What Qualifies a Cult

Pacific Group Edition

I once asked Mary if PG was a cult, and she told me to Google the dictionary definition of “cult” and to call her back with the answer. I did, and I am sad to say that the dictionary definition is deeply lacking. It said, “A misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular person or thing.” Can you believe that? How much more vague and undefined can that be? Not much. I remember her telling me, “Now does that sound like PG to you?” I said no, and she told me I was overthinking, and I accepted the answer, and moved on. We also would joke often that if PG was a cult, it was a good one, and that if we were being brainwashed, maybe it was because our brains needed to be washed. I know many people who have had similar “jokes” in their cults.

Below is a detailed list written by cult expert, Janja Lalich, noting the qualities and characteristics of a cultic group. I am no expert at all, I just have some lived experience and understanding to share, so I am going to share how I see the Pacific Group qualifies as a cult with this list. There are other lists out there by other experts that I find very helpful, but this one is particularly clear and inclusive and I feel it really shows how a cult isn’t what is commonly thought of as, “a group people aren’t allowed to leave.” It’s a personal pet peeve of mine when someone says, “But they were allowed to leave.” As far as I can tell, no definition of a cult I’ve seen even says, “Members aren’t allowed to leave.” I have however heard many cults use that ubiquitous logic as evidence to keep their members in and make them feel safe thinking, “Oh, I can leave at any time… this isn’t a cult.” When in fact, the thing that actually keeps people from leaving is this very kind of manipulation and coercive control, and rarely a physical restraining.

Qualities & Characteristics of a Cult:

• The group displays an excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader, and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.

  • Pacific Group is excessively devoted to Clancy Imislund, the founder of the group. The group is what it is, because it is an amalgamation of all of his beliefs about how an AA group should be run, and every member follows them. When he was alive, and since he has died. During his life, I remember being at the Wednesday night meeting and the room would start to buzz when he walked through the door. Sponsors directed their sponsees to go and say hello to him. Men wore suits and women wore dresses because that was his suggested attire. He had sponsees who acted as servants to him, getting him coffee, saving him a seat, and doing his bidding. Most notably, whenever someone celebrates their AA sobriety anniversary, known as an AA Birthday, they “take a cake,” which just means the group sings each member the happy birthday song, and that member goes to the podium to say their thank yous, and every member says, “Thank you Clancy for the structure.” at some point in their momentary speech. Even today, after his death, members who never even knew him, who weren’t even sober while he was alive, attribute their sober success to him, because they’ve been trained to do so. I also want to note that the group still celebrates his birthday, and leaves an empty chair/space open for him in meetings and in pictures where he would be included if he were still alive. There is a memorial plaque with his picture on it in their Ohio St meeting hall. He is also known by all to have been a serial cheater, and an abuser of women. He has been with some of the women he sponsored/ in the group, and people will actually say, “He wasn’t perfect, but he helped a lot of people.” completely disregarding the slimy, predatory, uneven power dynamic behavior that was very not ok. Clancy was the very actual leader of this very actual cult.

• Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.

  • Pacific Group uses a lot of thought stopping cliches to discourage questioning. A major phrase used is, “Let go and let God.” If someone is having a hard time or wanting answers, they’re encouraged to just let it go, aka stop thinking about it and stop talking about it. Another phrase used to discourage questioning, and dish out shame, when someone is noting the abusive behavior of another member, especially in leadership, is, “Don’t take someone else’s inventory.” So, mind your own business and don’t focus on their behavior. The questioner/accuser is often reminded of their own bad behavior, and told to take the blame for that, and not blame another person for their wrong behavior. Dissent is shamed or shunned. Anyone who starts to veer off from the group’s teachings and starts having their own thoughts will often be shamed by their sponsor and other members until they fall back in line, or leave the group, at which point they’re labeled as, “unwilling” or a “some are sicker than others” and regarded as being unworthy of connection to the group and members anymore. The shunning is usually disguised as self-protection by current members. They often use the analogy of it being easier to pull someone down off a table than it is to pull someone up- the current members being the one’s above, on the table, and they’re encouraged to let the ex members go, so they don’t get dragged down themselves. Odd, when AA is supposed to be about helping each other. That behavior is definitely not helpful.

• Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, or debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s).

  • In AA in general it is common to chant specific phrases during a meeting, thats true in PG as well. What’s specific to PG is that the purposely don’t chant certain things that other regular AA meetings do, and members who try to, are ‘Shhh’d” by the majority. Setting the group apart from other groups. They also are known to say the Lord’s Prayer at the end of every meeting, as opposed to the Serenity Prayer that most other AA groups use, and the Lord’s Prayer even has Pacific Group specific intonations in its reciting. But what I want to note here is the debilitating work routines used to suppress doubts. Members, especially newcomers, are required to attend a meeting every night of the week for at least their first year, as well as have a commitment (unpaid job at the meeting) at each one. They are also often required to attend The Yard every Saturday morning from 9a-12p, any watches that may be happening that week (Which happen after the meeting, and go from 9:30p-12a), any off-shoot supporting group like Finance Class, or PG play rehearsal, which take up multiple hours on a weekend day, as well as attend meetings. So a week might look like, Sunday: Finance class 8-9:30a. Play rehearsal, 12-4p. Meeting 5:30-9p (commitment included), watch 9:30-12a. Monday, work 9-5p, meeting 6-9p, home. Tuesday, work 9-5p, meeting 6-9p Watch 9:30p-12a, home. Wednesday Work… etc etc. They keep you excessively busy, with only group activities, to keep you looped in and keep you from having enough space to think for yourself or think about what you’re doing. You’re completely immersed in the group, so that it’s all you know, and so it’s all you think about. People are constantly sleep deprived and overworked, and that’s a known tactic used by cults to keep people in a state of being too exhausted to question, or think critically.

• The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (e.g., members must get permission to date, change jobs, or marry—or leaders prescribe what to wear, where to live, whether to have children, how to discipline children, and so forth).

  • This is true for Clancy and his leadership. But in PG, the sponsors themselves are the leaders on their sponsees. That is what I think makes PG a little different from a typical cultic group- the variety of leadership via the many sponsors, but they are all trained to sponsor very similarly. The sponsor decides everything for the sponsee. Every sponsee is given a call time to check in with their sponsor each day, and depending how how extreme your sponsor is, (there were varying degrees of intensity, and my sponsor Mary was one of the most extreme,) you’re constantly checking in throughout the day and asking permission and direction for what to do with your life. Jobs, relationships, moving, commitments, etc. are all decided for the sponsee by the sponsor, and there is no personal decision making involved. The common thought shared is “My thinking is what got me here, I’m going to let someone else make the decisions for me.” So each person is unable to make decisions for themselves because doing so got them in AA in the first place, and giving up the decision making to someone else is what’s going to save them. The sponsee is also required to be 100% honest with the sponsor and is punished if they are not. Members are often encouraged to live with other members, and be friends with other members. And even if it isn’t explicitly suggested, it’s what automatically happens because they’re spending all of their time together.

• The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s), and its members (e.g., the leader is considered the Messiah, a special being, an avatar—or the group and/or the leader is on a special mission to save humanity).

  • PG’s reputation is that it prides itself in being “The last house on the block” for alcoholics. Meaning, the alcoholics who just can’t seem to get sober, come there. I already mentioned Clancy’s exalted status. Members also attend other meetings, decked in the PG traditional suits and dresses, to speak, which is a telling sign of membership for outsiders. And if a PG member is attending an “outside meeting” regularly, and they become the secretary (person who runs that meeting for a time) of that meeting, they implement PG policies for the group. I.e. speakers are asked to wear a suit or dress while speaking, no cussing while speaking, members must shake hands upon entering the meeting, specific commitments that only PG meetings have are introduced to the meeting, etc. Members believe that they’re doing the meeting a great service by changing it to be more like PG, disregarding the fact that each meeting is meant to be autonomous and different from one another, according to AA tradition. I want to also note, the fact that any meeting that isn’t a PG meeting is referred to in the group as an “outside meeting” is also such a wild thing, and very telling of their “elitist” and “us-versus-them” mentality.

• The group has a polarized, us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.

  • As just mentioned, they believe there is PG and then there are outside meetings. They have a reputation in the AA world as being extreme and everyone in AA that knows about them, has an opinion about them. Many note that they’re culty/ extreme/ too much, etc. And PG members know it, and love it. They use this, often, within the group as well, as a way to keep members in— they imply that the outsiders are jealous, or less devoted, etc. Making the outsiders seem bad, and deterring the current members from trusting them, or wanting to be a part of them.

• The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders, or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).

  • In AA, there is no governing body that regulates meetings, and members. It is the thing that for years I would have said was the best thing about AA- that it’s self governing and has no leadership. But it’s actually one of the worst, because in moments of abuse, there are no authorities to report it to. There are sponsors/ group leadership, but when you’re in an isolated system like PG, those sponsors are often a part of the system of abuse themselves, and any outside opinons aren’t believed because it’s ingrained in members to believe that an outsider just isn’t as committed to sobriety, and being willing to listen to such advice would likely be a sign that one is “on their way out”—such a clever way to get members to shun outside opinions by making them believe they’re unwell if those opinions make sense. Also noteworthy is that Clancy didn’t have his own sponsor, and while many PG leaders have sponsors, they are typically other leaders within the group, so there is not system of checks and balances. It’s an insular community with no one to answer to but itself.

• The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary. This may result in members participating in behaviors or activities they would have considered reprehensible or unethical before joining the group (e.g., lying to family or friends, or collecting money for bogus charities).

  • PG is known for its “tough love sponsorship.” A common phrase is, “I care more about your life than I do your feelings.” And the realistic translation of that was, “I don’t care if you feel psychologically distressed, if you have to rely on people for rides because I wont let you get a car, and your home life is suffering because I am making you go to meetings and events every night of the week— you’re still alive and sober, right? So stop complaining and thank me.” The means by which sponsors “help” their sponsees to stay sober are often harmful to them and their families, but the ends justify it all. Something I’ve heard people say to justify the abuse, is, “They are just sponsoring how they were sponsored…” but that’s no excuse for allowing it to continue. It’s very similar to generational abuse and trauma. It gets passed down until someone decides to change things.

• The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt in order to influence and control members. Often this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.

  • I’ve mentioned previously the same and guilt put on those asking questions. It’s also used to manipulate members into being obedient, and falling in line. The entire system is created so that your only support system is them, and so when you have fears or questions, the only place to turn is to other members, and if you’ve got a extreme sponsor like I did, to your sponsor alone. An example of this is that I once txt Mary asking her something about having to go to so many meetings every week, and made sure to tell her I wasn’t being snarky, I was just wondering. Her response was berating and shaming, where she said, “I directed you to go to two meetings a day when you’re not working, so you’ll do that. If you miss the book study, you would need to make that up. Is that clear, or are you still wondering?” It continued on… and I’ll post a picture of the txt at the end of this, but it was deeply shaming and deeply guilting. When I received the txt, I spoke with my sobriety sisters about it (the only group of people I was allowed to discuss my issues with, because they would tell Mary, and she could control them) and they encouraged me to do as she asked, and told me I was being dramatic for feeling hurt by it. This happened a million different times in a million different ways, and is experienced by most members within the group.

• Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.

  • Another common phrase used by the group is, “Build your life around your meetings, not the other way around.” Members are encouraged to build their entire lives around the group, and to cut ties with any relationships, jobs, commitments that get in the way of their group involvement. I can’t tell you the number of people I know who were told to quit a job, or end a relationship, stop speaking to a family members, or move homes, just to align with the group’s/ sponsor’s goals.

• The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.

  • While I wouldn’t say the group is preoccupied with the task of bringing in new members, they certainly put an excessive amount of focus on the “newcomer” and keeping them once they show up. Since AA is so popular, and many join on their own without promotions being made, the goal of the group is to get the newcomer to stay. Most members are looking for their own sponsees, and so when a new person comes in, they are lovebombed by potential sponsors, in hopes that the person will ask to be sponsored by them. Once the newcomer chooses a sponsor (and sometimes a sponsor even assigns themselves to the newcomer, giving them no choice in the matter) all other potential sponsors then back off and pay little attention to the newcomer, because they are on the look out, and focused on finding their own sponsees.

• The group is preoccupied with making money.

  • This is maybe the one thing on the list of what qualifies a group as a cult, that I have had a hard time seeing the ways that PG might fit it. AA in general is a self-supporting organization. Meaning, the members donate a couple of dollars each meeting, to keep the meeting going. The money goes towards rent, coffee, snacks, and often each group has a “prudent reserve” for emergencies. Pacific Group is the same. I would say, though, that the groups membership is large and they are bringing in large amounts of money every week as a result. I also want to note that I don’t believe the group is solely motivated by money. I think its motivation is more power-focused.

• Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.

  • I covered this one in the example of debilitating work routines used to suppress doubts about group’s leadership, as well as other points. The group really is its own little society, that provides enough made up purpose for its members to devote all of their time, outside of their jobs, to the group and its mission. Their lives are often stunted outside of the group, as a result of it. It’s frequently a discussion sponsees have with sponsors begging for permission to miss a meeting just to take a day to do laundry and clean their apartments, which they are shamed for asking for and have to figure out a way to fit it in super early in the morning or super late at night, or as would frequently happen, just not get around to it.

• Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.

  • Again, I covered this. When I moved to LA, I lived with other PG group members only for years, until I got my own place, after switching sponsors, who was not in the group. Most members, if they do not live alone or with a spouse, live with other group members. And as is natural when you spend all of your time doing group activities, you are only socializing with other members.

• The most loyal members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave—or even consider leaving—the group.

  • The most telling sign of this, is that when a member leaves, everyone still in the group assumes they have relapsed, and if the ex-member hasn’t been shunned, the group will treat the ex-member condescendingly, as if they are now on a lower path, about to drink. I know from my own experience that I never dreamed of leaving the group for years because I was so convinced that I was going to drink and die. It was constantly repeated to me that if I didn’t do all I was told to do, I would. So many other members believe it is a life or death thing. And while I do agree— many people need to get sober because their life is on a track towards death, especially with the fentanyl epidemic being what it is today. So, in essence, it really IS life or death. But the way the truth is used against members to keep them specifically within the group, is, in my opinion, lacking in integrity. When a member does end up going out and dying, it reinforces that fearful belief. But the truth they don’t share is that there are many paths to recovery, and there is not one path that works for everyone.

Pacific Group is a cultic group of Alcoholics Anonymous. Now, I am not saying it hasn’t helped many people to get and to stay sober. The reason people often join groups is because they work, and because they are doing some good. That isn’t what characterizes the group as cultic or not cultic. But an interesting thing about cults is that there are often certain members who experience the worst of it, and certain members who don’t. Leaders are really clever at picking and choosing those people, in order to give the impression that it is doing what it promises, and so that when those who experience the worst try to call it out, the others can point to the members who it is working for as proof against it. Not everyone in a cult is treated equally. It is so complicated, and I want to reiterate, I am NOT an expert, and I do not claim to know everything. This post is, I am sure, lacking, but these are the things I have noticed about the Pacific Group, that qualifies them as a cultic group. I believe it is enough to make the point, but I am sure any cult experts reading this will be able to make points I have missed, and I welcome them to do so.

I also want to say, to anyone making the argument that my sharing this is going to “kill somebody who could have been helped by PG,” that your logic is flawed there. You’re assuming that I, and everyone, believe that PG is the only group that can help someone struggling with alcohol and drug addiction. The facts show that there are many other resources someone could utilize for their recovery, and I don’t believe my warning others of the harmful and often traumatizing nature of the Pacific Group is going to kill a single person.

My only goal is to raise awareness of the issues that make Pacific Group a cultic group, and that go undetected simply because there isn’t a regulating system to keep them in check.