Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 9, No. 1, 1992, Page 25
--to generate mistrust about a particular member when neces-sary (for example,
implying that someone was an agent and calling on members to be cautious and even
shun) and
--to create feelings of defensiveness, paranoia, and isolation, which eventually
separated members from social, political, and family networks outside the
organization.
For the individual member, living under these very stringent security policies added to the
growing sense of alienation from society and thus increased dependence on the organization.
For the leadership, the result was an enhanced ability to control the members.
During the recruitment process, these security rules were used to discourage the recruit from
asking too many questions. Also it allowed the recruiters to remain vague in what answers
they did give. Details about size of member-ship, racial or sexual composition, geographic
location, who else were members, or exactly what kind of work a new member might be
doing were not to be discussed. It was explained that this type of information was
confidential, that it was exactly the kind of “hard” information the State would love to get its
hands on. It was not long before a new recruit learned that leaks of hard information led to
things like the planned police disruption and eventual destruction of the Black Panthers and
other revolutionary groups.
The outcome of such security lessons was that a recruit was in fact told very little and was
urged to act on faith. At the same time, certain deceptions were used to entice someone to
join. Most of the recruits coming out of Women and the State, for example, were told that
they were joining a national organization with “cells” around the country and in Canada, and
that it was solely a women’s organization. In reality, at the time, the group was barely larger
than the original 13 founders, it existed only in San Francisco, and it included both women
and men. Similarly, African-American and Hispanic recruits were commonly led to believe that
the WDU had a large and growing multinational membership, when, in fact, it did not. In the
end, recruiters said whatever would work.
Acceptance In
If it wasn’t obvious already to the recruit, the concern for security that was emphasized
during the final intake interviews brought to the fore the realization that he or she was about
to join a secret, clandestine formation. A jumble of emotions --fear, anticipation, confusion,
excitement, relief --overwhelmed the new recruit upon being told that he or she had been
accepted.
From that moment on, life took on new meaning, as well as a new reality. A rush of
instructions, a wealth of study materials, a list of security guidelines, a seemingly endless
series of meetings, all wrapped up in new responsibilities and new obligations --new things to
remember and old things to forget. Life became long hours of work, criticism, and study
sessions with new comrades recruits experienced a shared sense of commitment and a
growing feeling of solidarity and togetherness. Within a matter of weeks, a new member’s
entire world revolved around the internal life of the organization. It happened almost
imperceptibly. Being asked to do more was a sign of greater acceptance and trust on the part
of the leader-ship agreeing to do more was a show of willingness to make the commitment
on the part of the new member. Any resistance was met with criticism, signaling a weak link.
Soon all personal activities fell by the wayside --softball on Saturday afternoons, women’s
karate lessons, evening classes, weekend trips with friends, shooting pool in a bar at night,
even visits with family or friends.
In a letter written after the WDU’s dissolution, I tried to explain to former friends how it
happened in my case:
--to generate mistrust about a particular member when neces-sary (for example,
implying that someone was an agent and calling on members to be cautious and even
shun) and
--to create feelings of defensiveness, paranoia, and isolation, which eventually
separated members from social, political, and family networks outside the
organization.
For the individual member, living under these very stringent security policies added to the
growing sense of alienation from society and thus increased dependence on the organization.
For the leadership, the result was an enhanced ability to control the members.
During the recruitment process, these security rules were used to discourage the recruit from
asking too many questions. Also it allowed the recruiters to remain vague in what answers
they did give. Details about size of member-ship, racial or sexual composition, geographic
location, who else were members, or exactly what kind of work a new member might be
doing were not to be discussed. It was explained that this type of information was
confidential, that it was exactly the kind of “hard” information the State would love to get its
hands on. It was not long before a new recruit learned that leaks of hard information led to
things like the planned police disruption and eventual destruction of the Black Panthers and
other revolutionary groups.
The outcome of such security lessons was that a recruit was in fact told very little and was
urged to act on faith. At the same time, certain deceptions were used to entice someone to
join. Most of the recruits coming out of Women and the State, for example, were told that
they were joining a national organization with “cells” around the country and in Canada, and
that it was solely a women’s organization. In reality, at the time, the group was barely larger
than the original 13 founders, it existed only in San Francisco, and it included both women
and men. Similarly, African-American and Hispanic recruits were commonly led to believe that
the WDU had a large and growing multinational membership, when, in fact, it did not. In the
end, recruiters said whatever would work.
Acceptance In
If it wasn’t obvious already to the recruit, the concern for security that was emphasized
during the final intake interviews brought to the fore the realization that he or she was about
to join a secret, clandestine formation. A jumble of emotions --fear, anticipation, confusion,
excitement, relief --overwhelmed the new recruit upon being told that he or she had been
accepted.
From that moment on, life took on new meaning, as well as a new reality. A rush of
instructions, a wealth of study materials, a list of security guidelines, a seemingly endless
series of meetings, all wrapped up in new responsibilities and new obligations --new things to
remember and old things to forget. Life became long hours of work, criticism, and study
sessions with new comrades recruits experienced a shared sense of commitment and a
growing feeling of solidarity and togetherness. Within a matter of weeks, a new member’s
entire world revolved around the internal life of the organization. It happened almost
imperceptibly. Being asked to do more was a sign of greater acceptance and trust on the part
of the leader-ship agreeing to do more was a show of willingness to make the commitment
on the part of the new member. Any resistance was met with criticism, signaling a weak link.
Soon all personal activities fell by the wayside --softball on Saturday afternoons, women’s
karate lessons, evening classes, weekend trips with friends, shooting pool in a bar at night,
even visits with family or friends.
In a letter written after the WDU’s dissolution, I tried to explain to former friends how it
happened in my case:
