This post was inspired by what I found to be yet another gratuitous, thoroughly disingenuous use of the ‘AA/12-Step bashing’ card by a blogger whose material is usually more even-handed then most 12-Step adherents but still egregious in this case. The entire blog post can be found here:
The blogger (Jason Schwartz) takes to task a comment made by Maia Szalavitz to an article on ‘Evidenced-Based Practice’ in the April 2009 issue of “Counselor” magazine (see the article & Maia’s commentary here: www.counselormagazine.com). In a thoroughly unwarranted swipe at Maia’s commentary, the blogger mislabels her commentary a “straw man argument” & “a sarcastic 12 step bashing moment”.
Obviously Jason Schwartz has not done his homework. Maia Szalavitz has been through the trenches — addiction, 12-Step, therapy, pharmacological solutions, & come out the other side sober, strong, intelligent, & dedicated to writing with great empathy & objectivity about issues of addiction & abuse. She is a survivor & she’s living proof that the Bill Wilson’s prophecy of “jails, institutions, & death” await those who leave the program is just plain vicious-minded bulls**t. For a good taste of Maia’s take on addiction & the place for evidence-based approaches please see: www.huffingtonpost.com; for a list of Maia’s bona-fides see: www.washingtonpost.com and here stats.org.
I replied with great vigor to Mr. Schwartz’s post but I’ve yet to see my reply hit his blog page. If it doesn’t, I’ll add it as an addendum to this post.
All that said, I want to once and for all drive a stake through the heart of the dual myths of organized ‘Anti-AA’ & ‘AA/12-Step bashing’. Frankly, I’m tired of the Step Community at large defining the terms of the discourse & weighting it so that they always come out as martyrs. Reasoned critique is not ‘bashing’, nor is personally expressing a well-founded opinion based in evidence & experience indisputable proof on an ‘Anti-AA’ movement.
It’s time to start speaking plainly about these issues in language that anyone can readily understand. Personally speaking, I believe it’s time to put an end to allowing legitimate criticism & calls for evidence being labelled as ‘bashing’ or ‘anti’ anything. The linguistic rules of this discourse are as follows: English as it is defined in dictionaries & in common usage. No more AA-ese, thank you.
It seems more and more these days that I need to define myself to others in terms of what I am not.
For example: I am not an atheist.
I am not opposed to any & all sundry belief in god, neither do I stand opposed to large collections of people gathering to rituallistically celebrate their belief in any & all theistic entities.
I am not opposed to the idea of an omniscient, omnipotent, intervening, judging, personal god or theistic entity, neither am I opposed to the very imaginative notions of benign, infinite & timeless ‘universal energies’ — or, more directly, ‘higher powers’.
What I believe is that the preponderance of evidence, discussion & thought on the topic (scientific, historical, socio-cultural, philosophical, & theological) combined with my own personal experience is that there is no god and no afterlife. There is no way for me to empirically disprove either notion, but I’m very confident in my ability to present a very compelling, evidence-based case against the probability of both.
Oddly enough, I came to this position not because I was born into this world a disbeliever. Rather, I sought long & hard to substantiate the ‘faith’ of Roman Catholicism thrust upon me at a very young age & came up wanting. Then, I read & researched longer & harder so as to substantiate a ‘faith’ of any sort in any theistic ideal. I practiced & prayed, steeped myself in the volumes of both Eastern & Western religious discourse. I looked for the evidence — in science, history, culture, and my life. In the end, there was no evidence. And in my heart I knew there was nothing more hollow than ‘blind’ or ‘act as if’ faith.
I do not have theistic faith. I consider myself positively open-minded on all subjects & experiences. But the years described above have taught me to err on the side of skepticism when it comes to the notion of god and the notion of an afterlife.
And so, I don’t try to argue Roman Catholics, Evangelical Christians, or Mormons out of believing in the miracles of Jesus, the awfulness of a coming apocalypse & eternal damnation for all but the truest believers, or the peculiar prophecies & philosophies of Joseph Smith. I don’t try to argue Orthodox Jews out of the infallibility of Talmud or the idea that a war god (among the other gods they worshipped thousands of years ago) promised them the land of the Canaanites. I don’t try to argue fundamentalist Muslims out of the necessity of Sharia Law, the insane fear of a woman openly displaying her sexuality, or the necessity of jihad against the infidels so as to prepare the earth for a unified submission to Allah. I don’t try to argue Hindus or some Buddhists out of their notions of karma & belief in reincarnation.
That doesn’t prevent me from openly saying that all of the above beliefs are awful & absurd &, in my opinion, display an arrogance & closed-mindedness on behalf of those who hold them. There is no ‘humility’ in believing that you are among the chosen, that you (or your group) is privvy to a divine, absolute & eternal truth.
But there’s no arguing faith. Faith is built on mysterious, intangible, & insular ‘revealed’ truths. Faith argues from authoritative texts its believers say is the word of god, runs endless circular arguments to prove its preposterousness, & points to the evidence of ‘miracles’ … for which there is no real, scientifically credible evidence.
Now, since I don’t argue, I don’t feel terribly compelled to listen.
I am quite happy in my skepticism. Should a divine truth reveal itself to me, I would be hardpressed to deny it. God (capitalized only so as to adhere to the rules of grammar) could reveal him/her/its self to me right now & stay my hand from the keyboard.
…
I gave it a few moments, but, as usual, the revelation didn’t come.
So what does all this have to do with AA and 12-step? I’m glad you asked that question.
I am not ‘Anti-AA’.
I am not an ‘AA basher’.
I will not accept those labels & contend that they are personally insulting epithets employed by those sympathetic to AA and/or the 12-step model when they know or feel they are on the losing end of a debate. Just like Jason Schwartz did when he couldn’t argue Maia’s points on the issue cited above. Instead of addressing her points, he sidesteps them by pointing out that the article’s author wrote a book on controlled drinking & that another individual (explicitly mentioned no where in the original article) is a staunch opponent of ‘evidenced-based therapies’ & the 12X12 movement in general.
Nice try, but no cigar. If anyone’s constructing a “straw man argument” here it’s Schwartz.
Further, I am not opposed to people openly declaring themselves “alcoholics”, neither am I opposed to those same people gathering to rituallistically celebrate their belief (or disbelief or ambiguity) in any & all theistic entities as an essential part of their daily recovery from “alcoholism”.
I do not blithely insult AA or 12X12 institutions without careful consideration or from a lack of personal experience & research.
Philosopher Daniel Dennett says it best in his roundtable discussion with Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, & Sam Harris (available on YouTube: http://tiny.cc/po1lZ ). In describing how he tried to be accommodating to religious sensibilities while writing his bestseller “Breaking The Spell”, Dennett found that no matter how much he tried to soften the language the response was always either insult or rebuke.
“It’s a mug’s game,” he says of his attempts at being deferential to the sensibilities of the faithful — a no-win situation.
That, far more often than not, is the case when engaging ‘dialogue’ with the AA/12-step faithful. What might initially seem like civil dialogue or debate often devolves into muted anecdote & sidestepping issues of evidence (best case) or full-on logical fallacies piled one on top of the other, sprinkled with a few (sometimes fabricated) Big Book quotes or homilies, and a handful of ‘loving, tolerant, god-conscious’ personal insults.
(Actually, I love a good personal insult as much as I love a good brawl. But that’s me — a hot-headed New York City mick who grew up in the city’s foster care system throwing punches at just about everyone in front of him until well into his 30’s. Insult the f**k out of me all you like: I can dish it out, I can take it, I can stop taking it & throw down, & I can laugh like hell about it all with you afterwards.)
But that’s not what I think this blog is about. This isn’t about indulging the strident lunacy or passive-aggressive “can’t we all just love each other the way god wants us to?” balderdash that drove us out of AA in the first place.
Take yourself through this little thought experiment: When was the last time you saw a crowd of picketers jeering loudly & holding up “Down With AA” placards in front of an AA meeting place? (Hint: Almost certainly never.)
So much for that vaunted worldwide ‘Anti-AA’ conspiracy.
What do you think is the general ratio of pro-AA/12X12 web-sites and bulletin-boards to those same types of forums who allow for the expression of a contrary opinion? (Hint: I would suggest a hugely conservative estimate of at least 10-to-1.) Please show me the explicit quotes in the general texts for SMART, SOS, LifeRing, Women For Sobriety that are even remotely analogous to the “jails, institutions, & death” or “Unless each A.A. member follows to the best of his ability our suggested Twelve Steps to recovery, he almost certainly signs his own death warrant” threats of AA’s Big Book & “12 Steps And 12 Traditions”.
So much for ‘AA-bashing’.
(For my money, Bill Wilson wrote both books on ‘bashing’ & bludgeoning his fellow alcoholics.)
I am Pro-Whatever-It-Takes-To-Get-Someone-Past-Self-Destructive-Behaviors-And-Back-Into-A-Meaningful-And-Productive-Life — without any contingencies. I am Pro-Freedom-of-Speech — especially for opinions that deserve equal time & observance in the public arena.
I am Pro-Speaking-Truth-To-Demagogy.
ADDENDUM 1: As to Mr. Schwartz’s smarmy, “(By the way, 12 Step Facilitation is an evidence-based practice.)” — I would refer him to MA’s excellent post on just that topic (here:donewithaa.wordpress.com). While he’s at it, the next time he goes to a meeting why doesn’t suggest aloud that he’s there not for “the program” but for the “Twelve Step Facilitation”. Let’s see how many people line up to love him until he can love himself.
ADDENDUM 2: As this post seems to generating a bit of traffic today, let me take the opportunity to correct an error in the original. Stating, “I am not an atheist” (paragraph #8) wasn’t accurate nor entirely honest of me. Truth be told, I am probably am much closer to an atheist than an agnostic in my personal [dis]belief. What I’m not is an ‘anti-theist’, although I do have some sympathies for those who would actively oppose religion & organized, ritualized belief in the supernatural. Everything else in the post I stand by without reservation.
Stinkin' Thinkin' 
July 8, 2009 at 11:08 pm
Righteous.
Isn’t it funny how the dominant “culture” is always whining about persectution in response to any questioning of their unwarranted entitlement to impose themselves into everything? It just gobsmacks me every time I hear Christians, say, crying about getting the shit end of the stick in America. Similarly, the AAs act like they are the David to our Goliath, when they’re the ones with the unquestioned credibility.
Excellent post, Speedy.
July 8, 2009 at 11:29 pm
Got it in one
July 8, 2009 at 11:51 pm
First of all, ‘substance abuse treatment’ is hardly off the ground, if that far. Of course until the time folks like Lister & Pasteur going to a doctor for anything did not accomplish very much. ‘Substance abus treatment’ is about at the point of medicine in general was before 1870. So, nothing works very well.
So, here comes 12 step; medicine stops still. AA becomes a dumping ground for the undeserving.
Professionals know full well the state of treatment.
Ignorance is impossible. It does not work; that fact is known.
Will live to see that change? The issue is in doubt.
July 9, 2009 at 12:33 am
Well, I’m an atheist and something of an AA basher of sorts, actually. My real motivation is to get 12-step religion out of the addiction therapy business. Otherwise, like Scientoligists or Moonies (do those still exist?) I don’t care what they do in AA.
July 9, 2009 at 12:39 am
anna, I agree with you. I just want to see something rational.
July 9, 2009 at 1:09 am
First of all the good news.
Most of the world does not know that AA is not everything that it claims to be. People are content “that it works” and that is good enough for them. next story please…until there’s a blurb in the article with an AA member or affiliate calling someone anti-aa or aa basher. Until that moment most people will assume the best about AA, until that moment someone states publicly that there is an anti-aa movement, whether there is or not, their credibility, which has never been questioned has now become the subject of questioning. Does it really work? Is there really a movement? If so why are people complaining? Is there an anti-MADD movement? Is there an anti-Kiwanis movement? Of course not. There are only anti-movements for things that people strongly do not like. I may not agree with any anti-movement but I can generally see their point even though I may disagree with it. As it turns out there is plenty not to like about AA. I still would not call myself anti-aa.
Here’s the bad news…
It’s a bad label. Kinda like the group that calls itself pro-life. If I oppose that means I am pro-death right? Wrong. It simply means that as a man I do not feel I have a right to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her body. I’d rather it didn’t happen at all, but it will and I’ll be over here minding my own business. Call me Pro-choice. Anti-anything will have a bad sound to it. Anything-bashing also has a negative tone to it.
I am Pro-evidence based treatment. Which is to say that if you can show me evidence that it works, I’m all for it. Show me a working AA model and I’m behind it. Show me a failed treatment center and I don’t. Those that oppose…..are the anti-evidence crowd. Wow, that really sounds sinister, doesn’t it?. Like it or not that is how things work down here.
Perhaps you don’t find Pro-evidence based treatment catchy enough. It is a bit long. Mike at Blame has called himself Pro-people in the past (I think that was his term if not I apologize) or something similar. You will get a label for not bowing to the step crowd, some of them profane. What would be your choice?
July 9, 2009 at 7:47 am
Very interesting post, Speedy. A bit of a side issue, but something which struck me forcibly (in the article rather than the blog) was just how casually it assumed that it is acceptable to sacrifice the rights of people with addiction and mental health problems on the altar of financial expediency. There’s a tacit assumption that they don’t have the right to the scientifically validated medical treatment most of society expects as of right. The rationale put forward in the article was financial rather than scientific or medical. It’s a waste of money treating addicts and the mentally ill and they are ultimately expendable. Hitler would have approved.
November 29, 2009 at 3:09 am
Andy, you’re right, it is all about the money.
Jailing someone costs money, AA doesn’t cost the state a dime. It allows the state to pass harsh laws satisfying the “tough on crime” folks, yet appear compassionate by allowing an (apparently) easy out.
July 9, 2009 at 12:37 pm
I responded to a question on Yahoo Answers awhile back about AA bashing, it was picked up (along with several other things I’ve written) by the “Danger Thin Ice” website:
What you consider bashing is probably just people like me telling the truth about AA.
Only 5% of newcomers stay in AA for one year, the other 95% leave; that from AA’s own Triennial Survey. Out of that 95%, at least some found the program harmful, I know I certain did.
I bounced in and out of the rooms for almost twenty years, never putting together more than a few months of sobriety. AA programmed me to fail. I’m an atheist and found it impossible to do the steps. People told me that even an atheist could manage it, but that’s plain bs. I went through all sorts of mental gymnastics in those years and it just cannot be done. AA members don’t want you to anyway, they want you to convert. Just read “We Agnostics” or the “12 & 12”…religious tripe. They can claim “spiritual, not religious” as much as they want, ever higher court that has heard the arguments have ultimately decided that AA is at least “religious in nature”.
During my brief stints in the rooms, I picked up all sorts of damaging beliefs, powerlessness, that I had a disease, and that I couldn’t make it without AA. Over 5 years ago, I took responsibility for my addiction and my recovery, and I’m still sober today.
And I’m not the only one. There are at least a dozen AA “bashing” groups on Yahoo alone, helping people heal from the abuses they found in the rooms.
I’ve been working with people who have substance abuse and mental health issues, almost every one of them has their own “twelve step horror stories”. (BTW, did you know there’s a book with that title? It can be read online at:
http://www.morerevealed.com/library.jsp )
Many of these people fell victim to the anti-medication, anti-therapy faction of AA who, despite literature to the contrary, tell people they must give up all medication or else they aren’t truly sober.
Have you ever looked at the studies done? How about the Brandsma study that showed that people who were exposed to AA were 4-5 times as likely to engage in binge drinking than those who attempted quitting on their own. Or the various studies that show AA’s 5% success rate is the same as the 5% success rate achieved by people quitting on the own? Or the Harvard study that showed that most people more people get sober with no treatment that through AA?
But my all time favorite study was run by George Valliant, Harvard researcher and member of the AA Board of Trustees, in attempting to prove that AA worked, he came up with this conclusion:
”Not only had we failed to alter the natural history of alcoholism, but our death rate of three percent a year was appalling.”
But he didn’t let a little thing like facts stand in his way, he still promotes AA.
For those who want to read more about these studies and AA’s efficiency, go to:
http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-effectiveness.html
Some people do credit AA for their sobriety, mainly because that’s were they were when they made to decision to stop, but that’s like something always being in the last place you look….you stop looking.
A comparison was done of 48 different methods of recovery, AA placed 38th in effectiveness:
http://www.behaviortherapy.com/whatworks.htm
Why should AA be immune to valid criticism? Where are the studies, the facts and figures that prove AA works? All you have are the testimonials of people who claim AA worked for them, what about the testimonials of those who say it didn’t and those who say it harmed them?
http://www.dangerthinice.org/bash%20alcoholics%20anonymous.htm
July 9, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Here is the comment made by James that I referred to earlier.
“When people ask me if I am against AA/NA – I respond – I am if being ‘for’ the ‘alcoholic’ or ‘addict’ affords them the right to question, which AA/NA does not allow”
Hope you don’t mind me re-posting your quote James.
July 9, 2009 at 6:06 pm
As to Mr. Schwartz’s smarmy, “(By the way, 12 Step Facilitation is an evidence-based practice.)”
Do you recall off hand where Schwartz said that?
July 10, 2009 at 5:10 am
ray,
second line in his swipe at maia. he even provided a link (Project Match, of course). check the link to his post.
speedy
July 10, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Which article? Blog? On community?
July 11, 2009 at 10:27 pm
ray,
here’s the link:
http://www.dawnfarm.org/2009/04/it-isn-all-about-evidence-based.html
comes right after his block quote of maia.
speedy
July 9, 2009 at 10:07 pm
Most folks with whom I find discourse blow it — sometimes right out of the gate or within due course and all credibility is lost. As with most folks who have no real basis for their opinions other than loosely gathered hearsay reading material they just ‘hope” is true. I notice some folks here have come to calling it “evidence”. Eeeeeyah 🙂 ok?!
Here is what I and many Twelve Steppers ultimately have on our side of the ‘so called’ AA argument: EXPERIENCE with it. The information in the Big Book – the experiences conveyed in that volume and the promises made alongith the conditions, caveats and direct warnings – as it turns out are ‘ALL’ one hundred percent true.
Everything that the co-authors say happened to them HAPPENED(s) TO ME. No brainwashing by slogan spouting sillies. No LSD experimentation, or Belladonna or whatever other excuases for tryign to write off Bill Ws experience people want to conjecture about .
(It happened to me – and THAT is how I came to believe Bills story because if it could happen to me then it certainly could have happened to Bill W – thats why I belive it – not because I read it and I am gullible)
No old fart cranky sponsor with a shit eating grin who spells like Vitalis telling me to do what he says “or else.” None of that stuff that maybe some of you have experienced – and I believe you when you say you HAVE experienced these ridiculous and pathetic creatures in “the rooms’ – just just honest to goodness down to earth folks, with lives outside of the “rooms” that match their words who don’t have to explain any of it to each other – try and fail to the inexperienced and who just say to each other, “Joe did you have the spirutal thing hapopen to you?” and Joe says, “YEAH, you?”
“Uh Huh”
“Pretty wild huh?
“Yeah, man I never saw it coming”
“Did you ….. uh . . .. ”
“Uh Huh”
“It’s sure is something”
“Yeah. Something ELSE. Hey we gotta show this to someone else.”
(they laugh)
“Some people will think we’re crazy dude!”
“Fuck em’ . . . but keeping it to ourselves would be cruel, man”
“Yeah. You’re right.”
. . . . and no further explanations or discussion is needed because they know it will be wasted trying to fit it into human language.
So when someone says, “I don’t believe any of that crap”. you know what? Who the fuck can blame them? It is pretty incredible. But if any of those ever are put into a position where nothing else has worked and they may are desperate enough to try anything – even something they don’t believe is true – THAT’S when they take those drastic actions to make it happen that they never would have been motivated enough to do in the past.
Peace,
Danny S – RLRA
http://recoveredalcoholic.blogspot.com
July 9, 2009 at 10:36 pm
I lost count….
How many straw men was that?
Talk about anti-evidence.
I have experience with AA (much longer than you BTW) and not all bad, but this stuff you spew out about cellular and molecular changes to your body and being on a higher level than everyone else is just BS. Maybe that’s the adderol talking. If your on such a higher level than the rest of us why do you still have ADD or did this occur after your molecular change? Hey, if you need it take it by all means. I think your probably under medicated.
Even on your web page your wife warns that you do not walk the walk that you project. Dude, your not even believed by people who love you.
Get honest as you guy like to say, stop violating AA’s traditions and get some professional help.
Get well soon,
Uberdog
July 10, 2009 at 4:17 am
Yeah, Danny, I’ll file this one right along with “Earn $1500 a week stuffing envelopes at home” in my testimonials file,
July 9, 2009 at 10:31 pm
They problem with your personal experience, Danny, is that what you believe to be a spiritual experience is no more valid than the person in church speaking in tongues, who believes that the Lord is speaking through them; or the person attending a Binny Hinn faith healing revival, who believes their diabetes has been cured, and they have their own spiritual experience. You and these people might truly, honestly believe these things – so I believe you in terms of you being truthful – but reason, logic and science disprove these beliefs.
There is such thing as a placebo effect, which is what you have experiences. Good for you, as it helped you to get off the sauce; but to advocate faith healing and to rely on faith healing to treat a medical condition is absurd.
July 13, 2009 at 10:10 am
Zippy has never, as far as I know, been accused of being part of a great “anti-aa” conspiracy, but, as usual, he tells it like it is:
August 12, 2009 at 9:41 pm
[…] The Language Posted on August 12, 2009 by speedy0314 In an earlier post (The Myth of Anti-AA & AA- Bashing), I argued (effectively I hope) two […]
October 6, 2009 at 3:42 pm
Sounds as if this guy may not be alcoholic but just enjoys a right good drink, only the person himself will determine he is alcoholic no one in AA should do it for him. Also I think some AA individuals have possibly been sending out the wrong message sad as it is we are all human and not prone to be without mistake.
October 7, 2009 at 3:37 pm
in not bashing aa
im blowing the whistle on
an organisation that harms people
and calling it to the attention of those
who have the power and ability to have
said organisation investagated
-it is sites such as this that help’d me
around things that harmed me in aa-
and help’d me get free of it.
October 7, 2009 at 3:45 pm
freedapeople
November 29, 2009 at 2:58 am
it sorta strikes me as much ado about nothing. AA is voluntary, if you don’t like it, leave. if you were hurt by it, get over it (after all, life is a series of hurts). if it doesn’t work for you, find something that does. if you’re contemptuous prior to investigation, investigate. obviously it works for some and it doesn’t work for others… it’s an imperfect world – no human institution is perfect (even so called divinely instituted ones). if your life has led you to an encounter with AA, then that suggests to me that something is awry in your life. that’s not AA’s fault. is it yours, or your parent’s, or societies’, or God’s – i dunno? but i do wish you luck.
i know, your point was something else – and i’ve totally missed it. sorry.
November 29, 2009 at 3:30 am
Shawn,
I have no problem with people joining AA of their own free will. Or the Scientologists or the Moonies for that matter. (Both also claim high success rates with substance abusers.)
I object to mandated AA, coercion, deceptive recruiting practices, and the flat out lies told about how wonderful the program is.
I see you pulled out the old “contempt prior to investigation”, nothing could be further from the truth. The people here HAVE investigated AA, I have almost twenty years of on and off 12step attendance. It is because of it that I am AA-critical. Have YOU investigated any of our stated reasons for being this way, or is it you that has contempt prior…?
Dismissing AA’s faults as “no human institution is perfect” is too wide a loophole, it excuses any manner of abuse.
I work in mental health, primarily with those who have substance abuse issues. People are railroaded into AA on a daily basis. Besides the fact that this is a violation of the Establishment Clause, it also does not work. The dually diagnosed rarely succeed in 12step treatment/meetings, many end up far worse off that if they had received NO treatment. In my job, I get to pick up the pieces. AA harms people, the statistics suggest far more than they help.
So no, I’m not “going to get over it”.
November 29, 2009 at 3:45 am
Shawn, piffle, at best. Stop making excuses. You know that AA is rubbish. That is why you are posting here.
November 29, 2009 at 4:27 pm
“Active Guardians of The Big Lie”
The big lie, cult characteristics, and mind control techniques of AA need to be disclosed to new members. This way AA can stop killing people by filling impressionable minds with self fulfilling prophecy such as; your only options are jails, institutions, and death.
November 30, 2009 at 3:38 am
shawn,
crack open a dictionary & look up the word ‘sophistry’.
speedy
November 30, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Thanks Speedy!
Pronunciation: \ˈsä-fə-strē\
Function: noun
Date: 14th century
1 : subtly deceptive reasoning or argumentation
November 30, 2009 at 10:54 pm
laame,
happy to serve [/snark].
12X12 has built an industry & a completely undeserved based solely on its exploitation of the referred to noun.
speedy
December 1, 2009 at 5:21 am
I don’t want to obscure any issues with fact, but Bill Wilson didn’t say anything like “The alternative to AA is Jails, institutions or death”
This is an N/A saying and they were referring to the end result of addiction.
It can be found right here.
Click to access EN3120.pdf
If anyone can point to anything in AA literature that Quotes Bill Wilson saying this I will be happy to eat crow and admit I was wrong.
December 1, 2009 at 7:30 am
cuda,
How would you like your crow?
December 1, 2009 at 11:56 am
Cuda,
I see AnnaZed has already answered.
See, the reason that we’re so critical of AA is because we understand AA, we spent time studying it, while most AA boosters just nod along, putting in their time and patting each other on the back.
December 1, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Cuda, you have very seldom, if ever, confused anyone with facts,
December 1, 2009 at 5:58 am
It’s in the Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions book (the one dictated to Bill Wilson by the manifested spirit of the 16th century monk Boniface ~ or so he claimed).
It’s is in the chapter describing Tradition 9 and reads as follows:
“Each AA member is to follow the 12 steps to the best of their ability or face jails, institutions or death. Therefore, we are disciplined by the spiritual principals of the steps and a higher power of our own understanding. Just as every AA member takes the steps to the best of their ability, each AA group as a whole must follow the traditions….blah, blah, blah ….”
From Boniface’s mouth to Bill’s ear to God’s ear and now to yours; it’s a much quoted admonition long before NA ever existed.
For a stepper you sure don’t know your AA dogma very well (Googling doesn’t count).
December 1, 2009 at 6:08 am
Surely you did 12 x 12 book study meetings?
I am mortified to tell you that I attended and even lead many of them. I know that tripe practically by heart.
December 1, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Actually I did and you’ll see the quote refers to “”AA Members” and in no way indicates that the “Only Alternative” to AA is such a fate.
It says. “unless each “Member” follows to the best of his ability our suggested 12 steps to recovery he almost certainly signs his own death warrant”.
A far cry from the misquote made here.
Also it should be noted that Bill Wilson was not the sole author. Thomas Powers and Betty Love were Co Authors and probably wrote the bulk of the book.
December 1, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Cuda, the MAJOR flaw in your and others argument is this. Either AA literature is always right or it is subjective depending upon how it fits the current agenda.
It’s patently false and misleading and you should be able to recognise that as you haven’t been drinking for the last few years. Unfortunately, you have been forbidden to think for yourself as thinking is villified in AA. It is the Big Blue Book of Bullshit and you have been indoctrinated. That is not subjective, it is true today and will be true tomorrow. It is true whether you go to AA or not. It is true no matter your race, color, creed or religious preference.
Put different emphasis on different words and see how many interpretations you can get out of any given paragraph. AA truly is a “mug’s game”.
December 1, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Oh Cuda, that’s just sad.
Is that the best you can do?
You don’t understand parsing text very well do you? Still, you thought you would try it anyway. Or maybe you just don’t understand that that is what you are attempting. Believe me you are way out of your depth here. I would be willing to help you to understand the fallacies at work in AA and in the mechanism of the program as written, but engaging while you attempt intellectual calisthenics is just too grim (not to mention pointless) a task.
And yes, we know all about Tom Powers’ contributions and Wilson stealing the copyright to this book much as he did with the Alcoholics Anonymous book. You can’t have thought that I believe in Boniface (surely). Additionally, Tom Powers left AA is disgust over Wilson’s predatory 13th stepping. Of course, this was after Wilson used him to organize his messianic ramblings into into (semi) coherent paragraphs for the 12 x 12 book, a portion of the royalties of which Wilson then bequeathed to his mistress (How’s that fit in with a life of rigorous honesty I wonder?). An astute reader can even see where Wilson’s laughable verbosity and folies de grandeur give way to the slightly more linear syntax of Powers.
December 2, 2009 at 2:37 am
OK, Cuda,
The correct quote is
“Unless each A.A. member follows to the best of his ability our suggested Twelve Steps to recovery, he almost certainly signs his own death warrant. His drunkenness and dissolution are not penalties inflicted by people in authority; they result from his personal disobedience to spiritual principles.”
The phrase “jails, institutions or death” originally came from NA. But it is now a common phrase heard in AA.
But since NA is but an AA clone, who, outside of you, cares?
December 2, 2009 at 2:43 am
I don’t know why we are arguing about this, but the mantra “jail, institutions and death” (lions and tigers and bears, oh my!) is from Wilson’s pen (or Boniface’s) in re AA in the 12×12.
Not that I really care, but there are those that argue that Wilson didn’t threaten alcoholics with these specters, but he did.
December 2, 2009 at 2:49 am
http://www.recoveryinternet.com/Tradition9.html
December 2, 2009 at 3:08 am
Tradition Nine
A.A., as such, ought never be organized; but we may create service
boards or committees directly responsible to those they serve.
Tradition 9 long form: Each A.A. group needs the least possible organization. Rotating leadership is
the best. The small group may elect its Secretary, the large group its Rotating Committee, and the
groups of a large Metropolitan area their Central or Intergroup Committee, which often employs a full-time Secretary.
The trustees of the General Service Board are, in effect, our A.A. General Service Committee. They
are the custodians of our A.A. Tradition and the receivers of voluntary A.A. contributions by which
we maintain our A.A. General Service Office at New York. They are authorized by the groups to
handle our over-all public relations and they guarantee the integrity of our principle newspaper, the
A.A. Grapevine. All such representatives are to be guided in the spirit of service, for true leaders in
A.A. are but trusted and experienced servants of the whole. They derive no real authority from their
titles; they do not govern. Universal respect is the key to their usefulness.
All societies and governments give power and authority to some of its members except Alcoholics
Anonymous. AA, a society of nearly 2 million alcoholics, is governed only by suggestion and the
spirit of service. That is pretty amazing when you think of how defiant and rebellious alcoholics are
by nature!
Each AA member is to follow the 12 steps to the best of their ability or face jails, institutions or death.
Therefore, we are all disciplined by the spiritual principles of the steps and a higher power of our
own understanding. Just as every AA member takes the steps to the best of their ability, each AA
group as a whole must follow the traditions. If a group strays from the traditions its message will
wither and the group will often deteriorate.
While taking the steps and practicing spiritual principles on a daily basis, inevitably, we find
ourselves wanting to give back to this amazing program that brought us back to life. This gratitude
for the program creates the spirit of service, an incredibly powerful thing that keeps the program up
and running.
The more we give back the more we grow. Something that started from one alcoholic sharing his
experience, strength and hope with another, has multiplied itself into a worldwide organization.
<<<>>>>
December 2, 2009 at 3:10 am
Anyway, that’s what I’ve got from when I used to type out this crap to be printed and put in laminated pages for study group ::groan::, but as you say who cares.
December 2, 2009 at 3:41 am
Well now I’m curious.
December 2, 2009 at 3:40 am
Definitely not the 1952 original 12 & 12 version.
There weren’t “nearly 2 million alcoholics” until decades later.
Brock W of Men’s Stag, The Foundation of the Retarded, Palm Desert wrote:
“I would like to start off with the long form of tradition 9; I feel it brings a greater understanding of the
message it carries” which then included your quote, but I can’t find it in official AA literature.
Desert Lifeline, August/September 2007
http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:kVGXud8Z_vkJ:www.aainthedesert.org/newsletter/2007/dl2007_09.pdf+%22All+societies+and+governments+give+power+and+authority+to+some+of+its+members+except+Alcoholics+Anonymous.+AA,+a+society+of+nearly+2+million+alcoholics%22&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
Interesting. Someone actually changed the sacred text?
December 2, 2009 at 4:29 am
Ok, that’s weird (I will let this drop), but my memory of these pages that I have all neatly saved on my computer is that I typed them from the hard bound copies from the AA Group. I don’t know what year that makes those editions bt my typing of them was maybe 5 years ago. They had the old covers on them, that I recall, and were old.
I was that insane that I used to (when asked) take whole swaths of the damn things and type them up verbatim so that various old-timer guru guys could use them as “book study materials,” though of course they had books as well. I can not tell you what an obvious thrill these semi-literate losers (for whom their AA seniority was the apotheosis of their “spiritual” lives) got from having an obviously privately educated erudite adult woman doing menial secretarial tasks for them (my sponsor said that it was good for my humility), but all they could come up with was “type this part of the book up for me, have it printed, then laminate the pages.” Often I was doing these in giant type for the two nearly blind geriatric messianic figures that ruled that roost.
Anyway, I didn’t make anything up, I just typed what was on the page. My sponsor thought it would be lazy and un-spiritual for me to scan and reproduce them ::sigh::. I don’t go there anymore so I don’t have access to these books and I tossed my more modern paperback copy of the 12×12 so I can’t compare it. Someone else will have to do that if they care.
December 2, 2009 at 6:53 pm
This must be from the traditions pamphlet. From my experience these things are rarely read. I guess, I, like Cuda was unaware of this and would have also attributed this statement to NA. I have heard that said in the preamble of NA, although I have only attended a handful of NA meetings, but hundreds of AA meetings.
Thanks for the information.
December 1, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Annazed, it is the best that Cuda can do.
December 1, 2009 at 9:00 pm
Try these contradictory quotes Cuda…
Page 95, paragraph 4: “If he thinks he can do the job in some other way, or prefers some other spiritual approach, encourage him to follow his own conscience. We have no monopoly on God; we merely have an approach that worked with us.”
Page 144, paragraph 3: “The man must decide for himself.”
They better suit you.
Then go to Orange Papers and study propoganda.
December 1, 2009 at 10:37 pm
In fairness to Cuda, I see nothing conflicting in terms of logic between those two quotes.
December 2, 2009 at 4:46 am
They don’t conflict each other but they do conflict the “Jails, Institutions or Death” alternative. (or whatever was said) Both are two different books and two different authors but AA nonetheless. AA gets the credit and AA gets the blame
Proving nothing except that people see and hear what they want to see and hear and turn a blind eye to that which they don’t.
The two quotes by Laame do indicate that the book does give alcoholics another option other than the Death Sentence that so many deem as a prophesy of Bill W.
In your earlier post Anna you asked if you could help me understand the fallacies of AA. Truth be told I could name things wrong that aren’t ever mentioned in this blog but I prefer to fix them from the inside. Unfortunately that makes me real unpopular in the rooms. Who cares. I will run 13th steppers the hell out of there and if i ever catch anyone advising against what a Doctor said I’ll show them the opposite in the book.
“Help me paint my living room and I’ll take you through the steps” No shit!! I’ve heard it. I also fixed it right there on the spot.
Damn right AA needs to be fixed and I’m in there doing what I can. Instead of insults and name calling here I think you guys should put up a statue in the Park with me riding a white hores or something like that!
December 2, 2009 at 5:06 am
You’re trying to fix something that never really worked in the first place.
AA is full of contradictions. A person cannot do the program as written because of those contradictions.
BTW, an old boss of mine was a painter by profession, an AA member, and a drunk. He’d work the rooms for free or nearly free help offering to help people through the steps. He’s also 13th step anyone he could, by whatever methods he could, including getting them drunk.
December 2, 2009 at 5:10 am
If you are working inside AA, trying to change the toxic aspects of the culture of AA (you mention 13th stepping and predatory behaviors) then good on ya, seriously. It’s your church, by all means do your best to make it a healthy place if you can.
My own problems with AA doctrine run very deep into the core of the program as written. For my own part, I can no see reform from within because I dispute the basic AA doctrine: the idea of human powerlessness and the dependence on a “higher power” to solve human problems absent the will of the person seeking help with those problems. Complete abandonment of these (to me) toxic ideas would be reforms that I would seek and I can’t see them being instituted within AA when they are, in fact, the pillars of AA. Ergo, I am no longer a part of AA, and have joined the ranks of the AA critical.
I know that there is a lot of name-calling here and some silliness as well, but many of us think that AA is, in its essence, faith healing and take strong exception to that as a so called “method of recovery” in a secular society, in opposition to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the US Constitution and in opposition to the Hippocratic oath for medical professionals. That is where the strident opposition comes from. If AA would just swan along like any other religion and concern itself with the welfare of its members and stay out of the courts, jails, mental hospitals and other places where it proselytizes I would be fine with that.
The problems that you mention with AA are not only endemic to AA but de facto elements of AA built into its structure starting with the behavior of Wilson himself which the entity AA is simply an extension of. As long as AA has no hierarchy, is answerable to no man and is afforded special license in our society to operate without oversight or accountability then abuse will be one the central facts of its existence. That being so, then the fact that some of my fellow citizens are coerced into participation in AA is a condition that I will continue to object to strenuously and often.
December 2, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Cuda said “AA gets the credit and AA gets the blame
Proving nothing except that people see and hear what they want to see and hear and turn a blind eye to that which they don’t.”
Again, untrue. I would very much like to see that AA did actually “work”. The facts bear out that it doesn’t. I do not see what I would like to see. Neither do many of the people here. That’s why this site and others like it exist.
“AA gets the blame” Really. Cry me a river. No other religion enjoys court mandated attendence requirements. AA has never accepted the blame for any misrepresentation of it’s alleged benefits or it’s abuses, under the guise of “anonimity in press, radio and films”, however, if anybody has but one good day, AA takes full credit and their anonimity goes right out the window with it.
“I think you guys should put up a statue in the Park with me riding a white hores or something like that!” Sorry. Your not a hero. Your just a person with too much time in a broken “program” trying to extract the value from it in which you were promised. i.e. rank, prestige and the ability to inspire awe in your peers by your length of sobriety. While it should be of great personal value to you, it really has no value in the “real” world that AAers are so very fearful of.
To use some current terminology, you are “upside-down” in AA. After investing so much time and effort in AA and with the value plummeting, one might feel inclined to hold on a bit longer and wait for the value to return. Problem being, your investment was over valued from the start and never was worth what you put into it despite your strongest beliefs. Rather than cut your losses you continue to throw good money after bad. I had a lot of stock in AA too. It was uncomfortable when I understood my situation. Rather then thinking of it as time lost, I view it as lesson learned and am able to move forward towards a more productive life. I would encourage others not to make the same flawed investment and not buy into this Ponzi scheme.
December 4, 2009 at 2:50 am
Yup, I’m in there doing what I can to fix AA, as well. No statues for me, tho. Just doing my job..
December 2, 2009 at 5:28 pm
I have seen AA work very well for those with brain damage associated with over consumption of alcohol and other drugs. These stupefied people are able to accept the ridiculous religious tenants, contrary statements, programming, and attend daily meetings (supervision).
They are the people that are not “too smart” for the program.
Once programmed, they become the undereducated, mentally damaged cult members that are difficult to reason with.
The danger lies in the fact that they have accepted the option of AA membership vs. jails institutions, and death. This can become their self fulfilling prophecy.
Yes, AA kills people.
December 4, 2009 at 3:50 pm
DEFINITIONS
H-30.995 Alcoholism as a Disability
1. The AMA believes it is important for professionals and laymen alike to recognize that alcoholism is in and of itself
a disabling and handicapping condition.
2. The AMA encourages the availability of appropriate services to persons suffering from multiple disabilities or
multiple handicaps, including alcoholism.
3. The AMA endorses the position that printed and audiovisual materials pertaining to the subject of people suffering
from both alcoholism and other disabilities include the terminology “alcoholic person with multiple disabilities or
alcoholic person with multiple handicaps.” Hopefully, this language clarification will reinforce the concept that
alcoholism is in and of itself a disabling and handicapping condition. (CSA Rep. H, I-80; Reaffirmed: CLRPD Rep.
B, I-90; Reaffirmed by CSA Rep. 14, A-97)
December 4, 2009 at 6:48 pm
The AMA being represented as an authority of science is of itself a red herring.
see
http://www.thehealthcareblog.com/the_health_care_blog/2009/06/how-relevant-is-the-american-medical-association.html
and
(from wikipedia)
Despite its self-proclaimed public service nature, the American Medical Association’s political positions through its history have been highly controversial. In the 1930s, the AMA attempted to prohibit its members from working for the then-primitive health maintenance organizations that sprung up during the Great Depression, an action that was in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act and affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court. American Medical Ass’n. v. United States, 317 U.S. 519 (1943). The AMA’s vehement campaign against Medicare in the 1950s and 1960s included the Operation Coffee Cup supported by Ronald Reagan. Since the enactment of Medicare the AMA reversed its position and now opposes any “cut to Medicare funding or shift [of] increased costs to beneficiaries at the expense of the quality or accessibility of care” — and it also “strongly supports subsidization of prescription drugs for Medicare patients based on means testing”. However, the AMA remains vehemently opposed to any single-payer health care plan that might enact a National Health Service in the United States, such as House Resolution 676. In the 1990s, it was part of the coalition that defeated the health care reform advanced by Hilary Rodham Clinton and her US President husband.
As one can see from the above snippet, the AMA is more about billing and the business of medical practice rather than the scientific study of the art if you will.
The AMA also has a PERMANENT injunction against them for stating anything negative about the Chiropractic profession due to their slanderous campain against them.
In your defense, most people do not understand that the AMA is not an authority on the science of medicine.
December 5, 2009 at 2:10 am
The AMA voted on whether or not alcoholism is a disease. If it is a disease, they could get paid to treat it. Insurance would not pay if it was deemed to be a behavior. *POOF* Alcoholism became a disease.
“A recent Gallop poll found that almost 90 percent of Americans believe that alcoholism is a disease. In contrast, physicians’ views of alcoholism were reviewed at an August 1997 conference held by the International Doctors of Alcoholics Anonymous (IDAA). A survey of physicians reported at that conference found that 80 percent of responding doctors perceived alcoholism as simply bad behavior.” Thomas R. Hobbs, Ph.D., M.D., medical director of the Physicians’ Health Programs (PHP)
December 4, 2009 at 5:57 pm
Cuda:
Tell me this: What does that have to do with AA?
December 5, 2009 at 2:12 am
I didn’t post that! Someone else just used my name for some reason.
December 5, 2009 at 2:22 am
Different avatar, lower cased “c”; I believe you.
January 10, 2010 at 5:54 am
here is what I left to your spoiled, arrogant. friend, that is Mark on his website, not that I take you out of this context either..
Hey! ever been to Compton California???..you guys are something else…
“Hey mark, here is another intellectual wind bag, getting off on our misery. Check website at bottom of page:
He says your acting immoral about posting us and fueling a debate. i say you are BOTH immoral because, you “both” just can’t see what it is like to come from abuse, mental illness, addiction, brutality, etc etc things that are “every day” life to the BULK of addicts. For example, I know poor women, that have Borderline Personality Disorder, because of their brutal upbringings, I have a life long case of PSTD and major depression. that is why we abuse substances and YOU and this other intellectual, SPOILED ass hole are getting off on OUR misery. You know, it is always been like this, all of our lives. people like you and this other asshole hurting us, at our expense, so you can feel good..
you guys don’t understand what you have tripped in us and you think this is some game, a way to pass time and you are hurting us, for your own SELFISH needs of feeling superior. You guys are the SICK ones. why are you getting off on all of this???????..
Perhaps you guys, should do the 12 steps, however, i know that will make you even worse.
Cant you see there is a very limited way of us getting help???????????????
You try losing friends , over doses and suicide and then come back here and be the insensitive SPOILED college boys that you are..
You just do NOT get this and you BOTH are hurting us
Congratulations!!! You overly privileged assholes…
January 10, 2010 at 6:12 am
There was NOTHING wrong with what i posted other that the TRUTH about you and Mark and the anti – aa movement , you are such an asshole..
I knew you would not post my message, and it didn’t violate any forum rules, but, it made you, look at YOU
Hey there whitey college boy, life degrees count as well and you know how wrong you are right now…you are just a little boy, still in the library,,,go to mommy little white boy you will never know life the way we do you are so myopic and lost, I feel sorry for you and I am sooo grateful to see life in its entirety and I will simply rest on the fact that you and Mark are just a couple naive losers with nothing better to do
by by you fucking jerk i hope you get killed…
January 10, 2010 at 6:25 am
thank you for deleting that posting..it really does validate everything that I said…you are such a fucking LOSER and I am feeling really good right now and I will thank you for that,,and again
please die, you are such a fucking peice of shit…
i hope you get a cap in your white ass..you fucking loser
January 10, 2010 at 6:30 am
hey here i am again…you are a little man, sitting at your computer provably masturbating to child porn..
You and Mark are just the fucking SCUM of the earth…
I really hope you get disfigured or die, I would prefer the death on you,,,
by by little faggot…if I knew who you were, you wouldn’t exist anymore,
not that you ever really have lived any life, little college boy…by by bullet catcher..i hope you SUFFER…and then DIE you fucking piece of shit of a person…
I would love to stab your eye out and then, stick the shank in your ears and GRIND it..by by you PATHETIC faggot and please get KILLED…
I WIN AND YOU KNOW THAT I DID…
January 10, 2010 at 6:41 am
I mean just look at your openeing staments you fucking are HILRIOUS you are such a fucking psueoid inellectual what a GOOF you are I feel great becauwe I know, that you and Mark are such fucking losers,,,I am laughing sooo hard at you above staement and I am going to get lots of people ot jcut look at your ARRGOGANCE
This post was inspired by what I found to be yet another gratuitous, thoroughly disingenuous use of the ‘AA/12-Step bashing’ card by a blogger whose material is usually more even-handed then most 12-Step adherents but still egregious in this case. The entire blog post can be found here:
thank you for deleting that posting..it really does validate everything that I said…you are such a fucking LOSER and I am feeling really good right now and I will thank you for that,,and again
please die, you are such a fucking peice of shit…
i hope you get a cap in your white ass..you fucking loser
February 4, 2010 at 8:04 pm
Nice to see that that serenity thing is working out so well for you, keep it right up!
Question:
cap?
Are you a teenager pretending to be black?
That’s very odd.
January 10, 2010 at 6:43 am
This post was inspired by what I found to be yet another gratuitous, thoroughly disingenuous use of the ‘AA/12-Step bashing’ card by a blogger whose material is usually more even-handed then most 12-Step adherents but still egregious in this case. The entire blog post can be found here:
LOLOLOLOLOLO)L!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WHAT A GOOF YOU ARE!!! LOLOLOLOL;!!!
AND WE ARE GROWING AND GROWING JUST 2.7 MILLION SITES ALONE AND I AM GETTINB A 1000 PEOPLE TO E-MAIL YOU NEXT BY BY YOU FUCKING HILRIOUS LOSER
LOLOPLOLOL!!1 I CAN’T BELIVE HOW PRETENTIOUS YOU SOUND
IT IS FUCKING HILRIOUS!!!!!!
February 22, 2010 at 10:02 pm
wow.
just … wow.
wish i weren’t so busy securing employment & a source of income that i lost touch with actually maintaining & reading the ‘commentary’ on the site. i could be pursuing the state of serenity enjoyed by what i’m assuming is the carbon-based life-form who goes by the handle ‘anti-aa’.
indeed — that is something that i want & i’m willing to go to any lengths to get. [/snark]
keep comin’ back (& stay the hell away from me),
speedy
June 2, 2011 at 9:23 pm
My Response to a Recent Inquiry
By Dick B.
© 2011 Anonymous. All rights reserved
Dear JC:
I make every effort to reply to any courteous email that comes to me at DickB@DickB.com. However, some people try to send me messages by clicking on the “Reply” button when they receive one of my “Dick B. FYI Message” newsletters. Such “replies” have been going to a different email address (dickb.lists@gmail.com) that is associated with the program we use for sending out the “Dick B. FYI Message” newsletters. Those “replies” have not been going directly to me. In fact, most never reached me until today, when my son Ken discovered this “secret cache” of backlogged responses and forwarded them to me in a large batch. Sadly, I do not have the time to sift through them all for happy birthday cards vs. genuine questions.
One other point about how people identify themselves when they contact me. When someone writes me—through any medium—and just uses initials like “J.C.” or “Jim C.,” I really don’t care to reply until and unless they identify themselves by using a fuller form of their name and by including their regular (“snail mail”) address. You have no idea how many “Jim’s,” “Jim C.’s,” “JC’s,” and even “James’s” and others—not including spammers—cross my path.
Now to your question and many claims about Swedenborg and the influence of his church on Alcoholics Anonymous. I took the time to review your material. I noted that the only source for your information concerning A.A. was a short Web page about Bill and Lois Wilson found on the Oak Arbor Church and School (Rochester, Michigan) Web site. The only “documentation” provided for the claims about A.A. history made on that Web page are: (1) a single reference to Lois Wilson’s autobiography, Lois Remembers, without specific page numbers; and (2) a single reference to Alcoholics Anonymous (the “Big Book”), again without specific page numbers. I can’t tell who you are quoting as authority for your sweeping claims and conclusions.
Yes, there is evidence provided in A.A. General Service Conference-approved literature that both Bill W. and Dr. Bob were involved with spiritualism. Spiritualism is evil. Period.
There is more information available as well. “The rest of the story” that the Christian A.A. bashers (e.g., Dave Hunt, the Bobgans, John Lanagan) are not telling. The part of the story that the people coming from a different perspective (e.g., Agent Orange) are also not telling.
Here’s “Part One” of “the rest of the story” from the A.A. General Service Conference-approved book, DR. BOB and the Good Oldtimers (New York, N.Y.: Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc., 198), 312:
“A lot of us believed in the spiritual thing,” said Clarence S. “We’d go to Roland’s [i.e., the house of Roland J. in Toledo, Ohio—about 139 miles from Akron on today’s highways] on a Sunday night. He’d call in the spirits. It got spooky after a while—beyond what we should be monkeying with. Doc backed off, too.”
Smitty agreed. “They got away from Roland J.—when they started to get bad vibrations,” he said. “They felt it might be dangerous.”
There was a similar feeling among Akron A.A.’s “They were all against this spiritualist thing,” said Sue. “Dad got to feel he was being criticized, and he was. They didn’t approve.” [emphasis added]
Notice that statement: “Doc backed off, too”? Notice the comment about the “Akron A.A.’s”: “They were all against this spiritualist thing,” [emphasis added]. The critics of A.A. have not been stressing or sharing those points. But it was in Akron where most of early A.A.’s great successes happened prior to the publication of the Big Book on April 10, 1939.
Here’s “Part Two” of “the rest of the story”—again from A.A. General Service Conference-approved literature:
Paul S. . . . said of Dr. Bob, “At this time [i.e., in early 1933], he began his conscious search for truth through a concentrated study of the Bible over two and one-half years before his meeting with Bill.” [DR. BOB, 306]
And look at Dr. Bob’s own statement about his study of the Bible long before 1933 in another piece of A.A. General Service Conference-approved literature, The Co-Founders of Alcoholics Anonymous: Biographical Sketches: Their Last Major Talks (New York, N.Y.: Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc., 1972, 1975):
I had refreshed my memory of the Good Book, and I had had excellent training in that as a youngster. [The Co-Founders, 11-12. And please see our title, Dr. Bob of Alcoholics Anonymous: His Excellent Training in the Good Book As a Youngster in Vermont (http://dickb.com/drbobofaa.shtml) for details.]
Dr. Bob had what he called “excellent training” in the Bible as a youth on which to lay his “concentrated study of the Bible over two and one-half years” leading up to his meeting with Bill W. in May 1935.
Dr. Bob’s son, “Smitty,” said about Dr. Bob:
He read the Bible from cover to cover three times and could quote favorite passages verbatim. [DR. BOB, 310]
No wonder we read the following statement in Dr. BOB and the Good Oldtimers:
(Dr. Bob was always positive about his faith, Clarence said. If someone asked him a question about the program, his usual response was: “What does it say in the Good Book?” [DR. BOB, 144]
And one more to close out “Part Two” of “the rest of the story” for the moment:
Prayer, of course, was an important part of Dr. Bob’s faith. According to Paul S., “Dr. Bob’s morning devotion consisted of a short prayer, a 20-minute study of a familiar verse from the Bible, and a quiet period of waiting for direction as to where he, that day, should find use for his talent. Having heard, he would religiously go about his Father’s business, as he put it.” [DR. BOB, 314]
I regret that people have chosen to use Bill’s many shortcomings—most of which are well known, and most of which have only a remote and speculative relationship, if any, to A.A.—as a means for lambasting Bill, lambasting A.A., or creating some new mythical A.A. that consists of adultery, LSD, psychic experiments, spiritualism, greed, and all the rest. [I mention these in my title, The Conversion of Bill W. More on the Creator’s Role in Early A.A. (http://dickb.com/conversion.shtml).]
Normally, I would not take the time even to reply to such tangential material. First of all, it is well-known and even published in official A.A. literature. Second, it is very likely to involve speculative and undocumented opinions. Third, it is rarely based on historical fact. Fourth, it has nothing to do with what I believe, or do, or research, or write about concerning A.A. As you probably know, for 21 years, my mission has been to find out whether and precisely how much A.A. was influenced by the Bible—not Bill’s shortcomings. And I have now published 42 titles and over 560 articles which lay out the facts. As you probably also know, 20 years ago, few if any knew anything about the Christian upbringing that both Bill and Bob had as youngsters in Vermont; and few if any realized that A.A. did not emerge from the Oxford Group until Bill wrote his Big Book. Prior to that, A.A. was—particularly in Akron—as A.A. cofounder Dr. Bob said, “a Christian fellowship.” It required belief in God and coming to Him through Jesus Christ. It required Bible study, prayer meetings, a “Quiet Time,” Christian fellowship, Christian literature, and recommended attendance at religious services. [See DR. BOB and the Good Oldtimers, p. 131; Alcoholics Anonymous, 4th ed. (the “Big Book”), p. 191; and Dick B., When Early AAs Were Cured and Why.]
Inquirers need to get up to speed on: (1) the difference between the Christian influences of the 1850’s and later influences; (2) the Christian beliefs of Bob and Bill as youngsters; (3) the Akron “Christian fellowship” (which is what Dr. Bob called it—DR. BOB and the Good Oldtimers, p. 118); and the Oxford Group/Shoemaker life-changing program that Bill wrote into the Big Book four years after the founding of A.A. in June of 1935. Unless they do, they won’t have a clue about the role that God, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Bible played in the Christian Recovery Movement, in the lives of the founders of A.A., in the original Akron A.A. “Christian fellowship,” and in its successes. And can play today!!!
Now let me make a suggestion to you in view of your courteous and thoughtful letter, and also in view of your commendable sobriety date. I would suggest, at a minimum, that you obtain certain of my books and other materials, and study them. Specifically:
1. The Good Book and The Big Book: A.A.’s Roots in the Bible by Dick B. http://www.dickb.com/goodbook.shtml;
2. Our “Introductory Foundations for Christian Recovery” class by Dick B. and Ken B. on 4 DVD’s http://www.dickb.com/IFCR-Class.shtml;
3. The Dick B. Christian Recovery Guide, 3rd ed., by Dick B. and Ken B. (2010) http://www.dickb.com/ChristianRecov-Guide.shtml.
When you have done that, I predict you will: (1) have some thoroughly-documented facts to pass along; (2) have facts that bear a real relationship to both the Akron and the Big Book programs (and they are vastly different); and (3) realize that all the Bill-bashing makes good reading for a few obsessed Christian critics, but detracts monstrously from all the needs and hunger of Christians in recovery—both those in and out of A.A.
What matters to me is that those Christians in A.A. who want the truth and who insist on serving in our Fellowship—whatever its warts and strange influences—are armed with knowing and rejecting the damaging effect of the attacks on Christians in A.A.
I have taken the time to write in extenso because you may be one of those questing souls who can really help others get up and going on relevant history that will help drunks who want God’s help.
Incidentally, to make the facts more brief, more simple, and more widely available, I have established the Dick B. Channel on YouTube.com—“dickbchannel”—an ongoing and comprehensive effort on to give those questing for truth another avenue in this information age for learning more about God, His Son Jesus Christ, the Bible, and—yes—A.A.
Gloria Deo
June 3, 2011 at 10:09 am
[…] at using a doorknob to perform miracles as we are – I figured I would link Dick’s post here, where Dick answers Jesus’ question, “what the fuck you are muttering about, […]
August 5, 2011 at 4:16 am
I’m a basher and anti-AA both, so I don’t have a problem with either title generally. It is annoying when you are labeled simply because you don’t agree with someone though. I think AA does more harm than good, however, and I wear the anti title with pride.