Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 9, No. 1, 1992, Page 13
functioning of the group. Invariably, her summation and analysis of a problem or a person’s
behavior were always at a much more sophisticated political level than any of the others could
have come up with. Time and again her view was accepted, with a mixture of awe, shame,
and guilt.
When she was in town the group had to meet more often and for longer periods of time than
when she was away. Eighteen-hour meetings were not uncommon. Since she always found
something wrong, she insisted on lengthy discussions and much criticism to set the group
back on the right path again. Over and over, in a merciless and humiliating manner, Baxter
pointed out the others’ political naiveté and lack of seriousness. She also criticized their
“closed circle” mentality and inability to recruit.
Although Baxter’s returns always brought major upheaval, the other women, eager not to
lose what they had begun, were willing to go along with this. They accepted it as a necessary
part of the process. More importantly, they felt that Baxter was articulating in a very powerful
way many of the things they each had felt: the sudden realization of the significance of
Marxism-Leninism, the irreconcilable inadequacies of the existing pre-party formations, and
certainly the centrality of women’s oppression. Suddenly there were the words and, for the
most part, they latched onto them with a fervor. Doreen Baxter was charismatic, with stature
and university training she was intelligent, impressive, and serious. And she was calling on
them to live out their own political beliefs with the same commitment and seriousness that
she herself avowed. It became apparent now to the women in this original group that they
were destined to be professional revolutionaries.
The Importance of the Second-in-Command
Shortly after Baxter’s permanent relocation to San Francisco in the summer of 1975, she was
set up in a small house. The others moved her in. They painted and got the house ready,
making it a comfortable space for her. She did not get a job instead she set to work at
building their newly formed organization: she wrote, studied, led criticisms, and conducted
political education. When the others came to visit her, they were ordered around, told to clean
up, empty her ashtrays, open her sodas. Often it was obvious that she had been lying around
in bed for days reading spy novels. Through long babbling conversations, she would convince
her visitor that she “learned about the enemy by reading spy novels.” In describing this
period, one founder said, “I thought all this was pretty bizarre, but I went along with it. I
knew if I said something she’d go crazy. I didn’t want her screaming at me.”5 Initially Baxter’s
financial support came from some of her own savings, but very quickly it came primarily from
members’ monthly dues --the beginning of the thread of growing financial corruption.
During this first summer, several of the founders had at least one uncomfortable encounter
with Baxter, who obviously was not as reformed in her alcoholism as she had attested to
Miriam one year before. These experiences were recounted in this way:
Lizzie: Once Cindy and I were at Baxter’s little house. She got wildly drunk and came
on to us. We were completely freaked out. Afterwards we called Sandra and she was
very unsympathetic to us. She said it was just a drunk talking and we should have
taken control of the situation. She called us liberals and blamed it on us.
Miriam: I knew she had a long history of alcoholism, but she had convinced me she
was squeaky clean when she came back. Then once at her house, she got very
drunk. I went along with it like I did in college, as a codependent. When I mentioned
it to Sandra, I got severely criticized. She said I should just let her pour the booze
down, let her do what she wants. She said I was just being liberal. I then shut it out
of my mind and lived in a fantasy. I never saw her drunk again after that. You have
to understand, I held her as a god. I was terrified because she had an evil side to her,
but there was also a level of brilliance that kept me from questioning these things.
functioning of the group. Invariably, her summation and analysis of a problem or a person’s
behavior were always at a much more sophisticated political level than any of the others could
have come up with. Time and again her view was accepted, with a mixture of awe, shame,
and guilt.
When she was in town the group had to meet more often and for longer periods of time than
when she was away. Eighteen-hour meetings were not uncommon. Since she always found
something wrong, she insisted on lengthy discussions and much criticism to set the group
back on the right path again. Over and over, in a merciless and humiliating manner, Baxter
pointed out the others’ political naiveté and lack of seriousness. She also criticized their
“closed circle” mentality and inability to recruit.
Although Baxter’s returns always brought major upheaval, the other women, eager not to
lose what they had begun, were willing to go along with this. They accepted it as a necessary
part of the process. More importantly, they felt that Baxter was articulating in a very powerful
way many of the things they each had felt: the sudden realization of the significance of
Marxism-Leninism, the irreconcilable inadequacies of the existing pre-party formations, and
certainly the centrality of women’s oppression. Suddenly there were the words and, for the
most part, they latched onto them with a fervor. Doreen Baxter was charismatic, with stature
and university training she was intelligent, impressive, and serious. And she was calling on
them to live out their own political beliefs with the same commitment and seriousness that
she herself avowed. It became apparent now to the women in this original group that they
were destined to be professional revolutionaries.
The Importance of the Second-in-Command
Shortly after Baxter’s permanent relocation to San Francisco in the summer of 1975, she was
set up in a small house. The others moved her in. They painted and got the house ready,
making it a comfortable space for her. She did not get a job instead she set to work at
building their newly formed organization: she wrote, studied, led criticisms, and conducted
political education. When the others came to visit her, they were ordered around, told to clean
up, empty her ashtrays, open her sodas. Often it was obvious that she had been lying around
in bed for days reading spy novels. Through long babbling conversations, she would convince
her visitor that she “learned about the enemy by reading spy novels.” In describing this
period, one founder said, “I thought all this was pretty bizarre, but I went along with it. I
knew if I said something she’d go crazy. I didn’t want her screaming at me.”5 Initially Baxter’s
financial support came from some of her own savings, but very quickly it came primarily from
members’ monthly dues --the beginning of the thread of growing financial corruption.
During this first summer, several of the founders had at least one uncomfortable encounter
with Baxter, who obviously was not as reformed in her alcoholism as she had attested to
Miriam one year before. These experiences were recounted in this way:
Lizzie: Once Cindy and I were at Baxter’s little house. She got wildly drunk and came
on to us. We were completely freaked out. Afterwards we called Sandra and she was
very unsympathetic to us. She said it was just a drunk talking and we should have
taken control of the situation. She called us liberals and blamed it on us.
Miriam: I knew she had a long history of alcoholism, but she had convinced me she
was squeaky clean when she came back. Then once at her house, she got very
drunk. I went along with it like I did in college, as a codependent. When I mentioned
it to Sandra, I got severely criticized. She said I should just let her pour the booze
down, let her do what she wants. She said I was just being liberal. I then shut it out
of my mind and lived in a fantasy. I never saw her drunk again after that. You have
to understand, I held her as a god. I was terrified because she had an evil side to her,
but there was also a level of brilliance that kept me from questioning these things.
