(on what an AA group might be)
For those of you not in the know (how fortunate you are!) the rather odd title derives – in modified form – from the view held in (some quarters) that AA members in the Medway area fall into two basic groups – idiots (not ‘morons’ – this term was used for its alliterative value) and schemers. It is not clear whether these groupings are co-extensive – although it is difficult to see how they might be – for the former is so profoundly lacking in intelligence that it is hard to fathom how they might possess sufficient wit to pull off the kind of strokes that have been attributed to them; anyway we are either idiots or rascals with the manipulative skills that would make JR (of Dallas fame) look like a boy scout. Anyway a few of us idiots (or schemers) got together and by dint of intensive gene therapy and putting our numerous heads together we scraped together some ideas on what an AA group might be – and then we actually had the temerity to put these ideas into practice. Now there are some people (in some quarters) who really don’t like other AA members having their own ideas about how things should be, who are quite offended when these AA members bother to research the traditions and other AA literature and then decide for themselves how they want to run their very own autonomous groups (this latter could equally well be applied to the cult groups as to the cult-proofed groups – the differences will be discussed later). These people (from certain quarters) think that they know what’s best for everybody else and are not too bothered about how they go about inflicting those opinions on others even if that involves getting some basic facts seriously wrong (or to quote the old journalistic adage – why let the truth get in the way of a good story – although it must be said that the views expressed (in certain quarters) don’t even qualify as a entertaining yarn).
So it you will forgive this idiot here are a few ideas on what an AA group might be: -
Firstly to have a group you have to have more than one person – it comes in handy and makes it more interesting. If it’s an AA group then the basic assumption has got to be that it is composed of AA members. Next question: What is an AA member? Answer: Anyone who has a desire to stop drinking. So one day Dave, or Davina, wake up and decide that there’s a gap in the market and they reckon there’s need for an AA meeting in a particular place and on a particular day. Their motives might be noble or base, but either way they want to start a meeting (with or without other people’s involvement) and they go off and find a venue. They check out what the rent is, if there are facilities for making refreshments, good access, weekly availability etc. They might ensure that their meeting is not going to conflict with any other meetings in the area (ie that it can be self supporting). They don’t need to check with any other AA member to do this, or consult with York, or notify Intergroup – they can just go off and do it. They then tell other AA members that a new meeting is going to start and that’s it. The appointed day arrives and the odds are that it won’t just be Dave (or Davina) turning up - so now we have a meeting (though not necessarily a group).
Now we come to the Preamble and Tradition Four.
It’s customary at the beginning of an AA meeting to read the preamble out. This describes what AA (as a Fellowship) is and is not about; it approximates to an outline of the Traditions of AA (which are presented in both Short and Long form in the book Alcoholics Anonymous). However this preamble does not necessarily describe what this particular collection of AA members is about. But if it is read out at the beginning of the meeting it is reasonable to assume that the people there assent to it and it provides the basic framework within which they conduct their business in the meeting as AA members. If individuals there do not agree with it (as they are free to do) then they have a number of choices. They may withdraw and look elsewhere for a solution to their problem, or they may argue that the preamble should be changed to reflect their own views or they may privately abide by some of what is indicated and ignore those parts that they do not like (and any other variations that you can think of). But it remains the case that whatever is read out is the only indication of what that meeting stands for and is the only information available to a newcomer (or for that matter any other member) initially to guide them as to what he or she is getting involved with. If we take it that the preamble is read out in an unaltered form and that the members there refer to it as an AA meeting then we have to take it at face value. The only requirement for membership of AA is a desire to stop drinking and therefore we have to assume (given the unmodified preamble) that the only requirement to attend that particular AA meeting is based on the same condition. If there are any other conditions, either explicit or implicit, over and above that specified in the preamble with regard to the right of an AA member simply to attend the meeting then these guidelines are being broken and likewise the Traditions of AA. If that is the case then we would argue that it has ceased to be an AA meeting and has become something quite different.
Now we come to Tradition Four which is:
“Each group should be autonomous except in matters affecting other groups or AA as a whole”.
The statement is quite brief but packed with significance - so now to unpack. Firstly it is explicit that this Tradition refers to “each” group or a group in the singular. This tradition does not refer to AA as a whole, or to AA groups collectively, but to AN AA group. Additionally the term “autonomous” is used which emphasises this singularity - this is the group on its own. The word “autonomous” is the adjective from the noun “autonomy” which means “the power or right of self-government, esp. partial self-government” (Chambers Twentieth Century Dictionary, 1972). Therefore this refers to the power or right of the group to govern itself, to run its own affairs as it sees fit but also acknowledges that this activity may be within the bounds of a greater authority. The tradition explicitly states that the only greater authority that the individual group need acknowledge is that of “a loving God as He may express Himself in our group conscience”. But the tradition goes on to add a further qualification to a group’s autonomy – that this should operate “except in matters affecting other groups or AA as whole”. Finally it is worth nothing that this Tradition is frequently misquoted – usually the first half is cited whilst the second half is frequently left out. This is usually raised as a defence to accusations of aberrant behaviour that may be causing problems for AA locally or nationally. Additionally the word “should” is used in the Tradition and this has been frequently replaced by the word “is”; there is a world of difference between these two modalities. “Is” simply refers to the actuality – “the sun is shining” is a statement of fact. There is no value or weight appended to this observation; it “is” as it simply “is”. “Should” however is a different kettle of fish. The modal verb “should” can be used in three senses: a) recommendation, advisability – as in “People with high cholesterol should eat low-fat foods”. b) obligation – as in “I should be at work before 9:00am”. c) expectation – “Susan should be in New York by now”. It would seem that the first two forms apply in the case of Tradition Four. On the weakest reading of this it is recommended or advised that groups should be self- governing. On the stronger reading it is regarded as an obligation that each group should run its own affairs as it wishes.
If we take the Tradition as a whole it appears that not only is this a guideline that it would be wise to follow but it may even be essential to ensure that AA groups do not simply become bland, cloned versions of each other but that diversity (within the qualifying bounds) should be encouraged. So following the advice (or obligation) proposed by this Tradition it would seem that a collection of AA members may form a group where the members of that collective agree upon a common approach to the problem and that these group members are free to run the meeting in anyway that they wish so long as they observe the conditions set by the Preamble (and therefore the Traditions) and the second part of Tradition Four specifically. Otherwise there is nothing in the Traditions (or Preamble) that excludes members of that group deciding who should qualify as a member of that particular group, what conditions must be satisfied for a member to be involved in service in that group, what the voting rights of members are within the group, who may do a chair at the group and so on….
So now to the specifics: With reference to the Traditions of AA the cult-proofed AA groups oppose the persistent and deliberate breaches of these Traditions that have taken place now over a number of years by the cult groups.
The cult and the Traditions of AA
Tradition One: The cult has its own agenda. It regards its perversion of the AA message to be superior to that of AA. It has deliberately and systematically sought to subvert AA and actively discourages members attending its groups from attending non-cult (ie AA meetings) meetings on the grounds that AA meetings carry an inferior message. Through a network of so-called Newcomer (Beginners) meetings it seeks to gain access to people new to AA as rapidly as possible so that it can impose upon these vulnerable people its warped message of recovery. In this way it undermines AA unity.
Tradition Two: Group consciences within the cult are undermined by its strictly hierarchical structure. Larger groups (in apparently conformity with AA guidelines) have steering committees which run the affairs of the group. However given the cult’s espousal of a dictatorial sponsorship system this ensures that group voting is carried out under the direction of a clique of sponsors who effectively run the group. Thus this Tradition is made a mockery.
Tradition Three: Newcomers have been led to believe that unless they follow the direction of their sponsors in every respect (or indeed fail to avail themselves of this questionable resource itself) and in every area of their lives, unless they give up medication (with or without their GPs advice), if they fail to do the Steps as indicated by their sponsor, and a raft of other conditions seemingly arbitrarily imposed then they will surely drink again. Some newcomers have as a result formed the impression that failure (ie relapse) means expulsion from the group and therefore from AA. Indeed one member we are acquainted with was in fact told by his sponsor when he failed to fall into line to “Fuck off and die!” – nothing ambiguous about that particular message. Another member (again who we are personally acquainted with) who relapsed and returned to their (cult) home group was told by their sponsor to “sit at the back of the meeting and keep quiet” as if they were some naughty school child who had to be shamed into submission. We have no doubt that these examples simply reflect the institutionalised response of the cult to any “failure” by its members.
Tradition Four: Cult groups have no interest in other AA groups (except that they exemplify an inferior brand) and have consistently disregarded the impact of their activities on neighbouring AA groups viz. provision of hot meals, free Big Books, timing of meetings, and most seriously advising newcomers not to attend AA meetings in the area, to get only a cult-approved sponsor etc.
Tradition Five: Apparently one of the few Traditions that it can be said the cult enthusiastically upholds – unfortunately the message it carries is but a dull and sickly shadow of the message of AA.
Tradition Six: The running of non-AA conventions (Road to Recovery in Plymouth) and the Canterbury convention (advertised by cult groups in the Medway area). The latter is not advertised as an AA convention yet is being publicised by these groups.
Tradition Nine: see above for cult steering committees. By no stretch of the imagination can these be considered “directly responsible to those they serve…”
Tradition Ten: see above for medication issues. AA’s guidelines on this area have been (and continue to be) ignored by the cult groups and members.
Tradition Eleven: Although this refers to AA as a whole and its public relations policy the cult have repeatedly sought to promote their own groups above those of AA generally by the use of targeted advertising using AA posters but putting on a group contact number rather than the AA national number. This tactic has been employed to divert newcomers to cult groups where they can be safely brainwashed with the cult’s dubious message.
Tradition Twelve: The cult’s sponsorship system (see above and elsewhere on site) completely turns this tradition on its head.
Now we come to the Medway cult proofed AA groups. These exclude no one who has a desire to stop drinking from their meetings. Anyone who has a desire to stop (or “stay stopped” as it’s sometimes modified) is welcome to attend the meetings. Any member can share at these meetings as they see fit. Any member of AA can attend group consciences. No member is told what meetings to attend, whether they should have a sponsor or not, whether they should do the steps or not, and if they relapse they are welcomed back and encouraged to try again – or to put it briefly, we’re about as directly opposite to the cult groups as you can get.
However these AA groups (via their group consciences) have a right – and we would argue an obligation – to run their groups as they see fit so long as they are not in breach of AA Traditions, and they have chosen to exercise that right. The cult-proofing element has been introduced specifically to prevent the intrusion of cult members into AA “group” membership (not AA membership) who do not subscribe – both in principle or in practice – to the Traditions of AA, nor its programme as laid out in the literature of Alcoholics Anonymous, nor to the spirit of the programme as embodied in its Fellowship. With regard to other AA groups no cult-proofed AA groups have told members not to attend these meetings, nor that they should only get their sponsors from within the cult-proofed groups etc; we will not labour the point further.
Anyway this Medway idiot is now completely exhausted by the cerebral effort that has been expended so far in writing this piece. If there are any errors, repetitions, false arguments, non-sequiturs, logical inconsistencies herein then you’ll just have to put it down to my intellectual impairment and have the appropriate compassion for a poor fool. Anyway far better in our view to be an idiot than a buffoon – oooohhhh!
Cheers
A Medway Moron
