When Support Groups Go Woke

[MechaJutaro]

Hola, everyone. Trust that your weekends have started out pleasantly thus far. Recently, a recovery organization I've belonged to since '14(SMART Recovery) elevated our former and first DEI chief to the office of Executive director. He promptly sent out the following newsletter:

"
Considering Power Dynamics in Our Meetings

Power dynamics exist any time human beings gather in a community with one another, and our self-management mutual support group meetings are no exception. Noticing and attending to the power dynamics that exist in our meetings is critical as facilitators. Not doing so is a barrier to empowerment that we should all be concerned about if we want our meetings to be safe places for for all participants to pursue their recovery journeys. What do we mean by power? In this context, we are referring to the real and perceived agency that one has over one’s own life and circumstances. There are a variety of factors that help to determine the relative power that an individual perceives in a given situation. Consider these examples:

Accumulated Recovery Time

Closeness to the Facilitator

Financial Security Relationship

Security Education Level Gender

Gender Identity Sexual

Orientation Race Age Physical

Health and Ability Mental Health and Ability

History of Trauma


While there are no absolutes as we consider the relative power of individuals in our meetings, we generally learn enough about participants to be able to recognize when an interpersonal situation is occurring between individuals that are not equally “powerful” at that time. It is crucial in those situations that we, the rained facilitators, intervene as necessary to reinforce the agency of the less powerful party to describe their experiences in their terms without judgment from other group members. If a participant is new to the group, we should assume that they are at a relative power disadvantage simply as a newcomer. Telling new or less powerful participants to use a SMART tool or how to use a SMART tool in response to a share is NOT what we are trained to do when a participant shares something vulnerable with the group. Instead, we should validate the person’s experience, ask how the group can provide support, and use our motivational interviewing skills to explore the share with the participant if they are interested in doing so. If a fellow participant, especially a more powerful participant, invalidates a person’s share, we should remind them that we don’t give direct advice in SMART Recovery and proceed with the steps above.

SMART Recovery is an incredible tool for empowerment when it’s implemented in a way that respects that not every person is starting off on a level power playing field. I hope that you’ll join me in reflecting on this topic with an open mind in the spirit of continuous improvement and wanting SMART Recovery to not just be accessible to all, but also empowering for all. Peace, Pete Rubinas (he/him/his)"


Dunno if anyone else here attends a support group regularly, and if so, whether or not you've all received similar instructions. So I’m posting here to ask what we’re to do in regards to one demographic who’s almost never discussed by proponents of DEI: Serial murderers

Fair inference… Contemporary equivalents to Albert Fish, Ed Gein, Jeff Dahmer, Karla Holmka, Aileen Wuornos, Carlton Gary, Javed Iqbal, Richard Ramirez, and Yang Xinhai who haven’t yet been identified and incarcerated are almost certainly present in recovery meetings throughout America. And an immense PD exists between folks like this, and the rest of us “normies”

Whereas they’ve enjoyed the power of dining on human flesh, and washing down their fava beans with several goblets of warm plasma, we non-serial murderers suffer the inequity of having had to settle for merely WONDERING what our fellow Homo Sapiens taste like, once they’ve been fried up and sauteed. Any ideas as to how one goes about rectifying this monsterous affront to the principles of Diversity, Equity, And Inclusion in recovery pow-wows would be most welcome. Is it OK for us to start asking the lambs in our flock outright, at the beginning of each meeting questions such as:

“Has anyone here tonight strangled a sex worker behind the dumpster at Dairy Queen recently?” Or “In the past six months, have any of you picked up a hitchiker while cruising down the freeway, dismembered that poor bastard while he was still alive, then tossed his limbs and vital organs into your oven for supper?”

Or would making such direct inquiries turn meetings into Emotionally Unsafe Spaces for those participants who’s idea of recreation leans toward hobbies like rock climbing and Laser Tag, and away from activities such as sexual assault and spilling innocent blood?

 

[TheFiend]

Hola, everyone. Trust that your weekends have started out pleasantly thus far. Recently, a recovery organization I've belonged to since '14(SMART Recovery) elevated our former and first DEI chief to the office of Executive director. He promptly sent out the following newsletter:

"
Considering Power Dynamics in Our Meetings

Power dynamics exist any time human beings gather in a community with one another, and our self-management mutual support group meetings are no exception. Noticing and attending to the power dynamics that exist in our meetings is critical as facilitators. Not doing so is a barrier to empowerment that we should all be concerned about if we want our meetings to be safe places for for all participants to pursue their recovery journeys. What do we mean by power? In this context, we are referring to the real and perceived agency that one has over one’s own life and circumstances. There are a variety of factors that help to determine the relative power that an individual perceives in a given situation. Consider these examples:

Accumulated Recovery Time

Closeness to the Facilitator

Financial Security Relationship

Security Education Level Gender

Gender Identity Sexual

Orientation Race Age Physical

Health and Ability Mental Health and Ability

History of Trauma


While there are no absolutes as we consider the relative power of individuals in our meetings, we generally learn enough about participants to be able to recognize when an interpersonal situation is occurring between individuals that are not equally “powerful” at that time. It is crucial in those situations that we, the rained facilitators, intervene as necessary to reinforce the agency of the less powerful party to describe their experiences in their terms without judgment from other group members. If a participant is new to the group, we should assume that they are at a relative power disadvantage simply as a newcomer. Telling new or less powerful participants to use a SMART tool or how to use a SMART tool in response to a share is NOT what we are trained to do when a participant shares something vulnerable with the group. Instead, we should validate the person’s experience, ask how the group can provide support, and use our motivational interviewing skills to explore the share with the participant if they are interested in doing so. If a fellow participant, especially a more powerful participant, invalidates a person’s share, we should remind them that we don’t give direct advice in SMART Recovery and proceed with the steps above.

SMART Recovery is an incredible tool for empowerment when it’s implemented in a way that respects that not every person is starting off on a level power playing field. I hope that you’ll join me in reflecting on this topic with an open mind in the spirit of continuous improvement and wanting SMART Recovery to not just be accessible to all, but also empowering for all. Peace, Pete Rubinas (he/him/his)"


Dunno if anyone else here attends a support group regularly, and if so, whether or not you've all received similar instructions. So I’m posting here to ask what we’re to do in regards to one demographic who’s almost never discussed by proponents of DEI: Serial murderers

Fair inference… Contemporary equivalents to Albert Fish, Ed Gein, Jeff Dahmer, Karla Holmka, Aileen Wuornos, Carlton Gary, Javed Iqbal, Richard Ramirez, and Yang Xinhai who haven’t yet been identified and incarcerated are almost certainly present in recovery meetings throughout America. And an immense PD exists between folks like this, and the rest of us “normies”

Whereas they’ve enjoyed the power of dining on human flesh, and washing down their fava beans with several goblets of warm plasma, we non-serial murderers suffer the inequity of having had to settle for merely WONDERING what our fellow Homo Sapiens taste like, once they’ve been fried up and sauteed. Any ideas as to how one goes about rectifying this monsterous affront to the principles of Diversity, Equity, And Inclusion in recovery pow-wows would be most welcome. Is it OK for us to start asking the lambs in our flock outright, at the beginning of each meeting questions such as:

“Has anyone here tonight strangled a sex worker behind the dumpster at Dairy Queen recently?” Or “In the past six months, have any of you picked up a hitchiker while cruising down the freeway, dismembered that poor bastard while he was still alive, then tossed his limbs and vital organs into your oven for supper?”

Or would making such direct inquiries turn meetings into Emotionally Unsafe Spaces for those participants who’s idea of recreation leans toward hobbies like rock climbing and Laser Tag, and away from activities such as sexual assault and spilling innocent blood?

This Pete Rubinas dude seems to be shamelessly employing stealth communist language throughout that highly deceptive "Power Dynamics" notice.

Also the fact Pete is attempting to impose that absurd gender bender cultist ideology on all participants, indicates Pete couldn't give a slightest of fucks about the actual participants.

Another thing I noticed is Pete's halfassed attempts to conceal the blatant hypocrisy of his whole "Power Dynamics" notice rationale.

It appears Pete expects all participants to quietly accept his new rules which would in effect disempower all participants equally as a standard while also giving all power to Pete & his facilitators to arbitrarily exert as they alone please. Of course, based on Pete's notice, it suggests he intends to exert his newly assumed position of absolute power to selectively "empower" participants of his choosing.

Pete portrays a clearly bullshit "equality" narrative which literally outlines his intentions to enable fundamental inequality.

 

[MechaJutaro]

This Pete Rubinas dude seems to be shamelessly employing stealth communist language throughout that highly deceptive "Power Dynamics" notice.

Also the fact Pete is attempting to impose that absurd gender bender cultist ideology on all participants, indicates Pete couldn't give a slightest of fucks about the actual participants.

Another thing I noticed is Pete's halfassed attempts to conceal the blatant hypocrisy of his whole "Power Dynamics" notice rationale.

It appears Pete expects all participants to quietly accept his new rules which would in effect disempower all participants equally as a standard while also giving all power to Pete & his facilitators to arbitrarily exert as they alone please. Of course, based on Pete's notice, it suggests he intends to exert his newly assumed position of absolute power to selectively "empower" participants of his choosing.

Pete portrays a clearly bullshit "equality" narrative which literally outlines his intentions to enable fundamental inequality.

Sadly, even 12 Steps have been infected by this nonsense https://unherd.com/2023/05/how-alcoholics-anonymous-lost-its-way/

 

[Rebarcock.]

Hola, everyone. Trust that your weekends have started out pleasantly thus far. Recently, a recovery organization I've belonged to since '14(SMART Recovery) elevated our former and first DEI chief to the office of Executive director. He promptly sent out the following newsletter:

"
Considering Power Dynamics in Our Meetings

Power dynamics exist any time human beings gather in a community with one another, and our self-management mutual support group meetings are no exception. Noticing and attending to the power dynamics that exist in our meetings is critical as facilitators. Not doing so is a barrier to empowerment that we should all be concerned about if we want our meetings to be safe places for for all participants to pursue their recovery journeys. What do we mean by power? In this context, we are referring to the real and perceived agency that one has over one’s own life and circumstances. There are a variety of factors that help to determine the relative power that an individual perceives in a given situation. Consider these examples:

Accumulated Recovery Time

Closeness to the Facilitator

Financial Security Relationship

Security Education Level Gender

Gender Identity Sexual

Orientation Race Age Physical

Health and Ability Mental Health and Ability

History of Trauma


While there are no absolutes as we consider the relative power of individuals in our meetings, we generally learn enough about participants to be able to recognize when an interpersonal situation is occurring between individuals that are not equally “powerful” at that time. It is crucial in those situations that we, the rained facilitators, intervene as necessary to reinforce the agency of the less powerful party to describe their experiences in their terms without judgment from other group members. If a participant is new to the group, we should assume that they are at a relative power disadvantage simply as a newcomer. Telling new or less powerful participants to use a SMART tool or how to use a SMART tool in response to a share is NOT what we are trained to do when a participant shares something vulnerable with the group. Instead, we should validate the person’s experience, ask how the group can provide support, and use our motivational interviewing skills to explore the share with the participant if they are interested in doing so. If a fellow participant, especially a more powerful participant, invalidates a person’s share, we should remind them that we don’t give direct advice in SMART Recovery and proceed with the steps above.

SMART Recovery is an incredible tool for empowerment when it’s implemented in a way that respects that not every person is starting off on a level power playing field. I hope that you’ll join me in reflecting on this topic with an open mind in the spirit of continuous improvement and wanting SMART Recovery to not just be accessible to all, but also empowering for all. Peace, Pete Rubinas (he/him/his)"


Dunno if anyone else here attends a support group regularly, and if so, whether or not you've all received similar instructions. So I’m posting here to ask what we’re to do in regards to one demographic who’s almost never discussed by proponents of DEI: Serial murderers

Fair inference… Contemporary equivalents to Albert Fish, Ed Gein, Jeff Dahmer, Karla Holmka, Aileen Wuornos, Carlton Gary, Javed Iqbal, Richard Ramirez, and Yang Xinhai who haven’t yet been identified and incarcerated are almost certainly present in recovery meetings throughout America. And an immense PD exists between folks like this, and the rest of us “normies”

Whereas they’ve enjoyed the power of dining on human flesh, and washing down their fava beans with several goblets of warm plasma, we non-serial murderers suffer the inequity of having had to settle for merely WONDERING what our fellow Homo Sapiens taste like, once they’ve been fried up and sauteed. Any ideas as to how one goes about rectifying this monsterous affront to the principles of Diversity, Equity, And Inclusion in recovery pow-wows would be most welcome. Is it OK for us to start asking the lambs in our flock outright, at the beginning of each meeting questions such as:

“Has anyone here tonight strangled a sex worker behind the dumpster at Dairy Queen recently?” Or “In the past six months, have any of you picked up a hitchiker while cruising down the freeway, dismembered that poor bastard while he was still alive, then tossed his limbs and vital organs into your oven for supper?”

Or would making such direct inquiries turn meetings into Emotionally Unsafe Spaces for those participants who’s idea of recreation leans toward hobbies like rock climbing and Laser Tag, and away from activities such as sexual assault and spilling innocent blood?

Get a avatar you an faggit

 

[Joe Kings]

My Dixie Wrecked

 

[MechaJutaro]

My Dixie Wrecked

Not a Winn Dixie I hope

 

[MechaJutaro]

This Pete Rubinas dude seems to be shamelessly employing stealth communist language throughout that highly deceptive "Power Dynamics" notice.

Also the fact Pete is attempting to impose that absurd gender bender cultist ideology on all participants, indicates Pete couldn't give a slightest of fucks about the actual participants.

Another thing I noticed is Pete's halfassed attempts to conceal the blatant hypocrisy of his whole "Power Dynamics" notice rationale.

It appears Pete expects all participants to quietly accept his new rules which would in effect disempower all participants equally as a standard while also giving all power to Pete & his facilitators to arbitrarily exert as they alone please. Of course, based on Pete's notice, it suggests he intends to exert his newly assumed position of absolute

Many recovery organizations, corporations, universities, etc etc are clearly in the midst of the sort of institutional capture Caspar, Rohdes, and Ekloff describe here https://fifthprincipleproject.org/2023/01/19/where-do-we-go-from-here/ The way out of this is actually pretty simple, even if not remotely easy. Those of us who are proponents of free thought/free expression must pursue a strategy similar the one Rohdes has laid out:



"Where Do We Go From Here?
January 19, 2023 by Frank Casper
As you all might know by now, the Article II Study Commission has issued another and perhaps the final version of the Article II report, pending amendments. We will follow up with another Fifth Principle Discussion once members have had time to review the report.

It is clear that if UU leadership gets its way at General Assembly, the Principles will be gone, and UUism as we’ve known it will go with them. This essay was written by Rev. Dr. Kate Rohde last September for those lamenting its passing, but the question it raises and the advice it gives are even more timely now.

Rev. Rohde shares with Rev. Dr. Todd Ekloff the pain and misfortune of having been disfellowshipped with charges that were never specified that came from anonymous sources. Rev. Rohde started her first parish ministry in 1980 as the only UU woman minister serving full-time in 8 states of the deep South. She served in eight churches over the next thirty-two years, several as interim, and at her retirement in 2014, was the living female minister with the most years in parish ministry. Her social activist history reaches back to her teen years when she organized the first program to address the Civil Rights Movement in her hometown to after retirement when she organized to get her country officials and law enforcement officials to agree not to cooperate with the crackdown on immigrants by ICE. Throughout her career, she was active in women’s rights, Civil Rights, gay and lesbian rights, immigration reform, peace, and U.S. policy in Latin America, especially genocidal policies in El Salvador and Guatemala.

The Institutional Capture of the UUA and Possible Strategies to Deal with It.
by Rev. Dr. Kate Rohde

“Institutional Capture” is a reference to the many institutions that have been completely or partially captured by the new, illiberal leftist ideology, which goes by many names: “woke,” “the the successor ideology,” Critical Theories, “The Elite,” and so on. This ideology sells itself as a social justice ideology, but has not, in fact, had demonstrable success in changing the lives of those it purports to help – usually referred to loosely as “members of marginalized groups,” nor does it have support from the rank and file of most of these groups. The typical adherent of these ideologies is white, college educated, and has a history of being on the left or progressive. They both claim to speak for the “marginalized” while at the same time saying that the voices of the marginalized should be centered. However, they continue to take positions that are anathema to majorities in those groups.

Latinos overwhelmingly dislike the term “Latinx.” The black community in Minneapolis soundly defeated police reform centered on defunding police. Few trans people support California’s new policy of allowing any male who will claim a female identity to be housed in women’s prisons

Institutions that are captured are characterized by a lack of free expression of ideas, members fear contradicting some often-fuzzy norm, shunning, punishments, or firing of those who resist the new ideology.

Ideologues do not deal in evidence and reason and even denounce reason. Beliefs should be based not on a careful examination of evidence but on “lived experience.” They decide whose “lived experience” counts. Their approach and framing are the only true doctrine. Those who argue with the “woke” are not met with considered, reasoned, counter-arguments. Rather they face attacks on their character and are called “racists,” “transphobes,” “homophobes,” right winger, or a FOX news addict. You are even accused of promoting violence and genocide. Language is used not to elucidate but to confuse and has ever-changing meanings, not unlike “newspeak.” Orthodoxy is paramount. Intent doesn’t matter. Hurt feelings are evidence of malfeasance, but if your feelings are hurt, you are fragile.

Institutions of Higher Education
Institutions of Higher Education have been institutionally captured all over the country, in part or in whole. The most famous instance is Evergreen College, but many of the elite schools: Harvard, MIT, Yale, Smith, Reed, Middlebury, Berkeley, and not-so-elite schools, have fallen to this illiberal culture that seeks conformity over truth.

The ACLU has stopped its robust defense of free speech and has taken extreme, illiberal positions on freedom of information, cruel and unusual punishment, etc.
The Southern Poverty Law Center has been captured. NPR, the NYT, the Guardian, and most liberal media has skewed coverage to appease the “woke” members of staff.
Publishers have been pushed to decline books by the younger, woke staff members; even books that were selling very well in England could not find a publisher here for political reasons.
Again, these books and articles are not extreme and are usually written by people who thought of themselves as Left or moderate until that position seemed to be captured. Due process in firing has gone by the wayside, and democratic processes have been undermined in many of the ”woke” institutions.

Unitarian Universalist Association
The Unitarian Universalist Association headquartered in Boston has been institutionally captured.

Theological education and the certification of UU clergy have been captured.
The UUMA has been captured, and thus the institutional arms of the ministry.
However, we do not know about our churches. Some are captured. Some are not. There are many in between. We have no idea what the numbers are. We also know that most UUs in the pew have little idea what is happening or has happened and tend to find out from a captured minister — one already in place or, more often, a newly minted one. Some new “woke” clergy have been ejected. Many “unwoke” parish members have been ejected or slipped away. The nominating committee has violated the will of GA and our By-Laws for nominating only one candidate for President of the UUA, an admitted CRT ideologue who has racial intimidation to silence others

Amongst us, there are the folks who see this new, illiberal, ideology, as an orthodoxy – a new religion of sorts. Of these folks, John McWhorter says, there is no dialogue because they are not operating out of the same frame of reference, nor do they believe in a meeting of minds – trying to change their minds is like trying to get a Fundamentalist Christian to give up Jesus.

There are those in an in-between space. Amongst those, the ones who can be reached are the ones who share a belief in freedom, reason, and tolerance and the idea that talking to people who differ can be educational and even help us refine our own thinking. The truth is more important to them than any particular ideology. Then there are those who see the capture and grieve the loss of freedom, reason, tolerance, and grace, in Unitarian Universalism and want to return to or keep what I would call, “UU Classic,” a democratic faith, without orthodoxy, that believes in continuing revelation, a search for truth, and that only with a free exchange of ideas can we refine and develop our beliefs and commitments. It does not divide people by race, ethnicity, sex, age, or other “identities.” Still, it seeks to help all kinds of people find access to our religious communities and contribute to them.

What Can be Done?


So, in this time of institutional capture, what can those of us who are classic UUs and would like to nourish those traditions for the future do?

I would put responses in the following categories:

-Nourish and strengthen churches where classic UUism is still the norm

-Publicize far more widely the attack on classic UUism by the UUA, MFC, UUMA, and Theological Schools


-Create new churches or online churches for classic UUs who no longer can find a home in their home church

Keep pressing the institutions within the UUA to keep living up to Classic UU values.
Nourish and strengthen churches where classic UUism is still the norm

 

[MechaJutaro]

Many recovery organizations are clearly in the midst of the sort of institutional capture Caspar, Rohdes, and Ekloff describe here https://fifthprincipleproject.org/2023/01/19/where-do-we-go-from-here/



"Where Do We Go From Here?
January 19, 2023 by Frank Casper
As you all might know by now, the Article II Study Commission has issued another and perhaps the final version of the Article II report, pending amendments. We will follow up with another Fifth Principle Discussion once members have had time to review the report.

It is clear that if UU leadership gets its way at General Assembly, the Principles will be gone, and UUism as we’ve known it will go with them. This essay was written by Rev. Dr. Kate Rohde last September for those lamenting its passing, but the question it raises and the advice it gives are even more timely now.

Rev. Rohde shares with Rev. Dr. Todd Ekloff the pain and misfortune of having been disfellowshipped with charges that were never specified that came from anonymous sources. Rev. Rohde started her first parish ministry in 1980 as the only UU woman minister serving full-time in 8 states of the deep South. She served in eight churches over the next thirty-two years, several as interim, and at her retirement in 2014, was the living female minister with the most years in parish ministry. Her social activist history reaches back to her teen years when she organized the first program to address the Civil Rights Movement in her hometown to after retirement when she organized to get her country officials and law enforcement officials to agree not to cooperate with the crackdown on immigrants by ICE. Throughout her career, she was active in women’s rights, Civil Rights, gay and lesbian rights, immigration reform, peace, and U.S. policy in Latin America, especially genocidal policies in El Salvador and Guatemala.

The Institutional Capture of the UUA and Possible Strategies to Deal with It.
by Rev. Dr. Kate Rohde

“Institutional Capture” is a reference to the many institutions that have been completely or partially captured by the new, illiberal leftist ideology, which goes by many names: “woke,” “the the successor ideology,” Critical Theories, “The Elite,” and so on. This ideology sells itself as a social justice ideology, but has not, in fact, had demonstrable success in changing the lives of those it purports to help – usually referred to loosely as “members of marginalized groups,” nor does it have support from the rank and file of most of these groups. The typical adherent of these ideologies is white, college educated, and has a history of being on the left or progressive. They both claim to speak for the “marginalized” while at the same time saying that the voices of the marginalized should be centered. However, they continue to take positions that are anathema to majorities in those groups.

Latinos overwhelmingly dislike the term “Latinx.” The black community in Minneapolis soundly defeated police reform centered on defunding police. Few trans people support California’s new policy of allowing any male who will claim a female identity to be housed in women’s prisons

Institutions that are captured are characterized by a lack of free expression of ideas, members fear contradicting some often-fuzzy norm, shunning, punishments, or firing of those who resist the new ideology.

Ideologues do not deal in evidence and reason and even denounce reason. Beliefs should be based not on a careful examination of evidence but on “lived experience.” They decide whose “lived experience” counts. Their approach and framing are the only true doctrine. Those who argue with the “woke” are not met with considered, reasoned, counter-arguments. Rather they face attacks on their character and are called “racists,” “transphobes,” “homophobes,” right winger, or a FOX news addict. You are even accused of promoting violence and genocide. Language is used not to elucidate but to confuse and has ever-changing meanings, not unlike “newspeak.” Orthodoxy is paramount. Intent doesn’t matter. Hurt feelings are evidence of malfeasance, but if your feelings are hurt, you are fragile.

Institutions of Higher Education
Institutions of Higher Education have been institutionally captured all over the country, in part or in whole. The most famous instance is Evergreen College, but many of the elite schools: Harvard, MIT, Yale, Smith, Reed, Middlebury, Berkeley, and not-so-elite schools, have fallen to this illiberal culture that seeks conformity over truth.

The ACLU has stopped its robust defense of free speech and has taken extreme, illiberal positions on freedom of information, cruel and unusual punishment, etc.
The Southern Poverty Law Center has been captured. NPR, the NYT, the Guardian, and most liberal media has skewed coverage to appease the “woke” members of staff.
Publishers have been pushed to decline books by the younger, woke staff members; even books that were selling very well in England could not find a publisher here for political reasons.
Again, these books and articles are not extreme and are usually written by people who thought of themselves as Left or moderate until that position seemed to be captured. Due process in firing has gone by the wayside, and democratic processes have been undermined in many of the ”woke” institutions.

Unitarian Universalist Association
The Unitarian Universalist Association headquartered in Boston has been institutionally captured.

Theological education and the certification of UU clergy have been captured.
The UUMA has been captured, and thus the institutional arms of the ministry.
However, we do not know about our churches. Some are captured. Some are not. There are many in between. We have no idea what the numbers are. We also know that most UUs in the pew have little idea what is happening or has happened and tend to find out from a captured minister — one already in place or, more often, a newly minted one. Some new “woke” clergy have been ejected. Many “unwoke” parish members have been ejected or slipped away. The nominating committee has violated the will of GA and our By-Laws for nominating only one candidate for President of the UUA, an admitted CRT ideologue who has racial intimidation to silence others

Amongst us, there are the folks who see this new, illiberal, ideology, as an orthodoxy – a new religion of sorts. Of these folks, John McWhorter says, there is no dialogue because they are not operating out of the same frame of reference, nor do they believe in a meeting of minds – trying to change their minds is like trying to get a Fundamentalist Christian to give up Jesus.

There are those in an in-between space. Amongst those, the ones who can be reached are the ones who share a belief in freedom, reason, and tolerance and the idea that talking to people who differ can be educational and even help us refine our own thinking. The truth is more important to them than any particular ideology. Then there are those who see the capture and grieve the loss of freedom, reason, tolerance, and grace, in Unitarian Universalism and want to return to or keep what I would call, “UU Classic,” a democratic faith, without orthodoxy, that believes in continuing revelation, a search for truth, and that only with a free exchange of ideas can we refine and develop our beliefs and commitments. It does not divide people by race, ethnicity, sex, age, or other “identities.” Still, it seeks to help all kinds of people find access to our religious communities and contribute to them.

What Can be Done?


So, in this time of institutional capture, what can those of us who are classic UUs and would like to nourish those traditions for the future do?

I would put responses in the following categories:

-Nourish and strengthen churches where classic UUism is still the norm

-Publicize far more widely the attack on classic UUism by the UUA, MFC, UUMA, and Theological Schools


-Create new churches or online churches for classic UUs who no longer can find a home in their home church

Keep pressing the institutions within the UUA to keep living up to Classic UU values.
Nourish and strengthen churches where classic UUism is still the norm

Cont:

How can we support classic UU churches going forward? I would say for these congregations, there needs to be a new organization that will do for them what the “woke” UUA will not. It would be a membership organization and need not exclude congregations who chose to remain in the UUA, but it would encourage those congregations to donate a substantial portion of UUA “dues” to UU Classic.

The most important task for classic UU is to find and make available ministers who are classic UUs in philosophy and temperament. Again, these ministers could be approved by the UUA or not, but the organization would check to see if they had education and training suitable for ministry and a view and understanding of UUism that is in line with Classic UUism.

Create and/or collect of curricula suitable for Religious Education for children and adults.

Create programming to connect congregations with one another for support and for learning, including some sort of way to share “best ideas.” Create more spaces for interaction with Classic UUs beyond the local church.







Publicizing the Institutional Capture

Many of us first became aware of the institutional capture of the UUA in 2017 when there was a complete turnover of leadership due to forced resignations and death, as well as a sudden declaration that we were a “White Supremacist” organization. This was followed by the Gadfly Papers, the mobbing, the book banning, and the throwing out of all rules and precedents to get rid of Rev. Eklof. None of these things happened in an orderly, reasoned, nor well thought out manner. Elected people were replaced by unelected people, and the only election was disrupted

 

[MechaJutaro]

Cont:

How can we support classic UU churches going forward? I would say for these congregations, there needs to be a new organization that will do for them what the “woke” UUA will not. It would be a membership organization and need not exclude congregations who chose to remain in the UUA, but it would encourage those congregations to donate a substantial portion of UUA “dues” to UU Classic.

The most important task for classic UU is to find and make available ministers who are classic UUs in philosophy and temperament. Again, these ministers could be approved by the UUA or not, but the organization would check to see if they had education and training suitable for ministry and a view and understanding of UUism that is in line with Classic UUism.

Create and/or collect of curricula suitable for Religious Education for children and adults.

Create programming to connect congregations with one another for support and for learning, including some sort of way to share “best ideas.” Create more spaces for interaction with Classic UUs beyond the local church.







Publicizing the Institutional Capture

Many of us first became aware of the institutional capture of the UUA in 2017 when there was a complete turnover of leadership due to forced resignations and death, as well as a sudden declaration that we were a “White Supremacist” organization. This was followed by the Gadfly Papers, the mobbing, the book banning, and the throwing out of all rules and precedents to get rid of Rev. Eklof. None of these things happened in an orderly, reasoned, nor well thought out manner. Elected people were replaced by unelected people, and the only election was disrupted

Cont:

Some thought that this capture might have been aided and abetted by the anxiety around the rise of Trump and the onset of the pandemic, but it continued when I was removed from Fellowship for private Facebook posts. Elections have been rigged, with challengers forbidden from disseminating information at General Assembly and not given opportunities to get their message out. Lay people have been harassed and punished at GA and in churches. A new church was banned from using the UU name. There are many incidents, but most UUs in the pews are unaware, nor do they understand how that may affect them in the future.

We can publicize and get reading groups for the many good books that are being written about what has happened – such as Used To Be UU.

We can raise money for a lawsuit and publicity campaign to get coverage of a liberal denomination canceling ministers for heretical views in a religion without heresies. We have some media contacts and there are a host of substacks, podcasts, and YouTube channels, looking for stories about cancellation culture and institutional capture.

We can create business resolutions to ameliorate cancel culture in the UUA, thus forcing a conversation. We could do this with candidates as well, but we would need to start early.

We can propose alternatives, as FAIR does, (perhaps using some of their materials), for addressing race and other justice issues in an inclusive rather than intolerant way. As they put it, take the “pro-human” approach.

Create new churches or online churches for classic UUs

We have some models for this. There is the Church of the Larger Fellowship model, where there are individual members who form their own group but do not meet. There is the online church that most of us attended during COVID, and some attended church at a distance — this could be formalized with programming for distant members. There is a satellite model where the “mother” congregation helps organize small groups at a distance who are members of the “mother” congregation and get partially online worship (sermon and such) with local additions. The mother church hires an assistant or coordinator to help these folks organize other programming. First Church Albuquerque tried something like that about a decade ago. This would allow “classic UUs” to continue a church connection where they don’t have one and to be formal members of a UU Classic congregation, swelling their ranks.

Keep pressing the institutions within the UUA to keep living up to Classic UU values

Remain involved with the UUA to slow the spread of the illiberal takeover and be there should there be a retrenchment. We don’t know where this “woke” virus will go, but since it eats its host it is not sustainable. Remaining involved might help if there is a movement toward recovery allowing classic UUism to pick up the pieces. Meanwhile, we could have a business resolution re-establishing the free exchange of ideas in forums, by clergy and laity in the church, at GA and other UU gatherings, etc. Forbidding the MFC from using positions on public, philosophical, and theological debates to prevent Fellowship or remove someone from Fellowship. Reinstate people removed for things they said or wrote. We could run candidates for every position and provide them with volunteers to help them get on the ballot and campaign. Create an organization of individual classic UUs to coordinate efforts in all these areas"

 

[TheFiend]

Sadly, even 12 Steps have been infected by this nonsense https://unherd.com/2023/05/how-alcoholics-anonymous-lost-its-way/

My frank opinion, and based off of real world + online experiences, is that the overwhelming majority of "western" nations aren't too keen or are already absolutely against these stealth commie subversion agendas.

By that I simply mean the subversive agents, no matter how many millions or billions of dollars are stealthily pumped into their commie takeover efforts, they are still fighting a losing battle which is ultimately doomed to fail.

Mainly because this sort of stealth commie takeover type shit has only ever proved somewhat minimally successful in situations where simultaneous widespread societal subversion had also been enabled aggressively via direct & sustained force.
Eg: China, Bolshevik Russia, Soviet usurped nations, etc.

Imo, it simply won't ever work in "western" nations... especially without first having largely collapsed each "western" nation to a level, at the very least, comparable with 1945 Germany.

Tbh I'm not sure why these commie retards are even still bothering at this point, considering the whole covaids psyop appears to have almost, though not quite, backfired.
Eg: Trust in "western" government corporations & their selected "experts" was relatively high in the beginning, but as the covaids psyop dragged on with governmental agencies shamelessly imposing increasingly illogical and blatantly criminal restrictions on their respective populations, where most seemed astonishingly gullible and easily fooled—initially, yet as of now-(despite significant efforts to deliberately distort & misrepresent statistical analyses)-the opposite has resulted. Ie: Trust is government corporations & their selected "experts" has suffered dramatically.

At this stage, it appears the more these stealth communist retards push their moronic agendas and the greater they exert their toxic influences from any of the already near fully usurped institutions = the exact opposite of what they are intending seems to result.

This reality will be extremely embarrassing for these stealth commies both collectively and especially individually. Although collectively they'll go to great lengths, as a communal unit, to aggressively conceal their shame behind literally anything that proves efficacious in the heat of the moment, however on an individual level they'll be incredibly susceptible to even the most subtle negative emotional elicitation.

These ideologically possessed communistic hive-minded imbeciles are very capable at societal subversion—but only when they've already established undeniable societal dominance, whether by long-term covert mass infestation efforts or instead by overwhelming overt force.
Whereas without already having established unchallenged societal dominance... these commie fucklets are about as capable as goldfish on land.

At least that's what I reckon.

And I'm basing this perspective off of various historical events and combined with what I've witnessed occuring over recent years.

An example being related to what I became certain of early last year after being actively involved with well over a hundred separate online fora communities.
All but a few were/are controlled by overtly communistic dipshits who aggressively impose their vacuous psychoses on all community members.
In every single case I witnessed, even though these commie administration clowns had absolute control over all community members and had no issue blatantly exerting this control arbitrarily as they pleased...and even though the immediate results generally seemed favourable to these commies...in the longer run these outcomes were entirely detrimental for them in many unpredictable and usually compounded ways.

At the beginning of last year I more often found myself completely out numbered by retarded commie adherents wherever I participated online, and tbh I felt as if I was singlehandedly fighting a losing battle because no matter how well I faired with my logical argumentation & presentation of real world facts against the numerically superior hoardes of irrational screechers, the outcome always seemed that the more effective my efforts were = the greater the commie cultists nonsensical resolve became... however in hindsight I can now see their resolve was illusory as they appear to present a defensive facade of their resolve being drastically intensified whenever their resolve is actually crumbling.

Basically any non-commie, with sufficient motivation and know-how, can singlehandedly take on entire commie cults and even though it may seem ineffective in real time, as it may seem the commie cultists aren't immediately affected and perhaps as though they're winning, yet the reality is that the commies are extremely fragile. All we non-commies have to do is plant seeds to eventually cause the commies to collapse in on themselves.

My apologies, MechaJutaro.
I'm currently short on time, so probably haven't coherently responded here.
(*I'll check back asap to address anything I may have missed.)

 

[MechaJutaro]

My frank opinion, and based off of real world + online experiences, is that the overwhelming majority of "western" nations aren't too keen or are already absolutely against these stealth commie subversion agendas.

By that I simply mean the subversive agents, no matter how many millions or billions of dollars are stealthily pumped into their commie takeover efforts, they are still fighting a losing battle which is ultimately doomed to fail.

This stuff will fail, IF

-More of us start speaking out, each time Identity Politics of any kind becomes injected into our organizations

And

-Agitate for the handful of activists who've insinuated themselves into our ranks to be drummed out on their asses, and for the organizations to refocus on their primary missions. This has already begun https://theintercept.com/2022/06/13/progressive-organizing-infighting-callout-culture/

 

[MechaJutaro]

This Pete Rubinas dude seems to be shamelessly employing stealth communist language throughout that highly deceptive "Power Dynamics" notice.

Also the fact Pete is attempting to impose that absurd gender bender cultist ideology on all participants, indicates Pete couldn't give a slightest of fucks about the actual participants.

Another thing I noticed is Pete's halfassed attempts to conceal the blatant hypocrisy of his whole "Power Dynamics" notice rationale.

It appears Pete expects all participants to quietly accept his new rules which would in effect disempower all participants equally as a standard while also giving all power to Pete & his facilitators to arbitrarily exert as they alone please. Of course, based on Pete's notice, it suggests he intends to exert his newly assumed position of absolute power to selectively "empower" participants of his choosing.

Pete portrays a clearly bullshit "equality" narrative which literally outlines his intentions to enable fundamental inequality.

Prior to being banned on Reddit, I brought this up over there also



Responses were similar to the ones you gave, Fiend

No Stepp 4431 wrote: "I think maybe it would be best to find another group until that one gets back to the proper purpose it was intended for"

Then, after I shared Rubinas's newsletter, replied: "But aren't we all powerless over our addiction? hence the gathering of one another for support and guidance instead of political dynamics?"

DaveThompson413 responded with: "I'm a member of a "support organization" which clearly states at the beginning of every meeting, that politics shall not be discussed.

And FWIW....

Early in my recovery, I befriended an older guy who had many years of sobriety. Most if those years were as a prisoner. He once told me (I never asked) what his crime was. Murder. He was a great friend till he died of old age"

Greerface chimed in with: "Why on earth would anyone mix recovery with anything else. Isn't staying sober hard enough?"

And over here

NoreastNorwest observed: "Sounds exhausting"

And SevereKoala4613 saliently urged: "I would find a new recovery meeting. I dont think social justice topics should be a main focus in a recovery space and I say this as a minority lol"

 

[Teeaichsee]

It all starts in the home and the schools plus let me add WEAK christian leaders does not help either. Our children have been taught wrong and the whole education system needs a reboot! Hell most kids dont even know they have rights that come from god,,,,They will never miss what they dont even know they had.

we have done one hell of a job teaching our kids!

 

[MechaJutaro]

It all starts in the home and the schools plus let me add WEAK christian leaders does not help either. Our children have been taught wrong and the whole education system needs a reboot! Hell most kids dont even know they have rights that come from god,,,,They will never miss what they dont even know they had.

we have done one hell of a job teaching our kids!

Whether or not God exists (I don't have a firm conclusion on this subject), The Constitution make it plain that legal rights are granted to us by the government. One has to amass public support, if his goal is to coax the government into enforcing a legal right

 

[TheFiend]

Prior to being banned on Reddit, I brought this up over there also



Responses were similar to the ones you gave, Fiend

No Stepp 4431 wrote: "I think maybe it would be best to find another group until that one gets back to the proper purpose it was intended for"

Then, after I shared Rubinas's newsletter, replied: "But aren't we all powerless over our addiction? hence the gathering of one another for support and guidance instead of political dynamics?"

DaveThompson413 responded with: "I'm a member of a "support organization" which clearly states at the beginning of every meeting, that politics shall not be discussed.

And FWIW....

Early in my recovery, I befriended an older guy who had many years of sobriety. Most if those years were as a prisoner. He once told me (I never asked) what his crime was. Murder. He was a great friend till he died of old age"

Greerface chimed in with: "Why on earth would anyone mix recovery with anything else. Isn't staying sober hard enough?"

And over here

NoreastNorwest observed: "Sounds exhausting"

And SevereKoala4613 saliently urged: "I would find a new recovery meeting. I dont think social justice topics should be a main focus in a recovery space and I say this as a minority lol"

Was just looking into the subject: 'DEI'...jfc it is some uber retarded shit.

It seems interesting to me....in the sense that its just absolutely fuckin' moronic aye.

Apparently even the pseudo-"jew" cultists are hating on 'DEI' too... although clearly not due to its utter fuckedness, but rather merely because it hasn't been serving that psychopathic supremacy agenda of the Talmudic parasite cult, and currently isn't conforming to their swinish "perpetual jew victimhood" fiction.

Instead it seems 'DEI' generally and arbitrarily categorizes pseudo-"jews" akin to the "evil whitey"... which is triggering for Talmudists because that's exactly the thing pseudo-"jews" are well known for purposefully masquerading as with malicious intent.
As far as I can see, this is the only positive-(although completely unintended)-aspect of the 'DEI' nonsense.

Its clearly another weapon intended for furthering perpetration of the societal subversion crap as well as the genocidal campaign against Europeans.

Imo, we can easily see through these bullshit "social justice" facades just by being attentive for the abundantly duplicitous rhetoric.

Here's a lazy example of what I'm rambling about:

[Quoted from Wikipedia - 'DEI']

"Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are ¹[organizational frameworks] ²[which seek to promote] the ³[fair treatment] and ⁴[full participation]of ⁵[all people], ⁶[particularly groups] who have ⁷[historically] ⁸[been underrepresented] or ⁹[subject to discrimination] on the basis of ¹⁰[identity] or ¹¹[disability]."

•1) "organizational frameworks"
-sounds nicer than straight up saying what it really is...such as: 'woke cult dictates', or 'NWO faggleteering', or simply 'bullshit'...

•2) "which seek to promote"
-or: 'intended to infect'.

•3) "fair treatment"
-or: 'arbitrary imposition & privilege'

•4) "full participation"
-lol... in so far as suits the agenda.

•5) "all people"
-or: 'selected useful idiots'

•6) "particularly groups"
-or: 'weaponized cults they've covertly usurped'

•7) "historically"
-as invented & customized on the go.

•8) "been underrepresented"
-Prepping the stage for perfoming the...lol, "historically accurate" fiction.

•9) "subject to discrimination"
-Which will be meaning the likes of malevolent parasites, primary psychopathological criminals, perverts, sexual deviants, pedophiles, cannibals and other festering putridity intended to become forcefully "normalized" via infectious 'DEI' fucknucklery.

•10) "identity"
-Probably referring to weaponizable communal-ideological cults, and not any natural individual's-unique-self-expression as identity.

•11) "disability"
-Yeah nah they're certainly not referring to actual physically or mentally less-abled innocent and non-criminally inclined persons.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[TheFiend]

Whether or not God exists (I don't have a firm conclusion on this subject), The Constitution make it plain that legal rights are granted to us by the government. One has to amass public support, if his goal is to coax the government into enforcing a legal right

Except real governments no longer exist ever since being hijacked and substituted with fictive legal entities commonly referred to as corporations.

Currently Biden is not a real president and merely the acting CEO of a Corporate entity registered as The United States of America Corporation.

Its difficult for most to grasp let alone acknowledge due to the deliberate extreme complexity of the whole legalistic charade and also the fact we're all kept ignorant of it outside of the "elite" institutions.

Legal minions tend to become incredibly hostile towards anyone daring to shine a light on any of this well established and near imperceptible enslavement scam.

 

[MechaJutaro]

Was just looking into the subject: 'DEI'...jfc it is some uber retarded shit.

It seems interesting to me....in the sense that its just absolutely fuckin' moronic aye.

Apparently even the pseudo-"jew" cultists are hating on 'DEI' too... although clearly not due to its utter fuckedness, but rather merely because it hasn't been serving that psychopathic supremacy agenda of the Talmudic parasite cult, and currently isn't conforming to their swinish "perpetual jew victimhood" fiction.

Instead it seems 'DEI' generally and arbitrarily categorizes pseudo-"jews" akin to the "evil whitey"... which is triggering for Talmudists because that's exactly the thing pseudo-"jews" are well known for purposefully masquerading as with malicious intent.
As far as I can see, this is the only positive-(although completely unintended)-aspect of the 'DEI' nonsense.

Its clearly another weapon intended for furthering perpetration of the societal subversion crap as well as the genocidal campaign against Europeans.

Imo, we can easily see through these bullshit "social justice" facades just by being attentive for the abundantly duplicitous rhetoric.

Here's a lazy example of what I'm rambling about:

[Quoted from Wikipedia - 'DEI']

"Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are ¹[organizational frameworks] ²[which seek to promote] the ³[fair treatment] and ⁴[full participation]of ⁵[all people], ⁶[particularly groups] who have ⁷[historically] ⁸[been underrepresented] or ⁹[subject to discrimination] on the basis of ¹⁰[identity] or ¹¹[disability]."

•1) "organizational frameworks"
-sounds nicer than straight up saying what it really is...such as: 'woke cult dictates', or 'NWO faggleteering', or simply 'bullshit'...

•2) "which seek to promote"
-or: 'intended to infect'.

•3) "fair treatment"
-or: 'arbitrary imposition & privilege'

•4) "full participation"
-lol... in so far as suits the agenda.

•5) "all people"
-or: 'selected useful idiots'

•6) "particularly groups"
-or: 'weaponized cults they've covertly usurped'

•7) "historically"
-as invented & customized on the go.

•8) "been underrepresented"
-Prepping the stage for perfoming the...lol, "historically accurate" fiction.

•9) "subject to discrimination"
-Which will be meaning the likes of malevolent parasites, primary psychopathological criminals, perverts, sexual deviants, pedophiles, cannibals and other festering putridity intended to become forcefully "normalized" via infectious 'DEI' fucknucklery.

•10) "identity"
-Probably referring to weaponizable communal-ideological cults, and not any natural individual's-unique-self-expression as identity.

•11) "disability"
-Yeah nah they're certainly not referring to actual physically or mentally less-abled innocent and non-criminally inclined persons.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Grande here sums up the lunacy of DEI and it's adherents pretty well here

 

[TheFiend]

Grande here sums up the lunacy of DEI and it's adherents pretty well here

Yeah you're right, and his assessment of the Stanford incident is pretty much spot on too.

In previous years I'd generally found some of his interpretations far too lenient regarding certain subjects underlying motives & intentions.
Alas it appears to be a common trait presented by qualified psychs in general.

Of course that's not to suggest he wrong at all, coz imo he's correct overall. I just think he sometimes tends towards conforming within the significantly restrictive parameters of pseudo-"scientific" mainstream psych doctrines and so occasionally either unintentionally, or perhaps due to YT's thought control shite, he may be purposefully limiting sharing certain raw insights or rationalizing YT friendly excuses for what I consider inexcusable behaviours by individuals who have consistently proven themselves by their Words & Actions to be fundamentally predatory.

However from this video it seems Dr Grande has become a little more willing to go further than what I recall he would several years ago when last I watched his content.
Regardless, he's still one of the top YouTube psychs for sure.

 

[Mungri]

I've avoided support groups my entire life, looking to maybe try them after my social worker appointment tomorrow. This shit just puts me off. The whole 'safeplace for snowflakes' BS. All they do is reinforce negativity and gaslight you further into believing you are more broken.

 

[TheFiend]

I've avoided support groups my entire life, looking to maybe try them after my social worker appointment tomorrow. This shit just puts me off. The whole 'safeplace for snowflakes' BS. All they do is reinforce negativity and gaslight you further into believing you are more broken.

Ya know how snowflakes can eventually build up on the roof of a structure where the combined mass of snowflakage crushes the structure...

...




...or on mountains...

...

The 'snowball effect' thang.

Snowflakes + safe spaces = fuckery.



What wood jesus do?

 

[Mungri]

'Awww, there there, you're all precious little smooth brains that need coddling and protection in a safe space'.

No, what I need is set up a supportive social event for people like me in a normal place like a bar or restaurant to learn real social skills, and not just be trapped in a room surrounded by other deadbrains.

And to stop bring infantilised and patronised which only further gaslights me into staying broken.

 

[TheFiend]

'Awww, there there, you're all precious little smooth brains that need coddling and protection in a safe space'.

No, what I need is set up a supportive social event for people like me in a normal place like a bar or restaurant to learn real social skills, and not just be trapped in a room surrounded by other deadbrains.

And to stop bring infantilised and patronised which only further gaslights me into staying broken.

I like how ya expect everyone to support you... except when they try...you immediately start hissing & spitting in their fuckin' faces.

Pretty sure you're one of the resident tfsf trolls, maybe formerly known as TJHall, or eyeball Willy, or dick Broe Stan... whatever the case, you will forever remain a broken cunt as long as you choose to continue acting like a selfish petulant child always playin' the victim brah.

No one gives a shit about you or me or anyone other than themselves and their own.

So either man up, embrace the suck and quit making excuses. Get up off yo fat ass, hit a local waterin' hole, down a few brews, and socialize.

Or don't. And just carry on whining about it ad infinitum.

 

[MechaJutaro]

I've avoided support groups my entire life, looking to maybe try them after my social worker appointment tomorrow. This shit just puts me off. The whole 'safeplace for snowflakes' BS. All they do is reinforce negativity and gaslight you further into believing you are more broken.

You're hardly the first person to express such sentiments. I had the following conversation with another SMART facilitator in another state just recently...

They wrote:
"You are more than welcome to criticize the actions/policies of the SMART National office, however. I am unhappy with most of the decisions they’ve been making lately and am vocal about it so I am sympathetic"

I replied: "Now, I'm intrigued ... What decisions are you referring to?"


They answered: "As far as the actions I was referring to, I think the national office is too heavy handed when it comes to required speech in meetings. They’ve treated me and other facilitators disrespectfully. They don’t correct volunteers who act poorly. I could go on and on…"



Me: "That makes two(And, no doubt, many more )of us. Thus, I've taken a break from facilitating meetings myself"

Them: "It’s a real shame. I’m totally bought into the principles of SMART and REBT, but the leadership make it so challenging to stay with the organization. I just have my local meeting now, no national ones. I stepped down a few weeks ago. I try to focus on serving the participants, but it’s getting harder and harder to remain"

Later on, I asked this same facilitator: "If those of us who are devoted to the principals of REBT/CBT don't speak out publicly regarding the increasingly dysfunctional nature SMART's national office, and the fact that it's getting harder to remain, what hope do we have of setting this right?"



To which they wrote: "You're not going to set it right whether you speak out or not. Pete Rubinas is a well-meaning but ideologically-motivated person and a very poor leader. He is convinced that what he's doing is right and you're not going to change his mind. You're far from the first person to complain"

 

[MechaJutaro]

My frank opinion, and based off of real world + online experiences, is that the overwhelming majority of "western" nations aren't too keen or are already absolutely against these stealth commie subversion agendas.

By that I simply mean the subversive agents, no matter how many millions or billions of dollars are stealthily pumped into their commie takeover efforts, they are still fighting a losing battle which is ultimately doomed to fail.

Mainly because this sort of stealth commie takeover type shit has only ever proved somewhat minimally successful in situations where simultaneous widespread societal subversion had also been enabled aggressively via direct & sustained force.
Eg: China, Bolshevik Russia, Soviet usurped nations, etc.

Imo, it simply won't ever work in "western" nations... especially without first having largely collapsed each "western" nation to a level, at the very least, comparable with 1945 Germany.

Tbh I'm not sure why these commie retards are even still bothering at this point, considering the whole covaids psyop appears to have almost, though not quite, backfired.
Eg: Trust in "western" government corporations & their selected "experts" was relatively high in the beginning, but as the covaids psyop dragged on with governmental agencies shamelessly imposing increasingly illogical and blatantly criminal restrictions on their respective populations, where most seemed astonishingly gullible and easily fooled—initially, yet as of now-(despite significant efforts to deliberately distort & misrepresent statistical analyses)-the opposite has resulted. Ie: Trust is government corporations & their selected "experts" has suffered dramatically.

At this stage, it appears the more these stealth communist retards push their moronic agendas and the greater they exert their toxic influences from any of the already near fully usurped institutions = the exact opposite of what they are intending seems to result.

This reality will be extremely embarrassing for these stealth commies both collectively and especially individually. Although collectively they'll go to great lengths, as a communal unit, to aggressively conceal their shame behind literally anything that proves efficacious in the heat of the moment, however on an individual level they'll be incredibly susceptible to even the most subtle negative emotional elicitation.

These ideologically possessed communistic hive-minded imbeciles are very capable at societal subversion—but only when they've already established undeniable societal dominance, whether by long-term covert mass infestation efforts or instead by overwhelming overt force.
Whereas without already having established unchallenged societal dominance... these commie fucklets are about as capable as goldfish on land.

At least that's what I reckon.

And I'm basing this perspective off of various historical events and combined with what I've witnessed occuring over recent years.

An example being related to what I became certain of early last year after being actively involved with well over a hundred separate online fora communities.
All but a few were/are controlled by overtly communistic dipshits who aggressively impose their vacuous psychoses on all community members.
In every single case I witnessed, even though these commie administration clowns had absolute control over all community members and had no issue blatantly exerting this control arbitrarily as they pleased...and even though the immediate results generally seemed favourable to these commies...in the longer run these outcomes were entirely detrimental for them in many unpredictable and usually compounded ways.

At the beginning of last year I more often found myself completely out numbered by retarded commie adherents wherever I participated online, and tbh I felt as if I was singlehandedly fighting a losing battle because no matter how well I faired with my logical argumentation & presentation of real world facts against the numerically superior hoardes of irrational screechers, the outcome always seemed that the more effective my efforts were = the greater the commie cultists nonsensical resolve became... however in hindsight I can now see their resolve was illusory as they appear to present a defensive facade of their resolve being drastically intensified whenever their resolve is actually crumbling.

Basically any non-commie, with sufficient motivation and know-how, can singlehandedly take on entire commie cults and even though it may seem ineffective in real time, as it may seem the commie cultists aren't immediately affected and perhaps as though they're winning, yet the reality is that the commies are extremely fragile. All we non-commies have to do is plant seeds to eventually cause the commies to collapse in on themselves.

My apologies, MechaJutaro.
I'm currently short on time, so probably haven't coherently responded here.
(*I'll check back asap to address anything I may have missed.)

 

[MechaJutaro]

I've avoided support groups my entire life, looking to maybe try them after my social worker appointment tomorrow. This shit just puts me off. The whole 'safeplace for snowflakes' BS. All they do is reinforce negativity and gaslight you further into believing you are more broken.

This is rampant in most organizations now more generally

 

[Cletusnow]

Hola, everyone. Trust that your weekends have started out pleasantly thus far. Recently, a recovery organization I've belonged to since '14(SMART Recovery) elevated our former and first DEI chief to the office of Executive director. He promptly sent out the following newsletter:

"
Considering Power Dynamics in Our Meetings

Power dynamics exist any time human beings gather in a community with one another, and our self-management mutual support group meetings are no exception. Noticing and attending to the power dynamics that exist in our meetings is critical as facilitators. Not doing so is a barrier to empowerment that we should all be concerned about if we want our meetings to be safe places for for all participants to pursue their recovery journeys. What do we mean by power? In this context, we are referring to the real and perceived agency that one has over one’s own life and circumstances. There are a variety of factors that help to determine the relative power that an individual perceives in a given situation. Consider these examples:

Accumulated Recovery Time

Closeness to the Facilitator

Financial Security Relationship

Security Education Level Gender

Gender Identity Sexual

Orientation Race Age Physical

Health and Ability Mental Health and Ability

History of Trauma


While there are no absolutes as we consider the relative power of individuals in our meetings, we generally learn enough about participants to be able to recognize when an interpersonal situation is occurring between individuals that are not equally “powerful” at that time. It is crucial in those situations that we, the rained facilitators, intervene as necessary to reinforce the agency of the less powerful party to describe their experiences in their terms without judgment from other group members. If a participant is new to the group, we should assume that they are at a relative power disadvantage simply as a newcomer. Telling new or less powerful participants to use a SMART tool or how to use a SMART tool in response to a share is NOT what we are trained to do when a participant shares something vulnerable with the group. Instead, we should validate the person’s experience, ask how the group can provide support, and use our motivational interviewing skills to explore the share with the participant if they are interested in doing so. If a fellow participant, especially a more powerful participant, invalidates a person’s share, we should remind them that we don’t give direct advice in SMART Recovery and proceed with the steps above.

SMART Recovery is an incredible tool for empowerment when it’s implemented in a way that respects that not every person is starting off on a level power playing field. I hope that you’ll join me in reflecting on this topic with an open mind in the spirit of continuous improvement and wanting SMART Recovery to not just be accessible to all, but also empowering for all. Peace, Pete Rubinas (he/him/his)"


Dunno if anyone else here attends a support group regularly, and if so, whether or not you've all received similar instructions. So I’m posting here to ask what we’re to do in regards to one demographic who’s almost never discussed by proponents of DEI: Serial murderers

Fair inference… Contemporary equivalents to Albert Fish, Ed Gein, Jeff Dahmer, Karla Holmka, Aileen Wuornos, Carlton Gary, Javed Iqbal, Richard Ramirez, and Yang Xinhai who haven’t yet been identified and incarcerated are almost certainly present in recovery meetings throughout America. And an immense PD exists between folks like this, and the rest of us “normies”

Whereas they’ve enjoyed the power of dining on human flesh, and washing down their fava beans with several goblets of warm plasma, we non-serial murderers suffer the inequity of having had to settle for merely WONDERING what our fellow Homo Sapiens taste like, once they’ve been fried up and sauteed. Any ideas as to how one goes about rectifying this monsterous affront to the principles of Diversity, Equity, And Inclusion in recovery pow-wows would be most welcome. Is it OK for us to start asking the lambs in our flock outright, at the beginning of each meeting questions such as:

“Has anyone here tonight strangled a sex worker behind the dumpster at Dairy Queen recently?” Or “In the past six months, have any of you picked up a hitchiker while cruising down the freeway, dismembered that poor bastard while he was still alive, then tossed his limbs and vital organs into your oven for supper?”

Or would making such direct inquiries turn meetings into Emotionally Unsafe Spaces for those participants who’s idea of recreation leans toward hobbies like rock climbing and Laser Tag, and away from activities such as sexual assault and spilling innocent blood?

Sounds like a faggit

 

[Mungri]

This is rampant in most organizations now more generally

Its a case of 'toxic negativity' ... Reinforcing people's issues / delusions is as bad if not worse than just trying to gaslight them away with toxic positivity.

The real solution is things like dialetical therapy... Identifying the issues and how to fix / override them.

'I understand that you're depressed, but you can't keep living like that everyday.... How about trying (self improvement ideas)'.

In current therapy and HR type stuff 'Awwww your a special little snowflake.... Everyone make sure to treat this person with special mode' and they keep reinforcing how broken the person is - treat me like this and good luck stopping me from biting your nose and ears off your head.

 

[MechaJutaro]

My frank opinion, and based off of real world + online experiences, is that the overwhelming majority of "western" nations aren't too keen or are already absolutely against these stealth commie subversion agendas.

By that I simply mean the subversive agents, no matter how many millions or billions of dollars are stealthily pumped into their commie takeover efforts, they are still fighting a losing battle which is ultimately doomed to fail.

Mainly because this sort of stealth commie takeover type shit has only ever proved somewhat minimally successful in situations where simultaneous widespread societal subversion had also been enabled aggressively via direct & sustained force.
Eg: China, Bolshevik Russia, Soviet usurped nations, etc.

Imo, it simply won't ever work in "western" nations... especially without first having largely collapsed each "western" nation to a level, at the very least, comparable with 1945 Germany.

Tbh I'm not sure why these commie retards are even still bothering at this point, considering the whole covaids psyop appears to have almost, though not quite, backfired.
Eg: Trust in "western" government corporations & their selected "experts" was relatively high in the beginning, but as the covaids psyop dragged on with governmental agencies shamelessly imposing increasingly illogical and blatantly criminal restrictions on their respective populations, where most seemed astonishingly gullible and easily fooled—initially, yet as of now-(despite significant efforts to deliberately distort & misrepresent statistical analyses)-the opposite has resulted. Ie: Trust is government corporations & their selected "experts" has suffered dramatically.

At this stage, it appears the more these stealth communist retards push their moronic agendas and the greater they exert their toxic influences from any of the already near fully usurped institutions = the exact opposite of what they are intending seems to result.

This reality will be extremely embarrassing for these stealth commies both collectively and especially individually. Although collectively they'll go to great lengths, as a communal unit, to aggressively conceal their shame behind literally anything that proves efficacious in the heat of the moment, however on an individual level they'll be incredibly susceptible to even the most subtle negative emotional elicitation.

These ideologically possessed communistic hive-minded imbeciles are very capable at societal subversion—but only when they've already established undeniable societal dominance, whether by long-term covert mass infestation efforts or instead by overwhelming overt force.
Whereas without already having established unchallenged societal dominance... these commie fucklets are about as capable as goldfish on land.

At least that's what I reckon.

And I'm basing this perspective off of various historical events and combined with what I've witnessed occuring over recent years.

An example being related to what I became certain of early last year after being actively involved with well over a hundred separate online fora communities.
All but a few were/are controlled by overtly communistic dipshits who aggressively impose their vacuous psychoses on all community members.
In every single case I witnessed, even though these commie administration clowns had absolute control over all community members and had no issue blatantly exerting this control arbitrarily as they pleased...and even though the immediate results generally seemed favourable to these commies...in the longer run these outcomes were entirely detrimental for them in many unpredictable and usually compounded ways.

At the beginning of last year I more often found myself completely out numbered by retarded commie adherents wherever I participated online, and tbh I felt as if I was singlehandedly fighting a losing battle because no matter how well I faired with my logical argumentation & presentation of real world facts against the numerically superior hoardes of irrational screechers, the outcome always seemed that the more effective my efforts were = the greater the commie cultists nonsensical resolve became... however in hindsight I can now see their resolve was illusory as they appear to present a defensive facade of their resolve being drastically intensified whenever their resolve is actually crumbling.

Basically any non-commie, with sufficient motivation and know-how, can singlehandedly take on entire commie cults and even though it may seem ineffective in real time, as it may seem the commie cultists aren't immediately affected and perhaps as though they're winning, yet the reality is that the commies are extremely fragile. All we non-commies have to do is plant seeds to eventually cause the commies to collapse in on themselves.

My apologies, MechaJutaro.
I'm currently short on time, so probably haven't coherently responded here.
(*I'll check back asap to address anything I may have missed.)

We need a US equivalent to The Free Speech Union

The US needs an equivalent to The Free Speech Union

https://freespeechunion.org/ Currently, the only civic organization of any consequence on this subject which exists here in The US* is FIRE, and their approach remains a highly legalistic one https://reason.com/podcast/2022/06/08/greg-lukianoff-saving-culture-free-speech/ That won't diminish...

thefreespeechforum.com

To really start fighting back effectively

 

[MechaJutaro]

I've avoided support groups my entire life, looking to maybe try them after my social worker appointment tomorrow. This shit just puts me off. The whole 'safeplace for snowflakes' BS. All they do is reinforce negativity and gaslight you further into believing you are more broken.

We need a US equivalent to The Free Speech Union here in The US

The US needs an equivalent to The Free Speech Union

https://freespeechunion.org/ Currently, the only civic organization of any consequence on this subject which exists here in The US* is FIRE, and their approach remains a highly legalistic one https://reason.com/podcast/2022/06/08/greg-lukianoff-saving-culture-free-speech/ That won't diminish...

thefreespeechforum.com

To really fight back against this culture of censoriusness that's overtaken our culture