January 2021 at www.cults.co.nz.
Close window