Continuing the Discussion of Gino Perente and NATLFED

thanks Mitch for posting this.
It's about time those of us who were at one time or another involved with NATLFED and it's myriad affiliates started to cut through some of the really preposterous "cult" hysteria that has been circulating on the net whenever Gino or NATLFED is mentioned. I worked with the group for a few years a logn time ago. It was hard, intense, totally demanding work. I'm proud to have been part of it. And maybe someday I'll look them up and do it again. If ever there was a time when a NATLFED was needed in the USA, this is it.

In an effort to get through all the myths out there about NATLFED and its entities, I encourage people who truely know about this crypitc topic to contribute to the wikipedia article about the group. It can be found at:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Labor_Federation

With your help, the truth about NATLFED will eventually surface in the clouds of misinformation. Thanks.

please contribute to an article on wikipedia about the truth of NATLFED. The article can be found at:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATLFED

Thanks.

I'd like to thank Mitchel Cohen for his fine, humorous, and nuanced reflections on NATLFED. I had (and still have) very mixed feelings about the organization, I abhor labels like 'cult', and yet I'm very glad I resisted the intense pressure to stay longer in their NY hq. for extended training in 'systemic organizing.'(this was when the 'FC' was still alive.)
In the local entity I worked in at the time there were some very decent, 'together' people; these women were natural organizers who could out-talk, out-think, and out-work anybody in your run-of-the-mill lefty organizations. That's what made it so damn painful for me to quit! The problem was that manipulative and heavy-handed persons & structures in the NY hq undermined and underappreciated these local organizers -- stupidly failing to notice what fine personal advertisements they were for NATLFED.
What it comes down to, basically, is that groups like NATLFED will continue to draw some good talented activists until the so-called Left in this country offers something else besides precious self-congratulatory chit-chat groups (preachers to the choir)and mindless direct-actionism.

I appreciate this recollection; it's interesting, and recognizing the source of NATLFED's draw is important.

But Mitchel Cohen's newest recollection of things NATLFED in this piece is from 1975. NATLFED continues to work, and many people--many of them young and recruited on college campuses--have reported very bad experiences with the group in recent years. One can not disregard their experiences. Mitchel, what have you heard from NATLFED in recent years? What do you think of their contribution to the movement? And most importantly (and getting back to the start of this discussion), what would you say to the young people they are trying to recruit now? This, I think, is the key question here. And personally, I would urge those young people to avoid NATLFED.

I want to thank Mitch for his comments. Chip Berlet like most middle class academics needs to learn to stop speaking from a position of ignorance so as to make room for those who actually know something. I was a natlfed Cadre for 7 years, most of that time something of a desident within the organization while at the same time recognized as an experienced and politcally advance cadre. I first heard of Chip Berlett around the time Jeff Witnacks article first came out in 84, by that time I had objected to; Gino becoming Field command, because it alienated cadre from thier individual responcibility and need to advance the revolutionary struggle, objected to NOC expansion to the point where 40% or more of party cadre where assigned full time to NOC away from valid practical work within the party. I also objected to the several occassions in which local entities offensives had been directly sabotaged by NOC on the basis of preventing unparrellel developement.

If you have a friend involved in natlfed field work you will never be able to discourage them by telling them that it is a cult and that what they are doing is not of value because it is simplistic and not exactly true. If you have 2 years or more experience organizing in the field with natlefed your are probibly one of the best trained labor organizers in the country and you should not let the brainless prattle of self absorbed idiots get in the way of doing the work you are capable of doing. When I saw chip Berlet on the stage with ward churchill at NCOR 2 or 3 years ago, ward lost a significant degree of credibility with me. The tecniques of natlfed with community oriented labor organizing works, and saying it doesn't and the group is just a cult totally discredits you.
But Natlfeds strong point, being the advance level of theory that comes with practical work is lost on the national level, it is likely the most top heavy organization on the face of the earth. In 81 I think NOC's physical plant, it's space doubled in size after the purchase of the building on carroll street, and national began bringing fledgling cadre stright into NOC without allowing them to develope practical skills, theory and the confidence that comes with experience to challenge Gino authority. These undeveloped children pride themselves on possessing a big picture when in reality they don't know squat and spend thier entire day like modern day monks reproducing orders they are briefed on. I personally saw occassions where three to four Noc cadre worked all day on directives to go out to an field entity that had two or three cadre to implemented them. They where from my observation just like Chip Berlet, academic oreinted middle class kids easily convinced they knew better than lower class people more family with direct class struggle.
If you are involved in natlfed then ask yourself what effective political movement has ever been that damn top heavy? thier field method works fine, if you want to learn how to canvass, fund raise etc then go ahead and become a Viable Volunteer for awhile and learn some practical skill, but leave before they suck you in, preferably with a copy of the EO slipped into you backpack. But Don't expect to ever implement anything all to far within thier structure, I guaranttee they will sabotage your work.
If any former cadre needs emotional support transitioning into REAL political work I am willing to lend an ear an an encouraging word or two. I have successfully transfered some organizational method into an anarchist framework, replicating the special event protocal to direct actions aganist globalizations. I am also interested to know if anyone else has done this.

Will C you
Gnomon

these two men were my best friends before they were involved with gino and the others.after donating what ever they owned ot the eastern farmworkers,they dropped out of their normal lives ,left their friends
and became more deeply involved in that small circle. never to be seen again Cult?or not....
that is what really happened.i havent thought about it for 20 years
untill i just read this.

I have spent some time providing insight of what I know about the begingings of Natlfed and some of the interrior operations. While I would not recommend becoming involved in natlfed today I think marginalizing any groups as a cult is unhealthy.

 http://tdsse.motime.com/

If you are a current or former member of Natlfed, or have a friend or relative involved in Natlfed, I would recommend reading the material on the above mentioned website. Although I do not know who Elizabeth Parenti-Soba is, whether she is actually related to Gino, or what her motives are in posting it, the words could have come straight out of Gino's mouth. Then I would recommend you reading "Thought reform and the psychology of totalism: A study of brainwashing in China" by Robert Jay Lifton.
I'm not sure how much of my analysis of this material come from Ms. Parenti-Soba's material and how much comes from the memory of Gino's classes either heard at NOC or read from transcripts late at night in upstate NY. It seems to me that Gino looked at why the current structure was still in power and, in part, saw that many institutions, our language and the way we are brought up predisposed us to accept this. He then decided to do much as the Chinese did and change people's perspectives (or para dyne as he put it, although I can't find a formal definition of that word) through thought reform. It worked about as well as it did in China and has caused a lot of damage to many people.
To Gino, perception was everything. It didn't matter if it was true. It didn't matter if you actually built mutual benefits associations as long as people thought you did. It didn't matter if he wasn't the fighter of communist haters, farm worker organizer, Guatemalan freedom fighter, etc., as long as others believed he was. Ms. Parenti-Soba speaks of folklore, working people's folklore and how that was the Genesis. The Genesis was not presented in this context, it was presented to impress the new recruits with Gino's history in the struggle and the organization's pedigree - even if neither had either. Folklore is one of the elements of thought reform and in that context, yes, that is what Gino was doing.
Much of the first 3 or 4 years of my time with Natlfed are difficult to remember, they are very fuzzy. But, I remember enough now to know that I was systematically exposed to thought reform in an effort to form the "new man", those who would lead the revolution. If your friend or relative is deep into Natlfed, was there before Gino died, or the current leadership is still practicing this manipulation of the mind, they probably do not consciously know it.
I want to post a couple of closing thoughts. The myth of the Suffolk Eastern Farm Workers Association drive is made up of some fact and a lot of exaggeration. When I first worked in Suffolk, I was the Riverhead membership coordinator. The story then was that the first summer of EFWA's drive signed 1000 members. The membership authorizations would support that number. As I participated over the years, I saw that claim go to 2000, then 5000, then 10,000 and before I left finally 50,000. This gave credibility to the leadership at NOC. It did not matter whether it was true, it only mattered that people believed it to be true. Any real work that actually would make change didn't matter, that could be made up.
In working with EFWA's upstate membership I feel confident in saying they did not want to be just a part of, or a number in the "people" or the "masses". They wanted to be seen as the individual they were and valued as that individual. I think an overwhelming majority would strenuously object to the practices ostensibly done for their benefit.

I want to extend a sincere apology to Elizabeth Parenti-Soba for my initial reaction to her site. Her unique perspective and work deserves serious attention from anyone in labor or who considers themselves a friend of labor.

Wow, just found this site.

My article on the Natlfed Cult can be accessed at

 http://www.rickross.com/reference/natlfed/natlfed1.html or on the Public Eye's site at

 http://www.publiceye.org/magazine/v04n3-4/Cadre_or_Cult_1.html

For some reason all onliine versions of my article have left out the Prologue....

The very end of the printed article ended with..

In a kitchen in Marysville (1), a few miles from the hole dug on the Feather River island ten years earlier, I sti talking with Gerald Doeden's old drinking buddy and former best friend (2).
"What was Doeden really like?", I asked him.
"Gerry could sell a refrigerator to an Eskimo, and then charge him 30% extra for being so far north," replied the friend. "There's one word, a code that we had between us," he continued.

"If you ever used it, Gerry would know you've talked to me,"
"What's that?", I asked.
"Ducdame"--it's from a scene in the Shakespeare play "As You Like It'

If it do come to pass
That any man turn ass
Leaving his wealth and ease
A stubborn will to please
Ducdame, ducdame, ducdame
Here shall he see
Gross fools as he
An if he will come to me
Ami--What's that Ducdame?
Jaq--Tis a Greek invocation to call fools into a circle

1) Marysville, California. The northern California town where Gerald Doeden grew up
2) Alan Thoma. Best friend of Gerald's. He confided to me that he was an FBI agent during the LARGO days, the time before Gino for the East coast.


Natfled was/is a cult. That in no way dismisses it's appeal.

When Gino Perente/Gerald Doeden first went to the East Coast in the early 70's the EFWA/NLF didn't instantly become a cult. Had my exposure/involvement with Natfed been confined to the very early 1970's with the EFWA I might also not consider it a cult. I have interviewed many people whom were both around Gino before he left for the East Coast (he left to avoid child support payments in California) and in the "formative years". While often a disturbing picture of Gino/Gerald emerges, it clearly hadn't become a cult until later.

I also don't subscribe to the concept that Gino and Lyndon Larouche worked together. What I DO think happened is that Gino got enough exposure to NCLC to copy and instill some of it's cultish features into his own cult. Just as he did with Synanon. His group was repulsed by Venceremos, but again exposure allowed him to copy some of the style, as with the UFW.

Natlfed is a cult because it is inherently dishonest with it's own members. It has a whole "Genesis" which is based on a most far fletched patch of lies. But it doesn't tell the potential recruits to the inner "Formation" any of it at the outset. No, it waits until they've already committed to a schedule characteristic of other cults, then lays on the lies/implied threats as a kind of locking mechanism. This is akin to how the Moonies let recruits to their cult know that Mr. Moon is the second coming of Jesus Christ. By this time both the Moonie and Natlfed recruits have both invested enough, have been on a schedule designed to usher them through, and the "revelation" serves as a locking mechanism or one-way valve into cult status. In a way, it's a modern form of psychological slavery.

Having said all that I realize that the lies also exist atop a fair amount of real indignation over social conditions and an awareness that it's going to take more than perhapst routine and preditable protest or organizing to turn things around. And that was one of my primary motivations when I started writing my article and trying to expose Natlfed as a cult. I didn't want the inherently well intentioned to continue to be siphoned off into a vacumm. In addition at the time I left the organization I really didn't know what I was dealing with. It was only after really researching and looking into alot that it being a lying cult was the only way any of it could start to make any sense. You think I wanted to have this take on it? I was only "interior" for about 3 months, but still it was time I was away and severed from friends and family as is the customary way for all cults.

In addition I could see that there was a lot of stored energy, of which I had no inkling how it would eventually come out. And here was a group telling all it's interior members that it was part of a Western Hemispheric movement, one tied to the Sandinistas (the popular revolution at the time) and centered in Cuba. I was genuinely concerned that the "deadline" would come due and some stupid acts would then lead to armed incursions into Cuba. Witness al Queda and the Iraqi invasion!

In addition, the chronic lying that Robin Spellman describes is something every current and former Natlfed "cadre" should be well aware of. Factions here, factions there, factions everywhere. Embellish this, embellish that, soon what is fiction and what is fact? It was a theatre of lies and deceit. But it served a purpose, to gather people in a circle around Gino. The cult leader.

Wow, just found this site.

My article on the Natlfed Cult can be accessed at

 http://www.rickross.com/reference/natlfed/natlfed1.html or on the Public Eye's site at

 http://www.publiceye.org/magazine/v04n3-4/Cadre_or_Cult_1.html

For some reason all onliine versions of my article have left out the Prologue....

The very end of the printed article ended with..

In a kitchen in Marysville (1), a few miles from the hole dug on the Feather River island ten years earlier, I sti talking with Gerald Doeden's old drinking buddy and former best friend (2).
"What was Doeden really like?", I asked him.
"Gerry could sell a refrigerator to an Eskimo, and then charge him 30% extra for being so far north," replied the friend. "There's one word, a code that we had between us," he continued.

"If you ever used it, Gerry would know you've talked to me,"
"What's that?", I asked.
"Ducdame"--it's from a scene in the Shakespeare play "As You Like It'

If it do come to pass
That any man turn ass
Leaving his wealth and ease
A stubborn will to please
Ducdame, ducdame, ducdame
Here shall he see
Gross fools as he
An if he will come to me
Ami--What's that Ducdame?
Jaq--Tis a Greek invocation to call fools into a circle

1) Marysville, California. The northern California town where Gerald Doeden grew up
2) Alan Thoma. Best friend of Gerald's. He confided to me that he was an FBI agent during the LARGO days, the time before Gino for the East coast.


Natfled was/is a cult. That in no way dismisses it's appeal.

When Gino Perente/Gerald Doeden first went to the East Coast in the early 70's the EFWA/NLF didn't instantly become a cult. Had my exposure/involvement with Natfed been confined to the very early 1970's with the EFWA I might also not consider it a cult. I have interviewed many people whom were both around Gino before he left for the East Coast (he left to avoid child support payments in California) and in the "formative years". While often a disturbing picture of Gino/Gerald emerges, it clearly hadn't become a cult until later.

I also don't subscribe to the concept that Gino and Lyndon Larouche worked together. What I DO think happened is that Gino got enough exposure to NCLC to copy and instill some of it's cultish features into his own cult. Just as he did with Synanon. His group was repulsed by Venceremos, but again exposure allowed him to copy some of the style, as with the UFW.

Natlfed is a cult because it is inherently dishonest with it's own members. It has a whole "Genesis" which is based on a most far fletched patch of lies. But it doesn't tell the potential recruits to the inner "Formation" any of it at the outset. No, it waits until they've already committed to a schedule characteristic of other cults, then lays on the lies/implied threats as a kind of locking mechanism. This is akin to how the Moonies let recruits to their cult know that Mr. Moon is the second coming of Jesus Christ. By this time both the Moonie and Natlfed recruits have both invested enough, have been on a schedule designed to usher them through, and the "revelation" serves as a locking mechanism or one-way valve into cult status. In a way, it's a modern form of psychological slavery.

Having said all that I realize that the lies also exist atop a fair amount of real indignation over social conditions and an awareness that it's going to take more than perhapst routine and preditable protest or organizing to turn things around. And that was one of my primary motivations when I started writing my article and trying to expose Natlfed as a cult. I didn't want the inherently well intentioned to continue to be siphoned off into a vacumm. In addition at the time I left the organization I really didn't know what I was dealing with. It was only after really researching and looking into alot that it being a lying cult was the only way any of it could start to make any sense. You think I wanted to have this take on it? I was only "interior" for about 3 months, but still it was time I was away and severed from friends and family as is the customary way for all cults.

In addition I could see that there was a lot of stored energy, of which I had no inkling how it would eventually come out. And here was a group telling all it's interior members that it was part of a Western Hemispheric movement, one tied to the Sandinistas (the popular revolution at the time) and centered in Cuba. I was genuinely concerned that the "deadline" would come due and some stupid acts would then lead to armed incursions into Cuba. Witness al Queda and the Iraqi invasion!

In addition, the chronic lying that Robin Spellman describes is something every current and former Natlfed "cadre" should be well aware of. Factions here, factions there, factions everywhere. Embellish this, embellish that, soon what is fiction and what is fact? It was a theatre of lies and deceit. But it served a purpose, to gather people in a circle around Gino. The cult leader.

Obviously I disagree with your take on Natlfed, though I doubt that it was a cult in the early 70's. Still even then you admit there was a lot to hate, showing up at the funeral to make sure Gino was dead.

As I investigated this cult one angle or theme on it became following Gino's path to being a cult leader... .

Talented Shakespearean actor and local con-artist/buffoon, disc jockey, alcoholic, drug addict... ..

Becomes involved with AA, then (per ex-wife's and others) almost gets arrested for drugs, but instead becomes an informant and sets up arrests.

Becomes involved/exposed to Synanon (cult tied to UFW), the United Farm Workers,

Forms several armed groups in the early 70's in northern California. He opens the Little Red Bookstore in San Francisco and tries to interface with the established militant left (Venceremos, former leader groaned when I asked him about Gino—vehemently denied he ever had anything to do with the group other than show up at open meetings and spout off). They "train" and he declares war on the state. His best friend from Marysville I interview and he admits to me that he was an FBI agent. I ask him if Gino was and he refuses to answer. It's my educated opinion that Gino did all this as a spin-off from being a narcotics informant, just adding political targets to drug ones. But once he tasted the mileu and his power to encapsulate himself with others, plus studied other groups and cults, well.. the rest is history.

The group falls apart as Gino disappears. Turns out he was in jail for not making child support payments that is why he moves to the East Coast. He shows up with a few people from the West Coast and the Eastern Farmworkers are born.

Adding to Synanon cult exposure are NCLC and Fred Newman's New Alliance Party. The salient point is that he was a quick study and he borrowed features from all he was involved or exposed to. And with quite a bit of natural ability on his own. I also suspect he was one of those people whom had a psychological need to encapsulate himself with a large group. Sort of like an ant colony where the Queen Ant is also as much of a slave as any of the worker ants.

I wanted to add some comments on the cost of the secrecy and centralism in the CPUSA-P structure. In making these comments I am aware that there are costs for being open as well. When I joined Natlfed and CPUSA-P I was 18 years old, with little political experience or training in critical analysis and thought. My volunteer experiences had been with church groups tutoring in downtown Cleveland, OH elementary schools and going on summer workcamps to fix low income housing. I had very little to base an acceptance of the Analysis of the party on and worse yet didn't know how inexperienced I was. Because everything about the party was secret and you only got opinions from other party members I accepted it. I was told that the practice was based on fact and scientific analysis. This sounded very logical to me and again I wasn't in touch with any outside sources to check it.

I haven't seen the Analysis for years and don't remember enough to comment on it specifically. But, scientists publish their analyses for good reason. They want peers to review them and criticise them to ensure their conclusions are warranted. Today, if presented with a document like that I'd be checking and thinking about several things:

1. What facts is the Analysis based on. How do I know these are facts. Where did the data come from and is it reliable.

2. Is the Analysis based on the right set of facts. Are there other facts that aren't presented that should be taken into account.

3. Is there another analysis and conclusion that could be made from the same set of facts?

Only when an analysis is subjected to these types of questions can it be accepted as scientific. Unfortunately, in a secret or clandestine organization like Natlfed no interior political thought and doctrine gets subjected to this. Those who had the political sophistication to ask questions like this of Natlfed didn't stay long if they disagreed. In fact, they probably wouldn't have even been told about the party if they disagreed with the Analysis.

A common Natlfed answer to questions of "what were we building that was better than the current government?" was - "what could be worse?", or "could anything be any worse?". Well, the answer to that is always, "Yes", it could be worse. I'm sure that the same rational could have been given the Nazi party in Germany during the depression of the 30s. The people may have asked if it could get any worse. And the answer was "yes".

Another unfortunate result of this type structure is that corruption and power-mongering at the top permeates quickly to the bottom. To be fair, the type of power mongering and manipulation that Gino practiced is present in many areas of our society. But, most areas have some kind of balancing and separation of power to ensure the organization is not corrupted as a whole. If locals have enough autonomy (the whole idea of federalism) then even with power mongering and corruption at the top, the organization may continue to reach some of it's objectives. But, if everything is so centralised that the top is micro-managing, the corruption cannot help but permeate everywhere.

Some of the Genesis, some facts in the Analysis, and some of the theory I learned in Natlfed are probably true. I don't think that Gino got everything wrong. The problem is that since quite a few things were not true and there was no sourcing of the "facts" so that they can be independently verified, it is difficult, if not impossible to say what was true and what wasn't.

I also want to clarify that when I criticise the gradual exageration of the membership numbers of the original Suffolk EFWA organizing drive from 1000 when I first heard it, to 50,000 by 1993, it is not to detract from the significance of what was done. That first summer saw EFWA participating in protests against police brutality and the building of enough strength to run a drive on the migrant camps that fall. If any point can be made, it's that you don't need an organizatinal ability to sign 50,000 members in a summer to take effective action on behalf of a membership. In fact, it's probably the actions against police brutality and then the picket line that attracted the volunteers and built EFWA's original strength.

I just wanted to add to my last comment that I mean nothing negative to those who have commented on the importance of folklore to a movement. Folklore is important and if presented in a manner such that it is understood as that can be quite helpful. But, when something is presented as a written scientific analysis or a formal document, it should bebacked up with sources and there should be some mechanism to subject it to critical review.
Just a sidenote -- A law professor I had was talking about the power of the written word and mentioned that God was referred to as "the Word" in the Bible. The immediate thought that came to mind was that at one time large parts of the Bible was passed on by word of mouth from generation to generation. I began wondering the differences in how those early generations thought from a verbal account with what those of us who have a written version think.

OK picture me as a version of that old and deceased comedian Sam Kennison ("It's a desert, nothing grows here" during one of the East African famines).

Now yelling,

"It's a cult, none of that matters!." Not any "organizing" (window dressing to "bring to formation"), not any "membership" (more window dressing), etc. Sure in the VERY EARLY years, before it became a cult, something remotely genuine might have been involved. But in a historical term this was also reduced to just retroactive window dressing for the cult.

What is the Anaysis based on? Come on! It is based on a series of lying manipulations designed to lock people into the cult. Why dance around the essence? Or is the post just to run interference?

Once you accept that Natlfed is a cult, a left wing political version of the Moonies, Scientology, NCLC, etc., then all the pieces of the puzzle fit. Then one can begin to come to terms with what it was all about.

Otherwise you're just chasing your tail in an endless circle of inane verbage!

Jeff Whitnack - I have no disagreement with you that Natlfed was (and I would suspect still is) a cult.
I hesitate to use the word only because I don't believe that most people know the scientific definitions of that word. I have done some personally painful reading on the subject and can only conclude that the scientific models fit. These include Lifton's model and a model from Steve Hassan. These models look at mind control in a spectrum and natlfed is on the severe edge that crosses the line between letting a person decide for themselves what they believe and manipulating them to a belief has been crossed. And yes, Lifton was with US military intelligence during the Korean War - but the scientific conclusions he reached are no more or less valid because of this. Elements of the mind control used in cults are used throughout our society, in the government, corporations, the left, the right, religious groups and business groups.
Gino's first person Genesis was full of lies. In later years it was used to give him and the Formation credibility through a historicality they did not have. The Analysis, from what I can remember, was not all lies. It actually had some facts within it. What I meant to communicate (perhaps I did not do it very well) was that it was not scientific, which is one of the claims that Natlfed makes. Natlfed has a series of classes, Systemic Organizing, Strata Organizing, etc.. They are not all lies either. But they are not scientific.
I appreciate your comments and only mean to add to them. But, I will point out that lying alone does not make an organization a cult. But, when you control the milieu a person is in 24/7, their schedule, the information they have available, their thoughts (think of the organization first, not yourself, "an organization is strong because it is an organization"), and their emotions (asking people to suppress emotions for the organizational good, "let the systems cut away anything that doesn't look like an organizer")then it is more probable than not that you DO have a cult.
I would not advise ANYONE to work full-time with Natlfed. However, as I am trying to sort through the experience. I do not want to write the whole thing off, but take anything that was positive away with me. I am taking a Labor Law class this semester to try and get an objective view on what the labor laws are as I do not trust what Natlfed said they were. The first 2 weeks reading was on labor history, the NLRB, and Taft-Hartley. The text confirms that at least on most of this, Natlfed was pretty accurate. What was interesting to me was that no one in the class had ever heard any of it before.
Natlfed did have some victories through the years and I don't believe it is a disservice to try and disect what of Natlfed can be positive.
I have alot of latent and until recently repressed anger against some natlfed cadre, especially against Gino. But, after getting through some of that I am trying to look at the experience objectively. Nothing and nobody is all good or all evil. I think everyone does things for a mixture of motives - some good and some bad.

seeking individuals with a sincere desire to end the war:
are you interested in learning systemic organizing yet unwilling to work with Natlfed? I am currently beginning a project consistent with the principles of systemic organizing but not inconsistent with the principles of anti-authoritarianism. The project requires 20 volunteers willing to invest 2 hours week over a six week period and is meant to lay ground work for a united front of resistance to U.S. imperialist policies supported by both the Republican and democratic parties.
If you are interested in participating with this effort please contact the project director Elizabeth Parenti Soba at  Dead_rose_rising@yahoo.com
we will maintain a policy of full disclosures provided to all participants participating with the project.

Wow in deed. I stopped into this media in order to post the announcement that will follow and found out Jeff has still not gotten a life. When your article on Natlfed first came out I was a natlfed cadre I was a national cadre involved with developing additional arena's of operations AND stood in stated disagreement with Gino on many significant points. At that time thier were a significant number of cadre who where developing or held significant critisms of Gino that they actively presented, including myself. NONE of them thought at the time that your article was helpful. To date every former party member of 4 years or more who has made any public statements on the matter has stated that your information is inaccurate, and some few of those who opposed Gino policies or where in conflict with him while they were in the party have held the position that your activity was meaningless or harmful to those oppossing him. IE you held much the same position toward Gino as the democrats hold to the republicans, you stood in the way of meaningful critisms of his policies as they stand in the way of meaningful opposition to the current administration. You contenue to present yourself as an expert based on 3 months of marginal participation, and most of your evidence is derived from individuals with as marginal a level of participation. If I researched any organization based only on the witness of individuals who had left dissatisfied after less than a year of participation and excluded the input of those who participated more than a year because they disagreed with me I would consider myself to be lying, yet you consider yourself to be an expert. I have a significant problem with this. Jefferson once said he could disagree with what someone said but would die in support of the right of someone to say it, I feel much the same of the about the harmful proliferation of the concept of cult. I would like to tell you to shut up but that would be wrong and meaningless, I will say that you lie far more than Gino ever did when you present yourself as being an expert.

Elizabeth Parenti Soba

seeking individuals with a sincere desire to end the war:
are you interested in learning systemic organizing yet unwilling to work with Natlfed? I am currently beginning a project consistent with the principles of systemic organizing but not inconsistent with the principles of anti-authoritarianism. The project requires 20 volunteers willing to invest 2 hours week over a six week period and is meant to lay ground work for a united front of resistance to U.S. imperialist policies supported by both the Republican and democratic parties.
If you are interested in participating with this effort please contact the project director Elizabeth Parenti Soba at  Dead_rose_rising@yahoo.com
we will maintain a policy of full disclosures provided to all participants participating with the project.

Jeff Witnack need not apply, we have a lot of work to do.

I was a natlfed cadre for 7 years and was in new york when the organization was raided. I do not recommend that anyone join natlfed. I feel that as long as natlfed maintains more cadre in administrative safe houses than they do on the field they violate the spirit of membership criteria that delinitates bolshivics/stalinists from menshivics/trotskites. I am am anarchist now and although I can imagine tactical situations in which I would work with a stalinist I will never work with a trot. As soon as natlfed maintains 9 cadre in the field for every 1 they have in an administrative safe house I will take them seriously as a revolutionary organization. I want to thank Sobie for alerting me to this discussion. That said regarding the Analysis;

I think on a national level the most important point of the analysis was that if a capitalist cannot expolit abroad he must exploit at home. The Analysis pointed out that due to the US defeat in vietnam and the growing resistance to US imperialism the need of capitalist to not just substain but increase the level of profits would require the restratification of the work force. Faced with limitations on the level of increasing exploitation abroad, Throughout the reagan, bush and clinton administrations the disparity between the rich and poor expanded to sickening proportions. Sounds like the analysis was based on reality to me.

Further I want to point out that as the level of oprression increase to the degree that thier was a significant movement to demand a living wage (which remains at 2-3X the minumum wage) the capitalist under bush invaded 2 countries (which futunately was all they could get away with because it was apparrent they where considering starting war with Syria, Iran and perhaps Korea as well.) This is again consistant with an understanding of the analysis.

Jeff you really need to back off, you don't know anything about what you are talking about, you do not discourage anyone from working with natlfed and you get in the way of both internal and external critisism based on an informed position. I find it very hard to maintain a civil disposition toward you in this conversation.

Ice Gnomon

I just started some counseling this summer to deal with the 14 years I spent in Natlfed. During those 14 years I was mentally, verbally and several times physically abused by cadre. I had phobias (irrational fears) implanted in my mind that 1) if I left I would be assassinated at some point and 2) if I did not work 16 hours or more a day, 7 days a week and take the abuse (it was called a command structure that was needed for revolution) I was responsible for the deaths of children in third world countries and was letting God down. I put in the 18 hour days and my heart into trying to build a organization that would provide a voice for farm workers in Wayne County, while unbeknownst to me, my work was systematically and consciously sabotaged from above. I finally got to the point after 14 years that I didn't care how many children I killed or that I was letting down the membership in Wayne County or if I was assassinated -- I just wanted out. I then left. I repressed my anger and the experience for 12 years. I am just now learning how to gradually let that anger out and how to deal with my emotions.
That said, it has absolutely no bearing on the truth or falsity of socialism, communism, the theory of strata organizing, the MBA, the Analysis or other theory put forth by Natlfed. It has no bearing on whether EFWA ran the first strike of farm workers on the east coast. It simply means that Natlfed's practice then, and probably now, did not and does not match the theory. There was a hidden agenda - i.e. power and sex for Gino and those who accepted his behavior and became like him. From what I can tell, those at NOC who disagreed and pointed out the contradictions were forced out of the organization. Gino made it so tough to stay that they left. As I stated above, people do things for mixed reasons. I do not rule out that Gino had aspirations towards change and revolution, but, at some point his need or want for power became the dominant motivation.
5 days ago as I tried to explain the TVTV process to my husband and how it was that someone who came to Long Island for a year to provide free health care to farm workers ended up in a cult. I decided to try an analogy and was able to explain using TVTV how I would systematically and methodically recruit someone into a religious cult where the leader wanted people to believe he was the messiah. I had no problem doing this. I watched a film on other cults and realized that Gino could have just as easily had everyone commit suicide and become martyrs when the revolution didn't happen in February 1984 as goad the FBI into a raid. He certainly didn't follow what he said would happen which was that the current leadership would step aside and let others try if the revolution didn't happen.
But again, that said, it doesn't change the truth or falsity of the above. What it does say is that there is a wrong way to recruit people. It will take me awhile to safely let the anger out of me and think through my beliefs. What I do know is that I will be doing something consistent with who I am and what I believe to make positive change in this world. What I do know is that there is a real and loving God who made and cares about every person on this earth - equally. I do know that oppression is wrong because it saps the human spirit and denies all of us the special gifts that person has.
I am willing to explain and document any of the above more fully to anyone who needs help dealing with an experience in Natlfed. I think it is important to get beyond that experience so we can use our beliefs - whatever those are - and talents in making this earth a better place to live. I also want to give a special thank you to those who have helped get this far.

The thank you above includes Elizabeth Parenti-Soba and Liv Dillon who have both written me and seem to have moved past and through the Natlfed experience to use their intelligence, skills and passion for change to do something positive. To them I say "You go girl!"

Robin

I volunteered at CHA on and off for 25 years. Helping those in need was and is a great noble purpose. 25 years ago a leader at the Oakland
office, "POP" Rastus Harris, a slender older black gentleman, would "hold court" while the upper cadre idolized him, catering to his every need.
They said back in New York he would labor at 62 cents an hour, hence the 62 cents monthly dues for members.
Pop, died in 1995. After reading the comments on this sight, about a one Gino Perente, A man of norwiegien decent, who pretended to be mexican, and was the top dog of NATLFED, also died in 1995, Now I have never met Gino, but is it possible, he and Pop were one in the same?

The cadre I met, told me Pop made all the decisions...He had a cane walked with a limp, And wore nice flamboyant hats, sometimes a leather jacket, When I was around, he was always silent. I got the impression the upper cadre would die for him.

If a "white dude" like Gino, could portray a definite "black dude"...
that was one helluva' disguise. Any one else know of "POP" Rastus Harris?
....google search...nothing. P.S. a detailed portrait of him appeared on the cover of the 1981 NATLFED calender.

"Pop", or Rastus Harris, was NOT Gino. They were two different people. I only met or had contact with Pop on one occasion when he was visiting his sister in Rochester, NY and came by the Wayne County EFWA office. He seemed nice enough, but I have no experience with him on a day to day basis. I think he was one of the original migrant farm workers who went out on strike in Long Island.
Although Gino certainly dominated Natlfed, used it for his own purposes, and was able to force out those who had disagreements with him, he was not in and of himself Natlfed. There were other cadre who were motivated more towards making a difference and didn't buy into his abuse (There were also some who did become abusive themselves). Because of this there were times in all of the entities (Eastern Farm Workers, Eastern Service Workers, etc.) when some very extraordinary things were accomplished. I would say that these things were accomplished in spite of the leadership structure. Natlfed also had volunteers in local areas who have, as the writer above, volunteered off and on for years. There are also member of the associations who are not full time organizers who have volunteered and made a big difference over the years. I met some very committed doctors and lawyers who volunteered their services for years and were good people trying to make a difference. I would guess that more could have been done if the leadership structure were different.

Pop left New York back in '75, and with the help of Carrol Haddad and another woman Margaret Ribar. helped establish CHA on San Pablo Ave, near 53rd in Oakland, CA. Carrol was OPS manager and was extremely good at the meetings dealing with the struggles of the poor. From there CCMP, BAAP, and others popped up in East Oakland,& 1666 7th street Western Service Workers Assoc. in 1981 "founded by "Pop".

At that time the "cell" encouraged me to volunteer more, but they understood when I said I have a job and other things to do. There were a couple of "loons"
there gettin' in my face a little to become full time, But the cadre intervined and apologized to me, and allowed me to go my merry way.

For me, all I have to do is tell them "no". Maybe it's my intense eyes...

As Robin says POP was not Gino, although he was an old time farm labor organizer highly respected, especially amongst those who left in the 80's who had significant disagreements with Gino. My favorite story about him is this trick of rolling a cigarette in his mouth without using his hands.
Gino never said his name was gino but that it was a party name he used and was related to how he fit into something called the genesis, which was an oral presentation of history that was not based on the great man great event mode. Gino was never suppose to be incharge of the organization, Struggler and Polly where and I find it very frustrating that his debunkers create a great man shadow that keeps people like polly, pop's strugglers and even myself in the dark in terms of what we where doing regardless of how real he was or not.

Elizabeth Parenti Soba

I want to speak more about some of the misconceptions that have resulted, i believe, from the insistance of casual short term participants like Jeff whitnack who portray themselves as experts on an effort he participated 3 months with. I was with the organization 7 years and was one of those who criticized Gino and other party leadership. I was one of those who left the organization, in part by agreement, in part by order and in part forced out after the raid in the early 80's, and it was clear that thier would be no forward motion in the organization as long as Gino was still alive. He had developed gangrene as a result of injuries during the raid and subsequent interrogation and I am of the opinion that this contributed to a determination on his part to sacrifice any higher principles to maintaining control. I agree with the criticism of NOC I believe first presented by myself or Gnomon that as long as natlfed maintains the majority of it's cadre as national staff in administrative safe houses, stripping it's field entities of personnel to create a buffer of inexperienced and naïve "national cadre" to utilize against any rank and file challenge to leadership it violates a fundamental application of it's own structural principles (that party members must be able to speak from a practical point of experience) and creates so top heavy an organization that moving forward seems to be impossible and in my opinion certainly is so.
I want to remind those who have heard the genesis, an oral tradition that was a primary organizing tool, that it began by explaining itself as an alternative to a great man great event way of understanding history . I am amazed by how so many people then proceeded to give him power as a great man and ignored valid criticisms. I want to remind some who may have heard him say it that the most advance theory in the party was within those who dissented and questioned why people hearing that ignored the dissent? I learned a lot from Gino but I was always willing to stand against him using channels and I openly criticized it when the excessive administrative resources at NOC were dedicated to shutting down those channels. During by last few years I was held almost as a prisoner at NOC while I went threw departure interviews and continued to dissent internally and was a close friend to many of those who where critical of organizational direction. I remember when Jeff Whitnacks article came out, neither myself or any active internal critic of national leadership thought it was useful as it's ludicrous inaccuracies provided diversions from real problems in the way George Bush stupidity provides a diversion from real criticism of his administrations policies.

Well let me also add that "no Pops, AKA Rastus Harris, was not Gino Perente or Gerald Doeden. I met Pops during my 3 month stint in Oakland. He seemed to be someone used as a propaganda prop for the cult.

Now those here may lambast me for only wasting 3 months of my time in Natlfed. But let me assure you that I spent MANY hours researching and interviewing tons of people. A common theme emerges, that of a left-wing political cult. Plug in right wing religion and Moon as Gino and it would be the Moonies.

There is nothing really difficult to figure out, it doesn't even take an expert, it's like wind direction. The whole organization was a cult devised for Gino Perente's benefit. He gathered fools into his circle. It was a bitter pill for me to swallow and I only got hoodwinked for 3 months.

All this talk of organizing and Mensheviks, is so much BS it would be laughable if someone deluded soul didn't really believe it.

I am sure when The Public Eye article came out many in Natlfed derided it...as they did articles coming out in Christian Century, The East Bay Express, Hayward Daily News, etc., etc. All of which I was involved with--- in my efforts to get Nalfed widespread exposure as a bogus cult.

When I started my efforts a concerned friend or parent couldn't look up Natlfed and find established proof they are a cult. That situation has been fixed and I am satisfied with my work to do so.

Perhaps if I am ever foolish enough to be again hoodwinked they will look up my past and just escort me out, or get rid of me in some fashion.

Meanwhile, if you all want to continue deluding yourselves as to the nature of what you were involved with, far be it from me to get in your way. Whatever floats your boat.

But my advice would be to face up to the fact that Natlfed was merely a cult devised for Gino's personal gain and needs. Nothing more and nothing less.

Ducdame.

To Elizabeth....

It is somewhat ridiculous how you portray Gino's cult as an organization you could mount criticism from within, and at the same time admit that many of the cultish attributes were imposed on you as well. I only heard of you as someone whom Gino came out with from the West Coast (interview with Wesley and Sylvia from Little Red Bookstore). I suspect the guilt of your involvement and activities both prevents you from facing up, as well as fuels your bizzare wrath and characterizations towards me.

Furhermore I could give a rat's ass what was the perception inside of Natlfed as regards my Public Eye article. (though the arrogance of Elizabeth and others assuming that Natlfed internal perception amounts to anything is most amusing---and especially among those whom have "blood" on their hands). What was, and is, important was that the word get out to potential new cult members (and their friends/family) that Natlfed is a cult. In terms of it helping people to find the inner resources to first recognize something profoundly bogus is going on and also the strength to decide to leave.....that was not a goal of my Public Eye article. I spent a fair amount of time talking to cult exit councelors (called in by concerned family members whom had contacted them) and the process of leaving a cult isn't necessarily facilitated to articles like the Public Eye article I wrote. In fact it could even serve as a "circling of the wagons" and be used to whip up internal paranoia or hysteria.

What I do think my article (and activities) has done, is for many whom have left, is it helped provide some focus as to what it was they were involved with. It wasn't an organizing drive, it wasn't a communist party, it was a bogus cult devised for Gino's personal needs. That is a difficult pill to swallow and a few still find it easier to make me a target. But many others have left the cult and sought me out.

Now I ask what exactly is "inaccuate" about my Public Eye article? No doubt I "missed" many of the little nuances and "facts" had I been enslaved for a longer period. But I doubt any of that would have been of real value. Once the cult's bizzare claims are debunked, once the cult is exposed, the rest is just superflous nonsense.

My article starts out with a desciption of LARGO members digging a big hole on an island in the Feather River. This group had about 15 members and I knew almost all of them, interviewed at least 5 or 6 directly (I knew them during this time but didn't know about LARGO until later). The article ends with a discussion I had with Gino/Gerald's best friend from Marysville. From interviews with his wife and girlfriend (whom he had a son with--whom sued him for alimony and propelled him east) it is clear he used to be a narcotics informer. Kind of a bounty hunter for local law enforcement. (I didn't put this in the article at the time)

The middle of my Public Eye article basically details the lies Natlfed tells to it's own members and shows that it fits the pattern of a dangerous cult.

And along the way of writing it, I helped expose them to CVSA, the left in general, communities across the country, etc. In Santa Cruz one former member went with me to all their supporters we could find and related the facts of them being a cult. They closed shop and left.

I entered Natlfed as a hoodwinked and enthusiastic "cadre". Perhaps it was only luck I got to leave relatively early and didn't waste many years of my life. Someone came and told me about Natlfed being run by "the same nut" that ran LARGO for them, described Gino "Sabo" (as they knew his alias before he used Parenti) as once using the name "Parente" when he attended a Welfare Rights meeting in Northern California. Elizabeth, how interesting that you continue to use both those surnames? Could you enlighten us as to what is involved with that? Is there something you need to let go of? Or did you come packaged somehow with two names Gino found so appealing? Reminds me of Runkle turned Ramirez! My personal motivation in writing the article was to expose this so-called "organizing drive", this so-called "communist party" to be both a dangerous cult and an utter sham. I was also initially worried that Gino's claims to be part of a Western Hemispheric Internationale (centered in Havana) might be used by the right wing----especially in light of the "deadline" to the month for a revolution (or assumption of power). But after getting familiar with Gino's personal style I realized that much of the threats was just more theatre and used for effect (though I've heard at the end some pistol whipping of elderly females occured at NOC).

It is absolutely inconsistent with your label of Cult to say that thier was internal opposition toward Gino or any other leadership cadre and yet anyone who was really involved in the organization during the 70's and 80's can testify that thier was. You volunteered for three months in order to masquarade yourself as an expert.

Yes you don't give a rats ass (one of Gino favorite expressions, I guess you picked something up from him) about those of us who seriously tried to resist the horrible policies of the reagan administration. That is the whole point of my "bizzarre" attitude toward you. You have not done shit against capitalist oppression but want to stand in the way of people who gave a significant amount of thier lives to doing something about what was and is happening to thier world from speaking of thier own experience.

Quite frankly I don't think you care a rats ass for anyone out of stroking you damn ego. If you were hoodwink it was your own damn fault.

I have to say that I check this sight very quickly after spending most of the day working on anti war activities and it really helps make my temper short. This is why it does not mean much to me that you spent so much time after your three months in activities denouncing natlfed and natlfed cadre as well as gino.

First, it was never Gino organization while I was with it, thier where other people in the party leadership and at some points his decisions were over ruled.

second, no one I know of in the party ever claimed to have a headquarters outside the U.S., in fact the party was pretty explicite that it's general line was more advanced than that of the parties of China, russia and Cuba. They were highly critical of the Chinese and Russian line of march.

third, Gino regularly told everone he met that Gino Parente was not his real name and that he changed his name regularly.

Fourth, the carlos and brook codes were not for security, they merely told the people calling how you were met. This is the same thing as when a letter has a particular department or suite number in it. It called being organized. I find it possible that the Dr S you met made revolution sound romantic, I find it equally beievable that you filtered it into dramatic romance yourself. This is much like the "are you a cadre of another organization" I did not find it romantic perhaps because I answered "yes, kind of" and proceeded to provide the basis for my answer. Perhaps some of your delusions were your own.

fifth, NOC is not the cave, the cave is not noc.

thier are more but I don't really want to waste any more time on it. I know you wont listen to anything that does not fit your existing understanding. I really only post this to communicate with people who really want to help manfested a better world. I truely believe that those individuals who gained valuable hands on skills working with the Natlfed I knew are worth communicating with, as you clearly state you don't care a rats ass for any of them. I do want to point out that your article never reduced our recruitment when it came out because it was easily countered by the reality faced by many who came through the doors of natlfed. It still is likely the case today. I and Gnomon have both clearly said we cannot recommend individuals join natlfed today, I have stated clearly that I could demonstrate that Gino purposely left it structured to self sabotage and I could prove this claim to anyone who wants to hear it. To be effective it must shift the balance of it's cadre out of administrative safe houses and into the field were they can gain practical skills from practical work that will equipe them not only to better manfest a desired world vision but also the confedence and ability to defy thier leadership and not act like a "cult". The lack of the large buruecratic body micro-managing and sabotaging field work would reduce the personal nightmare that Natlfed is to individuals involved in it today. This is a practical, real, serious, critisism that you are incapable of understanding because your agenda is to maintain your own little bubble of self glorification. Jeff you really don't give a rats ass for anyone.

I think there may be a basic misconception in Jeff Whitnack's comments about cults which I feel compelled to answer. I'll apologize ahead of time if it is simply the way it comes across as opposed to what was meant. The people surrounding Gino Perente were not fools and they were not stupid. They did not knowingly join a cult. They did not have the information they needed to make an informed decision and by the time they did, they had been manipulated by mind control techniques such that it was difficult to impossible to leave. No sane person would sign up to be abused day in and day out. Cults in general do not recruit poor people with mental and physical disabilities. They want people who are intelligent so that they can bring people and resources to the cult. They also want people who have inheritances or resources which they can steal. And Natlfed did steal (get people to hand over) their inheritances. In addition to Mia Prior's case which was publicised and someone actually went to jail for, I personally know of 3 other people where no one ever had to account.
Many people surrounding Gino were recruited and had phobias installed that worked as effectively as a prison cell to keep them there. I won't try to explain that in full but will refer people to authors such as Margaret Singer, Robert Lifton and Steve Hassan, and first year social psychology textbooks to explain and document this process. Pretty much the same process is used for religious,political and business cults. The cult can be a genuine business, a genuine political group or a genuine religious group. In Natlfed's case some genuine organizing work did take place. This does not make it any more or less a cult. In fact it probably makes it more dangerous. Gino used to say that the best lie is not ever a complete lie but a stretch/bending of the truth. What Natlfed did do was steal alot of time from alot of people. It matters not whether it was 5 years, 14 years, 20 years or 3 months - it is still just as wrong to steal that time.
However, I think what haunts many ex-natlfeders who were around for a long time is that much of the history, ecnomic facts and way of analyzing the facts and history were not at all lies. As I said earlier, I am not now a socialist or communist and at most might have gone through an ideal socialism period for a couple of years if it hadn't been for natlfed. But it does not mean that I don't see the study of these ideologies and how they interpret history as valid. I also find alot of truth in the analysis of stratification of the American workforce and the community/labor organizing methodology and theory of MBAs. Do MBAs work? No one knows that because that wasn't what Natlfed was really about. In the bits and pieces they were implemented in by natlfed cadre who didn't realize it was a sham they seemed to be effective at times. Would a communist party such as Provisional Party said they were make a difference? No one knows because that wasn't what Natlfed was about. Gino made sure that anyone who was serious about building either was either sabotaged or was forced out. I don't agree with the Marxist/Leninist/Stalinist party model because I think it does give to much power to one or a few individuals who eventually, unless they are a saint, abuse it. But, that is just my opinion. I believe in government that has as many checks and balances against any one or few people having absolute power because I think everyone is corruptible.
I remember getting a TRO to prevent residents in Greenport Long Island from being evicted with less than a week's notice. One gentleman was disabled and hadn't known he was being evicted because he couldn't leave his apartment. The eviction notice was tacked on his door. EFWA discovered the problem while canvassing and setting up TB screenings and followup because of a TB epidemic on Long Island among farm workers. I remember filing a lawsuit on behalf of potential victoms of TB against the Suffolk County Health Dept. to force them to deal with the epidemic. I remember demonstrating outside the Riverhead jail daily to support a hunger strike in the jail for decent medical care, non-spoiled food and other issues. I remember meticuously finding people evicted with sometimes only 3 days notice from Water St. in Lyons, NY through canvassing, and asking one who knew someone who knew someone. After winning a settlement with the HUD Dept. to compensate them with relocation money we had to find them and get an affidavit. I remember bringin in 5 truck loads of food a week for two years (this is in addition to canned goods in the emergency food closet)to feed people in Wayne County - since I was the only full timer I know I didn't eat it. I remember collecting 500-1000 sets of sheets, towels and blankets for 6 years to distribute to migrant workers who otherwise slept on bare cots with perhaps one blanket. I remember many trips to Immigration in Buffalo to ensure migrant workers could take advantage of the amnesty program. I remember trips to the Medical Center in Syracuse to get people medical care. I remember finding people shelter in the middle of the night. No one can forget those things and they were not nothing -- at least not to the people who were helped. I also remember many low income workers helping to run these programs and taking pride in themselves for doing so.
The irony is that the very things that made Natlfed so real and not nothing were the things that brought more potential victims to the group. I want to make sure I state very very clearly that this is not an endorsement and my best advice is to stay away. All of these things can be done without Natlfed. The individuals involved can find another way. But, it does haunt those who were in Natlfed and until we can heal and find other outlets for the drive to change the conditions for the poor in this country will continue to do so.

Robin Fahlberg

First to Robin,

I agree that most of the people tricked into joining the bogus cult of Natlfed were not stupid or foolish people. There was probably a small minority (some come to mind) of people whom would have a hard time negotiating life in any meaningful fashion were it not for the structure of the cult. But most of the people were quite talented. Ron K, John G., Carroll Haddad, Willie, Brook, Geoff, Dick and Sheila, Alice, (to name just a small sample of the specific people I recall) etc. all seemed easily to be people of both talent and way above average intelligence. But to paraphrase Forest Gump "foolish is as foolish does". I think that every cult has it's recipe for recruitment. Find a recuitment pool of idealistic young people whom are burning themselves out anyway (CCMP, CCLP, etc). A certain amount of them will be in some personal crisis of sorts (break-ups, etc.). And it helps if there is some underlying un-met religion or political underpinnings. For instance many of the Moonie cult recruits had underlying Christian religous beliefs, but had grown up in country club type atmospheres, i.e. not exactly living up to real Christian ethos. The initial bait was Christian fellowship, then only after committing much of themselves, being on a cult-like burnout path, the "genesis" of Moon is laid on them in a locking type mechanism.....Moon is revealed to be the new Messiah. Suddenly all of Jesus's quotes from the New Testament become merely incitement for pushing them deeper into the Moonie cult----"leave your family to follow him", etc. It's just a gameplan. You follow the protocol and you'll get your per centage. If Robert Redford had a need to be a cult leader he'd come up with a game plan and get his per centage. Now his would probably be greater than mine would be, if I were also so motivated to be a cult leader. But if one works diligently, learns mistakes and setback, perfects techniques, then the "fools" will be gathered.

So too it was/is with the Natlfed cult and it's lies, from Genesis, to it being in any way a real communist party or organizing drive. Suddenly all of Lenin's writings on organization, the aura of the Bolsheviks, becomes fodder as was the New Testament for the Moonies. Sure well meaning people did some "good things" (as no perhaps also do the Moonies) but at the end of the day it was all just used as more flypaper to catch and entrap new people. If today we saw a news story about the Marines in Iraq handing out food and relief, would that change our mind about the criminal nature of Bush's war there? No, of course not. So why is doing "good things" in Natlfed suddenly any different? In fact it's worse in a way becaue they're using valid goals and agendas to betray the very people willing to go there.

There is something inherently disrespectful and abusive about any cults relationship with it's members. Natlfed is hardly any exception, it fits that description quite nicely.

Now for Elizabeth....(or more for the record)

First, in typical Natlfed fashion, you take my "I don't give a rat's ass..." comment and expand it to fit your agenda. I did care about those trapped in Natlfed, it was just that the goal of my article was not to directly encourage them to leave, but rather to expose this cult as being such in a definative way. I believe my goal was accomplished. I know a LOT of people left after the 1980's raid (or perhaps after the failure of the deadline). And that today the cult is a mere shadow of what it was in it's zenith. If I were to try and ascertain the contribution of my efforts (put reality into an Excel spreadsheet) I would hardly ask for your input.

For the record, I DID NOT enter Natlfed as part of any pre-conceived plan. I wish it were so, but unfortunately I was one of the "fools" also. Initially I tried to research this "group" as being something other than a cult---I didn't want to believe it, stigma and all. But it was the only way the "key" would fit the "lock".

When you say...

<SNIP>
"Fourth, the carlos and brook codes were not for security, they merely told the people calling how you were met. This