[ Link here =
http://www.orange-papers.info/orange-letters425.html#King_Fan ]
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 03:12:13 +0000 (UTC) (answered 18 January 2015.) You say "Please pick out your favorite two or three points of disagreement, and show us what thereal truth is, citing valid and credible sources of information.", yet this is something you yourself have difficulty doing. For example, you assert (at "http://www.orange-papers.info/orange-propaganda.html#everybody") an entire list of things that A.A./N.A./Al-anon supposedly say. They (XA programs) do not say any of those things. And there is no "real truth" nor "valid and credible source of information" you can produce that demonstrates otherwise. The official literature actually suggests the exact opposite. Your "evidence" for this is a quote (from a non-X/A source, no less), that 12 step programs can be "important." The quote dose not say that "everyone is doing them," or even that "most people are doing them". Your next "evidence" is a quote that is selectively used without any frame of reference or qualification, that is "The tremendous fact for every one of us is that we have discovered acommon solution. We have a way out on which we can absolutely agree,and upon which we can join in brotherly and harmonious action" Note the key word "a". AA has "a" way out. Not "the way", not "the best way", not "the most common way", not "the way everyone is doing it" (despite your claims otherwise). Your experience in AA may admittedly have been quite different. You may in fact have run into a book thumper or a crusty old timer who told you exactly everything that you listed. I would tell you my experience has been exactly opposite. I have never run into anyone with that sort of attitude. Now, your response to me would probably be "well that's just anecdotal evidence, that's just your experience." And I would reply, yes it is, just as your example is anecdotal evidence and your own personal experience. And your response would be that you heard from X number of people something close to what you said, and I would say I have heard from X number of people exactly what I said. And in the end, it's just a big mess of anecdotal evidence. So you go to "valid and credible source(s) of information", which in this case would be the official organization stance. And the official organizational stance is not what you claim it to be. Nor does any scientific study or paper say what you have listed on your page. Look, there are lots of ways to get and stay sober. I have lots of alcoholism in my family. My brother went to AA and still drinks not very successfully, unless you count accumulation of DUI's a success. My mother used to drink and quit drinking through her church. My uncle was a drug addict and alcoholic and quit without any program or support group and now has become an occasional social drinker. I went to AA and found something that works for me. So my personal experience shows many different paths a person can take. And I'm OK with all of them. And so is AA. But you only believe I am some brainwashed delusional fool who believes you must be "saved", and may "only be saved through AA." On that, you're simply wrong. I appreciate that you're sober. Anyone who has struggled with any kind of addiction and found a way out is 100% ok in my book, no matter how they quit, be it willpower, "won't"-power, church, Moderation Management, AA Agnostica, or whatever. You're sober, and that's all that matters. And I'm sober, thanks to AA, and that's all that matters. The only difference between you and I is that I can see that your way works for you, and I'm 100% cool with that, and you can't see that my way worked for me, nor are you cool with that. God bless ("a" God, we Buddhists can believe in a God as well) you as always.
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~=~=~=~= "Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped." — Elbert Hubbard =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~==~=~=~=~=~=~=
Hello King Fan,
Thanks for the reply. I am pleasantly surprised to receive this letter.
Yes, I asked you to
You complained about a variety of things:
They (XA programs) do not say any of those things. And there is no "real truth" nor "valid and credible source of information" you can produce that demonstrates otherwise. The official literature actually suggests the exact opposite.
Your "evidence" for this is a quote (from a non-X/A source, no less), that 12 step programs can be "important." The quote dose not say that "everyone is doing them," or even that "most people are doing them".
Actually, the list of sayings that you complained about is common jabber in A.A. circles,
and much of it comes right out of Council-approved literature:
(What does "brotherly and harmonious action" really mean?
That is yet another one of Bill's many
euphemisms.
And it usually it means is,
"go recruiting"
and then
"attend A.A. meetings and help to indoctrinate the new recruits
by not quite telling them the truth".)
Many of those statements came right out of Council-approved literature, and some
are even the words of Bill Wilson. Bill Wilson routinely talked out of both sides
of his mouth. First, he would make mollifying statements like "We know only a little,"
and "A.A. isn't the only way", and then he would reverse himself and say that A.A.
really is the only way:
(A.A. was advertised as a "quit-drinking" program, not
an "acquire faith" program. But now Bill's goal is to make the
beginners "acquire faith." That's
another bait-and-switch trick.)
But then Bill Wilson switched sides and declared that A.A. really was The Only Way:
Indeed. We aren't trying to save alcoholics here, we are trying
to get more cult members. Don't waste your time on the
ones who won't join the cult. Keep fishing, and you will find someone
desperate enough to grab, like a drowning man, at anything
you hold out.
And you will find somebody; that's how this cult succeeds in
getting new members.
And note Bill Wilson's
delusions of grandeur
showing again:
If you don't push some other alcoholic into Bill's program, then
you will be
denying him the "opportunity to live and be happy."
Bill actually claimed that alcoholics couldn't possibly recover, be happy, or even live,
without his Alcoholics Anonymous program.
Nobody else in the whole world had the magic. Just Bill Wilson.
That is the standard cult characteristic of
We have THE ONLY WAY.
The other statements that came from A.A. promoters are also common A.A. fare. A.A. benefits
by having propagandists and promoters who constantly repeat such untrue slogans and clichés,
in magazines and newspapers, and on TV, and in movies, constantly parrotting the
advertising slogans,
and then when somebody challenges them, A.A. defenders are quick to complain that those
pundits are not "Council-approved" sources, so A.A. cannot be criticized for
what they say. That's like having your cake and eating it too.
A.A. benefits from having all of those promoters and propagandists advertising and praising and selling A.A. and
A.A.-based "treatment", but A.A. denies any responsibility for what they say.
That's the same thing as the arguments about what constitutes "the real A.A.":
Baloney. It's all really A.A.
Likewise, common A.A. sayings and slogans that are routinely repeated by A.A. members and
taught to newcomers count as part of the standard A.A. lore, even when they are
not printed in Council-approved literature. Such non-approved slogans include:
And that is just the tip of the iceberg. I have
a list of over 900 A.A. slogans,
and most of them are not "Council-approved".
You see, there is much more to A.A. than just what you call "the
official organization stance."
There is the official A.A. as defined by the A.A. headquarters in New York, and
then there is the real A.A. as it is actually practiced by groups all over the country.
And when people are sentenced to A.A., they get the real street version of A.A., not
the "official A.A.".
And when casual visitors or newcomers go to an A.A. meeting, they get the real street
version of A.A., like
Clancy's Clones
or
Mike Quinones' Midtown Group,
not the nice sanitized "official A.A.".
Note the key word "a". AA has "a" way out. Not "the way", not "the best way", not "the most common way", not "the way everyone is doing it" (despite your claims otherwise).
Well, Bill Wilson said many times that A.A. was the only way out. I just listed
several such quotes from Bill Wilson above.
Again, Bill Wilson routinely talked out of both sides of his mouth.
Quoting one sentence where he said, "a way out" does not erase all of the dogmatic
statements that he made about A.A. being the only way to avoid death, and the only
way to live happy.
Now I'm glad to hear that you admit that there are many different ways to get sober
and stay sober, and A.A. is not the only one. The problem is, the Council-approved literature
and Bill Wilson disagree with you.
The quotes above show Bill Wilson declaring that A.A. really was the only way to stay alive.
On top of that, the point of that quote was not to talk about whether Bill Wilson
claimed that his religious practices were "a way out", or
"the only way out"; the point was that Bill Wilson was using the
"everybody knows"
propaganda trick:
That is, of course, a load of bull. The A.A. "pioneers" did
not all agree that Bill Wilson's cult religion worked as a solution.
Bill Wilson was writing the exact opposite of the truth.
In fact, the early members
had loud screaming matches over whether Bill's religious fanaticism would drive
away the very alcoholics whom the program was supposed to help.
Half of the original membership refused to do Bill Wilson's "Steps".
They demanded that Bill Wilson remove the statement that the 12 Steps were "required"
for membership in A.A., and that the Steps be labeled "suggested steps",
which is what ended up being the text in the Big Book, on page 59.
But then Bill Wilson got his revenge by writing on the very first page of the next chapter that
we may not overcome drinking if we don't
do "this vital Step."
That produced a funny back-and-forth dance. In chapter 2 of the Big Book,
"every one of us" agrees that the 12-Step religion works great, but in
chapter 5, the Steps are only suggested, but then on the first page of chapter 6,
the Steps are suddenly "vital".
When people see something wrong with A.A., the standard A.A.
defender's response is,
"Oh you just went to the wrong meeting." "You just met one bad apple."
"Your mileage may vary."
That is bad logic. That is the logical fallacy of
Escape Via Relativism.
A dozen nice meetings in your neighborhood do not erase the crimes committed
in other meetings, or heal
the people who got hurt elsewhere.
Then you tried
the "I didn't see it happen, so it didn't happen" logical fallacy.
It doesn't matter how many nice meetings you went to. Other people got robbed, raped, and
murdered at their A.A. meetings.
The fact that you never saw a dogmatic fundamentalist sponsor doesn't mean
that they don't exist. Lots of other people have told me about
their bad experiences.
Then you tried to dismiss
all stories of abuse in A.A.
as just so much anecdotal evidence.
Well, you know, even sworn testimony in a court could be dismissed as
"anecdotal evidence",
but after a dozen women get up and swear, "He attacked me and raped me," then
that counts for something. It isn't just anecdotal evidence after a while.
Guys get convicted on the basis of such evidence. And A.A. can get convicted too.
Anecdotal evidence is stories like,
"Joe Blow drank five bottles of Dr. Phineas T. Farnsworth's
Magic Green Tree Snake Oil Elixer, and he immediately recovered from the plague.
So you should drink that Magic Green Tree Snake Oil Elixer too."
Evidence is,
"Karla Brada was sentenced to attend A.A. meetings where she met a
man who murdered her."
That isn't just an anecdote.
She's dead.
By the way, notice that the logic isn't reversible: After a dozen women testify,
"He attacked and raped me," another dozen women testifying,
"He didn't attack and rape me," don't prove him innocent.
Even the most active serial rapist will miss tens of thousands of women in any city,
so there will always be lots of women who could testify that they weren't attacked.
Similarly, saying that nothing bad happened in your meeting doesn't mean that nothing
bad happened in other meetings.
I can't regard some people as 100% okay just because they don't drink alcohol any more.
There has to be more to life than that.
And I have higher moral standards than that.
A couple of extreme examples that come to mind are Adolf Hitler and Heinrich Himmler,
the head of the Gestapo and SS. Adolf Hitler was a very abstemious fellow who
rarely, if ever, drank alcohol, and Heinrich Himmler was so extremely anti-alcohol
that
he sent soldiers and SS officers
to the Dachau Concentration Camp as punishment for drunkenness.
But those two non-drinking men ran the Holocaust that murdered 6 million Jews
and about 6 million other people too, Leftists and Socialists and Communists and other
political opponents and priests and ministers and gays and Gypsies and Poles and
7th-Day Adventists and just anybody else whom Hitler or Himmler didn't like.
I just can't believe that Hitler and Himmler were 100% okay because they quit drinking
alcohol.
On a more local level, I don't consider the
rapists or
sexual predators
or con artists whom you will find in your friendly neighborhood A.A.
meetings to be 100% okay people.
A.A. even has a slogan about that:
"If you sober up a horse thief all you have is a sober horse thief."
Perhaps you didn't really mean to be so effusive in praise of people who quit drinking.
Being sober isn't the end-all and be-all of life. Heck, it's just the start.
Sobriety isn't "all that matters".
What if someone is a child molester or a murderer who is stone-cold sober while he commits
his crimes? What is sobriety worth then?
One of the big problems with A.A. is that so many members think they really have it
made when they get a few years of sobriety.
I have received so many letters that describe
people who have done nothing with their lives in 10 or 20 years except go to A.A.
meetings
and repeat the same stories and slogans again and again, for years.
Personally, I don't call that living. I'd consider that Hell.
Sobriety is NOT the only thing that matters.
Now I understand that you were probably only thinking about various recovery methods as you made
that statement. The problem is, A.A. is not a method of recovery from
alcohol abuse or alcohol addiction.
A.A. is a cult religion that pretends to have a cure, or a "non-cure, but a solution
— a daily reprieve from a death sentence".
A.A. does not work to make alcoholics quit drinking. That has been proven in medical
tests again and again.
The fact that you see a few sober people with several years of sobriety at meetings only
shows that some sober people are attending the meeting. You don't know what made them
get sober. The truth is, they quit drinking because they chose to. The fact that
they yammer about how A.A. saved their lives shows that they have been hoodwinked
and indoctrinated into believing and repeating falsehoods. Yes, they have been brainwashed.
Then you assume that A.A. somehow made you sober, but I've never heard a realistic
explanation of how doing
the 12 religious conversion steps of Dr. Frank Buchman's cult religion
makes people quit drinking alcohol. There is no sane, sensible, or rational
explanation of the workings there.
Just because somebody is going to some A.A. meetings at the same time as he
quits drinking does not mean that the meetings or the 12 Steps caused him to
quit drinking. That is the logical fallacy of
Confusion of Correlation and Causation.
The 12 Steps don't even
tell you to quit drinking. They tell you just the opposite: "Admit" that you
are powerless over alcohol, admit the you are insane, and turn your will over to some
"higher power" or God, or Group Of Drunks, or whatever, and that vague
"power" will supposedly perform a miracle for you,
and control your hands and make you quit drinking. (Even though It never cared to
make you quit drinking before.)
Can you tell me how Doorknob Almighty makes people quit drinking?
Or Kon-Tiki, or Stone Idol, or Golden Calf, or Big Rock?
Or Group Of Drunks?
I have never in my life met a group of drunks who had miraculous healing powers.
If they did, it would totally revolutionize medicine.
Don't bother brewing up penicillin, just brew beer and get those wonderful alkies drunk again,
and we can cure everything from Ebola to cancer.
No, the A.A. "God" must be the big angry male tyrant of the Old Testament,
the "God" of Dr. Frank Nathan Daniel Buchman, William Griffith Wilson,
and Dr. Robert Holbrook Smith, a vicious dictator who will kill you unless
you "seek and do His will" every day. No thanks. I don't need that in my life.
And I successfully quit drinking without "Him" running my life.
Thank God for small favors.
Tom Cruise is equally convinced that Scientology restored him to sanity, as he jumps up
and down on the couch and declares that Scientology knows more about the human
mind than all of the psychiatrists in the world. What is his sobriety worth?
(Scientologists are adamant about not drinking or taking drugs either.)
How restored to sanity is he? But he's sure that he is, and Scientology is the cause.
In fact, Scientologists declare that only Scientology can cure alcoholism and
drug addiction.
NARCONON
is their big addiction cure-all. So why shouldn't we
believe Tom Cruise and the Scientologists when they say that Narconon is the
best thing, and the only thing that works? Just dump A.A. and practice Scientology. Why not?
Warning: That is a trick question. Any good reasons that you can give for rejecting
Narconon apply equally to A.A. and "Twelve-Step facilitation".
Both you and Tom Cruise have exactly the same amount of valid medical research that
shows that your favorite thing actually works: ZERO.
And we have plenty of
cases where people died
in both organizations as a result of bad therapy and quack medical treatment.
You dismiss such stories as "anecdotal evidence", but those people are still dead.
Lastly, since you are under the misimpression that A.A. works to make
people quit drinking, please answer this one simple question:
Out of each 1000 newcomers to A.A., how many will pick up a one-year
sobriety medallion a year later? No qualifiers are allowed, like, "We will only count the people who worked the program right, or
we will only count the people who really tried, and kept coming back."
Everybody counts. No exceptions.
No excuses are allowed. When the doctor gives a patient penicillin, and it fails to cure the infection,
the doctor doesn't get to say, "But he didn't work the program right. He didn't pray enough.
He didn't surrender. He held something back in his Fifth Step."
No excuses.
So what's the actual A.A. cure rate?
God Bless you too.
And have a good day now.
== Orange
Well, here I am in the final stretch of getting ready to move.
Actually, I haven't done much at all. My back hurts and I can't stand up for
more than a few minutes without it hurting more, so I'm right back
down again. All that I want to do is lay in bed and let the pain pass.
I haven't gotten much done.
But I'm putting a notice up on Craigslist, advertising for a guy with a truck and
helpers to pack up everything I own and move it to a storage locker in the
next week.
Then I'll hit the streets. Homeless while 68 years old, and disabled. In the winter.
Now that will be a new experience.
Such is life. Nobody said it would be easy.
Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2015 21:51:58 +0000 (answered 26 January 2015.)
Hi.
Hello Ron,
Thanks for the good wishes, but those are not my videos. They were done by a couple of fellows by the names of James and Mike B.,
James is also known as "BlameDeNile" or "BlameDenial".
They like my web site so they put plugs for it at the end of their videos.
Congratulations on your quitting drinking, and I'm glad to hear that you aren't going back to it. Me neither.
I know the feeling that you are talking about when you say that you think you were happier when you were drinking.
That is the siren song of
The Lizard-Brain Addiction Monster.
I've heard that so many times. It whines and insists that things were so much more fun back in the "good old days":
Which is completely untrue of course. Things were actually so bad and so painful that we had to quit our addictions.
We quit because continued drinking was hell. Still, old Lizard Brain pines and moans:
And it just goes on and on. Old base brain is convinced that getting high will feel good. It tries very hard
to forget the pain that made us quit. And of course the pain was so bad that we had to quit.
Lizard Brain is so moronic that it thinks it can get the pleasure of
smoking and drinking and doping without the pain that comes with it.
It thinks that it can get one side of the coin without the other.
About not having any close friends with whom you can share such thoughts, may I strongly recommend
going to some meetings of something like SMART or SOS?
I don't know if they have any face-to-face meetings in your city, but it's sure worth looking into.
Having some companionship, some friends who understand what you are going through can help. It isn't good to be alone
all of the time. You don't need to go to such meetings for "recovery". Heck, you are already recovered.
But finding some kindred spirits can be a good thing. It can be a real comfort to have someone else who understands.
Here is the contact list:
Sensible Evidence-based Recovery and Support Groups
About this feeling:
Oh yes. I agree. That is one of the bad aspects of A.A. They make sobriety into a status game, where your value
as a human being is determined by your sober time. It's also like the children's game, "Chutes and Ladders",
where one slip or misstep and you slide all of the way back down a chute to "Start" and you lose everything,
and you have to start over, climbing up all of those ladders again.
That is one thing that SMART does not do. You never have to go to a meeting and declare how much sober time
you have, or don't have. You never have to go back to a meeting and accept a "Just For Today"
coin that tells everybody that you just lost all of your sober time.
It just doesn't happen in SMART, and people's status or value is not determined by their sober time.
In fact, SMART teaches that all ratings systems are inherently incomplete and unreliable.
To truly rate a person accurately, you would have to know all about him, and you would have to add up
scores for a zillion different things, like
There would have to be hundreds of such questions, and then somebody would have to
decide which questions were more important and got more points in the final score, which means that somebody
brings in their own arbitary value system, which is inherently unfair, and inaccurate as well. Does anybody
have a perfect rating system? The Nazis had strong ideas about the perfect man, high school coaches have another,
priests and ministers have other ideas, and women seeking husbands have other standards.
So oddly enough, even though we have been taught to rate others and to judge, our judgements of both ourselves
and others are almost invariably inaccurate and incomplete.
And unfair.
There are times when I think that Jesus's line about "Judge not, lest ye be so judged," was really a warning telling
us that we would end up judging ourselves just as harshly as we judge others. And it will mess with our minds.
And the A.A. thing of judging people by just a few things like sober time, years of meeting attendance, number of
sponsees, and skill in parroting the slogans, is insane. There is much more to life than that.
About the "anti-meds": that wasn't totally clear. Did you mean that they were pressuring you not to take your medications?
If so, please ignore those fools. They aren't doctors, and they don't know who should take what.
They have no business telling anybody to take or not take medications. That is A.A. quackery at its worst.
Take care, and have a good day now.
== Orange
Last updated 28 January 2015. |