Chapter 1
A General Response to Challenges of Neo-Tech
A 1995 Response
From: cjensen@soka.edu (Clark Jensen)
To: neo-talk@zonpower.com
Subject: Let's grow up already
Response to General Challenges
For more than 2500 years, conscious beings on earth have lived with the disease of irrationality. Now, in the year 1995, we have not only made a first time identification of the disease and cure, we have identified the concept that "mocks even itself" and realize how we all create and then individually live in a criminal civilization.
In 1995, individuals are free to communicate in cyberspace and thus, through lists such as this, create an atmosphere (and civilization) that is free of criminal politics and irrational influences.
Neo-Tech oriented individuals already know much about the disease of irrationality, but none have cured it. Each individual suffers an anticivilization and accepts it. Even on lists like this, each individual is alone in his or her honesty. Many of us experience negative effects of the anticivilization. For instance, any time we observe someone act with any degree of hidden laziness, or anytime we watch the news, etc.
The spark of Zon exists in many of us now. The paradoxically, absurd, ridiculous, grotesqueness that we all embrace is highly evident to us. But even cyberspace is not a competitive atmosphere for becoming Zons. At least not right now.
My message is to those who realize our situation:
HEY, lets wake up everybody !! What in the world are we all doing sitting here in an anticivilization when we could be passionately free in the Civilization of the Universe! Come on now, lets all just wake up from this trance of mysticisms. We got great things to do, great relationships to build, great obstacles to overcome. Forget the obstacle of irrationality. That ain't no obstacle when you got the power of rationality! HEY, you are YOU! That's powerful and awesome. We all are so great, how can we all just sit around and not be ZONS? ZONPOWER is awesome, and so smart. Do you realize your absence of Zonpower? Do you envision your Zonpower? You should. Because Zonpower provides eternal happiness. Aren't any of you bold enough to step over the line to rationality? You assume you can't do it because you've never been to Civilization, at least, never been there and knew it. It also doesn't help that everyone else is so non-ZON.
So, Let's quit these boring academic discussions and start being honest with ourselves and each other. Let's grow up. I don't want to hear anymore academic discussions. We should be waking up, and posting about our attempts to be honest with ourselves. If I may make an analogy, Alcoholics get together because they all share an irrational problem, and burden, and they use each other's knowledge to rid themselves of or rationalize away the problem. Here in Cyberspace, we should be focusing on our common problem, the addiction to dishonest investments in an anticivilization. The first step is to recognize their is a problem that is out of control. I see almost no one stepping forward to admit their mysticism. Although discussions are sometimes interesting, they are seldom focused on the most important problem.
Let's redirect our focus everybody, in your own life, and more relevantly, reflected in the postings on the list. Let's remember the spark of Zon inside us and realize we are all stupidly accepting the anticivilization. If you moved to a fictitious America that was a Civilization of the Universe, then how could you hold on to your own dishonesties when surrounded by countless Zons and their Civilization of Zonpower? Today you are surrounded by the anticivilization. If no individual is courageous enough to step into the Civilization of the Universe, then perhaps competition may force or compel individuals into the civilization. Let us have the right attitude here at Neo-Talk.
Five Years later - Year 2000 Challenges and Responses
Re: NT-The World's Most Unique Cult? Pt. 2
Posted By: Marc Forrester <NT@mharr.force9.co.uk>
Date: Saturday, 19 February 2000, at 3:25 a.m.
In Response To: NT-The World's Most Unique Cult? Pt. 2 (Matt)
Challenge
AUTHORITARIAN- No -- FRW and MH do not command total loyalty or allegiance.
LEGALISTIC- No -- There are no tightly structured autocratic groups that govern both spiritual matters and the details of everyday living.
Response
And as far as I'm concerned, these two are the core of the useful meaning of the word 'cult'. The beliefs and values of any group of people are a matter for separate discussion - a cult is a totalitarian mind-control scam run by a small group of deeply sick people in order to drain the lives of the followers for wealth and power.
If, as you would have it, there is another kind of 'cult' which has none of the above, but consists of a formless group of like-thinking people in communication, that dilutes the word almost to meaninglessness. You're trying to broaden the scope of the word to include Neo-Tech because the word itself will still carry the emotional aura of its tighter definition.
Interestingly, that's the only 'attack' anyone ever makes on NT.
Challenge
OPPOSITIONAL-YES- "Their beliefs, practices, and values are counter to those of the dominant culture. They often place themselves in an adversarial role vis-a-vis major social institutions."
Response
No. Take any random NT person and another random person from their local dominant culture, and you'll find that the majority of their values match. The dominant culture doesn't value dishonesty, taxes, mysticism or death, they're just resigned to it all.
And there can't be a human alive who hasn't placed themselves in an adversarial role vis-a-vis some major social institution. Major social institutions have a marked tendency to be wrong.
Challenge
EXCLUSIVISTIC-YES-"Related to the oppositional character of cults is their elitism and exclusionism. The group is the only one that possesses the "truth" and therefore to leave the group is endangering one's salvation.
Response
No. There are other truths parallel to, intertwined with, and beyond NT. Some are being discovered under other labels like Extropianism and personal sovereign freedom, others will be realized in the future. NT is a way to heal the scars of the dark ages, not the one true way and ultimate truth.
That's zero out of the first four, by my count.
Challenge
Look, the truth is either FRW and MH are right or they're wrong about the C of U existing in the universe, right? But if they are right, according to them (Neo‑Tech, God-Man, Our World After 2001, The Book, etc.) then only those who are deemed as true producers, who have the true producer's "spirit" will be "granted" entrance into the eternal bliss of the C of U - What kind of fear does this instill then?
Response
Absolutely bugger all, my friend. I don't rely on the existence of a C of U, and I don't fear that should one exist, it would cast me into the fire for being an inexperienced child only a quarter century old. Only religious and cultist minds think this way, and we ain't that. Nothing like.
Challenge
After all, we all want to be one of the "chosen ones," no?
Response
Feck, no. We want to choose for ourselves.
Challenge
To refuse to become what NT defines as a "value producer" will endanger your eternal soul because you are then forfeiting your residence in the eternal C of U. Remember, no one else will be permitted.
Response
Says who? NTP? They don't have a direct line to the C of U. They're not aliens among us. It's just something they seem to believe.
Challenge
PERSECUTION CONSCIOUS-YES-To some degree-"Perceived persecution is one of the hallmarks of virtually all new religious movements. "NT expects and embraces persecution (understandable so) but of course this becomes a badge of honor for most groups in similar positions.
Response
No. We don't think the big bad world of normal society is out to get us, which is what this implies w.r.t cults. We expect persecution from those that we label as master neo-cheaters. Rational enough, surely? We would like to see them lose their jobs, after all.
Challenge
ANTI-SACERDOTAL-YES-Neo-Tech is "an organization comprised of lay people."
Response
Okay, one unarguable hit. So does that make your local chess club a cult?
Challenge
It is indeed the oppositional, and exclusivistic qualities, in fact, which cause the most concern and are arguably two of the more pernicious qualities of a cult anyway.
Response
Assuming for the sake of argument that NT is oppositional to society, (Heh) yes, I'd argue that this isn't pernicious. Society isn't perfect, and if everyone agreed with its current values it would stay exactly as it is forever. Would that be a good thing? Should everyone believe whatever CNN tells them to? Can you say George Orwell?
Challenge
BUT, the reality is that FRW, and his son MH, ARE the leaders of Neo-Tech ultimately. They are the ones who produce the writings, are considered the "authorities" on the Neo-Tech literature, run the company,
Response
No. Wrong, entirely wrong. They've written the writings, the writings are out there being read, and the readers are Neo-Tech. To call NTP its leaders is like calling Von Neumann the leader of the IT revolution.
Challenge
and set forth the system of beliefs, which have become, as I pointed out at the very beginning, a set of religious beliefs,
Response
By a definition that equates the phrase 'religious beliefs' with the phrase 'beliefs'. You're at it again.
Challenge
And who can deny the deafening hush and awestruck reverence that descended upon the 65 attendees of last fall's Neo-Tech Summit in Las Vegas when FRW entered the building-"Ladies and Gentlemen!" (I wasn't actually there, just taking artistic license to imagine)
Response
Ha! Well, at least you're honest. Well, I'd be quiet and awestruck if I Steve Wozniak walked into the local computer club. That doesn't mean I'd want to wash his feet with my hair.
Challenge
Now some may argue that Neo-Tech never claimed to be infallible. But is this true? Neo-Tech insists that their particular view and approach to life is the only valid one, and that ANYBODY else who refuses to get with the program, dispel all their mysticisms and live as a "Neothinker" is WRONG, and doomed, both in this life and the next.
Response
If they said that, we don't believe it. So how are we cultists?
Challenge
Nonetheless, as I've pointed out in my posts, my experience with Neo-Tech, and with the supernatural realm of existence, supernatural miracles I have witnessed with my own eyes, and my relationship to Christ, all completely nullify Neo-Tech's absolute insistence that there is no supernatural realm, that no "miracles" can possibly exist, etc. And I'll admit, back when I followed Neo-Tech that kind of illusory "control" that I thought I possessed was comforting as I lived in my hermetically-sealed off world of Neo-Tech. There most assuredly is something comforting about believing that you are in complete control.
Response
Matt, I believe from that comment on your 'hermetically-sealed off world of Neo-Tech' that you didn't click with NT the way most of us did. Rather, you converted to it as if it were a different religion. Of course it didn't work as a religion, (Because there were no other 'True Believers' continually reinforcing it with guilt trips and hypnotic rituals) and so you returned to your old one stronger in your faith than ever, as a result of a vision.
IE: A waking dream, caused by a trance or misfire of sleep paralysis. Have any of the miracles you witnessed left the physical world altered in permanent and inexplicable ways? Or are they all just perceptual? Did your vision of Jesus match perfectly with the image of him you already held? Did he tell you anything you didn't want to hear? Dreamsigns. Watch for the dreamsigns. Especially when the world around you seems exactly what you most deeply wish it to be.
Challenge
Moving on, then, to wrap up this section, I think we can all agree that NT claims to possess the "Ideal and practical means of resolving the problems afflicting the world," and that NT "provides converts with a clear sense of meaning, direction, and purpose for their minds and lives."
Response #1
No argument there. The difference is, what you get out of a cult is a bad credit rating. What you get out of Neo-Tech is a better world.
Response #2
Posted By: BC <Zon_Galt@mail.com>
Date: Sunday, 20 February 2000, at 2:30 a.m.
I thought I'd point out a major recurring problem which occurs when you come to these boards for debate: your guerilla-styled discussion tactics--and the far greater problem that rises from them.
This is probably the third time I've seen you do it (actually, there have been many, many more times). First on the 1st generation of the NTNs, then a little while ago with Gav, ALW, and others, and now with Marc F.
You started out here on NTN#12 attempting to prove the factuality of the Christian God-Concept. You made your case very well and definitely showed your polish and education, but you couldn't really make much of a dent in the counter-arguments of those who sparred with you. Coincidentally, physical world responsibilities took you from NTN#12; ok, fair enough, I can understand that not everyone sits at a computer during their workday.
Yesterday, you decided to change the issue and focus on classifying Neo-Tech as a "cult". Again, a patron of these boards thoroughly laid the smackdown on you (intellectually), and again--instead of addressing the salient arguments--you wrote a long post on a tangential point about the miracles in your life.
Whether or not Marc F. was totally correct on the details of the miraculous ANECDOTE you shared is academic to the greater points he was making. But now with your long post, you're trying to reshape the discussion again to subtlety evade a debate you look to be losing. You did the same thing in your other appearances! :-)
Now, you COULD claim that you'll get to it when you have more time, but then why the time spent on the long post touching on the tangential points?
You'd make a better case for your philosophy if you'd dispense with these guerilla debate tactics.
Consider this: Ultimately, you'll come to the same impasse you did on the other boards and the one you came to earlier with Gav. That is, you'll always end up revealing your disdain for the use of reason.
I remember you once posted your story to the old NTN#1 and then after that you said "So, anyway, that's the story-you can fling your arrows of logic, of reason, your high-minded and ersatz-formulated arguments. THIS is the reality of life-there is an incredibly powerful spiritual realm that exists."
Ok, fair enough, you choose faith over reason--or SO IT WOULD SEEM. :-)
Now here's the really big ironic point: You don't really have the same blind faith as "normal" Christians. It took your whole experience of being "possessed", writing your 666 book, and hearing the "voice of God" to bring you into Christianity.
And there it is: YOU HAD PROOF! :-) You had audio-sensory data to use as a basis for taking the beliefs you now espouse. You also had all those miracles which occurred later. Much could be said and done to debunk the things you speak of, but that's trivial--the point is you DID have proof!
Had a Christian proselytizer approached you much as you approach this board, you would have used logic and reason to slice and dice their arguments just as Gav, Marc F, ALW, and others have sliced and diced yours. How can you expect to do any better? How can you expect differently of those you preach to here?
You have no credibility: you expect everyone to accept something on faith which YOU YOURSELF required proof for! The only way you can fairly expect all these people to be convinced is if you petition your deity to provide them with the same paranormal experience you had, and follow-up with miracles of sort you describe.
Until that occurs, your argument "holds no water", so to speak. You belie yourself with hypocrisy, and there's no way you can get around that.
"I have cursed thy Rod and Staff. They no longer comfort me." - U2
BC
PS I hope you didn't take any of this personally! I still think very highly of you and think you make your case well--it's just flawed at its most fundamental level.
Attack Neo-Tech!
Hmmm
Posted By: koah claims
Date: Friday, 11 February 2000, at 3:23 a.m.
In Response To: Re: Quick note for Gav. (Vincent)
Regarding the KOAH posts and all claims made by ex NT employees:
1. Frank R. Wallace has given his real name on the site...it is not a mystery for anyone who really cares to find out. His name isn't even relevant to the ideas presented he IDENTIFIED them not INVENTED them the ideas are universal ...the only inventions of Wallace here are his marketing terms and marketing techniques and business ideas. Because he never "fit in" and was dyslexic he had a unique perspective with which to view existence...never really sucked into the AC he was able to look in from the outside...combined with his fierce determination to overcome his dyslexia he labored over hundreds of books and pulled together, synthesized, all that was valid and exposed all that was dishonest...a rare value indeed.
2. The claims made regarding NT publishing behavior are completely unsubstantiated and attackers take them as fact...because it helps them justify their own dishonesties/mysticisms. Even if the claims were fact it does not invalidate one word in the literature.
3. Since none of us have any way to directly verify the events surrounding these allegations it is a moot issue altogether. THE only valid points to be discussed are within the philosophy itself. In addition, the rules of the posts are plain the post removal was valid.
4. All of the ex employees' claims are out of context for a given reader. Perhaps FRW made monetary offers but the worker never actually met the criteria...the readers only context is from within the immature whining on the net.
5. Apparently there are many happy employees that still work for NT...how would one disgruntled workers claims be auto-verified by simply reading a Usenet post? It can't be done. And FRW simply has no time to respond to the claims... his goal is to collapse mysticism worldwide...which takes every moment and fully concentrated effort...so we'll never know...and it doesn't matter at all within the context of a persons own pursuit of happiness.
6. Calling New Technologies or New Techniques a cult is a serious error with no basis in fact.
This is simply a very impotent attack conjured up out of nowhere with no reference to true cult dynamics...in fact NT itself has nothing to do with joining or following anything at all. There is no leader...no group, no membership fees, no daily or weekly meetings to attend, no dogmatic rituals to follow, no commune to join, no pilgrimage to a sacred place to undertake, no symbolic icons to wear, no dishonest dictates, NT isn't even a philosophy....it is a reality based business dynamic geared towards honestly leveraging your profits in every transaction in life. It is actually dumbfounding to me that anyone would actually choose to attack NT at all...have any of these attackers REALLY understood what is being said in the literature? NO because they fear being completely honest...they fear losing their investments in dishonest behaviors.
I have yet to read one single valid attack on NT business dynamics. Every attack I have read is steeped in non-sequitors and out of context assertions. What's even more amazing is that none of the attacks are ever geared directly to the more radical aspects of FRW's theories like NT physics quantum communication, eating only "Neo-gruel"...Faster than speed of light communication and travel... Control of existence..."thinkons"...etc. Nor are they ever convincingly argued utilizing solid reasoning.
Lastly, attacking NT publishing company or FRW (with out of context assertions and unsubstantiated claims) instead of attacking the literature (using facts and valid logic) is the classic dishonest technique to redirect your attention from THE POINT....do you produce marketable values for a living or do you destroy them?
Ironically, I am glad that there are those who attack in this manner...it gives us all a chance to explicitly see dishonesty in action...and this is why the attack post board is here...not simply because FRW has the "Cajones" but because it is a valuable and cost effective way to demonstrate dishonesty directly. Thank you attackers for helping us all see more clearly.
Posted By: white rabbit <digitalgav@yahoo.co.uk>
Date: Friday, 28 April 2000, at 1:09 p.m.
In Response To: Don't believe the hype! (Jonathan)
Challenge
I don't accept that NT is some kind of 'Incorruptible Matrix'
Response
good for you
Challenge
There are too many things in Neo-Tech literature that are just assertions or theories with no solid basis, and where they are, it is stated that they are, but then you have to define 'solid basis' and from a context whereby Neo-Tech has all the answers.
Response
No, it says it can err and it learns from these Boards, and further research, it says nothing including NTP is infallible
Challenge
:One example which I am very leery of is the whole thing about Julian Jaynes 'discovery' that human beings just spontaneously discovered consciousness, because of survival pressures.
Response
define 'spontaneously'
Challenge
I don't buy that whole theory for various reasons, which I may elaborate on later but I just typed a really long post about it and lost it because I accidentally closed the browser!
Response
I hope you will type that again,
Challenge
And the translation of the Bible. What a joke! Maybe the bible translation is intended as a joke but if not, It should be obvious to any reader of the NT interpretation of the bible was not in the context that the bible was written or intended to be interpreted.
Response
That's because it was written by people who didn't understand Jesus message/intentions such as Paul (or John) (or maybe any of the apostles) Or it was understood and manipulated to create the meaning that it does have by people like Augustine Bishop of hippopotamus (joke). NT has re-written it in the way that they think Jesus would agree with if he were alive today.
Challenge
If Neo-Tech wishes to remain credible in this It should just maintain that most of the Bible is diametrically the opposite of Neo-Tech.
Response
NT already says that. (no I have not just contradicted myself)
Challenge
Another example is the whole long wave theory which the following article appearing on CNN today refers to new scientific evidence that disproves the theory that the Universe will end in a big crunch, - even naturally taking out the factor of Zon's controlling the universe (another theory with no solid basis as of yet)
Response
The Long Wave was written near the start of sci theories of the Universe, big bang theory I believe was an 80's theory. It was sound from what knowledge it was based on and was far ahead in scope and understanding. (not that I know physics), but I am a reader. That the current theories purport to a no crunch isn't necessarily correct. Also, it may not really matter to the essential points of the Long Wave article
Challenge
'The findings rule out the possibility that the fabric of space-time is curved onto itself like a sphere or bent outward like a saddle. It also means that the universe will not someday collapse onto itself in a big crunch.'
Response
fascinating. I hope Wallace puts out a piece to explain this stuff. It should certainly help with his fusion/syntheses charts. However, is the article suggesting that the big crunch theory says the universe collapses in on itself due to it growing larger and since it is curved it will eventually complete a circle and so collide. If so, then I don't think that is what was suggested in the Long Wave anyway. The Long Wave article posits entropy death as the cause of gravitational pull back of the universe. So perhaps Wallace won't release a few lines on this as it is just more pseudo-science CNN style ignoble spins of Gordian knots.
Challenge
Taking a census of the cosmos The flat universe also fits the so-called inflationary theory that the universe underwent a rapid expansion in a fraction of a second after its birth.
Response
as posited by The Long Wave.
Gav
Challenge
Attack Neo-Tech!
Attn. Moderator: Someone is spamming your list
Posted By: Jonathon Galthaiser <crnuck@netscape.net>
Date: Sunday, 16 April 2000, at 1:22 a.m.
I have received 2 spams in a row from a site called the www.localgroup.net. It is the creation of a David Hunter. Apparently, this person has mastered all of Neo-Tech's core knowledge base, and slightly rewords it to make it sound original. The dead give-away, however, is his use of historical examples and objectivist points that are identical to the original writings of Frank R. Wallace. It really makes me ill to see such blatant plagearization that is perpetrated for financial gain. He uses the same marketing tactics and verbiage that Neo-Tech has used for the 15 or so years that I've been aware of them.
This is high flattery of Neo-Tech, but it is also copyright infringement. Has NT Publishing already pursued this case?
I have never seen such a clear case of copyright infringement, and I would never support such a site, unless they secured a license arrangement with Mark Hamilton and Frank R. Wallace. Any new values that this group could provide would be tainted, in my eyes, by their stealing of original works of literature, and original integrations.
J.G.
Response
The poster's reaction below of ill disgust is certainly justified. The person he refers to has neither connections to nor permissions from NTP. He has no permission to use its copyrighted material. He engages in plagiarism at the most dishonest level by not acknowledging NTP as the source of essentially all his copied material slightly reworded. That is what NTP notified him months ago about his material. Legal action is contemplated if his blatant dishonesty is not fully corrected. NTP has a two-year statute of limitations to sue in federal court for damages.
[Note: See NTN's copyright policy on www.neo-tech.com/copyright]
A Few Helpful 1999 Challenges and Responses
From: "Mike Wahler" mkwahler@ix.netcom.com
Newsgroups: alt.neo-tech
Subject: Re: Is it for real?
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 11:42:21 -0700
Challenge
drm2g wrote in message:
How can the Neo Tech promoters be taken seriously when they lie so blatantly? Why do these liars have such a following?
Response
When I was a little boy, my mother told me, "You can be an astronaut if you want. If you do, you'll need to do these things ... " (learn as much as possible in school, develop self-discipline, etc.)
Well, I am not an astronaut Did my mother lie to me? I don't think so
Have you tried actually applying the principles promoted by NT? Or are you waiting for someone else to do your thinking for you and pronounce it "good" or "bad?". Making decisions based upon the opinion of another is an example of mysticism. Mysticism is the antithesis of NT (or vice-versa)
Don't get me wrong, the experience and knowledge of others can help you a great deal (unfortunately, depending upon who they are, they can also harm you far more).
But making decisions based upon *your* careful consideration of knowledge that someone explained (not dictated) to you, is a rational leveraging of cumulative human knowledge.
Despite their best attempts, I must admit that many feel themselves to be "followers" of NT. This is a "grave mistake
NTP's (IMO) core document is "The Neo‑Tech Discovery" which enumerates over a hundred general principles, which if integrated into one's life they claim to be the key to prosperity and happiness.
BUT: The "preface" or "forward" or whatever they called it warns: Please do not prejudge Read *everything*, either agreeing or disagreeing, but remember having been exposed to a particular concept, for later introspection Also don't just look at each concept individually, but also at all of them as a "matrix" in which they all fit together. (IMO, this is the essence of the brilliance of Dr. Wallace's work).
What I have observed over the years in many who post here, and claim to be avid supporters of NT, is a subtle sidestepping of the "don't prejudge" admonition. For example, someone might say, "I used to have a dogmatic opinion about X. But after reading and thinking about the reasoned explanations in the, NTD, I realize I was wrong." This is all very well and good, if the reason for his change of mind was what Dr. Wallace intended: juxtaposition of an idea against reality.
But many have (often subconsciously) elevated Dr. Wallace to the level of "guru," "high priest," or some other icon whose wisdom is infallible.
So what happens is that instead of folks presenting their ideas and analyzing them in the context of reality, they blindly compare them to the opinions of Dr. Wallace, automatically giving him "correct" status.
They go from not prejudging, to not judging (i.e. thinking) at all. I would call this "the "laziness escape." ("Someone else has already got it all figured out, so I'll just do what he advises").
Well, believe it or not, Dr. Wallace is simply a man, and is not infallible. But he is very bright, and (IMO) uses very rational and reasonable explanations and arguments to present his views. But he *wants* his ideas to be challenged and discussed. He knows he can't be right all the time, and if someone can show him how a particular point is really wrong, I feel that he would be grateful, rather than affronted. That is the practice of *honesty* (which BTW is one of the two main pillars of NT - honesty and effort.)
This newsgroup is a good place for folks to share their understanding (or not) of NT, to challenge old ideas (including those in NTD) and present new ones.
And yes, I agree, that NTP's marketing practices seem strange on the surface. But if you think about the nature of their product, and actually examine their literature with a little thought, you'd realize these people are honest. You may have trouble seeing this, as their *wide-scope*, *full-context* honesty, is something rarely seen today.
Mike
PS Neo-Tech is different things to different people. This seems natural to me, considering that people are different. For me, (to my surprise), the biggest benefits for me have been in my relationship with my spouse. This surprised me a little because I have always been financially ambitious. But I think what happened was that I (maybe subconsciously) applied this knowledge to what I "instinctively" held as most important to me. I now find it far easier to concentrate on my financial goals in the new, exciting atmosphere of real love I have created by using the NT concepts. So, no I'm not obscenely wealthy, nor at the pinnacle of happiness. But now it is "pleasurable0to pursue it, confident in my ability to recognize and neutralize obstacles in my path (often disguised as beneficial).
Subj: [neotalk] What is Neo-Tech
Date: 99‑05‑21 16:38:56 EDT
From: starlx@netzero.net (Star One)
Reply‑to: neotalk@egroups.com
This is a repost from the old Neo-Tech forum prior to the Egroups formation. Hope some of you newcomers find it useful. And that you "old-timers" will correct any mistakes that you see ...
*****
Hello, Newbies! This post is for you!
Eventually, you'll catch on, but meanwhile this list may help give you a jump start on comprehending some of these posts:
NT = Neo-Tech -- This one has several different meanings or applications:
NTP = Neo-Tech Publishing Company, the producers of the NT literature
O'ISM = Objectivism -- NT is based (among other things) on the groundbreaking work of Ayn Rand and Leonard Peikoff. The philosophy promulgated by this pair (and others) is referred to as "Objectivism." It touches all areas of life: personal, business, ethics, art, etc.
FIH = Fully Integrated Honesty ‑ A lot of people claim to operate their daily lives based on this concept, but it is doubtful that many do, because achieving this state of mind can be extremely difficult. Basically, it means that 100% of your effort is given to understanding the world/universe in its totality, and using this ever‑increasing knowledge to create honest values tradable in a free, laissez faire marketplace. The author(s) of Neo‑Tech believe that there are NO "higher authorities" such as "God", "The State", "The Fatherland", etc., and furthermore, if any conscious being would be totally honest with himself/herself, he/she would come to this same conclusion. The main thrust of NT literature is to remove the facade or veneer with which mankind has been duped for years into believing in and supporting these "higher authorities."
The NT literature seems severe at times, even downright hostile, but that is because (as is demonstrated throughout Neo-Tech) the belief in "authorities" has resulted in so much waste and destruction throughout human history. Never before has mankind had the opportunity to look back and rationally evaluate what has gone before. Now, thanks to Neo-Tech, you can do this and begin to achieve FIH.
FRW = Frank R. Wallace -- The esteemed author of "The Neo-Tech Discovery' and the owner/creator of the NTP company. FRW is believed by many to be one of several pen names used by the individual who created NT. I have no further information on this particular issue.
AC = Anti-Civilization
CU = Civilization of the Universe
Whew! This one is a challenge to explain. At a certain point, NT literature started referring to "Zonpower" -- a natural human ability which would be the result of a consistent, long-term application of Neo-Tech principles. Basically, whenever the prefix "Zon" is used, it applies to the world as it will be at some point in the future after Neo-Tech is accepted world‑wide and after all the "authorities" haw been "out-competed" and put out of business.
So, earth civilization *now* (prior to the world-wide acceptance of Neo-Tech) in all its gory mess is referred to as the "Anti-Civilization." And the new world to come (after NT is accepted) is referred to as the "Civilization of the Universe." In other words, we will be like all our celestial "brothers" throughout all space who have gone beyond the "nuclear threshold" and have created a wonderful value-filled existence for ourselves and loved ones for all eternity.
But these two terms, AC and CU, are also used to indicate a certain quality of life which can be experience in whatever degree by individuals *right now.*
Beyond the above acronyms, everything else is mostly "computerize" which is typical of Email, newsgroup posting, etc. nowadays. Here are a few standard abbreviations:
OTOH - On The Other Hand
LOL - Laughing Out Loud
ROTFL - Rolling On The Floor Laughing (my personal favorite)
ROTFLMAO - Rolling On The Floor Laughing My A** Off
BTW - By The Way
IMO - In My Opinion
IMHO - In My Humble Opinion (usually, the person using this acronym is being anything *but* humble <laugh>! This is, therefore, a rhetorical device
*Asterisks* are used to emphasize words, which is preferable to writing in all caps because is the on-line equivalent of SHOUTING (see what I mean?)
Star One
Disclaimer - Copyright - Contact
Online: buildfreedom.org | terrorcrat.com / terroristbureaucrat.com