The Addiction Myth

So what if AA is a Pagan cult? Whether or not you think alcoholism is a disease, AA helps people who are in a really bad spot and keeps them out of trouble.  They are less likely to drink or do drugs while attending meetings and performing the 12 Steps.  Why so stuck up on Christianity?  What’s the problem here?

There are so many problems with the above statement I don’t know where to start!

So let’s start from the beginning.  Well not quite the beginning. Let’s start with the story of Moses and the 10 Commandments.  In this story we see the advent of monotheism and the Israelite’s God’s crushing of the practice of paganism/polytheism.  Now, put aside your prejudices about monotheism and polytheism.  Those are actually irrelevant for our purposes.  We are just looking at what happened:

God had rescued the Israelites from 400 years of slavery. They had escaped from Egypt, and had just started wandering in the desert.  God called Moses to Mount Sinai. So Moses went up. But it was taking a while. From Exodus:

32:1 And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down out of the mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, and said unto him, Up, make us gods, which shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we know not what is become of him. 32:7 And the LORD said unto Moses, Go, get thee down; for thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves:  32:19 And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing: and Moses’ anger waxed hot, and he cast the tables out of his hands, and brake them beneath the mount. 32:22 And Aaron said, Let not the anger of my lord wax hot: thou knowest the people, that they are set on mischief [alternate translation: You know how prone these people are to evil.]. 32:23 For they said unto me, Make us gods, which shall go before us: for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we know not what is become of him.

The point is, from ancient times, the practice of paganism is associated with evil.  There is no clear authority, and therefore the people can follow and worship the god, and the code of ethics, of their choice.  This lead to chaos and mischief.  Exactly what kind we can only assume, but probably the kind that went against the new laws that God issued in the form of the 10 Commandments.  The first of which is:

20:1 I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the LORD your God am a jealous God,visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.

Then it goes on the remaining commandments: honor your parents, don’t kill, don’t steal, don’t covet thy neighbor’s wife.  Etc. Etc.  

But what a strange first commandment!  Why does it matter what god you believe in, as long as you are a good person and do good things?  This puzzled me as a young religious school student.  And no doubt, many Sunday school class hours were dedicated to this very issue.  Why does it matter?

It matters a lot!  This is a HUGE problem in ethics.  For even if we create a code of ethics that sounds pretty reasonable, ultimately we have no reason to accept it over any other, except by our own judgment.  And no doubt that was a big problem in ancient times.  And no doubt, people could justify all kinds of injustice from plausible principles.  So here the great innovation of the 10 Commandments is that the question of authority is answered in the very first commandment.  Now of course, you don’t have to accept that commandment either, but then you are at risk of death, along with 4 generations of your descendants.  Scary stuff.

Fortunately for the sake of civilization, the 10 Commandments are pretty reasonable, and have stood the test of time.  (The only thing inexplicably missing is a commandment against abusing children, sexually and otherwise.)

If you are a good person at heart, it doesn’t matter what you believe in.  You’ll generally do the right thing.  The problem is, what if you’re not a good person?  What if you are angry, a liar, manipulative, or cruel?  What if you enjoy hurting others and taking things which are not yours?  What if you are tempted by a beautiful woman walking alone?  In this case, the purpose of the first commandment really shines.  You don’t do these things because you will be killed, and your children will suffer too.  If you believe it.  And no doubt, many people believed it, for how could they know otherwise?  And this belief lasted thousands of years, until people stopped believing it.  And injustice reigned again.  So they had to raise the stakes.  Jesus came along and emphasized the greater reward of eternal Heaven, or punishment of eternal torture in Hell.  Be good, children!  And this worked for a while too.  Still does, for the most part.  But lots of people stopped believing in God.  No problem for the ones who are good at heart.  But what about the bad ones?

Alcoholics Anonymous came along in the 1940′s, introducing its 12 Steps.  The first 3 are:

1. We admitted we were powerless over alcohol – that our lives had become unmanageable.
2. Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.
3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him.

Yes, there is a mention of God.  Is this a Christian God?  Clearly, not at all.  It’s the God “as we understood him”.  It’s about as opposite to the Judeo-Christian God as you can get.  In fact, in the Big Book, you can choose any concept of God that you wish: “You can, if you wish, make A.A., itself your ‘higher power.’ Here’s a very large group of people who have solved their alcohol problem. In this respect they are certainly a power greater than you.”  (Big Book, p. 27) Or it could be a tree or coffee pot, as Steppers are wont to declare.  Of course, this is pure heresy.  If you can believe in anything, then you can believe in any code of conduct you like.  If you’re a good person, no sweat.  If not… Houston we have a problem!

But at least it cured their compulsion to drink, right?

Wrong!  AA is a drinking club for mischievous young people one small crisis away from their next relapse.  Also in the club are older men who model the abstinence-binging cycle (which in their case lasts through middle age).  And finally are the sad and socially inept, who go to AA seeking companionship but end up being brainwashed into addictive behaviors and manipulated for sex or money, and ultimately leave the group in disappointment and anger.

AA is a refuge for scoundrels and criminals.  They can justify any type of behavior due to the pagan belief system, including lots of well-documented criminal behavior.  We tend to think that alcoholism causes criminality. In fact the opposite: criminals use alcohol as a cover for their mischief.  They do this with the help of AA:  as long as you claim to be unable to control your drinking, then you can attend AA and everyone thinks you’re trying to get better.  But remember, this is a bad person.  A scoundrel.  A criminal.  Do we believe them when they say they have an unbearable compulsion to drink?  I don’t know about you, but I tend to think not.  They are perfectly in control of their drinking, and will do so when convenient.  (Yes extreme alcohol use can cause withdrawal symptoms (delerium tremens), but these do not contain actual cravings for alcohol, and can be alleviated medically.)

Most people in AA do not choose a Christian god as their higher power (e.g. Jesus Christ).  Most choose a pagan entity such as a ‘creative spirit’ or any of the many gods in the many spiritual pantheons like Buddhism, such as a god for prosperity.  Yoga is very popular within AA.  People in AA are not Christian, and it would be a mistake to assume they bring Christian concepts to bear, such as alcohol being evil.  Mentally ill people may choose a voice in their head as their Higher Power, and in fact sometimes are encouraged to do so.  One poster on the recovery forum on Craigslist was encouraged to use one of his spirit guides (ancestors) as his higher power.  Only problem was, he couldn’t always tell which ones could be trusted.

Again, whether or not you think Paganism is inherently evil, certainly it is attractive to the rebel and the trouble maker, and it is much easier to justify evil behavior under a Pagan theology.  AA lays it out on a silver platter: the alcoholic has carte-blanche to do as he pleases.  If sober, he can act according to a belief system of his choice.  If drunk, he can act any way the evil spirits in the alcohol direct him.  And as the innocent sufferer of a disease, it’s not really his fault.  It’s a brilliant scheme!

The most common ‘sin’ encouraged by AA is philandering, and in fact AA is a sex club for many.   This is certainly true in the gay community as aging men seek an alternative to the bar scene.  Many are quite open about going to AA simply for the purpose of hooking up.  If they have to claim to be alcoholic, so be it.   Also, many lonely people are attracted to AA, and these people are often abused and manipulated by the cult for sex or money.  Some people drink in order to escape the wife and kids, but of course they don’t want the family to think that, so they go to AA and pretend to be alcoholic.  ”It’s not that I don’t love you.  It’s that I can’t help drinking.  I’m sorry.  I’m just a sick person.”  (Though the family is usually complicit in this scheme, to some extent.)  And then they go to a couple meetings.  Or say they are going to an AA meeting and do something else.

Another reason for excessive drinking is to provide a convenient excuse to dump the current girlfriend (“I need to be single.  This relationship threatens my sobriety.”)  Closet homos love AA because it keeps personal questions at bay.   (“Why don’t you go out?  Because I’m an alcoholic and can’t be tempted.” And then go to a gay bar or cruise online.)  Many people involved in criminal activity drink to soothe a troubled conscience.  Alcoholics seem to have no difficulty justifying any kind of reprehensible behavior, including for example, meeting and flattering foreign dictators who threaten world war.

And of course, many women drink as a way to express anger and engender sympathy. It’s a “cry for help.”  Often this is out of anger toward a parent who did not provide adequate love and attention.  Most female speakers at AA meetings I’ve attended have shown great resentment towards their mother.  Drinking and drugging was an effective way to get attention and revenge, without admitting one’s anger and jealousy.  It’s a form of self-destructive revenge, like cutting.  And it can lead to suicide in extreme cases.

And then there are those who just enjoy fighting, bullying, arguing and being cruel.  Many people are perfectly good at this sober.  But why not have a few drinks before hand?  All the more fun, plus you can always say that you were just drunk.  Plus you can always say that you are addicted to alcohol.

One could also view alcoholism as a form of demon possession.  When someone drinks, it’s like they are possessed by an evil spirit. We may have experienced this with a friend or family member, and it’s scary.  There is no way to control the person, other than to hope they sober up and calm down.  Now add to the mix that the alcoholic has an irrational craving, or a subtle corruption in thinking that tells him to take the first drink, and we are off to the races.  So the 12 Steps could be viewed as a process of exorcism — overpowering and expelling the demon.  We might be tempted to think that it is then compatible with a Christian ideology.  But this parallel is illusory.  We are just replacing one demon with another.

And what of the claim that AA keeps people from drinking?  In fact, AA is no more effective at reducing drinking than any other therapy, or no therapy at all.  Most people moderate drinking on their own.  And what about the claim that AA keeps people out of trouble?  There is no evidence for this either.  AA does not reduce criminality over no group attendance.

When someone says, “AA works for me and it’s the only thing that ever worked for me,” they are not saying that they will no longer drink, or will not engage in criminality.  There is no evidence for this.  All they are saying is that they figured out how to use the drinking club for mischief and for abusing and manipulating others.   To what extent this is conscious on the part of the members I don’t know.  But if not, I hope to make it so!

In addition to the concept of God, there are other important differences between the 12 Steps and the 10 Commandments, that point out the dangers of the AA ideology.  The next most important is how we deal with sin.  In the 10 Commandments, we are prohibited from killing (6), adultery (7), stealing (8), bearing false witness (9), and coveting our neighbors wife or property (10).  The reward for keeping the commandments is God’s “steadfast love”.  We can only presume that the punishment for failing to do so is death.

Compare this to the 12 Steps:

4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.
5. Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.
6. Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.
7. Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.

This presents an entirely different concept of sin.  Instead of being prohibited from evil behaviors, we are praying to our god to remove the kind of thinking that leads to the urge towards this type of behavior.  For example, we may find ourselves with lust toward our neighbor’s wife.  Pray to god to remove it.  We may want to steal money from a house.  Pray to god to remove our greed.  We may be jealous of a more successful friend or sibling.  Pray to god to remove this ‘character defect’.

Obviously this is impossible.  These are normal human emotions and cannot be removed as if they were a psychic tumor.  The key is to learn to deal with these emotions in a healthy and mature way, without acting on them.  With good parenting, most children learn how to do this.  In a way, the God of the Judeo-Christian religion is like a loving parent: “Don’t hurt, don’t steal, don’t be jealous.”  Whereas the god of the 12 Steps says, “Pray to me so that I can remove your anger, jealousy, and resentments.”  In fact, according to the 12 Step ideology, the key to ending the cravings is to remove our daily resentments about things.  This then enables us to contact our HP (Higher Power), which then removes our defects of character and then the cravings to drink.  Yes, this is actual AA theology.

Imagine a child who is walking with a parent and steps into the street without looking.  The parent might say, sternly, “David, don’t walk into the street without looking.  You can get hurt.”  If it happens again, the child gets a whack and another stern warning.

Or the parent might say: “David, don’t walk in the street without looking.  You could get hurt and then you’d feel sad and I’d feel sad.”  If it happens again, the parent says, “David, I’ll give you an ice cream if you don’t walk in the street.”

These two different parenting styles show the difference between the two ideologies.  The first approach will be more successful in the long term in fostering good behavior.  The second approach may work briefly, but will ultimately backfire.  A child isn’t necessarily afraid of feeling sad.  So it’s not really a disincentive.  Plus, they are rewarded for pushing boundaries (which is the child’s job). In the same way, bad people are not necessarily afraid of their own foibles.  They may actually cherish them.  Thus, they can easily choose a god who is unable to remove this defect.  Or the god of their choosing might be out to lunch when the prayer is offered.  It is too easy to blame the mischief on something else.

And in fact the AA cult lionizes criminals and scoundrels.  Recently a Craigslist post eulogized the mafia gangster and murderer Henry Hill (also alcoholic), and the group members all offered condolences.  The post has since been deleted, as are many posts that are unflattering to AA.  Henry Hill excused his own mischief, with the easy excuse that his god simply failed to remove the defects of character that caused it.  The AA cult is a refuge for scoundrels, criminals and liars.

Step 10 says: “when we were wrong, promptly admitted it.”  This sounds good. One should apologize quickly.  But this becomes a habit for AA members.  Commit the crime, then apologize and blame the addiction.  We’ve all seen children who do this.  They get into trouble and then quickly hug mom and say “I’m sorry.  I love you.”  But of course they learned this behavior from the parent who failed to properly discipline the child (in the second parenting example above).  It’s a sign of an incipient sociopath.

The 12 Step theology cleverly exploits Christianity’s requirement to forgive and to turn the other cheek.  They can get away with mischief because we feel like we are being ‘divine’ by forgiving someone who is sick.  Plus they are praying, and that can’t be a bad thing, right?  So what if they are praying to a different god.

They also exploit the Christian concept of Redemption, as taught in many  New Testament parables such as the “Eleventh Hour” and “Prodigal Son”.  Like the subject of the parables, the alcoholic lives a sinful life, often self-professed liars, cheaters, and master manipulators, until late in life when they repent and seek forgiveness.  And as good Christians, we must admire them and accept their conversion.  Never mind that they are a disciple of a god of their own choosing.  And in fact often they will reunite with the family they abandoned, and become more honorable.  But with one glaring exception: these people are the strongest proponents of the myth of addiction, claiming that they were unable to stop drinking under their own power — thereby paving the way for young alcoholics to repeat the cycle.  (Note: these people were liars before their first sip.  Do you believe their account of addiction?)  These Paganists are clever!

And whereas Christianity values “peace on earth”, AA extols “serenity” — inner peace.  This sounds good because it would mean they’d be less likely to crave a drink.  But in fact, it simply suppresses normal emotions that we all must learn to deal with.  It leads to the “Serenity Now” paradox, in which one tries to calm oneself down with a mantra, but then suddenly explodes due to suppressed anger.  You can’t suppress or excise negative emotions, although the Big Book claims that the HP will give you the power to “match calamity with serenity”.  This philosophy only sets up the drinker for the binge-abstinence cycle.

An outsider looking at the group might assume it is Christian simply because it believes in the devil (which uses alcohol as its tool).  But the devil exists in many religions.  And in fact the reality is that the group idolizes drugs and inebriety!  (Just go to your local AA meeting or listen to their stories — see the Meetings Blog.)

Bill W, the founder of AA and creator of this brilliant scheme, was a philander both before and after his sobriety.  If you want to believe that he was hopelessly addicted to alcohol, fine.  But the simpler explanation is that he used alcohol as a tool to escape his wife and roam for sex.

As heresy, Paganism has an inherent appeal to rebels and trouble makers, though it is not clear to what extent its followers are aware of this.

Paganism has been around longer than any other established religion.  AA gives it acceptance and credibility, and allows it to enter the mainstream using drugs and alcohol as the vehicle.  As with any good heretical cult, it is cloaked in the prayers of Christianity, the religion of the establishment, to avoid scrutiny and controversy.  In fact, many people dislike AA at first because it seems too religious/Christian.  But anyone who gets too hung up on these pedantics is probably not AA material to begin with.

If AA is so heretical, why is it tolerated by established religions?  For example, some churches allow AA meetings.  Also, the Jewish group Taglit-Birthright Israel offers “sober” trips to Israel for young people.  Perhaps it is because they don’t realize that AA is a Pagan cult.  Or maybe they don’t think it’s dangerous.  Or maybe they know it’s dangerous but prefer to keep their enemies close.

“I drank so much that I couldn’t remember what happened afterwards, except I woke up in a stranger’s bedroom surrounded by empty condom wrappers and a guy snoring loudly next to me.”

The alcoholic will often claim “blackout”.  We are supposed to take this as evidence that the drinker is compulsive and unable to control their intake.  Excessive drinking to the point of memory loss is a symptom of the disease.  After all, why would someone put themselves in that kind of situation intentionally?

In fact, the reason is simple.  People put themselves in sexually risky situations all the time.  And they do so with or without the help of alcohol.  Some people do it because they are insecure about their appearance, and being wanted by another person provides validation.  Some do it because they are terrified of getting older, or are desperate for human contact.  In all cases they are hoping to find “the one”, but settle for something less for the night, and end up ashamed of their behavior.  They prefer not to remember it.  Claiming “blackout” provides an easy excuse to forget about it, and not be held accountable by others for their poor decisions.

It’s one thing to wake up next to a fat chick after a night of heavy drinking.  It’s quite another to make out with her sober — and for others to see you doing it.  Alcohol reduces our inhibitions.  We are apt to think that this is an unintended consequence of drinking.  And perhaps it is for the first couple of times that we imbibe.  But we quickly learn the reality, and in fact many drink expressly for this purpose.  The alcoholic, of course, will prefer that you think he drinks because of a compulsion for the taste and smell of booze.  But it is usually a compulsion for sex.

There is a crystal meth epidemic in many gay populations.  It is a public health problem because many men have unprotected sex while high.  So, we might think that these are men who are addicted, and reckless behavior is an unfortunate consequence.  In fact, it is the opposite: reckless sex is the purpose of getting high.  Many men will repeatedly get drunk, then get high, then scour the internet for sex.  The high increases the pleasure and reduces one’s natural level of disgust.  So it’s possible to perform sexually with someone you would never consider otherwise.  Of course, afterwards there is much shame about the encounter, so they claim “blackout” to try to forget it.  (They want you to believe that they are ashamed because they are ashamed of being gay — internalized homophobia.  But in fact, they are ashamed because the partner is unappealing.  If the partner was good looking, they’d be proudly holding his hand walking down Santa Monica Boulevard!)  And they repeat this behavior in the hopes that one day they will strike gold, and meet the man of their dreams.  More likely, they will contract HIV.

In the movie Ted (2012), one of the characters (Patrick Warburton) claims to be experiencing blackouts and not remembering anything except getting really drunk and then waking up with bruises and finding texts on his cell phone about meeting someone in a hidden area.  This happens repeatedly.  Marky Mark suggests he’s into gay aggression, but he responds, “I don’t think so.  I don’t remember what happened.  I blacked out.”  By the end of the movie we see him walking around a party holding hands with a handsome man.

The Big Book promotes the blackout myth repeatedly, but in all cases the blackout occurs for shameful behavior that the person would naturally want to forget, although it is usually unspecified.  For example, in Personal Story #10 – Tightrope – a gay man describes regular blackouts:

For me, the idea of being homosexual – the word gay wasn’t then in common use – was unthinkable.  Drinking helped me to forget and evade.  Also, it provided some cover….  The struggle continued throughout years of unsuccessful dating and pretending.  When I eventually decided to act on my desires, the guilt and the shame — as well as the drinking — increased…. After a few years I was a nightly blackout drinker…. at times I awakened battered and with my watch or wallet missing, or in the company of strangers whose names I did not remember and did not want to know.

Obviously he wants to have it both ways.  He wants you to think that he’s getting drunk in order to overcome the shame of being gay (although elsewhere in the story he claims to have a lover).  This is society’s fault.  Your fault!  But in reality he’s ashamed of the guys he’s hooking up with.  If the guy was cute, he’d remember every second of it.  And brag about it to his friends!

Later in the story he claims to be blackout drinking entirely at home.  And yet he’s still waking up with bruises.  Are we to believe he’s staying home?  Even if he believes it himself, he can hardly be expected to accurately account for his whereabouts in such a state.  Are we to believe he’s drinking because of an addiction to alcohol?  It seems clear that he’s so desperate for a little action that he’ll take some risks.  Keep in mind, good alcoholic is trained to exaggerate his level of drinking and risk taking.

If someone claims “blackout” at the holiday party, you can be sure they made a pass at someone who they already knew was not interested.  And they had wanted to do this for a while, and thought about it even before the first sip.

I call BS on “blackout”.

Most people think Alcoholics Anonymous is a beneficial group that helps people recover from their their addiction to alcohol.  It provides a safe, structured and open environment where people can discuss their problems and provide mutual support to stay clean, get better, and move on with their lives.

But in actuality, AA is the opposite: it is a society for people to remain sober temporarily and pretend to address their problems, while keeping open the possibility of relapsing and returning to drink and drugs at any time, which then gives them the freedom (or excuse) to do whatever they want.

Of course, these people say that AA works and is the only thing that helped them.  What they don’t say is that they have relapsed many times while in AA, and they will probably relapse again.  In fact: “No experimental studies unequivocally demonstrated the effectiveness of AA or TSF approaches for reducing alcohol dependence or problems.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16856072

If you’ve been to an AA meeting, you may have gotten the feeling that you were not in good company.  You may have had a bad feeling about certain people.  Perhaps you went with a friend, and you thought the meeting was very interesting.  You found the shares fascinating and you found yourself clapping after each.  But you decide it’s not for you.  Something about it seems creepy and manipulative.  But you think, it’s good these people have this kind of meeting to go to.  It helps keep them off the streets, and at least someone is watching them.

Your suspicion is correct.  In fact, AA is a haven for liars, criminals, and sociopaths.  These are people who enjoy drinking because it gives them an excuse to behave badly.  For example, they enjoy getting into fights, making trouble, neglecting their family, abusing their wife or children, cheating and random hookups, etc.  By going to AA, they can at least claim that they are trying to get help for their problem.  Furthermore, because AA teaches that addiction is a disease, and requires that the member admit powerlessness, the attendee can claim that their behavior is not really their fault.  And as they sit in the meeting, they can fantasize about what they plan to do the next time they are overpowered by the urge to drink.

AA is a school for scoundrels.  It teaches people that it’s ok to spend your youth drinking and doing drugs and having fun, neglecting your family, commit crimes, and then get sober for a while to make it seem like you are trying to reform.  Then, relapse and repeat the cycle when sober living gets boring.  Just claim that you had an overpowering craving to drink again, and despite your best efforts, you just couldn’t stop yourself.

This behavior is modeled by the speakers who come to AA to tell the stories of their own addictions — as recounted in the section “Things We Heard at Meetings”.  In most cases they are men and women who went to AA when they were young, but didn’t “get it” and they left.  They continued on with their hedonistic lifestyle, drinking and drugging and partying for many years, and openly brag about the fun they had, even though it adversely affected their families, and put innocent people at risk through DUI.  They didn’t come back to AA for good until generally middle age, often describing a feeling of being ‘done’.  Whereas, the ones who come back at younger ages tend to have shorter sobrieties, since they are not done with their partying, and we are only seeing them between relapses.

For example, here is a Craigslist post by a late 30′s man who ‘sponsors’ many younger attendees and describes how they show a brief interest in the Big Book, and then cycle out of sobriety:

https://forums.craigslist.org/?ID=217256239

The fact that the core AA groups are composed mostly of middle age (and beyond) men and women proves this simple fact.  There are no dedicated long term young attendees.  (There are a few exceptions to this rule, but generally these people have various kinds of disabilities that make them unable to participate in a youthful way of life.)  The reason is that young attendees either naturally moderate their drinking (as most people do), or they continue a cycle of relapse with binge drinking, followed by recovery/AA, repeating for many years.

Among women and gay groups, the dynamic is somewhat different.  In this case, the reason for attending is mostly social.  Gay men and single women may seek a social outlet to replace the bar scene, which is no longer fun as they’ve gotten older.  AA is a great place to socialize and meet other people in the same boat, as well as bad boys and fixer-uppers, if that’s what you’re into.  However, these people are generally not really alcoholics.  They didn’t have serious problems with alcohol, and didn’t have a hard time quitting.  In fact, for many it’s a relief not to have to spend money on booze, or to wake up every weekend morning with a hangover.  The only problem is that these people must admit to being an alcoholic in order to be accepted in the group, and this unintentionally perpetuates the Myth of Addiction.  They justify it to themselves by believing they are helping those with ‘real’ addictions.

Of course, there are many women and gay men who are truly scoundrels, and use AA as a platform for 13th stepping, and taking advantage of others.  But there is a much lower level of criminality among these groups.  And of course there are many straight men who started drinking to quash feelings of guilt, inadequacy, or financial stress.  These men will leave once they can resolve these feelings.  Those who can’t may stay a while.  The web site AddictScience.com is a pseudoscientific explanation of addiction by Steve Castleman; it is a monument to the sublimation of feelings of shame and inadequacy caused by years of systematic emasculation by his power hungry wife.

The core philosophy of AA reinforces its self-serving, corrupt and hedonistic purpose: you are powerless over alcohol (step 1) and so you must turn your will to God (or Higher Power) to help you regain control over your life (steps 2 and 3).  There should be no mistake: the solution to alcoholism is not addressing the core emotional problems that tend to cause excessive drinking, as we would naively believe.  The solution to alcoholism is a spiritual belief.  This is intended literally and much of the Big Book focuses on this very point, and emphasizes it in various ways.  Yes there are steps that focus on evaluating your own life, but these are intended only for the purpose of being able to open yourself up to let in the Spirit.

Remember that we deal with alcohol-cunning, baffling, powerful! Without help it is too much for us. But there is One who has all power-That One is God. May you find Him now! (Big Book, p. 58)

We trust infinite God rather than our finite selves.  We are in the world to play the role He assigns.  Just to the extent that we do as we think he would have us, and humbly rely on Him, does he enable us to match calamity with serenity. (Big Book, p. 68)

AA philosophy provides the member with carte blanche to do as he pleases, as long as he believes that God wants him to, or as long as he believes that he is under the control of an evil spirit (such as whiskey).

It is a travesty that our courts send impressionable young people into this environment to be indoctrinated into this way of life.

Bill Wilson, the creator of this brilliant scheme, is the prototypical alcoholic.  He was an inveterate womanizer both before and after his sobriety.  (For more information, see the section on the “Big Book” in the blog post: Why does every best seller on addiction turn out to be fake?)

AA perpetuates several myths to make the public believe that alcoholism is a disease that can strike anyone.  The Big Book is full of stories of professionals – doctors, lawyers, engineers, CEOs — who are struck down in the prime of life with this debilitating disease for no apparent reason.  But if you actually attend AA meetings, you discover no such thing.  Most attendees have limited education and few work skills.  Often AA’ers say they know of a doctor or professional in the group, but I haven’t seen any.  Every once in a while a professional-type will come to a meeting.  But they generally don’t stay around for long.  Sleeve tattoos, nose piercings, and sun-seared cheeks are much more common.  Nevertheless, the myth persists.

Alcoholism is a disease that strikes people who sometimes have difficulty telling the truth and have a history of getting into trouble.  The reason is simple: alcoholism — the compulsion to drink — is a lie, a fantasy, a hoax, a fraud.  Often people at AA will admit they’ve had a history of lying. If someone has a history of lying, then we shouldn’t automatically believe that they have a drinking compulsion just because they say they do.  More likely, they drink because it’s fun and they enjoy making trouble or getting into it.

When sharing at meetings, they often describe the thought patterns of this ‘disease’ as if normal people would not have negative thoughts.  But everyone struggles with pessimistic, cynical, and even sadistic thinking.  It is not a disease, as long as you can acknowledge it and deal with it without hurting others.

There are also many people in AA who were brainwashed into believing it.  Often these people are lonely and looking for a group to which to belong.  If they have to admit to something that’s not true, then it’s a small price to pay.  These people generally discover that there is not much of value in AA and leave after some time.

AA perpetuates the myth that drinking is compulsive.  But in fact, listening carefully to the stories, this is never actually an issue.  I have never heard anyone ever describe a situation when they didn’t want to drink but did so anyway.  Instead, they may describe a situation where they decided to have “just one drink” and it spiraled out of control — drugs, sex, DUI, etc. etc.  But what’s the deal with the first drink?  They never mention any concern about it.  In fact if anything they feel entitled to be able to enjoy just a drink, as any man would.

AA also perpetuates the myth that it works.  One often hears the mantra, “AA was the only thing that ever worked for me.”  And we are relieved, because otherwise what would we do with these people?  But many of these people are still actively cycling through relapse and recovery, and the ones past middle age no longer have interest in drinking and instead prefer the social aspects of the group and the potential for 13th stepping an impressionable and vulnerable newcomer.  Also, some are professional addictions counselors, so their livelihood is completely dependent on the belief in its effectiveness.

AA also provides speakers for schools, who teach the kids the lesson of the 12 Steps: don’t do drugs because you may find that you are powerless over them and they will take over your life.  Most children will of course be cautious with drugs, but some will consider this as a career option.  This is the goal: many of the speakers work at rehabs and sober living facilities that have every interest in maintaining a flow of new addicts.

All this may be hard to believe, but there is ample evidence that AA is no more effective at preventing excessive alcohol use than no treatment at all.  The main evidence for its effectiveness is self-reported from addicts who are life-long liars to begin with.  This is the key to understanding the value of AA: don’t listen to what the members say; watch what they actually do.  We as a society are much too gullible, especially when we see a group of people who seem like they are genuinely trying to help each other.

Is there anything of value in AA?  There are 2 main features for which we are tempted to forgive the group its faults: it teaches to make amends to people harmed by the addiction, and it encourages service to other addicts.   However, overall it causes far more harm than it prevents, and making amends is simply a way to regain the trust of those affected — even if they’ve been let down many times before.  AA emphasizes the importance of apologizing quickly instead of focusing on how to prevent it from happening again.  Also, service work does make people feel needed, and this is important.  But there are better ways to make people feel needed.  Furthermore, service work in some cases is nothing more than trying to convince others that they are alcoholics in need of treatment.

AA provides a fellowship for lonely people, and this is very important.  But it would be far better if it did not require that one admit one is powerless to join the group.  This only sets one up for manipulation by others.  For example, sponsors, who promise freedom from the newly diagnosed disease, have great power over naive inductees who are looking for someone with the answers to life’s questions.

AA provides people with an opportunity for self reflection and growth, and we think this is a good thing.  But in fact, this is something we all do continually, whether we are in AA or not, and we are expected to do, and it is patronizing to think that some people need a specialized program to do this.  In fact, it is just a cover for their transgressions, so that they can maintain a facade of righteousness.

AA is really just a school for scoundrels, with tentacles in many areas of our lives, the government, and our children’s education.  More than any other organization, it promotes the Myth of Addiction — which harms innocent people at the expense of the selfish and sadistic, and squanders precious years and resources.  The myth is a modern delusion that must be exposed and discarded.

Let’s do an experiment.  Take two groups of children.  To one group you instruct:

Children, be careful around candy.  Some people get addicted to candy.  Here’s what happens: They start eating it and things seem ok at first, but after some time they find that they are unable to stop.  Then, they eat all the candy, even though they are getting really fat and desperately want to stop.  Even though they may not even really like the taste of the candy!  For these children, the only solution is to completely ban candy from their lives.  Otherwise they may succumb to the addiction again.  It is a life-long struggle, although there are treatment programs for it.

To the other group you say:

Children, be careful around candy.  If you eat too much candy you’ll get fat.  If you find that you are eating too much candy, or that you are getting fat, stop and think, have I had enough?  Can I consider a fruit or vegetable instead?

Now, put the children in a room with candy, fruits, and vegetables.  Which group do you think will eat more candy?  Which will have more bingers?

Now imagine doing the same experiment with drugs.  Which group do you think will have more drug addicts in 10 years?

We are very susceptible to the power of suggestion, and this fact has been demonstrated repeatedly in both psychological experiments and throughout history.  In fact, there is a book about it: Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds.  It’s a great book: fascinating, detailed, and well-written.  You won’t believe the crazy things people used to believe — as well as the parallels with events today.

Admitting you are an alcoholic in AA can also create or exacerbate an addiction.  In this Washington Post editorial, a young woman describes how she developed the ‘addict persona’ after being unexpectedly forced to admit she was an alcoholic at an AA meeting — it became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Most people take drugs at some point in their youth, and most don’t become addicted.  We need to teach our children: “Drugs are bad for you.  Yes they seem like fun and can make you feel good.  But they make you irresponsible and will stop you from reaching your potential in life, and some cause long-term damage to the brain.  If you are taking drugs, or escaping with drugs, you need to stop and think about what is wrong.  Help is available.”

We will never be able to rid the world of drugs. But let’s not underestimate our children’s good judgment if we deal with them honestly.  If we tell the truth about drugs, they will lose their supernatural appeal, abuse will fall, and “Drug Addiction” will be added as a new chapter in the book of modern delusions.

———————

For more information on candy addiction:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-science-willpower/200912/sugar-addiction-in-your-body-not-just-your-mind

www.littlesugaraddicts.com/

http://www.livestrong.com/article/339955-sugar-addiction-in-children/

http://bingeeatingtherapy.com/2012/03/01/friday-a-addicted-sugar/

Addiction is a terrible thing. The addict is desperate for drugs and does terrible things to get them. Once he has them he doesn’t give a damn about anyone or anything.  It is as if his soul is possessed by the devil. Of course, we are not religious and we don’t believe that literally. There is a scientific explanation for why the addict acts with such malice. His goal is not to hurt people; he is lying and cheating and stealing to get the drug. Although the child seems like a demon, he is actually in the throes of a medical disease and must be dealt with compassionately. In fact, entire industries were created to treat and research this disease. If you want to find a rehab, there are many. It’s a tough disease, but it can be treated. Never cured, of course, but treated. And people get better.

As you know from this web site, this is all BS: Addiction is a myth. There is no such thing as ‘drug addiction’ or ‘alcoholism’. Drug addicts take drugs by choice. It is not a compulsion or disease. Therefore all drug addicts are either liars, or they have been brainwashed.

I know, this is hard to believe. So let’s start with a story:

There is a boy and he is cute and sweet and people seem to like him.  But there is a problem.  This boy does things he shouldn’t do. He lies about where he was and what time he’s coming home. He is often late.  He hurts people ‘by accident’. He injures the family cat. He develops a fascination with knives and is found playing with them.

Is he blatantly defying his parents? No, it seems he is not rebellious. He does these things secretly and does not seem to want his parents to know. They find out only by accident or coincidence. So this cannot be open defiance. Plus he always has a reasonable explation for his behavior, followed by a ready hug. He is an innocent boy and there is no reason not to trust him.

Many boys do things they shouldn’t do. They do bad things and they are punished, or they feel guilty or ashamed, and they never do them again. They’ve learned their lesson.

But this boy is different. He does things he should know he shouldn’t do. The behavior continues. This cannot all be just coincidence. He doesn’t seem to learn and sometimes doesn’t seem even to want to learn. The parents are in a quandry. What can they do? His behavior starts to seem intentional. It happens despite punishment and pleading. What is going on here? This is not supposed to happen! From Parenting 101: you tell the child it’s wrong and they stop doing it. But with this boy, you tell him it’s wrong and he starts doing it! It’s as if he is doing these things purposefully! Could it be?  Even worse: sometimes it feels like he is doing these things just to be hurtful and cause pain.

No.  It couldn’t be. This child simply doesn’t know the difference between right and wrong. He is still a child, and this is normal for children. Sometimes it takes longer for some children than for others, and maybe sometimes they are a little rebellious. Maybe this is actually healthy.  ”My child will be fine,” the parent believes.

The child is disruptive in class. He is sent to the school counselor. He is diagnosed with ADHD and an impulse control disorder: he does things he shouldn’t do but he can’t help it. It’s a compulsion. He needs to learn to identify his compulsion when it happens and stop it before acting on it. It’s a disability, and the child must be treated with compassion. Do not punish the child – this will only make things worse.  It will take time and patience.

Is this boy a monster? An incipient psychopath? No, this is just normal growing pains.

He is put on adderol to improve focus and reduce distraction. Things seems to improve for a while. They boy seems better at times, and other times seems even worse. Let’s give it time….

After a few months they taper the boy off. It seems there are side effects. Sometimes he can’t fall asleep until the early hours of the morning.  And he has started to act out in other ways. The experiment fails, but we were not happy about giving the child drugs in the first place.

He is caught stealing a toy from a toy store. This is the problem with impulse control: he wants something and then he must have it. He cannot control his impulse. We must work on impulse control. But there is something strange here: the toy is not the kind of toy the child would actually ever play with. Quite the opposite. The child has typically scorned in this type of toy.

The child goes to a school presentation about drugs. He learns that drugs are very bad.  So why would someone take them?  Often, you take them because your friend does. It is called ‘peer pressure’. The child doesn’t have friends, so he is not concerned. “This won’t affect me because I don’t have ‘peer pressure’,” he thinks. Then they describe what happens when you take drugs for too long: you become addicted. You can’t stop taking them. What does this mean exactly? What happens when you run out? What happens is this: when you run out you feel so sick and terrible, and you are so desperate to get drugs again that you steal something to get money to buy them (because drugs are very expensive). Then when you get caught stealing, they take you to jail. Jail is a very bad place, and there is no air conditioning so it is very hot all the time. There is no TV or XBox and people will hurt you and no one will protect you. This sounds terrible. “I will not do drugs,” the boy promises himself.

The child learns more about drugs. Someone says that drugs are fun and make you feel good. This is not appealing to the boy. “I feel fine,” he thinks to himself. “I don’t need drugs.” He sees a TV show with a strung out drug addict sitting on the street corner: this is what happens when you do drugs. “What a loser,” the boy thinks.

But the troubling behavior continues. The boy sometimes seems angry or depressed without any obvious cause. He picks fights and makes fun of a fat girl. Arriving at school, he always seems to have forgotten something: homework, pencil, note. At home, he sits on and breaks his younger brother’s toy.

He does things he KNOWS he shouldn’t do. But really it’s more than that: he does things he knows everyone else knows he knows he shouldn’t do.  Is he seeking attention?  Is there a desire to be punished?  But punishments seem to have no effect.  Let’s focus on rewards instead.

The next year there is another assembly on drugs. He learns more about addiction. The drug addict does terrible things. He lies and cheats. He hangs around with the wrong people. He does not love his family any more and even steals things from them. He gets into trouble. He robs stores. He does these things because he is addicted to drugs and he must do whatever he can to get the money to buy more.  Then when he’s ‘high’, he ignores everyone else.  He doesn’t listen to his parents or teachers or do his homework. His grades fall.  He knows these things are bad but he cannot stop using despite his best efforts. At first he did drugs to ‘feel good’ but now he does them to avoid feeling really, really bad.  He is a slave to the drug.  Every one tries to help him but it’s no use. He is hopelessly addicted. Again, he is caught stealing. This time he sent to jail for many years. His friend has overdosed and is found dead. This is the lesson of drugs: “You will end up dead or in jail. Don’t do drugs. Just say no.”

The child listens intently. He wonders what it feels like to be on drugs. He wonders what it feels like to be compelled to do things that are bad, and to have no control or ability to stop. There is something strangely appealing about that.  But there is a problem: he still has no friends. Where will the ‘peer pressure’ come from? Oh well, he thinks, not here in school. Everyone here is so nice.  He forgets about drugs.

The he goes to middle school. It is a larger school with students from different parts of town. In health class one day there is another discussion of drugs. He hears it all again: the lying, cheating and stealing. The loss of respect for your family. The inability to control your actions. Having to do awful things just to get the drug. He looks around the room. There is a girl in the class who is looking out the window with a scowl.

He goes into his parent’s liquor cabinet and takes a little alcohol from each bottle, not enough to be noticeable, but when taken together it fills a small soda bottle all the way to the top.  It is her idea.  He holds it to his nose and the smell is terrible.  The taste must be bad too.  How bad could it be?

By far it is the worst thing he ever tasted and his mouth recoils reflexively.  He can’t believe anything could taste so terrible or that people actually drink this stuff.  But he forces it down — at first in very tiny sips.  They are drinking out behind the school.  For the first 15 minutes they have made little progress on the bottle. She is not drinking much either; she also finds it distasteful.  But he is determined.  Something in him says to drink, to drink until he is good and drunk, to drink until it is all gone.   The drink starts to flow more easily and he can take small sips.  About half way through she tells him to stop, and she is serious and seems legitimately scared.  But the spirit is in him, and sensing her fear only makes him want to drink more.   In 20 minutes he has downed the bottle.  In another 20 minutes he  is thoroughly drunk and sick and scared, but also excited.  He throws up.  They remain for a while and he starts to feel better.  They go home.  He tells his parents he ate too much candy after school and feels sick, and goes to his room for the night.  He feels what it feels like to be drunk and terribly sick.

He doesn’t touch alcohol again until high school.  In college he drinks beer, and it’s relatively moderate.  He prefers pot. Later he will prefer meth and ecstasy; these become his drugs of choice.  Usually he carefully controls the dosage.  But some days – like when his parents nag him to go back to school or get a job – he will overdo it, and take multiple doses.  He can’t help it.  It is a compulsion.  Something inside him makes him do it — even though he says to himself, “Don’t overdo it.”  He tries to remember what the counselor taught him in elementary school, as he’s bringing the smoldering pipe to his lips.   Think consequences: is this really what you want? He thinks about the next few days of partying and the cute girl he met last week.  He chuckles — if the counselor only knew.

[Fast forward 10 years....]

After a long career as a drug addict and seller, a police record and many stints in jail and rehab, having injured many people both mentally and physically, and having dragged his family through years of hell, the boy finally overcomes his addiction.  How?  Somehow get got himself to an AA meeting.  At the meeting he suddenly realizes that he has to get sober and checks into rehab.  Now it’s the weekly AA meetings that keep him sober — this is the only thing that ever worked for him.  He goes back to school and decides that he wants to help others with the same problem he had.  After all, he’s been through the pain so he can understand and can help like no one else.

The drug addiction has been licked.  He is free of this terrible disease.  However, he still has a problem with impulse control.  He sadly accepts that it will be a life-long struggle.

But he stands as a testament to the success of the treatment industry.  He even speaks at local schools to warn children of the dangers of drugs.

AddictionMyth gratefully acknowledges Addiction expert Dr. Adi Jaffe for his contribution to this article.

All of the best-selling accounts of addiction turn out to be fakes.  This is true of James Frey’s A Million Little Pieces, The Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous, and Beautiful Boy: A Father’s Journey through his Son’s Addiction by David Sheff.  Why is that?  If you read this site, you already know the answer: because addiction is a myth, and therefore any account of it must be fictional or fraudulent.

The problem is that many people believe in addiction in part due to the influence of these books.  If you read one of these books, and believe it, then you have bought into the Addiction Myth.  Just like if you saw the movie “Requiem for a Dream”, which is about a drug addict, you might think such a thing actually exists — and given the cinema-verite quality of the movie, you could be forgiven for that.  So if we are to debunk the Addiction Myth, we must debunk these books.  And we must view any new accounts of addiction with increased skepticism.

A Million Little Lies

A Million Little Pieces topped the New York Times best seller list for 15 weeks in 2005.  It was the autobiographical account of the author’s struggles with alcoholism and crack addiction, and his recovery through a 12 step program.  It got some very good reviews and was chosen by Oprah’s book club. I have no doubt it’s a great book and well written, and a joy to read.  There was one little problem however.  It was later found to be full of fabrications and exaggerations, and was even nicknamed “A Million Little Lies”.  Oprah famously chastised the author and his publisher on her show, and some libraries have reclassified the book as fiction.

Personally I have no problem with shameless self promotion and even lying about details of things, as long as you’re not in a court of law or similar.  If you can fool the American public and make a lot of money off entertainment, then good for you. This is a case of buyer beware: we should be naturally skeptical and not believe every thing we read.  But if we are entertained then we’ve gotten our money’s worth, and don’t have much right to complain if it’s not all true.

But I do have a problem if you try to create public policy based on a myth.  And the entire substance abuse treatment industry is based on the Addiction Myth.  The drug war is predicated on the Addiction Myth.  So if you’re going to lie about addiction then it’s important to debunk it.

However, Frey was not accused of lying about addiction. In fact, if anything people generally believe that part of the story to be true.  But of course, if he lied about other things, then he’s also likely lied about addiction itself, which drove the plot of the book.  With pathological liars, it’s important to question every claim, even the seemingly innocent and plausible, and there’s no easy way to separate the truth from the lies. Drug addiction would be much easier to believe in if just one honest person claimed to have it.  But as yet in the course of human history that has not happened.  Every addict is a liar.  And it would be foolish to choose to believe the Addiction Myth based on testimony from liars.  For more info, see my post: The Types of Addiction Fakers.

The Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous

The Big Book was written by Bill Wilson and Dr. Bob Smith supposedly as a way to help other alcoholics overcome their addiction.  It’s full of stories about alcoholics, explanations of the ‘disease’, and spiritual advice.  While it’s an entertaining read, and these guys are very convincing and persuasive, a careful examination reveals serious problems.  People who knew Bill W personally claim he cheated on Lois both before and after sobriety, and was guilty of other indiscretions.  Again, I would not criticize someone for these pecadillos, except if you hypocritically claim not to be committing them.

3:2 My drinking assumed more serious proportions, continuing all day and almost every night.  The remonstrances of my friends terminated in a row and I became a lone wolf.  There were many unhappy scenes in our sumptuous apartment.  There had been no real infidelity, for loyalty to my wife, helped at times by extreme drunkenness, kept me out of those scrapes.

A ‘lone wolf’ means that he was on the prowl.  For what exactly?  Obviously sex, though he conveniently can claim that his blackouts prevent him from remembering that.  Also he claims that ‘extreme drunkenness’ helped him avoid infidelity.  But he seems to have had the opportunity — ‘scrapes’ — and if so, then certainly mild drunkenness would have encouraged it.  It’s illogical to claim otherwise.

And yet he claims to be “developing a manner of living which demands rigorous honesty” (58:1).  In fact this is required by the steps 4 and 5: “Fearless moral inventory” and “admit the exact nature of our wrongs.”  Perhaps he feels these steps don’t apply to him.

The book is full of stories of completely innocent alcoholics whose only flaw is the inability to stop drinking.  Everyone looks at them and says, “He has the perfect life, why can’t he stop drinking?”  And the alcoholic himself truly has no idea why he is drinking, other than he picks up a drink and next thing he knows he’s unable to stop.  However, we know the reality is not so ideal.  Alcoholics are often abusive and hateful.  Alcoholics do dangerous and irresponsible things when drunk.  And yet there is no mention of this.  No beating of wives, no fighting, no neglect of children.  Clearly this is an attempt to idealize the alcoholic.  Modern psychology insists that addictive behaviors have underlying psychological causes.  But there is none of this in the Big Book.  ”In their hearts they really don’t know why they do it.” 23:2

Bill Wilson’s own story of a roadtrip with his wife across the country never mentions any infidelities. However, this seemed to be the norm, as described in the New York Magazine article “Saint Booze”: http://nymag.com/nymetro/arts/books/reviews/n_9880/.  Bill would often get drunk and come home very late.  One can only assume he was doing more than just drinking.

To add insult to injury, the Big Book proceeds to implicate the wives in the alcoholic’s debacle (Chapter 5 – To Wives):

• We have had retaliatory love affairs with other men.
• In desperation we have even got tight ourselves — the drunk to end all drunks.
• In nearly every instance the alcoholic only seems to be unloving and inconsiderate; it is usually because he is warped and sickened that he says and does those appalling things.

Supposedly this chapter was written by the wives of alcoholics, but actually it was written by Bill W himself.  It is self-serving and manipulative, and has harmed generations of women who unwittingly tolerated their husband’s cheating and abuse.  The only consolation: “We alcoholics seem to have the gift of picking out the word’s finest women.”  He was a master of flattery.

“God alone can judge our sex situation.”  Bill was tired of being judged by his peers, and there was copious evidence that he has reason to be judged harshly.  There were many other women, and this was well known and caused dissent within the organization: http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-otherwomen.html#ftnt03

Although he believes there is no psychological cause of alcoholism, there is one point in the Big Book where he gets pretty close:

It is plain that a life which includes deep resentment leads only to futility and unhappiness.  To the precise extent that we permit these, do we squander the hours that might have been worth while.  But with the alcoholic, whose hope is the maintenance and growth of a spiritual existence, this business of resentment is infinitely grave. We have found that it is fatal.  For when harboring such feelings we shut ourselves off from the sunlight of the Spirit.  This insanity of alcohol returns and we drink again. And with us, to drink is to die. 66:1

Deep resentments are obviously a reason for drinking.  If you resent something (e.g. envy of a friend, or if you are not as attractive or young as you’d like to be), then you may turn to alcohol to relieve the pain.  However, Wilson prefers to believe that the reason that resentment causes drinking is that it prevents access to the Spiritual power that is the only thing that can prevent it.  One wonders whether he ever considered the simpler alternative.

Above all, the book is a classic example of cult indoctrination: First admit you have a disease (Step 1: “I am powerless under alcohol”), and then follow our program which is the only cure.  ”Rarely have we seen a person fail who has thoroughly followed our path.  Those who do not recover are people who cannot or will not completely give themselves to this simple program.” (58:1)  If you fail it is your own fault, you just need to try harder.  Impressionable young minds, primed by early childhood indoctrination into the myth of addiction, are particularly vulnerable to this type of thinking.  And yet, AA has never been shown to be effective in treating addiction, any more than going it alone.  The reason is simple: drinking is a choice and people simply choose to stop drinking when they’ve had enough.

Beautiful Boy

Beautiful Boy: A Father’s Journey through his Son’s Addction by David Sheff, is a thoroughly engaging and interesting story of his child’s drug abuse.  It is very detailed and rich, and an intimate view of a liberal, affluent San Francisco family that tries to outdo itself in raising the perfectly happy child.  It is most deserving of its position on the best seller list.  Only problem, again, is that it’s fake.  And in this case it’s fake from the very first word: Beautiful.

Unfortunately, the son is quite unfortunate looking.  He has a huge nose and droopy eyes.  See for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0VicHvaqss

The reason for his son’s addiction is obvious: he’s ugly and got no alibi.  Of course, you get no indication of this in reading the book.  If anything he wants you to believe his son is near adonis-like.  But once you see his pic you can understand his conundrum.  (I daresay the dad is quite foxy.)

One can imagine the father telling the son how beautiful he is his whole life.  And then one day the son realizes he’s not, he’s been told a lie his whole life, and so now he’ll inflict a lie on his family in revenge: the Lie of Addiction.

And thus begins the family’s journey through hell.  The father is angry at his son for doing this, but never seems to hold him accountable — his disease was responsible for it.  No doubt, he feels guilty and will not acknowledge the truth.  There are basically two schools of thought on child-rearing.  One is that you raise a child to be a responsible, independent, and resilient adult.  The other is that you give your child a very happy childhood, and avoid any discomfort and pain at all costs.  This family was clearly in the second camp.  And the outcome is not unexpected.

The story begins with marital strife: “I maturely address our disagreements by falling in love with a family friend”.  This is both sarcastic and misleading.  For if there were disagreements, he never says what they were. No, he falls in love with the neighbor, and then decides he wants a divorce — this is more plausible.  It is a vicious battle with high priced lawyers, ending with the Solomonic splitting of the child between SF and LA (school year/holidays-summers).

There are many indications throughout the book that Nic is just manipulating the family to cause them pain.  For example, when he steals stuff, he always seems to steal the most important things: he needed a notebook and whoops he stole his sister’s journal.  He steals the most valuable bottles of wine from the wine cellar.  (In these cases he was not stealing for money, just personal use.)

Nic is taught the Addiction Myth early on: “His response to an assignment in which he has been asked if you should always try your best: ‘I don’t think you should always try your best all the time,’ he writes, ‘because, let’s say a drug atick asks you for drugs you should not try your best to find him some drugs.’”

Nic learns well, and he recognizes the importance and power of the myth for adults. It will become a tool for him to use against them.  His father also recognizes the power of the drug story in the impressionable young mind:

Drug stories are sinister.  Like some war stories, they focus on adventure and escape.  In the tradition of a long line of famous and infamous carousers and their chroniclers, even hangovers and near-death experiences and visits to the emergency room can be made to seem glamorous.  But often the storytellers omit the slow degeneration, psychic trauma, and finally, the casualties.

He is acutely aware that his son may be enticed by the addict myth.  He is aware of “the sense of rebellion in lighting a joint” in part due to his own drug use.  The irony is that the original stories are mostly fake exaggerations, and yet his son brings them to life even more real and vicious than originally conceived. His son is a very entertaining actor, often replaying/reciting scenes from movies.  It’s not surprising that he takes on the addict character, as it is one of the most fun to play.

And to read about.  As his father says:

His favorite authors have been replaced by an assortment of misanthropes, addicts, drunks, depressives, and suicides: Rimbaud, Burroughs, Kerouac, Kafka, Capote, Miller, Nietzshe, Hemingway, and Fitzgerald…  It worries me that these writers, particularly when they glamorize drugs and debauchery, are so compelling to Nic.

Bingo!  He’s just playing out what he’s reading.  He’s a boy who is disappointed with himself and is seeking some relief in a subversively noble way.  Nic is not an addict.  Every so-called addict is simply acting out some version of the same story.

In this article: http://www.thefix.com/content/gay-pay-meth-addiction-nic-cheff8899 Nic describes his prostitution:

That’s why, to me, getting high and prostitution really was like the same thing for me. They were almost indistinguishable from one another. And that’s why I felt absolutely compelled to include it in my book. Because the truth about me and my addiction was that I truly, deeply hated myself and I was doing everything I knew how to do to try and feel better. I hated myself so much. The only thing that mattered was finding some kind of relief.

More than anything else, I wanted to feel beautiful. I could’ve made money in other ways. Prostitution was something I wanted to do. That sounds crazy fucked up, but it’s true.

Nic, we appreciate your honesty.  And we’re sorry you felt so bad about yourself.  Now we know you’d have sex with men just to get a little attention and validation.  Could it be the same with your addiction?  Was it all for show?  Your dad tells us that you absolutely loved “Requiem for a Dream”, which you saw at age 18.  Is this your real life rendition?

In the midst of his using, he writes a poem and crumples it up under his desk for his father to find: “I’m so think and frail / Don’t care, want another rail.”  He is obviously just trying to cultivate the addict persona for his father’s sake.

And his father falls for it hook, line, and sinker.

In his own book Tweak, Nic describes his first experience with alcohol:

When I was eleven my family went snowboarding up in Tahoe, and a friend and I snuck into the liquor cabinet after dinner. We poured a little bit from each bottle into a glass, filling it almost three- quarters of the way with the different-colored, sweet-smelling liquid. I was curious to know what it felt like to get good and proper drunk. The taste was awful. My friend drank a little bit and stopped, unable to take anymore. The thing was, I couldn’t stop.

I drank some and then I just had to drink more until the whole glass was drained empty. I’m not sure why. Something was driving me that I couldn’t identify and still don’t comprehend. Some say it’s in the genes. My grandfather drank himself to death before I was born. I’m told I resemble him more than anyone else — a long face, with eyes like drops of water running down. Anyway, that night I threw up for probably an hour straight and then passed out on the bathroom floor.

Under no credible scientific theory could the alcoholic become addicted on the first sip.  It takes time and repetition for the reward pathway to develop.  Clearly Nic is trying to manufacture an addiction at age 11.  He is precocious, and it is totally fake.

He claims his addiction started during high school, one summer in France, when he played the role of the ex-pat, hanging out in cafes and drinking wine (but not writing or painting — not enough time for that).  When he got back to the states, there was no alcohol available, so he switched to pot.  But again, these drugs activate completely different pathways.  The addiction to one would not transfer to the other.  It’s obvious from what he’s told us, he’s not doing drugs because he’s addicted.  He’s doing them because he’s trying to suppress the pain of low self-esteem.  The ‘addict’ role is the perfect solution.

And he plays it excruciatingly well.  He tortures his family for years with lies, stealing, breaking in, and veiled threats of suicide.  His behavior is calculated to extract the greatest degree of embarrassment to the family.  During the times he was sober, which lasted up to 2 years, however, he never actually apologized for his behavior.  Each time he would start to, he’d turn away.   You’d think that the diseased addict would feel sorry for the things he did, and regret them, even if he didn’t feel 100% responsible for them.  Perhaps the feelings are just too strong, as his father would like to believe.  But if that is the case, then one can hardly expect this weak boy to stay sober.  The relapse should come as no surprise.  I suspect there is more to the story: why doesn’t the father and the rest of the family demand an apology?  They are hiding something; they are guilty of something and don’t feel they have the right.  Perhaps one day we will find out the answer.

I suspect that the child was a liar from the beginning.  The reason for my suspicion is that there is no claim otherwise.   The author never said that his son was honest.  But with drug addicts it’s a very common theme – lying and manipulation since childhood — so it’s kind of an important issue. Also, there is a point where the boy says he got pot from a boy who was probably totally innocent, and the father believed him. Newsflash pops: your child will never tell you the truth about where he got drugs, especially if he’s hanging out with his friend when you ask him!  It was probably planned out that way!

[Editors note: "I am a liar.  It's not exactly news.  I've been a liar since as long as I can remember." -- Nic Sheff, We All Fall Down (p. 266).  Thank you Nic.  This is news to us!]

But despite the criticisms, the book is really good and I highly recommend it.  The father is a great writer.  He packs in so many good details, like the scenes in the rehab clinics, that are as exciting and dramatic as if you were actually there.

As for Nic, it seems he has a promising writing career ahead as well.  And he’s married to an attractive girl, at least from the pics I saw, so at this point he has no reason to complain.  Life is good.  Congrats to all of you!

The Addiction Lie

The addiction narrative makes for a fascinating read, and it is very appealing to the histrionically inclined.  Unfortunately it is just fiction, and should be presented as such.  If there is a non-fiction account of the development of an addiction, I have yet to find it.

There is a multi-billion dollar medical industry dedicated to studying the science of ‘addiction’.  However, this is an exercise in futility.  There is no such thing as addiction (defined as an uncontrollable compulsion to drink/drug).  All they can show is that parts of the brain light up when people who use drugs see pictures of them, e.g. cocaine, etc.  Surprise, surprise!  I’m sure my brain would light up when I see a donut.  But I’m not addicted to them.  (Well maybe a little.)

—————–

http://healthland.time.com/2012/01/20/the-wet-house-homeless-people-with-alcoholism-drink-less-when-booze-is-allowed/

“Homeless people with Alcoholism drink less when booze is allowed”

“The occurrence of delirium tremens, or DTs — potentially life-threatening withdrawal symptoms — also declined by more than half”

http://healthland.time.com/2012/02/03/siblings-brain-study-sheds-light-on-the-roots-of-addiction/#ixzz1losag4Ya

This study shows that identical twins have nearly identical brain abnormalities that predispose them equally to addiction, but only one develops the addiction.  The addictive personality is possibly caused by lying — a symptom of lack of impulse control.  One sib is able to control their lying, and the other isn’t.  It would be interesting if they compared the early childhoods of these twins on sociopathic tendencies.  Compare this brain syndrome to schizophrenia, for which there are characteristic brain abnormalities.  Conclusion: Cannot be concluded that addiction is a disease.

“Studies find that most people who struggle with alcohol and other drugs in their 20s “are out” of their problems by their 30s, typically without treatment.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16856072

“No experimental studies unequivocally demonstrated the effectiveness of AA or TSF approaches for reducing alcohol dependence or problems.”

AddictScience.com - Addict Science

This web site  is dedicated to a neuroscientific explanation of addiction.  The person who created the web site claims that he was an unsuspecting victim of a disease that took over his life unawares.  However, he provides no details on his personal life that would show how he was systematically emasculated by his wife, and how this lead to excessive drinking.  He also does not reveal any details of his sexuality.  Often, closet homosexuals become excessive drinkers since they find that it is easier to suppress their desires by drinking (or act on them with the help of the facially challenged).

——————-

Hopefully the Myth of Addiction will be exposed soon, and we can get some relief from the annoying self-righteousness of AA Big Book thumpers.  And end the stupid War on Drugs.

Congratulations Bill W and Dr. Bob!  The Library of Congress ranked your book among the 100 most influential books in American literature.

http://www.loc.gov/today/pr/2012/12-123.html

“Alcoholics Anonymous” (1939)
The famous 12-step program for stopping an addiction has sold more than 30 million copies. Millions of men and women worldwide have turned to the program co-founded by Bill Wilson and Dr. Bob Smith to recover from alcoholism. The “Big Book,” as it is known, spawned similar programs for other forms of addiction.

This book is one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated on the American public (and has long since gone world wide).  It is well deserving of its position on the list.  It has spawned industries, inspired entertainment of all kinds, and caused untold suffering throughout all strata of society.  We hope that its position on the list will subject it to greater scrutiny and not lend it any credibility, and that it will soon be widely debunked for the fraud that it is.

Its numerous and absurd prescriptions are taken quite literally:

Remember that we deal with alcohol-cunning, baffling, powerful! Without help it is too much for us. But there is One who has all power-That One is God. May you find Him now!

We learned that we had to fully concede to our innermost selves that we were alcoholics. This is the first step in recovery. The delusion that we are like other people, or presently may be, has to be smashed.

The Big Book has done more than anything else to foster the modern myth known as ‘drug addiction’ (even more than Dr. Drew!).  It is the foundation for the multi-billion dollar substance abuse treatment industry (which has a dubious record at best), and the fear of addiction is the basis of the harsh criminal laws that support the prison-industrial complex.  The myth provides limitless fodder for all forms of entertainment, including movies and tv, using the drug addict/alcoholic as plot line.  The drug war itself is a product of the fear of addiction, and provides a dramatic plotline for many movies (“No Country for Old Men” – sorry I know it’s been a while, but what performances!).

The book has also created endless suffering for families and friends who try to help the drug addict, in the mistaken belief that it is a disease beyond the control of the sufferer, like multiple sclerosis or Alzheimer’s.  They don’t realize that they are just the victims in a selfish scheme of the drug user to avoid growing up.  This is now known as codependency and enabling.  The Big Book is a recipe for this, and the chapter “To Wives” is a perfect example (as described in http://addictionmyth.com/?p=247).

And now that it has achieved public acceptance, we as a society must now expend valuable resources in ‘treating’ drug addicts through public funds and insurance regulations (thanks Obamacare!).

Essential Health Benefit #5: http://www.healthcare.gov/news/factsheets/2011/12/essential-health-benefits12162011a.html

Today’s fable:

At today’s meeting in West Hollywood, we were again reminded of the power of the addiction myth and the danger that it poses for all of us.  The featured speaker was a young woman from Montana who moved to LA with the hope of making it big in movies.  Failing to achieve professional success in the field of dramatic arts, she instead created her own real-life drama, by descending into a dark hell of drug use of all types — alcohol, cocaine, and various anxiolytics.  By doing so she was able to justify her lack of success to herself – she was an ‘addict’ just like her dad.  Of course, she didn’t want her mother to know (wink-wink), and she was continually trying to impress her (for reasons unexplained).  For example, one day on a coke induced frenzy, she texted her mother of her intention to run the city marathon, for which she was not training.  As the time drew nearer, she realized the futility of this mission, so she concocted a plan: she would down a bottle of xanax and then get behind the wheel.  The plan worked!  Soon enough she was in an accident, and hurt her neck, and therefore was unable to run the marathon. (Don’t worry she was ok, dunno about the other driver though.  I hope it wasn’t you!)

Among the other experiences in hell were going on weeklong binges and then sleeping for 8 hours at a time, often missing appointments with drug counselors and parents.  Once she flew to NYC because she thought it was a good idea, and in an alcoholic stupor she found herself in a strange man’s hotel room, about which she doesn’t remember much, and then later almost missed her flight back home!)  She was being terribly irresponsible!  Once when her family was visiting, she drove around with her nephew in the car when she was high on benzos, and could have fallen asleep at any moment.  But she didn’t think she was doing anything wrong at the time.  She was an addict, and as you know about addicts, they aren’t even aware that they are addicted!  Yes she was addicted to alcohol and was aware of that, but drugs prescribed by doctors aren’t anything to worry about, even if you get them off your creepy neighbor.  So we can forgive her for that transgression.  At the end of the visit her mother gave her the “I-never-want-to-see-you-ever-again-you-are-a-terrible-person” look.  This was such a surprise because she had tried so hard to hide her drug use!  But addicts are notoriously non-self-aware — more evidence that you really have a problem.  Fortunately this was the wakeup call she needed, the bottom-of-the-bottom for her, and she decided right there and then that she had to set things right.  So she marched back into her local AA meeting (for the umpteenth time), and found all the support she needed to remind her that all drug addiction is addiction, not just alcohol, and that addiction justified all her terrible behavior and gave her a great story of redemption to tell in AA meetings across the city for months to come.

All in all a very entertaining meeting.  If you’d like to concoct your own addiction story, just follow my step by step instructions posted here:

How to construct a great addiction story

Were you inspired by today’s story?  Feel free to add details of how you put innocent people at risk through DUI.  Don’t worry we won’t judge you!  As long as you do your amends.

Drug addiction is a myth, and drug addicts and alcoholics are total fakers. This may seem hard to believe, because the idea of drug addiction is so ingrained in our consciousness. However, we believe in drug addiction even though we never experienced it ourselves. Although the theory seems plausible, we are completely reliant on the accounts of others, and that they are accurately representing their internal experience. Unlike other diseases like cancer and arthritis, for which there is clear physical evidence, and even for some mental disorders such as schizophrenia, there is no clear physical representation for addiction. In fact, as shown elsewhere on the site, the medical evidence for addiction is often invalid and inconclusive at best. Is it really a disease? Or is it a modern myth? To what extent are the addicts themselves aware of their lies, or do they actually believe the addiction myth, making it a self-fulfilling prophecy?

To answer these questions, we must first understand that there are actually several different types of so-called ‘addicts’, and the answers differ for each group.  Each group by itself can be shown to be composed of fakers and liars, but when specific qualities of each group are taken together, they form the ideal of the Mythical Addict that exists in our public consciousness.

Types of addicts:

Narcissist:

The narcissist uses drugs for fun, drama, and attention.  They feel superior to the average person and drug use is a prerogative of being special. They generally are in good physical health and have access to a strong social network and solid financial backing. They enjoy trying and experimenting with lots of different drugs and scenarios. This is normally an exciting time in their life, usually in their youth, sometimes they get into minor scrapes with the law. The fun lasts for several months or years, and then after a while it loses its appeal. This can happen for various reasons, such as growing older, or needing to take on more responsibilities. Also, drugs lose their potency after a while, and subsequent highs cannot match the first. Most adjust naturally to the new circumstances and move on. But some get ‘stuck’ in the drug scene and take on the identity of ‘addict’. Celebrities are good examples of his. Robert Downey, Charlie Sheen, Russell Brand, and Lindsay Lohan come to mind. These people love the drama of drugs and being able to play the bad boy/girl. They might want us to think they are suffering, but in fact they are having the time of their life – or at least trying to stretch it out as long as possible. By pretending to be addicted to drugs, or at least teasing the public with the suggestion, they can continue to behave irresponsibly and act out, getting the attention that they crave, all the while knowing that in the end they will have our sympathy and admiration after they overcome their demon addiction. It will make for a great book.

High school rebels are another example of this category. If they are struggling in school, or just lazy, they can fake an addiction. Suddenly they are the center of attention — all the while insisting they want to be left alone — there is nothing more gratifying to the narcissistic psyche. Sometimes there is the added bonus of a mini-vacation from daily responsibilities, and the awe and respect for having ‘done time’ in rehab.

This category – the narcissist – is aware that their addiction is fake, but they have no problem getting away with it. This is described in the previous post, “The Real Addicts”. The prognosis for these people is quite good. After a stint in therapy or rehab they are back on their feet and ready to tackle the next phase in life, often with great success. Relapses are generally brief and inconsequential (although they like to make hay of them).

Unfortunately some narcissists are unable to successfully navigate this phase in life, and forever cling to the regret of lost youth and opportunities.  These people can be quite sad, and the outcome may be tragic, whether they are still using drugs or not.  Plastic surgery is one symptom of this syndrome. Performers who take their own life at a young age are usually examples of this.

Despite faking their addiction, the narcissists are generally not abusive manipulators in other parts of their lives. They can justify the lie in their own mind by believing that even though they themselves are not serious addicts, there are others. For this reason they may create exaggerated accounts of their addiction to ‘help’ the hard-core addict. And example of this is Kristen Johnston’s book ‘Guts’.  She tries really hard to make it a gut-wrenching account of drug abuse, but really it all boils down to coming to terms with her weight problem.  Or as she puts it, “Feeling comfortable in my own skin.”

Soul seeker:

The soul seekers take on the addict role because as humiliating as it is to call yourself a ‘drug addict’, the reality of their life is even worse. These are often lonely, unsuccessful, frustrated people who never seemed to have found a place for themselves in the world. Often they lacked interest in education and left school without a solid background in any field. By taking on the identity as a drug addict they assume a new identity that serves a dual purpose of instantly belonging to a group, and being a victim of a disease. The advantage of the disease model is that they now have an explanation for why their life didn’t turn out as they had hoped: they are the victim of a powerful disease that limited their potential. These people take on the addict role as a badge of honor. “Hi my name is Bob and I am 1 year and 4 months sober,” they will state at every opportunity. Now everyone knows that this person has overcome great hardship and his low station in life is explained away – is in fact noble.

For these people, AA is central to their life. It fills the void in their soul.  This is often bewildering to their family, who may have no other experience with addiction and don’t understand their child’s/sibling’s obsession with it. Each time they meet, the ‘addict’ mentions AA, or counters an unsympathetic attitude toward sobriety. A family member then asks: “Are you still in that group?” Or, “Aren’t you better now?” This is of course taken as further evidence that they don’t understand, and AA is the only group who really understands them. The AA group and disease model protect them from an unsympathetic and judgemental family – both socially and emotionally.

These people often claim to have experienced a happy childhood without significant trauma or predispositions to addiction. This is generally true.

The very first step in AA’s 12 step program is: “Admit you are powerless over alcohol”. You cannot join the group unless you profess immediate belief in this — equivalent to stating: “I am a drug addict”. These people – the soul seekers – are particularly vulnerable to this form of brainwashing, because they feel so empty inside and have a desperate need for social acceptance. Some take the first step, knowing that it’s not true but proceeding regardless, while others rush headlong into their new religion. Either way, after this point, none will retreat, and the myth of addiction has been propagated anew.

Malingerer:

The malingerer is the saddest form of fake alcoholic. They usually start their drug use to treat persistent physical pain or mental anguish. As time goes on they find they need more and more drugs to overcome their discomfort. These people soon become dependent on drugs, in that stopping the drug can result in various forms of withdrawal symptoms that they exaggerate in their own mind to convince themselves that the drugs are necessary, and that they are severely addicted. (Because they are already in pain, they are particularly susceptible to the withdrawals. For example, Delerium tremens for alcoholics can last a few days, and pain and flu-like symptoms for codeine withdrawal can last up to a week.)

For this reason, the malingerers quickly take on the mindset of addict, though they often try hard to hide it for fear of losing access to their drug of choice. Even if the underlying pain goes away, they may still hold fast to their addiction since it provides comfort. These people may become debilitated and homebound. Some think these people are victims of the overuse of powerful new pain killers like Oxycontin. They are considered by some to be a lost cause – teetering between states of constant pain and mental haze – and never to resume a normal life. To this extent, ‘malingering’ may seem an unfair term, since they really are in pain, but I am using it to describe the addiction itself, which is fake, although one can sympathize with the sufferer and appreciate the reasons for exaggerating the symptoms.

Many people suffer from mental anguish, such as guilt, shame, anger and jealosy. Most people are able to deal with these emotions in a healthy way and move on. But some cannot, for various reasons, and so they turn to substances to reduce the pain. One example would be being financially dependent on someone you didn’t like. Another example would be a man in a relationship with a woman whom he did not find attractive, but at the same time he didn’t think he could do better and so is ‘stuck’. Another example is someone who has a defect in their appearance, such as being overweight or a bad complexion. Almost any drug will do to suppress the pain and provide distraction, and so these people become ‘addicts’ of all types – alcohol, cocaine, ecstasy, meth, etc. As usual, the drug works great in the beginning, but loses its effectiveness over time. As the mental pain re-emerges, they start to take on the role of ‘addict’ as a way to somaticize their suffering. It is easier to say, “I have the disease of addiction”, than “I am not happy with my boyfriend any more, but I don’t think I can do better if I left.” Among women, some concomitant symptoms are anorexia, purging, and self-cutting.

The mid-life crisis among both gay and straight men also precipitates the downward spiral into excessive drinking followed by the salvation of sobriety offered at AA.  Self-medication by alcohol suppresses the grief and regret stemming from the loss of sexual prowess and gradual decline in health and stamina.  Most men navigate this period successfully, but some men (usually single men and playboys) get stuck, and continue drinking.  AA may come as a welcome relief, as they encounter people in a similar predicament.  Although the solution offered by AA may not seem satisfactory at first, in the end, the sufferer would prefer to take on the identity of an alcoholic than of a “balding loser”.  We don’t want to admit the true, and humiliating, cause of our suffering.

Some of these people inflict abuse on their partners or benefactors (e.g. parents), who feel they have no choice but to continue to support their loved-one who is apparently an innocent victim of a disease. They don’t understand that it would be far better for both parties to cut the ties, since the relationship itself is causing the pain. Good looking people and young people are particularly manipulative with this type of addiction, because their partners want to keep them around at all costs, despite the abuse and scorn heaped upon them.

Many ads for drug addiction services such as inpatient treatment promise that their therapy will restore the happy family — an irresistible offer for which parents will pay thousands. The irony is that the relationship itself is causing the problem, and the best and simplest solution is for the parties to go their separate ways.

These addicts are well aware of the lie, but sustain it because the truth is too painful or inconvenient to admit. They may cycle in and out of rehab for years. Also, gay men who have not accepted their sexuality usually fall into this category.

Psychopath:

By far the worse type of addict is the psychopath. These people are dangerous!  They are perfectly well aware that their addiction is a lie, but use it to abuse and manipulate others. For example, some men target lonely and vulnerable middle age woman, and after a quick marriage, proceed to strip them of their financial assets, using drug and alcohol addiction as the excuse for reprehensible behavior. “I’m sorry I hurt you, but I am a drug addict and I can’t help it. It’s the disease that makes me punch you and drain your bank account.” For this reason, the woman sticks by her man, as long as he claims to be attending 12 step meetings. The woman hopes against hope that that her loyalty will ultimately be appreciated, even though often these men have left a trail of devasted and destroyed victim-brides in their wake.

Children addicts – who were often spoiled as kids – can also be quite the psychopaths, and have little regard for their family or anyone else. Because of some perceived injustice during childhood, they may proceed to destroy the family’s finances through credit card fraud, outright thievery (particularly of cherished items), and expensive but futile attempts at treatment, even at the expense of their siblings who are deprived of critical resources such as educational funds.

Criminal defense lawyers seem to have a particular affinity for AA. This is not surprising considering that these people must lie or at least stretch the truth for a living, and certainly deal with unsavory characters and reprehensible crimes.  AA provides a fertile test bed to perfect one’s attitudes and techniques. You will not be seriously questioned since no one would claim superior credibility.

Business men in seedier industries such as adult entertainment and night clubs are other examples of this type.  They thrive in unethical environments and take advantage of customers and business partners.  They may even consider themselves to be con men.  They are hard partiers and drink and drug to excess.  Their financial books are as fake as their addiction.  Later in life they may come to regret some of the things they did.  Fortunately they can claim to have been under the spell of an evil drug at the time, and all is forgiven.  (They may have drank in part for the purpose of suppressing guilt over shady dealings.)

Many of the these people admit to being liars, and often take pride in claiming to be ‘master manipulators’ since childhood.  They say they were hopelessly addicted to drugs and alcohol.  They lied about everything else — now we are supposed to believe them about their “addiction”?

For the psychopath who is less successful financially, the addiction lie is the perfect cover to inflict all types of abuses and avoid taking responsibility for one’s life. These people will not stop until they are shunned by everyone who tried to ‘help’ them.  Once in AA, they can continue in their evil ways sober, by preying on vulnerable newcomers for financial and sexual gain.

The alcoholics of the psychopath type have a history of lying and agression that preceded their first sip of alcohol, or first taste of a drug. They may enjoy getting into fights whether drunk or sober. They may have a history of telling lies and stories about fake past accreditations and achievements. But given they are liars to begin with, why should we believe them when they say that they have an extreme compulsion to drink/drug? Of course they don’t. They are just saying that because it’s a convenient and self-serving lie. If your disease makes you do reprehensible things, you have the perfect alibi. People will not realize that simply you are a reprehensible person to begin with. (And yes, there are terrible, reprehensible people out there. Many will not reform until very late in life.)

Combinations:

In fact, an alcoholic often posses traits from 2 types (though rarely more than that). For example, Amy Winehouse was a ‘narcissist’ type with a touch of ‘malingerer’. The malingerer self-destruction eventually lead to her death.

Bill Wilson – the prototypical Psychopath

AA philosophy promotes the addiction myth that serves the psychopath perfectly. Bill Wilson, the founder of AA, was a well-known womanizer. Of course, you wouldn’t know it by reading the Big Book, which he wrote, and describes his own alcoholism. In the book, he is an innocent and powerless victim of extreme urges beyond his control and best intentions. He’s happily married and, for example, in the middle of a promising financial deal, when suddenly he finds himself with a drink in has hand, things start to get fuzzy, and the next thing he knows he’s lying in a hospital bed convulsing with delerium tremens, after having been unconscious for a day. His wife and family look on, sobbing.  He is as surprised, frustrated, and saddened as they are.

In fact, he knows exactly what is going on.  He is drinking because he is unhappy with his wife and his life in general. As he says about his wife:

• There had been no real infidelity, for loyalty to my wife, helped at times by extreme drunkenness, kept me out of those scrapes.
• Lois has always been more like a mother to me.

These statements suggest the kind of thinking of a man who had no real loyalty toward his wife, and this is confirmed by people who knew him. He was an inveterate womanizer (known in the groups as “13 stepping” for members who target others for sexual purposes). Instead of loving his wife and spending time with her, he turned to the bottle, and turned to other women using drunkenness as his cover.

Is is possible that Wilson was not aware that his ‘addiction’ was just a lie to cover his infidelity? This man is well known for his egoism, so perhaps he managed to justify the lie as somehow noble. It’s interesting that modern understanding of addiction almost always requires an underlying psyhic issue (as Dr. Drew is apt to point out). Wilson professed a strict belief in the disease model, so he would probably not be very happy with that.  At some level, he must have known.

Wives: The real victims

The chapter “To Wives” in the Big Book was supposedly written by AA wives: “As wives of Alcoholics Anonymous, we would like you to feel that we understand as perhaps few can. We want to analyze mistakes we have made.” In fact, this was written by Wilson himself, and is a self-serving defense of the alcholic, and confirms the wife’s duty to stand by her man even in the face of repeated abuse and relapses (now known as “codependency”). In fact, the woman should leave him, but the chapter reminds women of their sacred vows: You must continue to love your man, even in the face of his repeated abuse, and even in the face of your own instincts. He goes so far as to make the wife share the guilt:

• We have had long rendezvous with hurt pride, frustration, self-pity, misunderstanding and fear.
• We have been driven to maudlin sympathy, to bitter resentment.
• We have had retaliatory love affairs with other men.
• In desperation we have even got tight ourselves — the drunk to end all drunks.
• In nearly every instance the alcoholic only seems to be unloving and inconsiderate; it is usually because he is warped and sickened that he says and does those appalling things.
• Try not to condemn your alcoholic husband no matter what he says or does. He is just another very sick, unreasonable person. Trust him when you can, as though he had pneumonia. When he angers you, remember that he is very ill.

This chapter, more than any other, demonstrates the brilliant evil of the Addiction Myth. Not only is the psychopath abusing the innocent family, he can rely on them for support for his continued drinking – food in the cupboard and a warm bed to pee in when he comes home plastered.

It is interesting that at no point in Wilson’s account of his own alcoholism does he ever admit to abusing his wife. And yet he seems to know so much about the propensity to do exactly that.  Leaving out these important truths in his own case makes him a liar and hypocrite.

Interestingly, Wilson’s grandfather, himself an alcoholic, spontaneously resolved to stop drinking at about the same age that Wilson did, although many years earlier, in some kind of religious fervor. Thus it seems more likely that aging is the cure for alcoholism much more than AA, and it’s no coincidence that most AA members stop drinking for good at middle age.

The Mythical Addict:

The mythical addict in the public perception is a young person with great potential, who has their entire life ahead of them, but through a couple errors in judgment they partake of illicit substances.  Before long they are full blown addicts, having descended into the depths of depravity, lying and stealing for their habit, losing friends and family and living on the street, sometimes near death.

This myth is actually a conflation of the 4 types of addicts:

• narcissist - young person with potential
• soul seeker – no history of addictive traits
• malingerer – sickness and withdrawals
• psychopath – lying and abusive

Though addicts may combine traits of two groups, they never can be truly of all 4 types.  Bill Wilson would like us to believe that he was the mythical addict.  But he was really just a psychopath with a touch of ‘soul seeker’.  The rest of his autobiographical account is fiction.

The persistence of AA and the addiction myth relies on the combination of all 4 types of fakers and the qualities that each brings to the organization.  Many of know an addict personally, whom we believe to be a faker, but we think, “Perhaps he’s a faker.  But there are other real addicts out there, and I know this because otherwise AA wouldn’t exist.”  In fact we are all just keeping the myth aloft through a mental game of hot potato.  There are no real addicts.

Fundamentally, the narcissists, soul seekers and malingerers all provide cover for the psychopaths to prey on the vulnerable, both in the groups and out in the real world, operating under the noble and tragic guise of the Mythical Addict.

The True Devastation of Drug Addiction

The self-serving myths have served only to rationalize the reprehensible behavior of addicts, have created a huge healthcare industry that takes in billions of dollars a year from innocent families (and taxpayers), and justify the imprisonment of millions of people. Worst of all, the Myth of Addiction is used to justify slaughter of many thousands of innocent people around the world each year, both from the drug war itself and the concomitant casualties caused by corruption and overstretched and outgunned security.

It is ironic that the the drug war is justified as preventing the scourge of ‘addiction’ when in reality it only serves to protect psychopaths.  All the while, it is spreading real physical death, injury, and destruction around the world (e.g. Mexico, Afghanistan).   Many of the children of these wars will be psychopaths too.  We must no longer tolerate the Myth of Addiction.

We know that drug addiction is real because every day we hear another story of a celebrity with a drug problem getting into trouble.  Drunk driving seems a particularly popular past time among many celebrities such as Lindsay Lohan, Mel Gibson, and Robert Downey Jr.  These are people who could easily afford a driver (and probably have one) but choose to get behind the wheel anyway.  What were they thinking?  They must be addicted to drugs/alcohol and this impaired their judgment.  There is no other explanation.

And there are the celebrities like Charlie Sheen who go bonkers in the public spotlight.  There is no explanation other than he is a raging drug addict.

Celebrities and drugs seem to go hand in hand.  Not so with other professions.  Other famous people don’t have the same degree of drug problems.  Politicians, business leaders, famous doctors and lawyers (who are not performers) don’t have anywhere near the level of drug use and abuse of celebrities.  If addiction is real, why wouldn’t it affect all segments of society equally?

I think there is a simple explanation.  What we see are people pretending to be addicted to drugs.  After all, what kind of people are experts at pretending?  What kind of people love drama?  Of course the answer is: actors and performers.   If there is anything better than fictional drama in tv and movies, it is real life drama.  Celebrities do drugs because they are fun and they enjoy the spotlight from getting into trouble.  They enjoy the drama.  Also, they crave attention, and bad attention is better than no attention, in the celebrity psyche.  These are people who are addicted to drama.  Which particular drug they use doesn’t really matter.  If they can suggest that they are under the influence of a powerful addiction, then all the better to gain our sympathy and excuse their behavior.

Drug addiction isn’t real.  It’s just a role that actors play because it is fun.  Lindsay Lohan clearly enjoyed the attention she got from playing with the court and defying the judge.  No doubt she wore her brief jail sentence as a badge of honor.  They are self-destructive whether on or off drugs, but being on drugs makes it easier to hide the true motivation.

Understanding the celebrity psyche this way explains other common behaviors.  Why is Katie Holmes divorcing Tom Cruise and demanding full custody of Suri, out of concern she is being inducted into Scientology?  Cruise was actively involved in Scientology when they married 5 years ago.  What this not a glaring red flag?  Of course it was, and the ensuing drama was only a matter of time.

There are even reality TV shows about famous people with addiction problems, e.g. Dr. Drew’s Celebrity Rehab.  These shows teach us how to act like a drug addict, and spread through society at large.  The movie “Requiem for a Dream” has taught a generation of drug addicts how to descend credibly into depravity.

Drug addiction is commonly used as a prop in tv shows and movies because it furthers the drama.  ”Person x committed the crime because they were addicted to drugs and needed money for a fix.”  ”Person Y prostituted herself because she was addicted to crack and needed a fix.”  In reality, this kind of crime is very rare.  There is much drug-related crime but it is mostly from turf wars over selling rights.  And there is much prostitution, but it is mostly by women who are insecure about their bodies and sell themselves for validation.  If they use drugs, it is also to relieve their insecurity, not because they are addicted.

Of course, none of this is to suggest that drugs are not dangerous. Drugs can be very dangerous.  People get killed every day from impaired drivers.  People die from overdoses.  But this is not because of addiction.  This is because people are freely choosing to take drugs to provide cover for irresponsible behavior.  Sometimes they go too far.

Was Michael Jackson addicted to drugs?  It would seem from the levels of drugs he was taking that he probably was.  But there is a simpler explanation.  MJ was a monster.  Through plastic surgery he turned himself into a frightening creature.  No doubt he was deeply ashamed and regretful about destroying his appearance, and getting suckered by his doctors.  Too proud to admit his mistake, his only choice was to bury the feelings deep inside, and then use drugs to keep them buried whenever they tried to resurface.  Ironically his pride and narcissism resulted in unbearable shame.  MJ had no option but to destroy himself.  There was simply no way he could continue to look at himself in the mirror each day.  But — he was not a drug addict.

Was Charlie Sheen addicted to drugs?  Based on his recent exploits, his drug-crazed episodes seem only to be fodder for advancing his career.  He knew exactly what he was doing, and did it brilliantly.  He’s a superb self-promoter.

“Whitney Houston struggled with drug addiction her whole life.”  Perhaps. But perhaps she did drugs because they were fun.  And one day she overdid it, perhaps intentionally.

Cindy McCain is a famous drug addict, stealing pain killers from the charity she started after marrying John McCain.  After she was caught, to avoid jail, she agreed to go into rehab and perform drug addiction awareness public service.  In fact, from reports of her behavior while working at the charity, she seemed to be angry with her husband (20 years her senior) and was probably trying to sabotage the charity in retaliation.  She stole drugs and used ‘addiction’ as a convenient excuse.  After a one-week stay at a rehab she quit the habit.  She was probably not a drug addict — just an angry, lonely woman.

It’s hard to think of a celebrity addiction story that cannot be easily dismissed as an attempt to gain attention and sympathy.  If you know of addiction only through celebrities then there’s a reason for that. It’s because professional performers are good at pretending to be addicts, and there really aren’t any others.  If you know an addict personally, do you really believe them?  Or do they have a history of acting or outright lying that precedes their ‘illness’?  In my experience, every addiction story disintegrates quickly when subject to a little scrutiny.

Are there any real addicts?

The speaker at a recent AA meeting told the story of her own addiction.  She started doing drugs as a young teenager, and before that she was put on ritalin during elementary school. But during the story she revealed some telling details:

• her mother was an actor
• “I love to fight”
• “I loved creating drama and scenes”

Her career now is as a drug and alcohol counselor who travels the world telling the story of her addiction to young school-age audiences.  I suspect the fact that her high school and college years were filled with drug use left her with few other career options.  Of course, she made the point: “This disease doesn’t care about your profession: engineer, doctor, lawyer.”  OK, I guess she’s the expert.

She claimed to live a ‘double life’ as a good daughter and student who knew how to act properly, and yet drank and drugged to excess in secret.  She also said she made amends to her parents.  When questioned on this point: “Why did you make amends to your parents when you hid you behavior from them?”.  She said:

• I made amends for stealing from them (she failed to mention this in her initial account)
• I–I made amends for lying to them! (almost as an afterthought)
• My father said he forgave me.  ”All teens are assholes,” he said by way of explanation.
• I don’t know if my mother has forgiven me because she is passive aggressive
• I hate passive agressive people — just be direct!

So it appears she was not the sweet daughter and student she claimed to be in her home alter-life, and there was more to the story than she originally recounted.  And one wonders if her whole drug use was passive aggressive revenge on her mother for perceived neglect or unfairness.

And this woman is now traveling the world spreading the Myth of Addiction to impressionable young children, who now have a new career option.