Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Now What Would George Orwell Have Made of the 'Amway' Myth? by David Brear

(This Blog Post by David Brear First Appeared on Quixtar Cult Intervention on November 10, 2008):

Now what would George Orwell have made of the ‘Amway’ myth? (The answer to this question, is everywhere) by David Brear


‘Many people would sooner die than think. In fact, they do.’

Bertrand Russell (1872-1970)


To the casual observer, it can seem surprising how often reference is made to George Orwell (1903-1950) in connection with ‘Amway:’
‘Amway Ministry of Truth;’
‘All Distributors are equal, but some Distributors are more equal than others;’
‘Freedom is Slavery;’ etc.
However, these irrefutable comparisons have merely been made by free-thinking commentators who, exactly like Orwell, whilst maintaining their sense of humour, were trying to expose a sombre truth behind a thought-stopping Utopian myth that seeks to crush individuality. Indeed, take a look at any common-sense analysis of the cult phenomenon, and Orwell’s shining presence is invariably there. In order to explain exactly why this quintessentially English author - who died more than half a century ago - is still rightly considered to be one of the most reliable guides to contemporary cultic labyrinths like ‘Amway,’ we first have to delve a little into history.

Karl Marx (1818-1883) was a German philosopher/economist, acknowledged to be the founder of ‘International Communism’ (i.e. the radical Socialist ideology, the adherents of which reject individual enterprise and advocate a world-wide revolution in which all private wealth will be abolished and the means of production, distribution and exchange, forcibly taken into collective ownership). Marx himself came from a wealthy and devout Jewish family. He studied, law, history and philosophy, but he was particularly influenced by the works of the German philosopher, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831). Using a form of radical thinking developed by Hegel (who sought to challenge received wisdom), Marx found early fame with his theory of ‘dialectical materialism,’ in which he stated that ‘political and historical events are due to a conflict of social and economic forces caused by man’s material needs.’ By 1844, Marx (aged 26) was openly challenging the establishment in his homeland; not least, by describing religion as ‘the opium of the people.’ Whilst exiled in Paris and then Brussels, he began to collaborate with Friedrich Engels (1820-1895). In 1848, Marx witnessed a series of major political and historical events: the second French revolution, the abdication of the Emperor, Louis-Phillipe, and the declaration of the second French republic. At this time, Marx (aged 30) and Engels (aged 28) published the ‘Communist Manifesto,’ calling for the total transformation of society by the abolition of private wealth. After radical Socialists failed to take control of Paris (May-June 1848), and moderate republicans installed Louis Napoleon Bonaparte as the Prince-President of France (1849), Marx withdrew first to Cologne and then to London. He developed a thought-provoking, new terminology for challenging the establishment’s own version of reality. In 1867, Marx (aged 49) published ‘Das Kapital’ (Volume 1). By the end of the 19th century, the collected works of Karl Marx had become preferred reading not only for authentic Socialists and intellectuals, but also for the latest generation of cult instigators. Unfortunately, it was possible to enslave the masses by peddling the myth of future redemption in an ‘International Communist’ Utopia; a problem that Marx recognised, but which he failed to stop prior to his death.

The ‘Bolsheviks’ (Russian for majority) were originally a self-righteous minority-group of ‘Marxist-inspired extreme-Socialists,’ led by Vladimir Ilitch Oulianov (1870-1924) a.k.a. ‘Lenin.’ They emerged from the many traumatized Russians, who, like ‘Lenin,’ had been exiled from their homeland for dissenting from the traditional myth that the ‘Tsar,’ and his heirs, were ‘anointed by God.’ ‘Lenin’ first infiltrated and then subverted the moderate Russian Social Democratic party, by packing a conference (held in ‘the Brotherhood Church,’ Hackney, London, August 1903) with his own followers. In 1912, the ‘Bolshevik/Russian Social Democratic party’ also became the ‘Russian Communist party.’ In July 1917, Tsar Nicholas II was compelled to abdicate. In October 1917, a provisional Russian government was overthrown in the ‘Bolshevik’ revolution.

The ‘Union of Soviet Socialist Republics’ was created by the leadership of the ‘Russian Communist party’ in July 1923. It comprised most of the Russian Empire overthrown in the 1917 revolution. ‘Lenin,’ who (in 1918) had been severely wounded in the head in a failed-assassination attempt, was the ‘USSR’s’ first ‘Comrade Leader.’ However, the new State was in ruins. A bloody civil-war had crippled both agriculture and industry, and millions were already dead or dying. ‘Lenin’ steadfastly pretended moral and intellectual authority whilst sanctioning a series of evermore heinous crimes, but, within a year, he was dead. A struggle developed between a faction led by Lev Davidovitch Bronstein (1879-1940) a.k.a. ‘Trotsky,’ and ‘Lenin’s’ nominated heirs, led by Joseph Vissarionovitch Djougachvili (1879-1953) a.k.a. ‘Stalin’ (‘Man of Steel’).

When, in 1929, ‘Trotsky’ was exiled and ‘Stalin’ took power, he might as well have of called himself ‘Tsar.’ To casual observers, the ‘USSR’ appeared to be governed by ‘democratic committees’ of which the ‘politburo’ (‘policy board’) was the most powerful. In reality, the ‘USSR’ was a one party totalitarian State maintained by the unquestioning obedience of its core-minority of well-fed ‘apparatchiks.’ The majority of subjects lived in squalor, manipulated by the reality-inverting Soviet press, ‘Pravda’ (Russian for ‘Truth’), and terrorized by the ‘KGB’ (‘Committee of State Security’). ‘Soviet’ children were obliged to attend State schools before they could talk. They were trained to denounce all dissidents (including their own parents). One of ‘Stalin’s’ favorite terms was ‘Economic Planning.’ Every ‘Plan’ was doomed to fail. When it did, another one was already in place with a different title: the ‘Two Year Plan’; the ‘Five Year Plan’; etc. According to ‘Pravda,’ prosperity would arrive in the future, if everyone forgot about themselves and worked for the collective good, but, in the ‘USSR,’ the future never came. In 1929, ‘Stalin’ (the son of a shoemaker and a former, trainee Orthodox priest) instigated a ‘Plan to collectivize agriculture and expand heavy industry.’ Within 12 months, he had created a famine in which probably more than 25 millions men, women and children perished. 1936-1938, ‘Stalin’ ordered the execution of at least 1 million ‘Comrades,’ (including approximately 35 000 army officers). 1929-1953, approximately 18 millions people were systematically categorized as ‘Saboteurs’, ‘Terrorists’, ‘Enemies of the People’, etc. They were put on show-trial and condemned to serve indefinite prison terms in the ‘Gulag’ system (‘Main Directorate of Camps’); probably 10 millions did not survive. Officially, none of this existed. When Soviet dissidents escaped to the West in the 1930s and testified to what was really occurring, they were systematically ridiculed by ‘International Communists,’ for whom the truth was unthinkable. ‘Trotsky’ spent 11 years traveling the world trying to organize an opposition to overthrow ‘Stalin,’ but in 1940, he was murdered by a ‘KGB’ agent in Mexico. In the late 1940s, escaped Soviet dissidents again published the truth in the West. For a while they were silenced by malicious lawsuits filed by ‘Stalin’s’ lawyers who were armed with compromising information gathered by the ‘KGB.’ After WW II, the Soviet myth infected Eastern Europe, spawning a series of reality-inverting ‘Socialist Republics.’ After ‘Stalin’s’ death, a new generation of ‘Comrade Leaders’ denounced his abuses. They accused him of having been at the center of ‘a personality cult.’ For a while, the new regime managed to repair old Utopian myth, but the ‘USSR’ went effectively bankrupt during the 1980s. By 1991, the ‘Soviet’ press could not maintain its absolute monopoly of information in the face of satellite television.

In 1920, more than 70 years prior to the demise of the ‘Soviet’ myth (and before it had even acquired its title), the Welsh philosopher and mathematician, Bertrand Russell, spent a month traveling in Russia. He followed a delegation of bedazzled, British Labour party members and trade-unionists. They’d been on a pilgrimage to witness the birth of what they believed was going to be the world’s first ‘Marxist’ Utopia. On his return to London, Russell published ‘The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism;’ a now largely-forgotten book, but which contained a remarkable insight:

‘I cannot share the hopes of the Bolsheviks any more than those of the Egyptian anchorites; I regard both as tragic delusions, destined to bring upon the world centuries of darkness and futile violence.… The principles of the Sermon on the Mount are admirable, but their effect upon average human nature was very different from what was intended. Those who followed Christ did not learn to love their enemies or turn the other cheek.… The hopes which inspire Communism are, in the main, as admirable as those instilled by the sermon on the Mount, but they are held as fanatically, and are likely to do as much harm.… The war has left throughout Europe a mood of disillusionment and despair which calls aloud for a new religion as the only force capable of giving men the energy to live vigorously. Bolshevism has supplied the new religion.’

In 1920, the words ‘totalitarian’ and ‘totalist’ were not available to Bertrand Russell. Although ‘totalitarian’ was originally coined circa 1922 by the leadership of the ‘Italian Fascist party’ to peddle their own myth, the word wasn’t recorded in its modern pejorative sense (of or relating to any centralized dictatorial form of government requiring complete subservience to the State — a person advocating such a system) until circa 1929.

In 1945, George Orwell (given name, Eric Arthur Blair) published ‘Animal Farm, A Fairy Story’ (Martin, Secker & Warburg, London). This best-selling book is the most-celebrated allegory of the 20th century. In it, Orwell exposed ‘Soviet’-style totalitarianism by presenting fact as fiction. With a perfect sense of irony, he described how, at a moment of vulnerability, any nation can need to accept fiction as fact.

‘Animal Farm’ begins in ‘England’ on the ‘Manor Farm,’ where animals live in ignorance and allow themselves to be exploited by their owner, Mr. Jones…. One night, a prize white boar, ‘Old Major,’ recounts his ‘Dream of an Animal Republic without whips, where no animal goes hungry and the strong protect the weak.’ He inspires his ‘Comrades’ to rebel. When ‘Mr. Jones’ gets so drunk that he forgets to feed them, the animals chase him off. Two literate young boars, ‘Comrades’ ‘Napoleon’ and ‘Snowball,’ take command by offering to build ‘Old Major’s Dream.’ They paint a line through the word, ‘Manor,’ on the farm gate, and paint the word, ‘Animal,’ in its place. They paint the ‘Seven Commandments of Animalism’ in white letters on the black wall of the barn:

1. ‘Whatever goes on two legs is an enemy.’
2. ‘Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.’
3. ‘No animal shall wear clothes.’
4. ‘No animal shall drink alcohol.’
5. ‘No animal shall sleep in a bed.’
6. ‘No animal shall kill any another animal.’
7. ‘All animals are equal.’

The animals are generally illiterate, but they are so willing to please that they trust ‘Comrade Snowball’ to form committees to run the farm.

He draws up a complex plan to construct a giant windmill. However, after defeating ‘Mr. Jones’ counter-attack, ‘Comrade Napoleon’ turns on ‘Comrade Snowball’ with the help of an ambitious young boar, ‘Comrade Squealer,’ and the mercenary farm dogs. ‘Comrade Snowball’ is exiled and diabolized. He is falsely accused of having been the secret agent of ‘Mr. Jones’ and he is blamed for every misfortune (including bad weather). Gradually, the animals are dissociated from external reality and driven into a state of paranoia. Their only source of information is ‘Comrade Squealer.’ The animals toil from dawn till dusk constructing the windmill believing that this will be for everyone’s benefit. However, the pigs move into the warm farmhouse and live off the fat of the land whilst the other animals are left to freeze and starve outside. ‘Comrade Napoleon’ employs a human lawyer and begins to trade the farm’s produce with neighboring human farmers. They cheat ‘Comrade Napoleon’ by giving him counterfeit money. The farm is then invaded by humans with guns and explosives. The animals suffer heavy losses. They fight-off the humans, but the windmill is destroyed. Two young pigs are obliged to make false confessions that they were ‘traitors.’ They are publicly executed by the farm dogs (on ‘Comrade Napoleon’s’ orders). A string of animals make false confessions of guilt, and they too are publicly executed. The rest of the animals are powerless — the ego-destroying truth that they’ve been deceived is unthinkable. ‘Comrade Napoleon’ begins to style himself as ‘Comrade Leader, the Father of all Animals’ and he pretends to be dying. The pigs start to wear clothes and to drink alcohol. Although he has been the bravest defender of the farm and its hardest worker, when he becomes too old and sick, the loyal cart-horse, ‘Comrade Boxer,’ is taken away to a glue factory. All along ‘Comrade Napoleon’ and ‘Comrade Squealer’ have been subverting the ‘Seven Commandments:’

‘No animal shall drink alcohol (to excess).’
‘No animal shall sleep in a bed (with sheets)’
‘No animal shall kill another animal (without just cause).’ etc.

Eventually, the ‘Seven Commandments’ are reduced to just one:


‘Comrade Napoleon’ and the other pigs begin to walk on two legs. They are observed by the animals through the windows of Mr. Jones’ farmhouse, drinking alcohol and playing cards with a group of capitalist farmers. The humans praise the pigs for running a farm where the ‘lower animals work harder, and are fed less, than on any other farm in England.’ The capitalists even want to copy the pigs methods. ‘Comrade Napoleon’ decides to change the name on the gate back to the ‘Manor Farm.’ Finally, the animals look at the pigs’ faces and realise that they have become indistinguishable from humans.

‘Animal Farm’ is now generally regarded as a satire of the ‘Soviet’ Empire. ‘Old Major’ is Karl Marx, ‘Mr. Jones’ is Tsar Nicholas II, ‘Animalism’ is ‘Communism,’ the ‘Manor Farm’ is the Russian Empire, ‘Animal Farm’ is the ‘USSR,’ the ‘animals’ are the Soviet Peoples, ‘Comrade Napoleon’ is a combination of ‘Lenin’ and ‘Stalin’, ‘Comrade Snowball’ is ‘Trotsky,’ ‘Comrade Squealer’ is the Director of ‘Pravda,’ the ‘farm dogs’ are the ‘KGB,’ etc. Shortly before his death, Orwell explained exactly what he meant:
‘I thought of exposing the Soviet myth in a story that could easily be understood by almost anyone and which could be easily translated into other languages. However, the actual details of the story did not come to me for some time until one day… I saw a little boy, perhaps ten years old, driving a huge cart-horse along a narrow path, whipping it whenever it tried to turn. It struck me that if only such animals became aware of their strength we should have no power over them, and that men exploit animals in much the same way that the rich exploit the proletariat.'

George Orwell’s final book, ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’ (Martin, Secker and Warburg, London, 1949), subtitled ‘A Novel,’ was originally to be entitled ‘The Last Man in Europe’ or ‘Nineteen Forty-Eight.’ In this, Orwell again presented fact as fiction. He set his story in ‘London,’ the chief city of ‘Airstrip One,’ the third province of ‘Oceania,’ itself one of 3 centrally-controlled Empires (including, ‘Eurasia’ and ‘Eastasia’) which are permanently at war with one another. In ‘Oceanea,’ drab austerity is the order of the day, but the smiling image of the ‘Leader’, ‘Big Brother,’ is everywhere, along with thought-stopping slogans:


The book’s central character is ‘Winston Smith,’ a deluded bureaucrat working for the ‘Ministry of Truth’ (i.e. the State-run propaganda machine). ‘Winston’ is, however, secretly struggling to establish his individuality. Although it is absolutely forbidden, he writes down the procedures by which he has been programmed to accept and disperse fiction as fact. In ‘Oceania,’ ‘Ingsoc’ (the ‘English Socialist Party’) controls everyone’s mind. This is achieved by maintaining an absolute monopoly of information using a constant repetition of reality-inverting key words and images. The English language is gradually being pruned down to a formulaic, childish jargon, ‘Newspeak,’ designed surreptitiously to handicap its users’ capacity to think critically. ‘Emmanuel Goldstein’ is portrayed as the ‘Enemy of the People’ and ‘Commander of the Brotherhood’ (a ‘network of evil conspirators’)… All sexual desire and activity (other than for the purpose of procreation) is deemed a ‘sexcrime’… children are used to spy on their parents… ‘Oceania’ is following a never-ending series of ‘3 Year Plans’… clocks have 13 hours… society is ordered into 3 rigid groups — the majority ‘Proletariat’ (who live in poverty and total ignorance), a minority of unquestioning ‘Outer Party Members’ (who have had their memories wiped) and a smaller minority of ‘Inner Party Leaders’ (who alone have access to the truth). ‘Winston’ has a sordid affair with ‘Julia,’ a fellow ‘Outer Party Member’ who prefers to use sex as a means of rebellion. The couple meet an ‘Inner Party Leader,’ ‘O’Brien,’ who pretends to identify with them. He talks of ‘revolution.’ ‘O’Brien’ turns-out to be an agent provocateur. He has ‘Winston’ and ‘Julia’ arrested by the ‘Thought Police’ and tortured. Finally, something snaps in ‘Winston’s’ mind. He betrays ‘Julia’ and declares his ‘love’ for ‘Big Brother.’

Whilst most contemporary, left-wing, British intellectuals were unable to see beyond its external presentation, Orwell looked only at the quantifiable evidence and realised that, internally, the so-called ‘USSR’ was about as far removed from an authentic Socialist republic as it was possible to get. However, mainstream British Socialists of Orwell’s generation (i.e. the leadership of the Labour Party and the trade union movement), although influenced by Karl Marx, also traced their egalitarian beliefs to non-conformist Christian Churches. Consequently, it wasn’t that difficult for them to begin to face the truth when it first leaked out. In the UK, during the 1930s, ‘Stalin’ came to be almost universally recognised as a brutal despot. In 1939, all but the most-deluded British communists had to confront reality when ‘Stalin’ signed a ‘non-aggression pact’ with Adolf Hitler. After 1941, when the ‘Nazi’ myth invaded territory controlled by the ‘Soviet’ myth, and Britain and the USA became allied to the ‘Soviets,’ it became a matter of expediency to deny reality again. Consequently, in 1945, it was almost impossible for Orwell to get ‘Animal Farm’ published. By 1949, the international political climate had changed dramatically. In 1951, CIA agents acquired the rights to ‘Animal Farm’ and ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’ from Orwell’s widow. Five years later, the former had been turned into an animated film and the latter into a motion picture. Ironically, these productions were secretly supervised by an organization known as the ‘American Committee for Cultural Freedom’ (i.e. the propaganda Dept. of the CIA).

Although Orwell included an extensive appendix to ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’ entitled, ‘The Principles of Newspeak’ (in which he clearly explained that, in any totalitarian system, reality-inverting language and imagery are used to stop subjects from thinking), when the book was first published at the beginning of the Cold War, many westerners (particularly right-wing politicians and journalists) imagined it to be a criticism of Socialism. Orwell died within a few months of publication, and his American publishers did not attempt to correct this misconception (it was good for business). However, the following is what Orwell had to say in response to the first, crass reviews of ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four:’

‘My recent novel is not intended as an attack on Socialism or on the British Labour Party (of which I am a supporter) but as a show-up of the perversions to which a centralized economy is liable and which has already been partly realized in Communism and Fascism. I do not believe that the kind of society I describe will necessarily arrive, but I believe… that something resembling it could arrive.’

How right Orwell was, but (just like Bertrand Russell 30 years before) few people seem to have taken much notice of his timely warning.

Copyright David Brear 2008

"The 'American Way' is really no different to the 'Soviet Way', but then totalitarianism can be tailored to fit any period or situation." David Brear


Final Thoughts (by  blog administrator quixtarisacult)

I asked David Brear for assistance in writing a few final thoughts on his expose. He was kind enough to provide me with some quotations of his own and a few from others. I am including them as they serve to put a ribbon and bow on the wonderful gift that his expose provides for anyone desiring to enter into the Graduate School of Amway Cult thought, and provide readers with a more insightful understanding of the Amway Cults and the Amway Myths, which are continuing to be perpetuated by the Amway Cult Instigators today. What follows are the words of David Brear:
I think what we want your readers to grasp is that 'totalitarianism itself is enduring, its camouflage is ephemeral.'
The 'American Way' is really no different to the 'Soviet Way', but then totalitarianism can be tailored to fit any period or situation.
The definition of democratic socialism is a political/economic system where the means of production, distribution and exchange are held in common ownership. In democratic capitalism, these are owned by individuals and commercial corporate structures, but independently regulated. Orwell worked out that if these economic factors are centrally-controlled by a perverted minority who cannot be held to account, or removed from office, then it's neither socialism nor capitalism and it's certainly not democratic.
For almost half a century the DeVos and Van Andel dynasties have controlled the means of production, distribution and exchange in their own totalitarian economy. In this respect, the only difference between them and 'Stalin' is that they have hidden behind 'capitalism' and American 'patriotism', but then capitalism in its purest form is crime and 'patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels.'
Remember, the pigs go down to the farm gate and change the name back to the 'Manor Farm' at the end of Orwell's allegory. It doesn't matter in the slightest what name is written over the entrance to any totalitarian system. The only word that is never written over the entrance to a totalitarian system, is 'totalitarian'.

Friedrich Nietzsche wrote:
'We need order to live.'

Adolf Hitler (an admirer of Nietzsche) wrote :
'The broad mass of the people will more easily fall victim to a big lie than a small one.'

The ancient, Athenian poet, Agathon (a man who lived 2500 years ago) wrote:
'Even God is deprived of this one thing only: the power to undo what has been done.'
We might not be able to undo what has been done, but, if we follow the example of Orwell, we do have the power to undo the big lies which make vulnerable people do wicked things. ...David Brear

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Just How Absurd and Dangerous is 'Amway?' QCI contributing author, David Brear:


‘A lie can be half-way round the world before the truth has got its boots on.’

James Callaghan (1912-2005)


Readers who are unfortunate enough to have come into contact with ‘Amway’s’ handful of fanatical Internet apologists know that their devious motto is:

Always attack, never defend!

At the same time, these financially-illiterate sophists (led by David Steadson a.k.a. ‘ibofightback’ a.k.a.‘Insider’ etc.) invert reality by excluding all quantifiable evidence to the contrary whilst steadfastly pretending that the ‘Amway Business’ is an innocent victim under attack from outrageous lies spread by a jealous minority of violently anti-capitalist lunatics who know nothing whatsoever about commerce. In support of this typically-paranoid totalitarian fantasy, the apologists (who pose as independent) sneer arrogantly and wield reams of ‘statistics’ the origin of which can only be ‘Amway’s’ own bleating flock of reality-inverting apparatchiks. However, on closer inspection, this mystifying material turns out to be so absurd, that it almost beggars belief that anyone (outside the most-deluded of ‘Amway’s’unquestioning adherents) can fall for it.

For decades, the ‘Amway’ Ministry of Truth has proudly proclaimed millions of ‘Independent Business Owners’ conducting billions of dollars of ‘Sales’ in dozens of countries. Yet, given the accepted, average annual drop-out rate (approximately 50%), it is possible to extrapolate that, in the adult world of quantifiable reality, tens of millions of aspiring ‘Amway Distributors’ have vanished down the years, to be replaced by an endless chain of wide-eyed would-be millionaires. Only a 1-2% core-group of claimed adherents have remained bedazzled for periods exceeding 5 years and, in the end, even they have abandoned all (false) hope of achieving future redemption in the (non-existent) ‘Amway’ Utopia. Informed readers will notice the remarkable similarity between this ridiculous, self-inflating ‘Amway’ propaganda and that of ‘Scientology.’ Tellingly, the parent ‘Amway Corp.’(including its ever-expanding labyrinth of subsidiaries) has never voluntarily released any accurate, verifiable information as to what percentage of the organization’s (apparently impressive) global market has comprised authentic retail transactions (i.e. sales to persons who are not transient players of the ‘Amway’ game of make-believe). Sadly, it’s not just the ‘Amway’ faithful who have swallowed these sugar-coated lies. Despite having once paid a total of C$70 millions to avoid extradition and imprisonment for perpetrating the largest tax-fraud in Canadian legal history, the co-authors of the ‘Amway’ myth, Richard (‘Rich’) Marvin De Vos (b. March 4th. 1926) and Jay Van Andel (b. June 3rd. 1924. d. December 7th. 2004), and latterly their heirs, have been fêted as philanthropic billionaire-industrialists and exemplary Christian conservatives by an alarming number of casual observers in the international media and political, legal and religious establishment.

Back in the 1970s, when subjected to long-winded investigation by agents of the Federal Trade Commission (who had apparently twigged that the ‘Amway’ myth is a far too good to be true), it was discovered that ‘Amway’s’so-called ‘Multilevel Marketing Scheme’ was, in fact, strangely familiar. Exactly like its Soviet namesake,‘Amway’s’ own ‘Policy Board’/ Politburo (comprising members of the De Vos and Van Andel clans) held absolute control over the means of production, distribution and exchange. FTC agents also discovered that the price and quality of the ‘exclusive’ products being exchanged within ‘Amway’s’ Soviet-style command economy, were maintained in such a way as to render them (effectively) unsaleable on the open market. Contrary to what‘Amway’s’ own reality-inverting apparatchiks and propaganda constantly repeated, the organization’s grinning proselytisers were about as far removed from being ‘Independent Business Owners’ as it was possible to get. They were de facto slave-recruiters indoctrinated unconsciously to accept the following fiction as fact and to exclude all free-thinking individuals and quantifiable evidence challenging its authenticity:

You can buy ‘Amway’ products at a ‘wholesale price’ and then ‘retail’ them to your social contacts at ‘30% profit.’ This ‘short-term strategy’ is fine for some, but, in the end, it’s a ‘waste of time.’ If you are really serious about making big money, there’s ‘no need to sell anything.’ You can ‘Follow a Proven, 2-5 year Business-Building Plan’ and consume a regular quantity of ‘Money-Saving Products’ yourself whilst offering your friends and relations a ‘Helping Hand’ by bringing them onboard. In turn, your recruits can ‘Duplicate Exactly the same Plan’ and consume a regular quantity of ‘Money-Saving Products’ themselves whilst ‘Helping’ their own social contacts to do the same, etc… as ‘Amway’ undertakes to pay its ‘Distributors’ a escalating percentage commission on the totality of their monthly ‘Business Volume’ and on that of their recruits, and on that of the recruits of their recruits, etc… if the ‘Business Building Plan’ is ‘Followed’ correctly, payments automatically multiply in an infinitely-expanding geometric progression. The more people you ‘Help:’ the more money you earn!

In simple terms, vulnerable Americans (who, for whatever personal reasons, needed to believe in the self-perpetuating and self-gratifying ‘Amway’ myth of ‘total financial freedom in 2-5 years’), were actually being peddled infinite shares in what could only be their own finite dollars. Since the centrally-controlled ‘Amway’ market was deliberately designed to produce no real external revenue, no matter how the cash in that hermetic system was divided by its all-powerful treasurers, it was a mathematical impossibility for the overwhelming majority of its powerless participants to receive a profit. The whole of ‘Amway’s’ fiercely complex ‘Compensation Plan’ was, therefore, nothing more than thought-stopping hocus-pocus, but the po-faced agents at the FTC apparently never fully-grasped how the trick was pulled.

Consequently, after 10 years of less-than-intellectually-rigorous FTC enquiries and hearings, ‘Amway’ was merely fined a derisory sum for ‘price-fixing,’ and its greedy rulers were not only allowed to keep their counterfeit company registered in the USA, but also to expand their counterfeit commercial activities overseas. This was because their attorneys steadfastly pretended affinity with the federal regulators and drafted a ‘rule’ which appeared to oblige ‘Amway’ agents to sell-on at least 70% of their own purchases to non-agents before they could qualify to receive commission payments. Interestingly, the US regulators can’t have been completely duped by this devious tactic, because they also compelled ‘Amway’s’ corporate officers to publish accurate and verifiable information about the actual derisory average levels of commission payments. Obviously, this part-regulation only applied in the USA (where ‘Amway’ recruitment took such a dramatic nose-dive that it eventually had to become ‘Quixtar’), whilst all the subsequent evidence proves that the ‘70% rule’ might as well not exist, because, unbelievably, the FTC omitted to introduce any independent instrument to enforce it, or to warn the regulatory authorities internationally of what had really been occurring in the USA. Thus, when ‘Amway’s’ counterfeit commercial activities were recently investigated in the UK, it was discovered that (just as in the USA in the 1960s and 1970s) the organization’s so-called ‘Multilevel Marketing Scheme’ was, in fact, still a ‘Soviet’-style command economy (centrally-controlled by the ‘Amway’ Politburo in the USA), and that the price and quality of the products being exchanged within it, were maintained in such a way as to render them (effectively) unsaleable on the open market. Approximately 96% (and possibly even more) of all ‘Amway UK’s’ claimed ‘Sales,’ were a puerile fiction. Over a period of 35 years, the secret, rolling failure-rate for powerless participants in the premeditated ‘Amway’ closed-market in the UK was (effectively) 100%. Yet again, contrary to what‘Amway’s’ reality-inverting apparatchiks and propaganda constantly repeated, vulnerable British citizens were being peddled the same old Utopian fiction as fact. They were also being indoctrinated to exclude all free-thinking individuals and quantifiable evidence challenging its authenticity.

Mysteriously, senior civil servants in Britain’s Ministry for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (who, off the record, freely-accept that it is impossible to make money in ‘Amway’ and that its core-adherents are brainwashed pawns) chose only to challenge ‘Amway UK’ in the civil courts, rather than try to trigger a diplomatically-embarrassing, international criminal enquiry. However, Lawyers acting for the UK government, like their American counterparts, again failed to explain to both the UK High Court and the UK Appeal Court that, without external revenue (due to the deliberately banal quality and exorbitant pricing of products) ‘Amway’s’ so called ‘Business Model’ is fundamentally fraudulent and that the so-called ‘Compensation Plan’ is utter nonsense. This time, ‘Amway UK’ escaped closure by announcing the expulsion a couple of over-zealous ‘Diamond Distributors’ (including Jerry Scriven) as well as steadfastly pretending innocence and by promising to reform its future activities. However, the counterfeit company is now obliged to publish accurate and verifiable information about the actual, derisory, average levels of commission payments, and its current claimed ‘Distributor’ numbers have dropped to an almost insignificant level.

Unbeknown to the UK High Court and Appeal Court, the identical closed-market swindle was uncovered in France in the mid-1980s; when a minority of confused former ‘Amway’ core-adherents approached consumer, and cult, advice associations complaining of massive financial losses and dissociation from their friends and families. At that time, ‘Amway’ dodged official investigation in France by announcing the expulsion of an over-zealous ‘Diamond Distributor,’ Jean Godzich, and around 80 other over-zealous ‘Distributors,’ for breaking the ‘Amway Code of Ethics.’ The company then steadfastly pretended innocence and promised to reform its future activities, but its claimed numbers of ‘Distributors’ fell from ‘90 000’ to less than ‘5000.’ Godzich went on to operate the identical close-market swindle, complete with (effectively) unsaleable products and a ‘Code of Ethics,’ using a mystifying labyrinth of corporate structures labelled, ‘le Groupement,’ before his re-branded, counterfeit commercial activities were challenged.

In the early 1990s, a complaint was filed against ‘le Groupement’ by a government-funded, French, cult advice group, ‘UNADFI’ (National Union of Associations for the Defence of the Family and the Individual), in conjunction with a consumer advice association, the Women’s Social and Civic Union, on behalf of around 300 destitute former core-adherents. This led to a police enquiry. A French parliamentary report soon revealed that more telephone enquiries (almost 1000 per year) were being made to UNADFI about ‘le Groupement,’ than about ‘Scientology.’ Godzich and 12 associates steadfastly protested their innocence, but they were eventually charged with operating a pyramid scam. In the mean time, the counterfeit company was successfully sued in the civil courts by its victims, but its declared assets were insufficient to pay its debts. ‘Groupement’ was bankrupted and compulsorily wound-up in 1995. A warrant was issued for the arrest of Jean Godzich, but he had already escaped to the USA with a large amount of cash. At this time, approximately 1500 deeply-deluded core-adherents picketed the offices of UNADFI in Paris. The building was occupied, files stolen and a senior UNADFI volunteer, Mathieu Cossu, was held prisoner for several hours and obliged to make a video statement that ‘le Groupement was not a cult.’ Prior to this Jean Godzich had tried to give UNADFI a donation one million French francs (approximately 160 000 Euros). When this blatant bribe was refused, Jean Godzich financed the creation of an (apparently independent) ‘anti-mental manipulation association.’ It was generally believed by paranoid core-adherents that Groupement was the victim of an anti-capitalist conspiracy and that UNADFI was a form of extreme-socialist cult itself.

Some of the other tactics used by Godzich to try to maintain his absolute monopoly of information in France were classics of a cultic movement. A code of silence was introduced along with an internal system of dispute resolution to discourage more dissidents from coming forward. Malicious lawsuits were filed against all external critics in which Godzich posed as victim. Traditional culture was infiltrated via gifts to charity, sponsorship of sport, etc.

The criminal case against Jean Godzich (in absentia) and his associates, didn’t come to trial until the Summer of 2000. At this time, no evidence was presented by the prosecution relating to the much larger ‘advanced fee fraud’ hiding behind ‘le Groupement,’ and the pyramid fraud charge was dropped on technicalities. Amazingly, French law recognizes counterfeit ‘investment schemes’ (or Ponzi schemes) without external revenue or profits to divide, but it does not yet accept that counterfeit ‘marketing schemes’ without external revenue or profits to divide are just a more-sustainable variation of essentially the same crime. However, in January 2007, Jean Godzich received a custodial prison sentence (by default) of 3 years from the Correctional Tribunal of Evreux (Dept. of Eure, Normandy), for illegally transferring around 6 millions Euros of his French-registered company’s social funds to the USA (prior to its compulsory closure in 1995). An international arrest warrant was issued for Godzich (a citizen of both France and the USA) and he was given an additional fine of 500 000 Euros for failing to turn up for his trial in October 2006. Three of his former associates were given suspended prison sentences ranging from 8 months to 2 years along with fines ranging from 10 000 to 80 000 Euros.

At this point, I should like to mention former White House Adviser (on the ‘Religious Right’ to the Bush administration), Doug Wead, who has recently found it necessary to post reality-inverting material on one of his own propaganda Blogs, in which he begins to refer to the Godzich/‘Groupement’ affair, but, tellingly, not by name. In fact, Wead’s propaganda (like that of ‘Amway’s’ instigators) is far more interesting from the point of view of what is excluded rather than what is included. That said, Wead casually acknowledges that he was once an ‘Amway Diamond Distributor’ and that he remains a ‘friend’ of Dexter Yager. However, he steadfastly pretends to be an innocent victim under attack from lies posted by ‘Amway critics’ on the Net. Apparently, it has been suggested (by certain ‘critics’) that Wead helped set up ‘Amway’ and then ‘le Groupement’ in France, and that a warrant was issued for his arrest in France. I should like to set the record straight. Although it is true to say that Wead’s name never appeared on any of the incorporation documents of the counterfeit companies that comprised the French chapter of the ‘Amway/Groupement’ myth, his name did feature on countless books, magazines and recordings sold to hundreds of thousands of ‘Amway’ and ‘Groupement’ victims in France (first during the 1980s and then during the 1990s). He even co-authored books with Dexter Yager and Jean Godzich. Wead was also a regular paid-speaker at ‘Groupement’ mass-rallies. Wead was undoubtedly a major beneficiary of a conspiracy to commit, and occult, an ‘advanced fee fraud’ using a mystifying labyrinth of ever-expanding and changing (apparently independent) corporate structures designed to prevent, and/or divert, investigation and isolate beneficiaries like himself from liability. Just as in the UK, it was Wead’s acknowledged ‘friend,’ Dexter Yager, who received the lion’s share of the illicit cash. Whether, he was the final beneficiary, is still a matter of conjecture. Yager led the ‘Amway Network’ of which Godzich and Wead were members. Yager continued to supply the identical books and recordings to Godzich, even after he’d been publicly expelled from ‘Amway France.’ These fraudulent materials were French translations produced by Canadian companies controlled by Yager. In the mid-1990s, French network television journalists traced Jean Godzich to Phoenix Arizona, where they discovered that he and Wead shared an office and that they were both regular ‘Prosperity Gospel Preachers’ at the ‘First Assembly of God.’ During a 10 year period, thousands of deluded core-‘Groupement’ adherents had been peddled grossly-over-priced tickets to visit Phoenix via a Belgian-registered travel agency owned (on paper) by Godzich and his (then) wife. These individuals had received full-immersion baptism into the ‘First Assembly of God’ from Jean Godzich’s brother, Pastor Leo Mark Godzich. The sinister ceremonies were caught on film by hidden cameras, but (when interviewed by a French television journalist) Godzich steadfastly denied their existence.

Given their track records, one would have to be pretty naïve, and/or dim, to believe anything that Messrs. Yager, Godzich or Wead has to say on any subject, let alone ‘Multilevel Marketing.’ Interestingly, Wead now claims to have long-since retired from ‘Amway’ to become a ‘best-selling author and American historian; However, if by ‘historian,’ Wead means someone who is concerned to discover the truth about the past and to give as accurate a representation of it as possible, then, in respect of ‘Amway,’ he is not a historian. However, Wead is not just another pathetic little narcissist (like David Steadson), steadfastly denying the ‘Amway’ financial holocaust - he’s one of the shameless racketeers responsible for it.

As stated in a previous article, two High Court Judges in the world’s largest democracy have already deduced that what purports to be the ‘World’s Largest Direct Selling Company,’ is actually a global fraud. Exactly the same alarming evidence has been uncovered in India as was found in the USA in the 1960s and 1970s, in France in the 1980s and 1990s and in the UK at the beginning of the 21st. century. Confused Indian victims have come forward to complain of massive financial losses coupled with dissociation from friends and family. However, on this occasion, although all the usual devious tactics are being pursued by the corporate officers of ‘Amway India Enterprises’, and their aggressive echelon of attorneys, in a desperate attempt to maintain their paymasters’ absolute monopoly of information (including the issuing of two malicious, High Court writs to block a police investigation), Chief Justice C.S. Singhvi, and Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, of the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, have concluded that ‘Amway’s’ so-called ‘Multilevel Marketing Scheme’ is in breach of well-conceived, Indian legislation (dating from the 1970s) which bans all ‘money circulation schemes,’ no matter how ingeniously they are disguised. The High Court has ordered that the Hyderabad Criminal Investigation Dept. should be allowed to continue to follow whatever procedures are permitted by Indian law to hold the corporate officers of ‘Amway India Enterprises’ to account.

Currently (just as in Britain and France in the recent past), the sanctimonious little gang of Bible-thumping, US-based charlatans behind the ‘Amway’ myth remain out of reach of the Indian authorities. It is to be hoped that the new Obama administration will not permit this pernicious international racket to continue for much longer.

Copyright David Brear April 2009