|
Just read your article and had to tell you that I thought it was EXCELLENT !!! I could launch into a huge monologue with praise and accolades about it, as well as about how my personal experiences made me really relate to it ? but that would take forever, and I should probably spend that time living my life. Thanks for writing such a great piece though! Rebecca L.
Hi, Rebecca. Thanks for the thanks.
Have a good day.
== Orange
Hi Orange, I found this on 12SF today. It's a review in the New York Observer of a new Wilson biography. From the review I glean that the author is not a gifted historian but another AA zealot. I'd be interested to know if you have ever heard this story of Wilson demanding a drink on his deathbed from other sources. http://www.observer.com/pages/story.asp?ID=8641 [Obsolete link to a book review.] -Michael
Hi. thanks for the tip. That's an interesting article.
Very interesting. I wonder where she got the story of
Bill demanding a drink on his death bed.
What I have read in other biographies is that he was
so sick from emphysema and pneumonia that he was very
out of it. Lois and Bill's doctor and friends flew him
down to Florida for a last-gasp attempt to save him,
but it didn't work.
I've been wanting to get my hands on that book. It promises
to be interesting, even if it is a "soft-focus" brush-off
of all critical material (which is just so typical of steppers).
== Orange
And I noticed
that Cheever said that she got access to the A.A. archives, so she could dig
into material not available to the rest of us.
I got a bunch of revealing quotes out of it,
here,
here,
here,
here,
and
here.
Thanks again.
== Orange.
P.S. Saturday, 10 April 2004: One of the Saturday morning National Public Radio programs,
Weekend Edition,
interviewed Susan Cheever about her book. The woman announcer — Linda Wertheimer —
asked of Bill Wilson, "He was a bit of a monster, wasn't he?"
Cheever replied that she just loved Bill, and however he and Lois got along
for 53 years was their business... Cheever explained that she had fallen in love
with Bill during the research for the book.
Ah, the mind of a true believer — rationalize, minimize and deny:
"Don't distract me with mere facts..."
The rap about Bill and Lois staying together for 53 years is pretty irrelevant.
People didn't get divorced so much in those days. Besides,
Tom Powers and other early
A.A. members had to sit up with Bill all night one time,
talking Bill out of divorcing Lois and
marrying his young mistress, because they feared that it would make A.A.
look bad if the leader was treating his wife that way.
Then Bill even got one of his mistresses a house just a couple of miles down the road
from Stepping Stones, so that he could go visit her any time he felt like it.
The fact that Bill remained legally married to Lois, and might have sometimes
even slept in the same house as her, didn't really mean that it was
any kind of a relationship to brag about.
Oh well, have a good day anyway.
== Orange
Hello Agent Orange: I admire and respect what you, Jack Trimpey, and others are doing to de-bunk all the addiction treatment hocus-pocus. As a social worker I estimate that every 3rd or 4th client I see is struggling, often desperately, with addiction. Most have been through the treatment mill more than once. Many sing the praises of treatment and blame themselves for not working a good program. Because of my profession they assume that that's what I want to hear. When I suggest that maybe the program is "working them", many will quickly become relieved. Finally someone is confirming what they've long suspected. They are not crazy. They are neither "selfish" nor "paralyzed" from using their own intelligence to understand what's going on inside their own heads! Unlike you I self-recovered from booze without any exposure to AA. I used AVRT but I was skeptical of Trimpey's anti-AA ranting in his last book and at his website. Like you I initially assumed AA to be a benevolent organization. That was until I started listening to the struggles of other addicts. Why was it so hard for them but not for me? THAT'S when I really started to pay attention to AA specifically, and the treatment industry in general. Like you and Trimpey, what I'm finding is just sickening. I'm pissed to see an entirely bogus industry make a profit by preying on the vulnerability of its victims. So I'm really pleased, and empowered, by your efforts. Thanks for your on-going meticulous research and reference material. Your site is a rich information treasury for budding anti-addition treatment advocates. By the way, I liked the Vaillant references in your intro page and elsewhere. I'm sure you've read his book The Natural History Of Alcoholism Revisited. I'm wondering if you caught this quote from page 266. Here he lists some of the facets of AA that has drawn criticism:
"Third, AA certainly functions as a cult and systematically indoctrinates its members in ways common to cults the world over. The negative side effects of AA, however, are perhaps more benign than those of any other cult with which I am familiar." Unbelievable! So a respected addiction researcher/Trustee of the AAWS Board acknowledges that AA is a failure and a cult, and still advocates 12-Step based treatment. Worse, he condones forced participation in treatment against the will of inmates, civil employees, health care professionals, and others who are offended by AA's overtly religious nature. What an egregious violation of civil rights protection against state-sponsored religion! Keep up the great work and YOU have a nice day! Ron
Hi Ron,
Thanks for the letter, and all of the compliments.
I also quit by, essentially, using AVRT, although I didn't know about that
name at the time.
I had been calling it simply "The Addiction Monster", and I had learned
by trial and error
to not be fooled by the jabbering and screaming and seductive persuasions
of that voice. I have a page
on that here.
(Oh, I went to A.A. meetings, but they did little or nothing
for me. I worked my own program. I never got a sponsor, I never did the 12 Steps,
etc..)
Thanks again, and have a good day.
== Orange
[ Tue, April 13, 2004, 2nd letter from Ron R.:] Hello again, Agent Orange. Thanks for your response. I also found this nugget from The Natural History Of Alcoholism Revisited, page 277. Vaillant is discussing the potential drawbacks to abstinence. Here's the chapter's concluding paragraph:
"Finally, and most important, it must be remembered that abstinence is a means, not an end. It is a puritanical goal that removes but does not replace. It is justifiable as a treatment goal only if moderate drinking is not a viable alternative and only if sight is not lost of the real goal — social rehabilitation. Even in Alcoholics Anonymous, the term 'sobriety' has the far broader, more platonic meaning of serenity and maturity. The perjorative term 'dry' is reserved for individuals who are abstinent from alcohol but otherwise remain unchanged from their former alcohol-abusing selves. The lesson of this chapter is not that abstinence is good, but that uncontrolled, symptomatic abuse of alcohol is painful." How about that? Do you believe the arrogance of this guy? Gee, I didn't realize that my life was so much emptier without the booze. I guess my improved physical health, fulfilling social relationships, and sharpened critical faculties are not suitable replacements. At least Vaillant reveals his true motivations. Quitting isn't the main priority; it's social rehabilitation. I wonder if Vaillant really means "social engineering"? Do you think he'd love to see society transformed by the soothing waters of sobriety, filled with a serene (dull) citizenry? Meanwhile, would the rest of us be branded by the scarlet letters D-R-Y, and socially marginalized unless/until we "get with the Program"? Nice. Who needs a Puritan when a Buchman/Wilsonian Fascist is so much better? No thanks. I'll remain in the quenching desert of Reason. Take care. Ron
Hi again, Ron, and thanks for this quote too.
Vaillant's statement fits into the pattern. In a way, it's just another restatement
of the old "dry drunk" put-down of
the stereotypical alcoholic.
You are "only dry", but not "sober",
if you don't join their religion and
change yourself into their idea of a good person —
someone who spends his life on his knees,
confessing how bad and stupid he is.
What is very strange is how Vaillant says,
"It [total abstinence]
is justifiable as a treatment goal only if moderate
drinking is not a viable alternative."
On first impression, it sounded like he was being broad-minded and not
pushing total abstinence on everybody; but on second thought I get the
impression that he is justifying coercive treatment. The "real goal"
is "social rehabilitation" of the individual. I'm sure that sounds good
to the judges who are
sentencing people to A.A. meetings.
And of course Vaillant is just assuming that all alcoholics are evil,
and must be socially (read: 'spiritually') rehabilitated.
He is so sure that there is much more
wrong with their "former alcohol-abusing selves"
than just drinking too much alcohol. But how would he know?
He doesn't know how it feels. He was never
an alcoholic. He's one of the Class A — non-alcoholic — Trustees.
Does he really have any idea why people drink?
Again, we see the idea that alcoholism is a sin, not a disease.
A.A. keeps telling us that alcoholism is a disease, and we are powerless over it,
so it isn't our fault. But then they pull that medical-to-moral morph —
a bait-and-switch stunt
— and start declaring that alcoholism was really caused
by moral shortcomings and defects of character and defective relationships
and
desires that
far exceed their intended purpose... etc...
Even "puritanical abstinence" isn't good enough.
It isn't enough that you quit drinking and save your own life, and
repair your health, career, marriage, and everything else.
Nope, you must be "socially rehabilitated"
in the Alcoholics Anonymous program and become an example of the A.A.
definition of the word "sobriety".
Like Vaillant wrote
in his first book,
Yep, I do believe that guy is a religious fanatic.
Oh well, have a good day anyway.
== Orange
Hi there, I am not into steps et al. but have been going well. Unfortunately I told the older members who are helping me to F*&% off last night and threw a plate of sandwiches at their car. They just drive me mad but I have yet to learn how to control my temper and as a result they keep controlling me because I am constantly apologising for past indiscretions. I like AA but in my head it is always 'Bloody AA' but I am not game to stop the meetings (I do one every night...just ID) Cheers and hope you can get back to me! The Frase
Hi. The money rattles up the pyramid. The Australian A.A. national headquarters
will get part of it, and then the rest of the royalties go
to Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Incorporated, in New York.
All of the foreign countries
pay royalties to AAWS for the "right" to publish the Big Book in
their native languages, in spite of the fact that the copyright is
bogus, expired, invalid, and as phoney as a three-dollar bill.
That is a whole subject in itself. AAWS has even been committing
perjury in the courts of Mexico and Germany to keep on collecting
those royalties. See:
Have a good day.
== Orange
[Thu, April 15, 2004, 2nd letter from The Frase:] Hi there orange, Look I am really hooked into this mob in a big way. I am over 2 years off the drink but am going mad in aa but too scared to leave because all the people I mix with have told me i will drink or be mad or just unhappy. They will also hold me out as an example of someone who thought they knew better than the sober members. We dont do steps or big book in our group but some of the long sober members are real stand over merchants, playing people off against each other etc etc. they will take all the credit for me getting sober but none of the blame if I don't because they have told me that will be because I have done something wrong. Is everyone in aa like that? I figure for some of them it is the only place where they have any standing. It is one hell of a screwy place. Am I seeing it correctly or am I just bitter and twisted?
Bye now,
Hi, Frase,
It sounds to me like you are seeing things pretty straight. You sound angry but
not twisted and bitter.
You might want to work on that temper, if only for the sake of your sandwiches,
but otherwise you sound okay.
This is one of those letters where you manage, in just one paragraph, to ask a
question that could get a huge complex answer. But I'll try to keep it short.
First off, the easy stuff:
See
another recent letter
for an example of one old A.A. member who sure sounds like
he has his head screwed on straight. It's just unfortunate that he isn't
in your group.
Now for the big, tough question:
"Will you relapse if you leave Alcoholics Anonymous?"
Well, I can't predict the future.
But after two years, you are not in any great danger of immediate relapse. Not really.
You know which way is up. You have your head together and your compulsions under
control. You aren't crawling the walls for a drink, or detoxing any more.
You sound like you are, in fact, feeling frustrated because you are ready
for something more in your life than just not drinking, and spending all
of your spare time in A.A. meetings.
You sound like you are ready for growth and they don't want to let you go.
So why don't we try to logic our way through this?
Try a little rational thinking?
While contemplating quitting A.A., you should think about all of the positives
and negatives of quitting or staying. Ask yourself,
What do you get out of it? What benefits or enjoyment do you get from A.A. meetings?
What will you get from quitting A.A.?
And then ask,
"What do I want most? What do I value?"
If we want to be organized about this, we can arrange the answers
in a cost-benefit analysis. We make a chart where we consider the positives
and negatives of both staying and quitting, like this: (These are just some ideas
that occur to me. Go ahead and make your own lists.)
So you look at all of that, and add it up in your mind, and then ask,
"What do I really want?"
The single biggest problem I foresee is loneliness. Do you already have a clean
and sober social circle outside of A.A.? If not, get one, make one, build one.
Make it your next big work project. Before you cut all ties to A.A.
and burn your bridges behind you, go
find and develop new social connections and build a new circle of friends,
or at least get some new clean and sober aquaintances whom you like.
Since you are going every night, and that is way too much, you could withdraw
from your A.A. addiction slowly. Start off with one night a week that will be yours,
rather than A.A.'s. Then make it two, and then three... Wean yourself off of the
toxins slowly, rather than just going cold turkey. That way you can slowly,
comfortably, get used to life outside of The Roomz.
And while you are going through all of your changes, just keep a couple of good
slogans in mind:
End of sermon. That's it. That's all you need.
Try out some of these activities instead of A.A. meetings:
Things To Do Instead Of Drink Or Go To A.A. Meetings:
Make up your own list. Add about a hundred more items.
If, while you are tapering off of A.A., someone starts giving you the
"You're Going To Relapse If You Don't Go To A Meeting"
routine, ask him how he knows that. Remember that you don't have to apologize to them for deciding to get on with your life. What you decide to do with your life is your business, not theirs. And above all, have a good day. == Orange
Hi Agent Orange, I like the work you've done, and the Nazi photos are a great collection. I thought you might like to know of a great German, Stauffenberg — who probably deserves a place in your collection as he singlehandedly [excuse the gross pun] gathered the high official opponents who would kill Hitler and tried to do so himself. They failed. The book you might like to read on him is:
"Stauffenberg — A Family History, 1905—1944" Anyway, judging by your criticism of cults I sincerely hope I am not writing to someone who belongs to ANY cult. Take care Squiggles
Hi Squiggles,
Thanks for the note. I'll check out the Stauffenberg book.
His story is a fascinating
one, but unfortunately, I can't see how I could squeeze it into the history
of the Oxford Group or Moral Re-Armament. It's a different story, even though it is a
tragic and important one. He almost ended World War Two, and almost saved many
millions of lives.
Another favorite story in the same vein is Die Weisse Rose (The White Rose),
the story of three college kids who resisted the Nazis and ended up being killed
by them. (I read it in German; I don't know for sure if it has been translated
into English, but I think it has.)
Alas, my collection of photos isn't nearly as good as I would like it
to be. And the crown jewels that I would really love to get my hands on
are out of reach. I would love to get photographs of Frank Buchman with
Adolf Hitler or Heinrich Himmler, or Goebbels, or any of the other
high-ranking Nazis. Undoubtedly, somebody took some publicity photographs
of the oily Frank Buchman smoozing with the Nazi leaders in Germany,
between 1934 and 1939.
There must be pictures of Himmler, Buchman, and Moni von Kramon together at
the Nuremberg Nazi Party rallies
in 1934 and 1935, for instance.
They must exist somewhere, in some dusty cellar or attic or official archive,
if they weren't destroyed in the war.
Do any German readers have old photos aging in the attic?
I don't need the originals; I'd be happy to just get computer image scans
that I could put into my web page on the history of the Oxford Group.
(But please, no faked, computer-generated, composites. I'm only interested in real
history.)
Have a good day.
== Orange
P.S.: I don't belong to any cult. As
our wise alcoholic patron saint,
W. C. Fields, once declared: "I would never join a club that would
have me as a member."
I am a recovering heroin addict. I am not recovering with the use of NA/AA but rather medication and my own spiritual journey that is between me and God not the "group" aka cult. Two years ago I tried to get clean off of heroin and the outpatient rehab I got involved in (along with every other rehab) pushed the NA way. We had to attend NA meetings three or four times a week. In fact, they told us the only way we really could get clean was to go to 90 meetings in 90 days! For over a year on and off (and truly against my will), I attended NA/AA meetings. I never had more than 1 month clean in those two years. In fact, my drug use progressed. Finally I found the thing that truly has saved my life, and brought back to me all the things that I had lost — methadone. I had bought into all the myths and lies that I had heard. But I asked, "why does NIH and NIDA (national institute of drug abuse) state that methadone is the only treatment that they encourage". The relapse rate for opiate use with the NA treatment is somewhere in the range of 80-90%!! I then learned that most all opioid addicts constantly return to the drug is because they have endorphin deficiency — that only medicine can fix. From day one, my life has changed because of methadone. I do not mind that I have to take a tiny cup of medicine every day to make my life liveable without heroin. I am not high because of it, I just feel normal. But NA members would say I have no right to speak at a meeting because I am not clean. Of course members of NA drink coffee (caffeine) and smoke cigarettes (nicotine) like they are going out of business. These things are just as mood altering as methadone is to me. Many members also take antidepressants, but this is ok. They do not see the hypocrisy there. Your website is quite revealing. Feel free to use my letter... Eric D.
Okay, Eric. Thanks for the letter. And I couldn't agree more
about the "no medications"
hypocrisy as they kill themselves on cigarettes.
And they also occasionally kill somebody else, too, by talking
him or her into not taking much-needed doctor-prescribed medications.
Have a good day anyway.
== Orange
Dear Sir/Madam I have been to AA meetings on and off for 4 years here in the UK — (some were enforced through a treatment centre). Now, I have been in mental torture for years now seeing I do not seem to get their philosophy — I just don't understand it. I am an alcoholic and it has been suggested to me that I might die if I do not get myself sorted in AA. Reading your article came a bit of a surprise, although I must admit I had my doubts. What I am curious about is — how do you get all this information? Are you alcoholic yourself i.e.. have you been to AA meetings? Is there a reason for you obvious deep hatred for AA? I don't mean to sound nosy but I need evidence so that I can sever my ties with AA forever. Thank you and Best Wishes Karen
Hi Karen,
Thanks for the letter.
Okay, starting at the top,
Everywhere I can. I use the local libraries, city and university, heavily,
and also the Internet. And I am in love with inter-library loans. That means
that I can often get even rare historical books of which only a few copies remain.
My research on the Oxford Group and the early days of A.A. was done that way,
and I get medical research articles that way too.
Also look at
the bibliography. It lists the books from which I have gotten something
or other. And the footnotes and quotes tell you more about where the information
came from.
Oh yes, many. More than I can count.
See the introduction.
But I must comment, watch out for the word "alcoholic".
It means different things to different people. A.A. gives the word
three different definitions, and unfortunately uses them interchangeably,
which really confuses the matter at hand. I don't agree with all of their
definitions.
The same confusion applies to the definitions of the word "addict" in NA.
I am an old hippy who has known some really wonderful drug users, over the years,
so I don't agree with the stereotypical put-downs of the standard addict or the
standard alcoholic.
Well, I hope it isn't actually "deep hatred", but I obviously do strongly
dislike cults that hurt my friends and
drive them away from recovery;
cults that misinform my friends and make recovery and survival harder.
And I do consider it a serious crime to foist quack cures, voodoo medicine,
and cult religion on very sick people and then charge their health insurance
for "treatment".
And personally, I dislike being lied to.
I find it insulting when they foist
a bunch of blatant lies
on us and think that we will be stupid enough to believe them.
Lastly, you said,
"I do not seem to get their philosophy — I just
don't understand it."
I hope that answers your questions. If you have any others, don't hesitate
to ask.
And have a good day.
== Orange
Dear Orange I have a 22 year old male friend of the family (my daughter's boyfriend) who decided to become sober and was doing an excellent job on his own with once a week trips to AA meetings. He was finding other passion in life, cooking, art, crafts and was further developing his relationships with friends and family. Until, this 39-year old male came up to him at an AA meeting and said "I will be your sponsor". Let's call the sponsor Tim. Tim started monopolizing my friend's time. He started taking him to meetings — and would keep him in his company up to 10 hours per day. Taking my friend on errands, work, wherever. My friend started isolating himself from us. He now prays about EVERYTHING and expects a message or sign from God. Once he gets his "sign" — (the way he now feels) he acts impulsively on it without any regard to others' feelings. He moved out of our home — where he has had love and support for two years that brought him to the point of getting sober. He has broke up with my daughter. He told her that he asked God to give him a sign and God told him "it was the right thing to do." It was devastating for my family and my daughter. The treatment was irrational, cold, and supported by his new AA buddies. He told her it was part of his 4th step and even though he didn't want to do it — he had to do it. Mike is tormented, not knowing what to do and how to be happy now. No more cooking, crafts, going to the movies or simple joys of life. I am very concerned at this "brainwashing" technique of AA. His sponsor (who I suspect is gay) has succeeded in isolating him from his support network. Now, this young man lives in a disfunctional home with his father and two teenage brothers who drink and smoke weed like a chimney. When I confronted Mike that he "is losing it" and that he should consider the source of his AA sponsor that may have Gay intentions — he became highly irrate and told me that it's people like me who doubt the program that will make him start drinking again. I do not want to see this young man go insane with messages from God. He is totally sucked into this cult like behavior - any advice???? I still have somewhat of a dialog with him. It is a tough call — to mess with someone's recovery program — but I know that something is fishy with this Tim guy. Mike's personality has radically changed.
Thank you.
Hi Marilyn,
The first thing that comes to mind is Steve Hassan's advice about
loved ones who have gotten sucked into cults: "Never give up. Never stop
trying to get them out."
(By the way, Hassan has a new book out, "Releasing the Bonds;
Empowering People To Think For Themselves",
that he graciously sent me a copy of to check out.
I like it. It is loaded with practical advice about breaking loose from
cults, and getting loved ones out of cults.
It comes from a guy who spent six or seven years in the Moonies cult.)
The way that the sponsor picked Mike up is classic.
One of the unwritten rules of survival in A.A. is, when someone approaches
you and offers to be your sponsor, RUN, DO NOT WALK, FOR THE DOOR.
You just met a vampire. (The newcomer is supposed to seek out the sponsor,
to avoid the problem of sponsors who collect slaves.)
And you are describing a lot of the standard cult techniques for recruiting and
rapid indoctrination:
But my second reaction is that it takes two to tango.
Cult victims are also willing cult joiners.
People who get sucked into cults have to voluntarily buy into the
load of baloney on some level, to some degree.
It's like the old saying about how you can't con an honest man, and the easiest
man to con is another con artist. Mike's new mentor is offering him something —
holding out some kind of bait —
perhaps
Mike allegedly received, while doing
the Fourth Step,
a message from God telling him to dump your daughter.
The Fourth Step is not even when you are supposed to be receiving such
"Guidance from God"; that's
Step Eleven.
Step Four is where you make a long list of all of your sins,
"moral shortcomings", and "defects of character".
So was your daughter one of his "sins" or "moral shortcomings"?
Says who?
For Mike to treat your family in such a manner is callous, selfish, and ungrateful.
The Twelve Step program is allegedly supposed to make people
"Serene and Grateful", not into ungrateful cads.
But
dumping one's family, including wives and children,
in the selfish pursuit of "my sobriety" is unfortunately
another standard A.A. practice, a time-honored tradition that Bill Wilson
wrote about in the Big Book.
I don't know how "reachable" Mike still is, but if you can get through to him
at all, you might educate him a little bit about religion. The A.A. program
is pretty heretical, by the usual Christian standards.
You might want to read the file on
The Heresy of the Twelve Steps,
which might give you some things to discuss with him.
Mike's behavior sounds just like that of some of the
converts to Frank Buchman's
Oxford Group cult, from which A.A. was derived.
And check out
this criticism of "receiving Guidance" — of the Buchmanite idea that
you can receive messages and signs from God all day long.
The whole idea of seeking signs was criticized by Jesus Christ in
the Bible. When
the Pharisees demanded
that Jesus show them a miracle, Jesus called them evil and told them to flake off.
But it is questionable whether Mike will hear any of that, or whether he will
immediately reject it.
Again, Hassan's book comes to mind. He tells about how to side-step thought
stopping (page 184). When Mike immediately rejects criticism of his sponsor,
or criticism of "seeking signs",
by saying that it will make him relapse, that's "thought-stopping" behavior.
Hassan says that the best way to side-step such behavior is to avoid
triggering such behavior to start with,
which means that you kind of have to talk around the point, and approach
it obliquely, slowly.
Hassan says that one way to criticize a cult without arousing immediate antagonism
is to criticize a different cult that exhibits exactly the
same behavior. Cult members are often more than willing to call other
groups cults. (It's
typical cultish hypocrisy:
"Those groups are
of course obnoxious cults. Glad we aren't like them.")
Obviously, talking about the failings of the Oxford Group cult
and its theology (without mentioning that it was the precursor of A.A.)
is a workable technique for discussing the failings of "Guidance",
and how much everybody was misled by Frank Buchman's "Guidance".
("I thank Heaven for a
man like Adolf Hitler...
D'you know Heinrich Himmler? No? Say, you ought to know Heinrich.
He's a great lad.")
And maybe, you could slip in
a few jokes.
Some people can't handle them; some can.
The joke about the A.A. member getting
told the winning lottery numbers by God
seems particularly relevant to Mike's behavior.
The TV repairman joke
might be a good one to slip him too.
Somewhere in his mind, Mike has to know that he is indulging
in spiritual make-believe.
He must know that his beliefs are indefensible.
That's why he immediately resents and rejects criticism of his behavior,
his sponsor, or A.A..
His whole belief structure will fall apart if it is subjected to the slightest
critical analysis. (But that's a good thing for you. It makes your job easier,
if you can get a word in edgewise.)
And perhaps Mike is also afraid to hear any conflicting information because of
fears and phobias. Cults routinely
implant phobias
in their members and tell them that all kinds of horrible things will
happen to them if they leave the cult or "lose faith".
In A.A., the rap is that you will relapse and die drunk if you don't
toe the line and do everything just right.
As far as you messing with Mike's recovery program is concerned,
I wouldn't worry about it too much. He doesn't have a recovery
program. Going nutso on cult religion is not a recovery program.
Treating people in such a cold, exploitative manner is not "recovery".
You can see from his behavior that he has already relapsed; his quality of
life has gone to hell. It's just that, instead of getting drunk on ethanol,
he is now getting drunk on cult religion, superstition, and make-believe.
I suspect that Mike has a lot of
really big, problematic,
underlying issues.
Whatever mental problems he had in the beginning that led him to get into trouble
with drugs and/or alcohol
are still there.
And the sponsor is exploiting those weaknesses.
You probably cannot repair Mike. I get the feeling that Mike is unable to
develop really deep, feeling, relationships with anyone.
I don't see a hint of compassion or consideration of the feelings of other people
in your description of his behavior.
Apparently, he considers your daughter to be expendable in his search for
his own happiness.
And Mike is just pulling a standard old A.A. manipulative stunt of
threatening to relapse if somebody says something that he doesn't
want to hear. That's the same stunt as
Bill Wilson
pulled on his wife 69 years ago. It is taught in the Big Book:
I hate to see people acting like
the stereotypical A.A. alcoholic
— selfish, unspiritual, manipulative, inconsiderate and uncaring.
It gives all of us alcoholics a bad name.
It makes some people wonder whether we are worth rehabilitating.
Well, gee, I'm really down on Mike's behavior, aren't I?
I hope that I'm not being unfair.
I don't want to get into blaming the victim (which I seem to be doing).
It's just that I can't help but feel that, while the sponsor
is undoubtedly encouraging Mike to act like that, he isn't forcing Mike to do it.
Mike is a grown-up boy.
Mike is making his own choices, and he must have some idea of what he is doing.
I hope this doesn't sound too cold, but being dumped by Mike may be the
best thing that could possibly have happened to your daughter.
Imagine if she had married him and had a couple of kids, and then he
dumped her like that. Better now than later. Now she has a chance to get
a good man who is more likely to stay with her and the children.
And while maybe Mike might eventually come to his senses and want to get
back together with her, I would be very wary of that.
I wouldn't encourage it, or even stand for it.
He has already clearly told you,
by his actions, how he really feels about you and your daughter.
If she gets back together with him, won't he be just as quick to dump her
again the next time it is convenient in his pursuit of his own happiness?
I think your daughter will be a whole lot better off, and a lot happier, with
somebody else.
Oh, and I don't know if the sponsor is
a homosexual predator.
Besides the obvious AIDS threat, I think it might be almost as bad if he isn't.
The alternative is that he's a cultish energy-sucking vampire, some
kind of a religious fanatic who gets his kicks by stealing people's minds and lives.
It would be easier for Mike to see through the game of a homosexual predator.
At least he would know when he was getting screwed.
Still, is there anything that you can do to help Mike?
I find myself referring back to Steve Hassan's book again.
There is a lot of good, practical advice in there,
more than I can type here. Check it out.
And, in fairness to Mike, one of Hassan's instructions is,
"Don't blame the victim." (Pages 120 to 122.)
Regardless of everything else, and no matter what else you do,
I would adopt a hard-nosed attitude of keeping your daughter's welfare firmly in
mind as the first and most important consideration,
and Mike's welfare is strictly secondary. If he is going to make
some stupid choices and mess up his own life, you may not be able to do
much to stop it. But your daughter doesn't
have to be pulled down with him or hurt again.
Oh well, have a good day anyway.
== Orange
Thank you for the web site. I am an AA member who has for many years had problems with the white anglo saxon arrogance of the AA message (I am a white anglo saxon of the non US type). This false belief that the ego must be crushed in order to get well has driven many people out of AA. Interestly enough, many "old timers" appear to suffer from a largely inflated ego and demonstrate that they have the right to bully newcomers into doing it the AA way. John M.
Hi, John. Thanks for the input. I have to agree.
And have a good day.
== Orange
You are among the biggest, useless and disgusting assholes I have ever had the displeasure of stumbling across on the internet. Whatever your delusional analysis says, there remains a significant population of alcoholics world wide who have stopped drinking, stayed stopped, put back together careers, financial credit and personal relationships. Do they exist in your world? You are obviously an intelligent man to compile such a paper. However, you are even more obviously selfish and irresponsible for not presenting a viable alternative to the drunk whose life is deteriorating but can't stop drinking no matter what he or she tries.
Hello Mark. You are correct when you talk about the large number of
alcoholics who have quit drinking. And
the Harvard Medical School says
that 80% of them do it alone, without any A.A. or any other support group.
(Like me.)
A.A. merely manages to fool a few people into believing that they quit because
of A.A., in spite of
the large numbers who actually quit drinking before
they ever go to A.A. (also like me).
Nan Robertson was a promoter of Alcoholics Anonymous who
wrote a book called "Getting Better Inside Alcoholics Anonymous",
where she reported that
most of the newcomers to A.A. had already quit drinking.
Check it out.
How can the alcoholics whom A.A. allegedly saves be so powerless —
"can't stop drinking no matter what he or she tries" — when
they have already quit drinking before they come to A.A.?
Thanks for the large compliment,
"You are obviously an intelligent man to compile such a paper."
I notice that you did not object to my facts, and you did not say
that I had my facts wrong. You know that I research very carefully.
You simply objected to my telling the truth about A.A. and alcoholism.
You said that I don't present a viable alternative to A.A.. I already have.
DO IT YOURSELF is the single most successful program in the world.
Recovery without cult religion is the time-tested, proven, way that works for
the vast majority of successful quitters.
And then, as I have said again and again, there are also organizations like
SMART,
WFS (Women For Sobriety),
SOS
(Secular Organizations for Sobriety),
and
the LifeRing Internet group
if you want a group or some company or advice.
Furthermore, you are assuming a lot when you say that alcoholics
"can't stop drinking no matter what he or she tries."
(And then you imply that somehow A.A. makes quitting possible, a presumption for
which there is absolutely no supporting evidence.)
The majority of alcoholics do eventually quit drinking.
I would suggest that these who don't quit simply do not want to quit.
Oh, they may say that they wish to quit,
but they don't. Not really.
They just wish that they weren't sick.
They just want to find a way to avoid the negative side effects of drinking.
They want the joy of drinking without the hangovers, the destroyed health,
the job loss, the broken marriages, the legal troubles, and the rest of it.
So they say that they want to quit, but as soon as the desire to get high again hits,
as soon as the cravings kick in,
they start thinking about how
it will be okay to just nibble, to just have a little bit, and they
rationalize their way into taking another drink.
And, just like the A.A. slogan says, many of them will eventually quit
drinking when they get Sick and Tired of Being Sick and Tired.
And some won't. Some will stubbornly choose to drink themselves to death.
That is sad, but nobody, including A.A., can make them live.
A.A. has
a terrible track record when it comes to making them live.
Likewise, many people choose to eat themselves to death, or to smoke themselves
to death. Powerlessness has nothing to do with it.
So, what is your alternative to AA? I suppose in your world, the weak-minded, feeble-willed drunkards of society should just be left to die. Wrong. I'm for giving them all of the help that we can. I just don't approve of shoving voodoo medicine and cult religion on sick people, and telling them that they are getting good "treatment for alcoholism". So how much hatred do you harbor against AA to put such a thesis together? The detail and research you put into your paper surely reflects that you put a great deal of time and effort into it. You must have an unbelievable amount of hatred in your depraved black heart to devote so much time and effort into doing nothing more than ranting like a child. Well, I must confess that I really do dislike cults that hurt my friends and drive them away from recovery. I have seen it many times. My dog demonstrates more care and responsibility than you do. Do you think you are doing mankind a favor by publishing this propaganda garbage? Hardly.
Ah, there it is again — that old line about,
"It is irresponsible
to release such information about alcoholism and recovery."
You actually have a lot of contempt for alcoholics — those
"weak-minded, feeble-willed drunkards of society"
, as you put it.
You think that
those stupid, feeble-minded alcoholics cannot
handle the truth, and that telling them the truth will kill them,
so we shouldn't tell the truth about A.A. or alcoholism.
I strongly disagree. Alcoholics need more true information, not less.
The alcoholics that I know can handle the truth just fine, thank you anyway
for caring so much about our welfare.
If you really want to help mankind, simply kill yourself. I pray that no one who is suffering so physically and mentally from alchohol addiction comes across your work. May you die in wretched misery.
Ah yes, Twelve-Step Spirituality, Serenity, and Gratitude. You've gotta love it.
Oh well, have a good day anyway.
== Orange
Hello,
"Sponsors in Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, and Dual Recovery have a bad habit of telling new sponsees to stop taking their pills — to stop taking the medications that a real doctor has prescribed and just trust the Twelve Steps to heal them." I don't see much point in debating your subject matter as you obviously feel very strongly and you are certainly entitled to your opinions. The Internet is a wonderful tool that give us a broad forum and opportunity to use our free speech rights. Actually, I have facts, not just opinions. I would like to point out to you that in Dual Recovery Anonymous, taking prescribed medications is considered as being part of a healthy and constructive plan of recovery. No, not recovery from a psychiatric illness, but learning to manage symptoms in a healthy and constructive way. This program isn't for everybody. It doesn't claim to be. It does help a lot of people who often do feel pressured, as you suggest, at the traditional 12 Step meetings or by sponsors who don't understand mental illness. Of course, giving up needed prescribed medications without a doctor's advice can be a tragic mistake. Thanks for listening, Dave A.
Hi Dave,
The very first friend of mine
who went to Dual Recovery Anonymous
was immediately told by his new sponsor and other old-timers in the group
to stop taking his Paxil, to learn to live without medications, so, in my
experience, DRA is batting 1000.
Perhaps you would like to telephone the
Vancouver, Washington, Dual Recovery Anonymous group and tell them
to cut the crap and quit endangering vulnerable people's lives? Thank you.
But you know that you can't really do much about it, can you?
That is one of the big problems with how all of the 12-step organizations are
organized — there is no way to discipline or reign in a misbehaving group.
The religious fanatics in Vancouver can be killing people with their
no-medications nonsense, and neither you nor the DRA headquarters can make
them stop it.
This is really old hat. Several years ago, the GSO of A.A. sent out a letter that
asked all of the sponsors to please quit telling their sponsees not to take their
medications. The sponsors ignored the headquarters and kept right on doing it.
This is really very, very old hat. The A.A. old-timer who first told me
about the no-medications problem
was fighting it 20 or 30 years ago, and
nothing has changed since then.
Oh well, have a good day anyway.
Oh, and do check out
The Hazelden Coffee War,
where the dogmatic fools decided that even coffee was
too strong of a drug to allow to patients in recovery.
Also see the write-up in the web page on
Snake Oil.
== Orange
P.S.:
Just recently, I ran into
an article by Carolyn See,
the step-daughter of Wynn C., who was one
of Bill Wilson's lovers and the author of the Big Book story
"Freedom From Bondage". Carolyn reported that the early
A.A. members
bickered about whether taking an aspirin for a headache constituted a slip.
They were nuts.
UPDATE: 2012.12.21: There have been so many "no meds" stories that the list has been moved to its own file: orange-no_meds.html
I just came across your web site and I'm already reading it with some pessimism. The reason why is two fold. Number one, I am an addict in recovery. The 12-steps and those principles have worked for me. Whatever the reason why this life changing event occurred, I credit it all to the work these two men did. I do this compelled by myself and myself only. The second reason for my pessimism is I don't see a whole lot of references made to other sources. If this is the case, most of this is slandourous and mostly opinionated. References to other sources? Are you actually reading what I have written? Many pages have large numbers of footnotes, and a bibliography at the bottom. For the entire bibliography, look here. My biggest question is, are you in recovery? Did you have a bad experience with A.A. or N.A. While I will agree that these programs have mutated since they were first started, where is the animosity coming from? Just curious as I begin to read your "online book" Jason
Hi Jason,
Yes, I am "in recovery", or "recovered", depending on which terminology
you like. I now have more than three years off of alcohol, cigarettes, and
all other drugs.
Yes, I had an experience with the 12-step organization. Read
the introduction, and also
this bait-and-switch trick,
and
also this.
About the program "mutating", that isn't the problem.
It didn't work in the
beginning, and
it still doesn't work.
Bill Wilson was
lying
in the beginning, and it's still
a Big Lie.
As far as the animosity goes, I don't like cults that deceive and hurt my friends.
Lastly, the fact that you enjoy 12-step meetings does not necessarily mean that
the Oxford Group cult religion practices
(practices, not principles) of Bill and Bob actually "work"
to accomplish anything useful. When Prof. Dr. George E. Vaillant, Class A Trustee
of Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc., tested A.A., he found that
it didn't work at all.
I'm glad to hear that you are doing well. Congratulations on
your recovery. You did the work, and you are giving the credit for your accomplishments
to somebody else. Nobody holds your hand every Saturday night but you.
Have a good day.
== Orange
[ Thursday, April 8, 2004, 2nd letter from Jason:] I have used the past few days reading your article and have made several notes regarding your web site. There is a lot of information and I disagree with a lot of it (however, not all of it). I sent you an e-mail a few days ago, and perhaps you haven't received it, or perhaps you just didn't bother to read or respond. In either case, once I have completely read your piece I will send you my entire opinion and you can choose to ignore it, post it, do whatever you want with it. However, I have to take issue right now with a statement you made on the web site. This seems to be a typical criticism with A.A./N.A. in which you read the text as someone who does not have a problem with drugs or alcohol. The passage comes from the page http://www.orange-papers.info/orange-effectiveness.html and it goes like this:
The book does not advocate the dissolution of the family. What this passage does is takes the biblical approach to relationships that says the order of importance of one persons life is God, Self, and all others. Actually, I believe it is God, self, spouse, children, family, and then all others, but this is another discussion. This program is meant to better the life of the individual. If my wife left me, or if my son died, God forbid, I would relapse if my priorities were not in the right order. I must put myself above all other things on this earth in order to live a successful life. The easy thing for me to do is to put my wife and my son above all else. However my spiritual teachings tell me otherwise. This does not mean I am selfish. Quite the opposite. I love my wife the way God loves the church. I live and stay sober due to the fact I love my family and do not want to injure them anymore than I already have.
You are correct in saying that A.A. does not openly advocate divorce and
breaking up marriages. Bill Wilson did it obliquely, by talking out of
both sides of his mouth. Read the Big Book.
It's all in the Big Book.
Then, in the Big Book,
Bill Wilson even dispensed advice on how us good old boys can cheat on
our wives and get away with it.
Read this.
How is that going to keep marriages together?
And more to the point, we have to look at the actual effect of such teachings.
What's really going on in A.A.? Read these three letters —
one of the first
that I received on the subject, and then these two —
here and
here —
that I received just recently.
They describe how A.A. really affects marriages, all too often.
And then there is just the A.A. culture. You often hear remarks like,
"I had to let my family go for the sake of my sobriety."
Check out a videotape of The Days of Wine and Roses for more of that
attitude.
To claim that "God" (who might be a Group Of Drunks, Baal Bedpan, or Doorknob Almighty)
comes first in one's life is just a veiled way of saying that the cult
comes first, because A.A. redefines the newcomers' ideas of God even while
A.A. is saying that it doesn't do that. It's another bait-and-switch trick —
First you can believe in any "Higher Power" you wish, but then you have to believe
in a wish-granting, order-dictating tyrant in order for the 12 Steps to work.
Not only does A.A. get to redefine God, but the sponsor and other A.A. old-timers
get to declare what God says. Ostensibly, newcomers are supposed to hear the voice
of God in Step Eleven, but then
Bill says that the
beginners get it all wrong,
so they must "check Guidance" with the elders, who will tell them what God really
says.
In the end, the sponsors, not God, end up running the newcomers' lives and
giving them their orders, and telling them what to think and what to do...
And you are overlooking the arrogance in that BB Unplugged quote,
where A.A. is more important than the husband. He only comes in third in
importance. In reality, by following that BB Unplugged advice,
A.A. gets both first place and second place in
the newcomer's life — once as "God", and once as the A.A. program. Since it seems you are someone looking from the outside in, you have no idea the struggle we go through. I myself struggled for over seven years to quit. I could not do it alone. There is a defect in myself; these steps have helped me to be a better person. My wife's support has also helped. After turning my will and my life over to the care of God I have not used, not once. There are several things that have helped that I won't go into now.
No, I am most assuredly not someone on the outside looking in.
(That's another
standard A.A.
ad hominem attack
— "You don't know what you are talking about.")
You haven't even read
the introduction, have you?
I've been through the mill too, and around the block. I've also struggled to
quit drinking and smoking for far too many years.
Just my last relapse lasted 9 years.
I finally quit when my doctor told me that I would die if I didn't.
He even said that I was a late-stage alcoholic, and that the death rate for
them was the same as for cancer — fifty percent.
I still managed to quit drinking and smoking anyway, without a cult religion, because
I was sick and tired of being sick and tired, and I didn't want to die that way.
I decided to be part of the fifty percent who didn't die from it.
A.A. does not have a monopoly on
knowledge about alcoholism. That is just A.A.'s cultish behavior again —
"
We are Special.
We are the only ones who have
the real knowledge and
the
deepest innermost understanding."
Remember that
the vast majority — 80% — of the alcoholics who successfully
quit drinking do it alone, without A.A. or any other treatment program,
so it appears that it is the other people who are really in the know.
I am still going to read your web site. Once finished I will send you my entire critique. I am continuing to read it as honestly and independently as I can. This has been difficult though. I look forward to a spirited debate in the near future. Jason
Okay, I'll be looking forward to it.
Have a good day.
== Orange
[Tue, April 13, 2004, 3rd letter from Jason:] We will simply have to agree to disagree for now. I've heard that before too, and what it usually means is, "I'm not going to change my mind no matter how many facts you provide." As I said, I have just begun to read your web site and there is a lot of information to take in. You have obviously done a considerable amount of research and I noticed you even quoted Dick B. I am reading one of his books now "The Akron Genesis of AA." I like The Akron Genesis of AA for its wealth of historical facts, but disagree with Dick's religious interpretation of history. He wants to believe that God created The Oxford Groups and Alcoholics Anonymous. No way did God create the Oxford Groups. The Hitler-praising Frank Buchman did it, or maybe you could say that the Devil did it, but certainly not God. And then Bill Wilson just copied the Oxford Groups cult to get Alcoholics Anonymous. The reason I know AA/NA works is b/c I tried in vain several times to stop using. I failed ever time.
Sorry, but that's bad logic --
That is the common logical fallacy of
Confusing Coincidence or Correlation with Causation. It wasn't until I discovered the 12-steps where I finally rediscovered God and was able to successfully stop using.
It wasn't until you learned to quit that you quit. You didn't quit until
you got so sick and tired of failing that you realized that you had to really
totally quit and stop messing around with
"sort of quitting, and sort of nibbling a little when the cravings hit."
It was a learning process. The 12 steps are just
Frank Buchman's routines for
indoctrinating new cult members. They don't make people quit drinking, and
they don't make people spiritual.
And if you had gone to some other group that told you that you had to dress
up in a ballerina's tutu and dance around for an hour whenever cravings hit, you
would probably have done that because you were "willing to go to any length
to get what they had", and now you would be totally convinced that the
Tutu Technique really does work, and is a great program for achieving
sobriety. Not only that, it is good exercise and clarifies the mind, too.
And in the end, it will make you more spiritual.
That may sound absurd, and it is absurd, but it is no more illogical than
believing that listing and confessing all of your sins will make you quit drinking.
However, more than that, I became a better person. Before, I simply was a user. I didn't steal to feed my habit; I didn't rape or commit harmful acts against others. However, I also wasn't a respected member of my community. I wasn't doing my fellow man any service either. These principals have helped me to do just that. I am now an active positive force in my community. I volunteer; I help those who are unable to help themselves.
I won't argue with that, other than to say that you improved yourself because
you chose to, not because of Bill Wilson's adaptation of Frank Buchman's cult
religion practices — Practices, not Principles.
There are no spiritual principles in the 12 steps.
"Love thy neighbor as thy God as thy self" is a spiritual principle.
"Do unto others as you would have them to unto you" is a spiritual principle.
"Honesty is the best policy " is a spiritual principle. I don't push my religion or my sobriety on other people. It sounds to me like you had a bad experiences with AA, and that is unfortunate. However, b/c it didn't work for you congratulations. I think I would consider you not to be an addict or an alcoholic.
And there is that standard A.A. cop-out again —
"You aren't a real alcoholic, because
you quit without our cult. No real alcoholic can quit without our magic."
That is also just another way of saying that
"A.A. is THE ONLY WAY",
which is typical of cults. They usually claim that they have
"THE ONLY WAY"
Read this letter, where another
true believer declared that I wasn't really an alcoholic.
It sounds as if you were able to quit on your own strength. Yes, as do the vast majority of recovered alcoholics and addicts. My concern, however, are for those, like me, who can't. Your "online book" does a great disservice to those looking for an answer.
Ah yes, there it is once again. Sooner or later, the true believers almost
invariably
parrot that line.
It's like a
standard A.A. slogan:
Actually, giving people misinformation about alcoholism kills far more alcoholics.
That is what A.A.W.S Trustee Professor George E. Vaillant found when he put A.A. treatment
through
an 8-year-long test.
Nothing killed the alcoholics faster than A.A., so it
is A.A. that is doing a great disservice to those who are seeking sobriety.
People just want good, practical, helpful information about how to quit and stay
quit, and what they get from A.A. is cult religion and Bill Wilson's lies.
It drives some people to drink.
I found that answer, and you have yours.
You really don't know what you have found. You are confusing causation with coincidence
again.
You are also trying the debating trick called
Escape Via Relativism — trying to imply that it's just your opinion
versus my opinion, and one opinion is just as good as another, or
one answer is just as good as another...
Furthermore, you are stubbornly refusing to see the facts, which makes your
"answer" worthless.
You clearly see how few of the newcomers become successful old-timers, and yet you
still try to claim that A.A. has a working answer.
Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.
Now the fact that you have found personal happiness is just fine.
Congratulations on your sobriety. I'm happy for you. But that does not prove
that A.A. has a workable answer for anybody else. A.A.'s huge failure rate
proves that it doesn't.
However, what about the millions of addicts who are looking for the answer to stop using, but can't on their own. What if these principals would work for them, however, after reading the material you present, they give up before ever trying. Should their one and only chance at living on this earth be wasted to a life of addiction and misery?
That is just so much baloney. A.A. kills more alcoholics than it saves, so
warning people about A.A. is not denying them a chance to recover.
Again, there are no "spiritual principles" in the cult practices
that are embodied in the 12 steps.
And the 12 Steps don't work. Even A.A. leader George Vaillant proved that.
Furthermore, I do offer people hope and an answer — sane, happy, healthy freedom.
Recovery from alcoholism and addictions without
life-long dependency on a guilt-inducing cult religion.
We have talked about this here before, several times.
Read this and
these recovery aids.
Again, I do not go recruiting. I would never recruit. Those who want what I have are more than welcome to come and check out what I have attained. You may not, but your friends and associates do, sometimes in very ugly coercive ways, like using judges and parole officers to force people into A.A., with the threat of jail or prison. Look at what the judges in Westboro, Massachusetts, have done just this year. And counselors and "therapists", many of whom are A.A. members, routinely tell people that they will die if they don't go to A.A. meetings. This is what got me to where I am today. Again, you are assuming a cause and effect relationship where there is no evidence for any such thing. You might as well be saying, "I ate mashed potatos and gravy, and then quit drinking, so obviously mashed potatos and gravy are a good program for making people quit drinking." Was Bob and Bill saints, I don't think so. Did they happen to stumble upon something great, I think so.
They didn't stumble into anything great — they were recruited into
Frank Buchman's strange
fascist cult religion, the Oxford Groups, remember?.
Then Bill decided that he could make
a lot of money by treating alcoholics with cheap cult religion:
Has it become something else entirely different, absolutely. No, it is just what it was in the beginning — a hoax. The idea that A.A. was a great success in the beginning is just another one of Bill Wilson's Big Lies. Courts are forcing addicts and alcoholics who do not want to change their life to a group who's mission it is to change lives.
Now
the coercion part
of that statement is unfortunately all too true,
but the courts get told to do it by the true believer A.A. members.
The Little Red Book of Hazelden (yes, a clone of the Communist
Little Red Book of Chairman Mao)
specifically teaches recruiters to indoctrinate judges, police, doctors,
and other officials as part of the 12th-step proselytizing work. It says
that faithful A.A. members can "carry the message" by:
Bill Wilson himself started that practice.
In a 1939 letter from Bill to Earl T., a founding member of the
Chicago A.A. group, Bill wrote:
The "Group" has also become institutionalized, and has compromised its integrity.
Again, it wasn't great in the beginning, so it hasn't really gone downhill.
It didn't have any integrity in the beginning, because
Bill Wilson did not
have any integrity.
But I agree that the institutionalization of A.A. has made things even worse,
because now places like Hazelden and the Betty Ford Clinic charge people $15,000
for 28-day-long A.A. meetings. And that kind of money makes a whole
host of propagandists
eager to lie and praise 12-step treatment
in order to get more paying customers.
There is now a national organization with approved literature. This is dangerous in my opinion. Really. Very dangerous. Read about the A.A. headquarters committing perjury in two countries and getting A.A. members sentenced to prison in a squabble over the issue of who can print and give away (or sell very inexpensively) translations of the old, out-of-copyright "approved literature". The situation is already way beyond dangerous; the disaster has happened. The national organization has become corrupted to the point of committing felony perjury against other A.A. members who were "carrying the message". However, I do not worry myself with either of these issues. No, it should be my job to worry, because I'm the one who can see more clearly what is really going on. I stay sober. I rely on the power of God to get me through the day. And after two years, it has become second nature. I have a loving and lasting relationship with my creator. Good. Congratulations on your recovery. It does get easier, as the years pass. I'm still working on reading your entire piece. It will probably take me a while, and I am making an honest effort to read it without bias and making no judgments. I will give you my complete opinion once I'm finished. Thank you for the response and for your opinion.
Yes, have a good day.
== Orange
[Thu, May 6, 2004, 4th letter from Jason H.:] Orange, The proof for me is in our writing styles. I never disparaged you or the things you believed in. I simply gave you my take on things and left it at that. However, you tore apart, criticized, and judged every statement I made. The proof I need is in that contrast. I have my beliefs, and they are strong, and you have yours and I'm sure they are strong as well. It is ok for us to disagree, as long as it is done respectfully. I feel I have done that. I will continue to go once a week to my meeting. I will continue to enjoy the fellowship we have. We will also continue to accept and help those who want to be helped. We will pass on what we did to get sober and let them make up their own mind. No recruiting, no coercion, no stipulations. I don't understand how you can see a problem with that. I wish you well in your future endeavors.
Jason H.
Hi Jason,
I did not disparage you or launch personal attacks on you. Read my letters again,
carefully. In fact, I congratulated you on your years of sobriety, and
agreed with you when you said that you had improved yourself:
"I am now an active positive force in my community. I volunteer; I help..."
I most assuredly did criticize your (really, A.A.'s) beliefs, but that is a
very different thing. Beliefs are not sacred. Beliefs are fair game.
Beliefs are, after all, just someone's cherished ideas or mental impressions or
opinions, no matter how true or untrue they may be.
If you sincerely, strongly,
believed that the world was flat and that U.S. astronauts never went to the moon,
like one cult religion does,
and you were teaching those beliefs to schoolchildren, then I would also
most assuredly attack those beliefs. Why? Because teaching those beliefs
to children would be doing harm to them, misinforming them about the truth
of this world.
(I see from your email address that you work for a school system, so the
example is relevant.)
Similarly, Alcoholics Anonymous has a bunch of beliefs that are not only untrue,
but which are positively harmful to people who are trying to recover
from alcoholism, like teaching people that they are powerless over alcohol,
and that they should
abandon "Reason" and "just have faith",
and that alcoholism is caused by
"defects of character" and "moral shortcomings".
A.A. routinely teaches a lot of very wrong ideas about
alcoholism to the newcomers who are sick, cloudy-headed, and vulnerable
to indoctrination. And A.A. will not quit doing it. A.A. will not ever
correct its dogma and doctrines. They won't change one word of Bill Wilson's
insane ravings in the sacred "first 164 pages".
But Bill Wilson really was insane and his "spiritual cure" for alcoholism
is lunacy.
And that is why I have to criticize those beliefs.
Lastly, you say,
"I will continue to go once a week to my meeting. ...
We will pass on what we did to get sober and let them make up their own mind.
No recruiting, no coercion, no stipulations. I
don't understand how you can see a problem with that."
Alas, you are still dodging the issue of coercive recruiting. You may not
personally do it, but A.A. does.
It is still happening every day.
Every day, all across this country, thousands of people are sentenced to A.A. meetings,
where they will then be indoctrinated with the standard A.A. dogma — what
you call
"We will pass on what we did to get sober..."
But that really means that you will repeat the indoctrination that was done
to you. They convinced you that the Twelve Steps made you get sober, so you
will now teach them to others, happily unaware of the fact that
the Twelve Steps are tools for converting
newcomers into true believers in a cult religion.
That's the problem I have with it.
Oh well, have a good day anyway. And I also wish you well, sincerely.
== Orange
[Tue, May 11, 2004, 5th letter from Jason H.:] Orange, You said in your last e-mail to me
Alas, you are still dodging the issue of coercive recruiting. You may not personally do it, but A.A. does. It is still happening every day. Every day, all across this country, thousands of people are sentenced to A.A. meetings, where they will then be indoctrinated with the standard A.A. dogma — what you call "We will pass on what we did to get sober..." That is the overwhelming issue I have with your "book" and your statements. Each AA / NA group is autonomous. No one can tell me how to run my meeting and I can't tell them how to run theirs. I would have less of a problem is you mentioned specific groups that were doing this. Specific people who were causing this harm, b/c I do think that people in AA and NA can do wrong. But you instead lump us all together and judge each one of us, tell us we are wrong for thinking this way, and then shove facts in a very specific order.
Excuse me, but every A.A. meeting that I've ever been to began the meeting by reading
the Twelve Steps and the Twelve Traditions out loud.
It doesn't matter who runs the meeting or how autonomous they are.
Most everybody reads large
quotes out of pages 58 and 59 of the Big Book to start the meeting.
All of those groups push the same basic theology — Bill Wilson's version
of
Frank Buchman's cult religion.
All of them start their meetings by repeating Bill Wilson's lies like:
I am not over-generalizing. You want me to list specific meetings that push
the A.A. theology? Okay, how about the last 10 meetings you went to?
The truth of the matter is I know it works b/c it works. You may not believe that, but I don't need facts to believe it. Take your rabbit foot example. If a child learning to ride a bike falls every time, and a friend gives her a rabbit foot and she begins to take off, was it the rabbit foot. Maybe, maybe not. If she leaves the rabbit foot in her room and can't get on the bike could that not offer as just more proof.
That is a good example of
circular reasoning —
"I know it works because it works."
That is, of course, totally invalid logic. You offer no facts or evidence
that it works; only your belief.
Then you say,
"You may not believe that, but I don't need facts to believe it."
That's the whole problem. That's why you qualify as a true believer.
You don't need facts to believe.
("Don't distract me with mere facts...") The fact of the matter is I can't prove the 12 steps work.
Right. Because they don't work (for sobriety, that is).
Even a leader of Alcoholics Anonymous,
Prof. Dr. George E. Vaillant,
member of the Board of Trustees of Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc.,
showed that they don't work to keep people sober when he tested them for eight years.
However, the 12 Steps most assuredly do work for brainwashing and indoctrinating
people. They are a well-designed program of
"thought reform" or mind control.
I also can't prove there is a God or that Jesus Chris died on the cross for my sins, but that is what I believe. Well then you really must go read the file The Heresy of the Twelve Steps. As a Christian, you will find many very serious conflicts between Steppism and Christianity. You had better figure out which religion you really believe in. And you had better figure out whom you really serve: Jesus Christ or Bill Wilson. I also can't prove I have an undying love for my child, or I would do anything my wife ever asked. I am now a person who believes in certain things. In my heart I know I am right. Maybe I'm doing it on my own, maybe I'm not, but I'm not going to stop b/c some random guy has a web site didn't like a group he went to and did a lot of reading from other people work. The fact that you fervently, ardently believe certain things does not prove that you are right — "In my heart I know I am right." It just proves that you want to believe those things. You really have done a lot of work. However, I know have a power now that I never had before. I make a conscience contact with God and he gives me strength as only my creator can. I'm sure science might be able to explain it, and when we are dead only then will we truly ever know. That is my truth. You have yours. The difference is I respect your truth. Yours isn't any better or any worse.
The fact that you draw power or energy from your beliefs is nothing new.
That is a very well-known, very old phenomenon.
Fanatical religions have had highly energized followers throughout history.
Check out the Zealots in the Bible. Again, the fact that your beliefs make
you feel good and make you feel energized does not prove them right.
Think about Hitler's followers. They were raised to heights of passion and
excitement by Hitler's oratory. They Came To Believe that they
could take over the world.
They even believed
that they were noble and spiritual people — that they were doing the world
a favor by getting rid of the dirty Jews.
They drew enormous energy and power from their beliefs, but that didn't make
them right.
Many churches and cults use emotional ceremonies to give people power and
energy. Study the evangelistic Christians.
You are in Tulsa, Oklahoma. You should be able to find some emotional
evangelists to study there. Who's the guy with the Tower of Prayer in Tulsa?
Also, isn't there an Oral Roberts University there?
You are in grand central station for people who believe without facts.
You should be able to visit some churches or ceremonies to see other people
who draw great energy and power from their beliefs (which are not the 12 Steps
or Frank Buchman's fascist philosophy).
You can derive a great feeling of comfort and serenity from that. The only problem with that is that it is totally untrue. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that God will handle all of your problems for you while you sit on your duff and bliss out with Serenity and Gratitude. (Nor does it say any such thing in Buddhist literature, or the Koran, or Jewish Talmudic tradition, or the Hindu Vedas, or the Bhagavad Gita, etc...)
When I am feeling stressed
out, I often use such mind-control or relaxation techniques on myself,
to keep from going into
a tizzy and flipping out with an anxiety attack: But the big difference is that I know what I am doing. There is a world of difference between consciously using mind-control techniques on yourself to control your own mind and calm yourself, and having other people using mind control techniques (like guilt induction and self-criticism) on you without your knowledge of how it works.
Again, I really don't want to get into a debate over this. Yes you do. That's why you keep writing these letters. And to answer one last question, I work in the Bond project office for the Tulsa Public Schools. I don't work with kids, and if I did, I would find that subject inappropriate. Your assumption that I'm indoctrinating youth is unfounded. Jason H.
I did not assume or even hint that you were indoctrinating children.
I noticed that you work for a school district. I did not assume that
you were a teacher. I merely assumed that you would agree with me that it
would be inappropriate to teach children that the world is flat.
I hoped you would understand why I would attack the belief that the world is flat
if I found that somebody was teaching it to children.
And I hoped that you would understand why beliefs are not sacred.
Beliefs are just ideas. And some ideas are true, and some are not.
And I hoped that you would understand how teaching some erroneous beliefs
to people can hurt them. —Like teaching alcoholics that they are powerless
over alcohol.
Oh well, have a good day anyway.
== Orange
[Mon, May 17, 2004, 6th letter from Jason H.:] Lastly, This is something I believe in. To you, a belief may not mean much. But to me, I hold my beliefs dear.
And that is the problem. Where did you get the idea that beliefs were valuable,
something to be held dear?
Let me guess: When you were a child, some preacher told you that God would get
mad at you if you didn't believe in Him, right?
You might even go to Hell.
Actually, the only person who cares that much what you believe is the preacher.
If you stop believing what he says, you won't give him any more money.
During the middle ages, many men, including Church authorities, sincerely and
fervently believed that there were witches — that Satan would come up out
of the ground and have sexual intercourse with women and turn them into evil witches
who cast nasty spells on the common folk and made them get sick.
Millions of women, girls, and even baby girls were murdered because of such
beliefs.
So what were those beliefs worth, even though their believers held them dearly?
Such beliefs are not good and holy things, they are positively evil.
One could even say satanic.
What is it worth to faithfully believe that
Frank N. D. Buchman
brought a wonderful new "spirituality" into this world while
he hung out with Heinrich Himmler and praised Adolf Hitler?
Likewise, what is it worth to believe that Bill Wilson was a genius and a great
saint who brought wonderful new spirituality into this world, when he didn't?
Unexamined beliefs can be extremely dangerous, and are nothing to brag about.
I appreciate you trying to show me the light, but as you can tell, no matter how much we debate this issue, we are not going to get the other to see our own point of view. Reading your "online book" is nonsensical. We don't share the same history.
Excuse me, but the truth does not change depending on your personal history.
(That is an attempt to use the propaganda trick of
Escape Via Relativism — "It's just your opinion versus my opinion.")
I am talking about things like the history of A.A., and what A.A. is now,
and the effectiveness of A.A. in helping people to overcome alcoholism,
and that has nothing to do with whether you or I enjoyed the last 20
years. Our personal histories are totally irrelevant and have nothing to do
with whether Bill Wilson was a scheming fraud who enriched himself by selling
a quack cure for alcoholism — Frank Buchman's cult religion.
I'm glad you have your sobriety. I know ,from experience, it is a rare gift for some. Again, you have your truth, and I have mine. I really do not and will no longer continue to debate this issue with you. I don't see the point in banging my head against a brick wall, nor do I want you to do the same. I wish you well in all your endeavors.
Sincerely,
Quitting already? You have not answered any of my questions about the important
issues. Every time I make a point,
you just change the subject.
Are you really going to quit by saying
"Well, I believe what I believe and don't distract me with mere facts"?
You never answered the question about the major conflicts between Christianity
and
the A.A. heresies.
I thought that at least that one would interest you,
considering how important your beliefs are to you. I mean, you are a Christian
living in Tulsa, aren't you? Or are you?
Oh well, have a good day anyway.
== Orange
Why?? and why not use you name ?agent orange. There a few things that motivate a human to put forth this much effort?.. What are yours?
Hi Sean,
In A.A., maintaining anonymity is proclaimed to be a high, holy virtue.
Funny that you think it strange if I choose to do the same.
I choose, for now, to maintain my anonymity because it is convenient.
Period. I may break it later, if I feel like it.
About the question, "Why put this much work into such a web site?"
Well, the real answer to that is also "because I feel like it".
But here are some more reasons:
Have a good day.
== Orange
P.S.: The answer to the question about the "Agent Orange" name is here.
I am a former heroin addict. I do understand what you say about AA and how it is being cultish. It's membership does consist of a large number of actually crazy people who quite possibly distort into "their own belief" the principals of AA. There are a large number of people who have known me for many, many years. I was at one point somewhat popular in the Los Angeles Subculture of rock and roll — hence the attraction to substances. I was a Chemistry major, I think that's why I was popular... though I am not entirely sure. After years of drug abuse, I became, what my ex and family lovingly referred to as "dangerously unstable and unhealthy." After that sunk in, for a while I did no drugs and had no alcohol — I even quit smoking for a month or so. However, my mood had not changed much outside of me being a bit more pleasant to be around and completely non-violent. But the craving to use never went away. Not for nearly a year. Then, one day, it was gone — I felt amazing, invincible almost... that, however was very fleeting. I ended up strung out less than one month before staying sober for a year. I had no good reason to use. I had not gone through anything emotionally jarring. I just got a few drinks one night, because it seemed like a good idea, and less than 3 hours after, I drove my car to my old dealers house, not drunk, and spent $200 on heroin. I was stone sober — a beer and half a martini. Not much alcohol, but it triggered something in me. I was not sober for 9 months. I was on heroin again, every day, while making a hair more than minimum wage selling coffee... I would steal the stuff a "friend" of mine bought when he passed out in the car. I would also spend my paycheck on whatever I could afford. Not exactly smart behavior, and I knew it, but I couldn't stop. I don't know exactly what happened, but one day I stopped — and almost completely painlessly. I had, the night before, been completely destroyed after finding out that the girl I had recently broken up with was now dating my old boss. I haven't used since. Most of the people who knew me then still know me now. The closest of them knew me when shit was getting out of control, when it spiked and I nearly killed this kid out of jealousy, and when I finally gave up. Of those people, only a handful of them know I am in AA. I do not make it known. However, the general consensus is I am fantastically better than I had been in years. I am still the same person — not changed for the cultier. I do not force what works for me onto other people (I know it may seem like I am trying to do this to you, but I am honestly not — read on). In AA, I have encountered countless people who are honestly spooky and cult-like in their behaviors. Many of them belong to a subset of AA that really creeps me the fuck out [that] is called The Pacific Group. Your encounter with AA sounds like you ran into people who started there or are active PG members. THEY ARE LIKE THE SCIENTOLOGISTS — many of them anyhow. There are a few gems, but most of the PG is freakywierd and dangeresque. Someone mentions they are part of PG, and I leave many details of myself out (like everything). Another group of people in AA are people (like myself) who used to self medicate. I don't say that in the way you are expecting. It is not the root of why I started, but probably one of the main reasons I couldn't stop. I have what is known as unipolar depression — I get a massive influx of dopamine as the serotonin level drops suddenly. I become REALLY DANGEROUS to other people. Apparently, opiates and wellbutrin are excellent treatments for that. I now take the latter. But many of the people think that to be sober, you need to be free of ALL substances (yet they smoke and drink coffee... gets me every time) and don't take medication that would probably benefit all of them and cause others, like yourself, to be less spooked by AA or NA. Did I mention that PG will kick you out if you take meds? Even ones for asthma — they are stimulants mostly derived from adrenaline. Now, I mentioned that I do not force this on anyone and I believe I need to clarify that. I am not trying to force this on you, but rather trying to give an explanation for some of the crazy things you say happened. All I know is that it works for me. I would love to discuss my take on it and have a bit of a debate, so PLEASE respond... sorry for the length of this email, but back story always seems to help people out a bit. I don't remember if it was your or another article that mentioned the higher power thing, but I do feel I need to address it and maybe clear something up about it. I struggled with that one, but couldn't deny that I was incapable of doing many of the things that nature does, like waves, or gravity and such. I also have had too many bizarre coincidences and had WAY too many "close calls" (like being caught manufacturing and only getting a 60 day home confinement sentence, a year probation, NO RECORD, and a $300 fine) to not believe in something. So with that, all that I believe is that there is something that has vested interest in the affairs of humans, and while I cannot possibly comprehend the whys and whats of it all, I can ask it for guidance. All that consists of for me is if an action I want to take is questionable, it is probably going to cause me or someone grief. Though I cannot expect to cause nobody grief, I can do my best to do the least amount of damage. How I do that is I pause before saying, or doing. It seems kind of basic and easy, but I needed to be taught that, because I didn't know. Basically what AA boils down to, FOR ME, is a few key ideas:
I hope that didn't sound preachy. I hope that you meet more people in AA like myself. People you wouldn't expect to be in AA, but are. If it did, flame me. If it was more of a discussion on your ideas, I would love your feedback. I think this stuff is interesting. Ian
Hi Ian,
Thanks for the letter. It doesn't sound preachy at all. And the length is
no problem — we don't have to pay for blank paper here.
My first reaction is that I really don't hate or even dislike all A.A. members.
That would be over-generalizing and stereotyping. I still know a few people
who go to 12-step meetings. I even like a few of them.
There aren't many of them left, though, because the
so-called "recovery community"
has such a terrible dropout or relapse rate.
You said,
"I had no good reason to use.
I had not gone through anything emotionally jarring."
That strikes me as one of the mysteries of addictions.
Sometimes you don't get the standard list of reasons, like child abuse,
sexual abuse, traumatic experiences, or poverty.
Why should well-treated rich people's kids suddenly turn into hard-core addicts?
And yet they do.
I suspect that there is something like a random genetic glitch, perhaps
a broken gene that has something to do with the
dopamine receptors, which I have talked
about before.
It may not a coincidence at all that you also said,
"I have what is known as unipolar depression — I get a massive influx of dopamine as the serotonin level drops suddenly."
I don't know about that particular condition, but it feels like,
"Yeh, somehow, that makes sense. Serotonin and dopamine problems —
that's a natural setup for wanting to fix it with self-medication."
UPDATE: 2014.12.09:
A study by the NIAAA
found that mutations of the gene that grows dopamine receptors in peoples' brains
makes some people get much more pleasure out of alcohol than other people.
And he might have mentioned that fascisms seem to always flaunt
an angry, arrogant, brutish attitude, too.
That's fun stuff, but it seems that you can't make it happen.
It just happens when the time is right, and you can't force it.
Whenever some phony guru comes along and says that he can sell us a
ticket to the magic, that's where I get off of the bus.
Bill Wilson and A.A. say that you can get your ticket to the magic
by doing their 12 Steps and going to a lot of their meetings and believing
in Bill's Bull. Nonsense. That's where I got off of the bus.
Oh well, have a good day anyway.
== Orange
UPDATE: 2012.12.20: I ended up getting so many letters about Clancy Imusland's Pacific Group that there is a whole file of them now: orange-clancy_i.html
Ciao Arancio, I am your Italian reader. I was checking out your new mails, and reading your answers. I feel so empowered and validated, when I do that. (And also have a good laugh) It reminds me about that scene in Woody Allen's "Annie Hall" , where he is in a queue in front of a theater and there is a pompous asshole behind him, bragging about and talking nonsense about media and communication, and all that... And Allen is dying to say something to make him stop because he is obviously telling such BS, and then Marshall McLuhan in person steps out of the queue and tells the guy he doesn't know what he is talking about and lets him have it. Well, anytime I read your answers to a Bhagwan follower or a 12 steps addict, I feel the same. Thank you thank you, Marshall!!!!
Ciao,
Hi Diana,
Nice to hear from you again. Yes, some of those letters are amusing, aren't
they? And more are coming in. Re-check the last couple of files of letters.
But you know, there is another take on that Woody Allen scene.
I actually got this from a true-life story of a New York literary
cocktail party:
Now that's the feeling I often get when arguing with the true believers...
You just can't tell them anything.
Oh well, have a good day anyway.
== Orange
Hi I just had a "moment of clarity" that had been fermenting on and off for several months.... The old "Hi my name is so and so and I am an addict / alcoholic" bullshit trip clone speak, no longer applies. When I was young, and being sexually abused and raised by two moral monsters for parents, and my emotional and physical needs were not being met, I needed to block out the shame and the effects of being wholly negated and neglected and abused. Now that I have substantially dealt with almost all of those issues, I can say of my self, "I was someone who due to circumstances beyond his own control - had to self medicate in order to survive; and when those survival tools stopped working I had to learn new survival tools, and now having been drug free for a long time, and having dealt with many of those issues, I have no need or desire to self medicate." You can stick this in the We Get Letters dept if you want. Shane Hi Shane, Okay, I will.
Dear Mr. Orange, Thank you for your most excellent site. Your research is awesome and you are to be congratulated for your diligence. I think you are doing a great service to alcoholics and other addicts. You should have your work published outside the net if possible. It should be more widely read. Is there any chance of that happening? I would give copies to the AAs I know as presents on their "sober birthday" dates!!
Hi Pete,
Thanks for all of the compliments. So far, I have no plans to publish this stuff
on paper.
Maybe on CD...
See this previous letter.
I have been a member of AA — sober for nearly 20 years now — and I have been doubtful about what I call the "quack pseudo-spirituality" of AA for some time. Like a lot of folks in AA, at first I accepted it all and tried to follow it. But I gradually realized that a lot of it just does not make sense and some of it is downright dangerous! For example — the dogmas "resentment is the number one offender" so "dont ever get angry" and "stuff your feelings" or you will drink! These statements are simply untrue in my experience. With regard to resentments — it depends what the resentment is. If I am resentful because I missed a train — then its just hard luck — get over it and wait for the next one! If I am resentful because of some gross injustice then it is GOOD to be resentful because it might motivate me (and others) to DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Drinking on resentments just doesn't come into it as far as I am concerned! And repressing anger is very dangerous! No wonder Bill W was depressed for 11 years! The Big Book and the 12x12 should have mental health warnings attatched to them! I still attend meetings, about once per week, and I even sponsor people — in a very non agressive way I have to say. I like helping people stay sober and I am happy to listen to their troubles when they need a friendly ear or a second opinion. But I do not promote Bill Wilson's "Programme" anymore. I go to AA now mainly for social reasons. I have made some good friends there, we go for coffee or a pizza after meetings, and its kinda fun. I also share at meetings and I only share what I feel to be the truth. (Which makes me unpopular with the cultists!) You are right when you say that the truth matters! In my opinion if is ain't true then it ain't "spiritual!" By that reason alone most (if not all) of what Bill W pumped out was false. However I also want to say that not all of what AA as a whole says is useless. For example the motto "one day at a time".... I found that a particular useful motto when nursing my father through a long and difficult illness. Getting through it all "one day at a time" helped us both through the crisis. I know that people outside AA find this little motto helpful in times of prolonged trial. I don't think it is either superstitious or cultish. It is compassionate.
Indeed. My favorite "good A.A. slogan"
(as opposed to "thought-stopping slogan") is, Finally I have my own humble little addition for your section AA heresy — "The God of AA". Here it is.......
The AA God is highly capricious and just can't make his mind up . He creates two types of alcoholic — those who are born with the capacity to be honest and who can therefore recover Bill W's way. — and then he creates those who do NOT have the capacity to be honest — (remember according to Bill W "They are not at fault. They seem to have been born that way"). So these poor suckers were created unable to be honest and therefore destined for the "gates of insanity and death" helpless victims of incurable alcoholism. (for which, of course, they should be eternally grateful!) Mmmmmmm.. nice God you got there Bill!!!. Now, I guess that won't getting published in Daily Reflections, or the Grapevine! Best wishes Agent Orange! Stay sober and keep writing! Pete (London. UK)
Hi Pete,
Thanks for a great letter and a good laugh.
My take on the "One Day At A Time" slogan is a little different.
I get the feeling that there is a strong implication that alcoholics are just
too feeble-minded to face the prospect of NEVER drinking again — they
will immediately freak out — so let's just ask them to stay sober for just one day
— "Just For Today".
I find that attitude to be defeatist, and it always leaves the door open for
relapsing tomorrow, or next weekend. And it encourages white-knuckle sobriety,
where people are hanging on by their fingernails just for today.
When I quit, I thought, "3 months, at least 3 months.
I'll give it a try for three months, and get myself together, and see
how I feel then."
(I was very sick, and needed 3 months to recover.)
Well, after 3 months of sobriety, I seemed to be even sicker. Actually, it was just that
3 months of sobriety had cleared my head enough that I could see more clearly just how sick
I had been, and how much damage I still suffered from. So I said, "3 years.
I've done that before. I know how to do that, so I'll do that again."
So I did three years.
Well, the three years was up just six months ago, so I signed on for another 3 years.
I find that quitting 3 years at a time really reduces the decision-making chores.
Instead of having to decide every day not to drink,
I only have to make a decision once every three years. :-)
Have a good day.
== Orange
Last updated 9 January 2015. |
