Racists Anonymous

1. Introduction

Version followed: the original Racists Anonymous (RA) model of the Rev. Ron Buford, Congregational Community Church (United Church of Christ), Sunnyvale, California. Weekly meetings began there around November 2015, first under the name "Here I Stand!", and other congregations requested Buford's materials from 2016. It is described here through news and denominational reports, chiefly the Trinity UCC adaptation in Concord, North Carolina (from July 2016), whose pastor published a paraphrasable list of the 12 steps, plus the 10-week "Racism and Racists Anonymous" series variant at Trinity Presbyterian Church, Oklahoma City (2017). [source: UCC 2016; CBS SF 2016; Washington Post 2016 via Valley News; Episcopal Diocese of NC; PC(USA) 2017; KQED 2016; Mother Jones 2017]

What is verified. The meeting sequence (prayer and greetings, Statement of the Problem, Statement of the Solution, presentation of the steps, introductions, sharing) is confirmed by the UCC's own news report and the Washington Post; the Step 1 wording rests on the NPR interview as quoted on Wikipedia and on the Washington Post; founding date and spread are confirmed by CBS and the Washington Post. Buford's kit, the Statements of the Problem and Solution, the covenant and the adapted AA booklet are distributed privately to host congregations; no public copy or official programme website exists, so their exact wording is [uncertain].

What it is. Racists Anonymous is not a therapy and not something a clinician delivers. It is a church-hosted, peer-support fellowship meeting modelled on Alcoholics Anonymous, in which participants work an adapted set of 12 steps on their own racial prejudice. Meetings are hosted by congregations (mostly UCC and Presbyterian in the US) and led by a pastor or lay facilitator; anyone may attend and attendance is voluntary. [source: UCC 2016; Mother Jones 2017; Christian Post 2016]

Core idea of change. Racism is treated as something like an addiction, a disease or (in the churches' theological language) a sin that everyone raised in the culture carries "in varying degrees"; participants are asked to admit they cannot fully see or manage it, hand it to a higher power, take a moral inventory of their biases, confess, make amends and keep watch on themselves daily. Buford built it because earlier community dialogues on race had left white participants feeling guilty and Black participants feeling angrier; the step model swaps blame and debate for self-examination, with each person working only on their own prejudice. The aim is to notice one's racism, act on it less and pass less of it on, as "a piece of the solution" alongside systemic change rather than a substitute for it. [source: Mother Jones 2017; PC(USA) 2017; Big Think; Episcopal Diocese of NC; Christian Post 2016]

Status today: not confirmed active. Published counts rose quickly and then stop: more than 30 churches had requested materials by early September 2016 (Washington Post); CBS reported in October 2016 that over 50 churches in 22 states had started meetings on Buford's model; by September 2017, 90 congregations in four countries had requested the kit and several had started groups (Wikipedia, citing the Washington Post). These counts do not agree on how many groups actually met [uncertain]. The latest known report is Swedish public television (April 2022), which said Buford's Sunnyvale group was still meeting; no news report, denominational notice or official listing of any RA group meeting from 2023 onwards is known [uncertain]. Treat RA as having no confirmed active groups: before referring, phone the host church to check whether a group exists and when it meets. [source: Washington Post 2016 via Valley News; CBS SF 2016; Wikipedia; SVT 2022]

This guide is written for a clinician who refers a client to RA, works alongside an RA group, or adapts its principles in their own work; the clinician procedures in Section 4B are [synthesis].

2. Framework

No phased treatment structure. RA has no assessment phase, treatment phases, discharge criteria or fidelity system. Its structure is the step sequence plus a fixed meeting format. [source: Episcopal Diocese of NC; UCC 2016]

Formats published.

Open-ended weekly meeting (original model). Sunnyvale met weekly on Thursdays, in a confidential hour in which people share thoughts and experiences about race; Concord met on Wednesdays, about one hour (6–7 pm). Folding chairs in a circle; about a dozen regular attendees at Concord, with numbers growing as newcomers joined; mixed in race, age (20s to 80s), gender and sexuality; most participants in the early groups were white. Concord launched as a 90-day trial (into October 2016) with review afterwards, approved by the church's governing council (Consistory). [source: Washington Post 2016 via Valley News; UCC 2016; Episcopal Diocese of NC; KQED 2016]
Time-limited series (Oklahoma City variant). A 10-week "Racism and Racists Anonymous" discussion series, voted on by the congregation, averaging about 20 people; each meeting centres on one personal account of racism or of meeting it, then discussion of how individuals respond. Unlike the original, it was opened explicitly to people dealing with someone else's racism as well as their own. [source: PC(USA) 2017; Christian Post 2017]

Meeting sequence (Concord version, confirmed). Opening prayer and greetings → reading of the Statement of the Problem → reading of the Statement of the Solution → the facilitator presents the 12 steps → introductions around the circle in the AA form (first name plus "and I'm a racist"; some say this, others say they are not sure, and the self-label was optional at Concord) → sharing of personal experiences, often focused on one step (e.g. a Step 9 amends meeting). Prayers (including the Serenity Prayer) and passages are read in turn from an adapted AA booklet. [source: UCC 2016; Washington Post 2016 via Valley News; Mother Jones 2017]

Step progression. Participants work the 12 steps in order over time; no published account describes sponsors, step-completion criteria, chips or step-study timelines [uncertain].

Starting a group. A congregation obtains Buford's kit, which he describes as a set of documents that includes a covenant that the resources "be used in a particular way", plus a guide to setting up meetings so people can work the steps (reports also list background material, the Statement of the Problem, Statement of the Solution and the 12 steps). Host congregations have sought governing-body or congregational approval first. There is no public request route, official website, certification or licensing; the covenant is the only use condition reported, and its terms are not public [uncertain]. [source: UCC 2016; Episcopal Diocese of NC; PC(USA) 2017]

Clinical framing for referral [synthesis]: treat RA as an adjunct of indefinite length, reviewed in therapy roughly every 4–6 weeks for fit and effect, not as a treatment with a dose.

3. Guiding principles

These are the fellowship's principles as host churches and Buford describe them, with what each means for a clinician working alongside it. [source: Mother Jones 2017; PC(USA) 2017; Christian Post 2017; KQED 2016; Episcopal Diocese of NC]

Everyone carries racism to some degree. The starting premise is that all participants are racist and differ only in degree. Practice: check that your client can hold this as a working premise rather than a verdict on their worth before referring.
Racism as disease or addiction, not moral failing alone. Framed as a disease everyone has (Buford: "we should treat it as an infectious disease"; Big Think). Practice: the frame reduces defensiveness; watch that it does not slide into "I can't help it".
Admit before change (Step 1). Denial is the first obstacle; participants admit they cannot fully recognise, let alone manage, their "addiction to racism". Practice: use the client's own admissions as the entry point, not imposed labels.
Work on your own racism, not others'. Buford frames it as each person working on their own racism. Practice: redirect conversations about a relative's or colleague's bias back to the client's own reactions.
No fixing, no arguing, just listening. Members do not fix, correct or debate each other's stories. Practice: this is a listening-and-disclosure space, not a debate or education class; prepare clients accordingly.
Personal story over statistics. Systemic data and abstraction are kept to context for personal stories (Oklahoma City). Practice: clients wanting structural analysis need another venue as well.
Spiritual surrender. Steps 2, 3, 7 and 11 turn the problem over to God or a higher power; the churches name racism a spiritual disease or sin. Practice: assess the client's religious fit before referral.
Daily vigilance and repentance. Buford says participants should remember and repent of their racism daily. Practice: this maps onto daily self-monitoring; help clients keep it from becoming daily self-punishment.
Voluntary attendance. Meetings are strictly voluntary; organisers acknowledge the people who most need it may not come. Practice: never mandate or coerce attendance.
Individual change as part of systemic change. Organisers describe RA as one piece, not the whole answer. Practice: pair it with action, not only reflection.
Open, diverse membership. Groups are open to anyone and include people of colour sharing experiences of meeting racism alongside white members examining their own. Practice: consider in advance what attending will ask of a client of colour.

4. Intervention inventory

Part A lists the fellowship's own practices as host churches publish them; these are run by the group and its facilitator, not by the therapist. Part B gives clinician procedures for referring to, working alongside or adapting RA; all of Part B is [synthesis] unless tagged otherwise. Example language is illustrative throughout.

A1. Self-identifying introduction

Purpose: enacts Step 1 publicly; lowers the threshold for honest disclosure by making admission the norm in the room. [source: KQED 2016; Mother Jones 2017; SVT 2022]
Steps (as published): in turn around the circle, each person gives a first name and says they are a racist, in the AA style. At Concord some members said they were racist and others said they were not sure, and the self-label was optional. Some members use full names, others stay anonymous. [source: UCC 2016; Washington Post 2016 via Valley News]
Example language: the form reported is "Hi, I'm [name], and I'm a racist" (Mother Jones 2017, KQED 2016).
Watch for: clients who balk at the phrase, or who say it glibly with no further disclosure. Working sign: the phrase becomes a doorway into specific examples rather than a ritual. Note that members of colour also introduce themselves this way in the original model [source: SVT 2022; Legal Insurrection, secondary]; prepare a client of colour for this.

A2. Statement of the Problem and Statement of the Solution

Purpose: frames each meeting: racism as a shared, partly unseen condition (problem) and the step programme with a higher power as the way out (solution). [source: UCC 2016; Episcopal Diocese of NC; Christian Post 2016]
Steps: read aloud near the start of each meeting after prayer and greetings; both are part of Buford's kit, which is not public. The Concord pastor's summary is that members recognise their participation in a system of discrimination against people of colour and hope to turn this over to a higher power [uncertain: exact content].
Watch for: whether a secular or non-Christian client can sit with the theistic framing.

A3. Readings from the adapted AA booklet and prayer

Purpose: ritual continuity and spiritual grounding. [source: Mother Jones 2017; UCC 2016]
Steps: participants take turns reading prayers and passages from an AA booklet adapted for racism; meetings open with prayer, and the Serenity Prayer is used. [source: Mother Jones 2017; UCC 2016; Washington Post 2016 via Valley News]
Watch for: the adaptation is imperfect (leftover alcohol language was noted by a reporter); some clients find this alienating or comic. Not reproduced here.

A4. Working the 12 steps (Concord list, paraphrased)

Purpose: the core change sequence: admission, surrender, inventory, confession, willingness, amends, ongoing review, spiritual practice, service. Version note: Wikipedia describes RA as using AA's 12 steps with only Step 1 changed; the Concord pastor's published list rewords several steps for racism. Buford's own step text is not public, so the exact wording of Steps 2–12 is [uncertain]. [source: Episcopal Diocese of NC (list); Wikipedia and NPR interview as quoted there (Step 1); Washington Post 2016 via Valley News; KQED 2016]
Steps (paraphrase of the published list):
1. Admit one is powerless over one's "addiction to racism", in ways one cannot fully recognise, let alone manage. [source: NPR transcript quoted on Wikipedia; Washington Post 2016 via Valley News]
2. Come to believe a higher power can restore one to a non-racist way of living.
3. Commit one's will and life to God as one understands God, for oneself and for coming generations.
4. Make a searching, honest inventory of one's biases, about race and other differences.
5. Confess the specific wrongs in thought and action to God, oneself and another person.
6. Become entirely ready to have these defects removed.
7. Humbly ask for one's shortcomings to be removed.
8. List those one has harmed and become willing to make amends.
9. Make direct amends where possible, except where that would cause harm.
10. Keep taking personal inventory and admit wrongs promptly.
11. Use prayer and meditation to deepen contact with God and seek guidance.
12. Having had a spiritual awakening, carry the message to others and practise the principles in all areas of life.
Watch for: Step 4 in RA explicitly includes biases beyond race (gender, sexual orientation and other external differences; Mother Jones 2017). No sponsor system, worksheets or timelines are reported [uncertain]. Working sign: specific, owned examples and changed behaviour, not general guilt.

A5. Personal story sharing with a no-fixing rule

Purpose: honest disclosure heard without correction; replaces debate. [source: Mother Jones 2017; Christian Post 2017; KQED 2016; SVT 2022]
Steps: after introductions, members share personal experiences: moments they judged someone by appearance, guilt, resentment; members of colour share experiences of meeting racism. Others listen respectfully; no fixing, correcting or arguing. Groups also discuss scenarios and problems each week (SVT 2022).
Example of content reported: a member describing unease about a passenger who looked Muslim on a plane, examined as a snap judgement (Mother Jones 2017).
Watch for: stories told to be absolved; members who start correcting others; disclosures that harm people of colour present.

A6. Step-focused meetings (e.g. Step 9 amends night)

Purpose: concentrates a meeting on one step. [source: Mother Jones 2017]
Steps: the facilitator chooses a step; members share where they are with it (the reported Step 9 meeting focused on times members had judged too quickly and how to repair).
Watch for: amends plans that would burden or expose the person harmed; Step 9's own exception for harm applies.

A7. Daily remembering and repenting

Purpose: maintenance between meetings (Step 10 in daily form). [source: PC(USA) 2017]
Steps: Buford asks participants to recall and repent of their racism every day. No written method is published [uncertain].
Watch for: rumination or scrupulosity versus brief honest review.

A8. Carrying the message / starting a group

Purpose: Step 12 and the model's spread. [source: KQED 2016; UCC 2016; Episcopal Diocese of NC]
Steps: share the message with others; a congregation requests the kit from Buford, agrees to the covenant on use of the materials, seeks its governing body's approval, trials meetings (Concord: 90 days) and reviews.
Watch for: a client starting a group as a substitute for their own step work.

A9. Time-limited series variant (Oklahoma City)

Purpose: a bounded entry point for congregations. [source: PC(USA) 2017; Christian Post 2017]
Steps: 10 weekly sessions; each opens with one personal account of racism or of encountering it, then group discussion of individual responses; listening and sharing only; open to people affected by others' racism.
Watch for: without the steps, it functions more as facilitated dialogue than a fellowship.

B1. Assessing fit before referral [synthesis]

Purpose: decide whether RA suits this client, or whether a secular or professional route fits better.
Steps: (1) Clarify the client's goal: own bias, guilt after an incident, a relationship conflict, a workplace complaint, or wanting community. (2) Check religious fit: RA meets in churches and uses prayer and God-language. (3) Check readiness for the self-label and for public disclosure. (4) Screen for shame-proneness, scrupulosity/OCD themes, depression and suicidality; heavy shame argues for individual work first. (5) Check whether any external body is requiring attendance (RA is voluntary). (6) Locate a current group by contacting the host church; confirm it still meets [source for group status: SVT 2022; Mother Jones 2017].
Example language (illustrative): "This group meets in a church, opens with prayer, and asks everyone to introduce themselves as a racist. How does that sit with you?"
Watch for: a client seeking a certificate of attendance to resolve a complaint; that is not what RA offers.

B2. Preparing the client for a first meeting [synthesis]

Purpose: reduce drop-out and shock.
Steps: describe the published format (prayer, statements, steps, introductions, sharing; about an hour, roughly a dozen people) [source: UCC 2016]; explain no-fixing and no-arguing; agree how much the client will share (passing is fine); decide first name only vs full name; plan a short debrief afterwards; suggest attending three or four meetings before judging.
Example language (illustrative): "You don't have to tell your story the first time. Listening counts."
Watch for: anticipatory shame or anger; rehearse the introduction aloud if helpful.

B3. Preparing a client of colour, or a client affected by racism [synthesis]

Purpose: protect against retraumatisation and unwanted emotional labour.
Steps: explain that in the original model members of colour also self-identify and that white members will disclose biased thoughts aloud; ask whether the client wants to attend to work on their own prejudices (RA's premise covers all groups) or to be heard about racism they meet, in which case the Oklahoma City-style series, which welcomes people affected by others' racism, may fit better [source: Christian Post 2017]; plan an exit option and a debrief.
Example language (illustrative): "You may hear people describe thoughts about people who look like you. What would you need if that lands hard?"
Watch for: the client becoming the group's educator; anger or hypervigilance after meetings.

B4. Debriefing meetings in session [synthesis]

Purpose: link fellowship experience to therapy goals.
Steps: after each of the first few meetings ask what was said, what the client felt, what they disclosed, which step was in focus, what they noticed in themselves; track shame vs constructive guilt (specific act, repair-oriented) on a simple 0–10 self-rating the two of you agree; note one concrete behaviour to try.
Example language (illustrative): "What did you hear tonight that you recognised in yourself, and what's one thing you'll do differently this week?"
Watch for: global self-condemnation ("I'm a terrible person") vs specific ownership; the latter is the working sign.

B5. Supporting Step 4 bias inventory in therapy [synthesis]

Purpose: turn the inventory into concrete, workable material.
Steps: have the client list specific situations (who, where, what they thought, felt, did, and what group feature triggered it); include gender, sexuality, religion and other differences, as RA's inventory does [source: Episcopal Diocese of NC; Mother Jones 2017]; for each item, identify the automatic judgement, the alternative interpretation and the cost to the other person; keep the list private unless the client chooses to share in Step 5.
Example language (illustrative): "Let's take one moment last week. What did you notice in your body before the thought arrived?"
Watch for: lists that are either abstract ("I benefit from privilege") or self-flagellating; aim for specific and behavioural.

B6. Amends safety check (Steps 8–9) [synthesis]

Purpose: apply Step 9's own harm exception before the client contacts anyone.
Steps: for each planned amends ask: does the other person want contact? Will this re-expose them, ask them to comfort the client, or make them manage the client's guilt? Is a living amends (changed behaviour, repair in the same setting) better than a conversation? Check workplace, legal or HR implications before written admissions. Rehearse a brief, specific, no-demand amends.
Example language (illustrative): "I said something about your accent at the meeting last month. It was wrong. You don't need to respond; I'm working on it."
Watch for: amends driven by the client's need for absolution.

B7. Daily review plan (Step 10 / daily repentance) [synthesis]

Purpose: make Buford's daily remembering practical without rumination [source for the daily practice: PC(USA) 2017].
Steps: a short end-of-day review (three to five minutes): one moment of noticing bias, what the client did, what they'll try next; cap the time; end with a repair or intention, not a verdict.
Watch for: review stretching into hours or triggering self-harm thoughts (see Section 5).

B8. Pairing with a secular alternative or adjunct [synthesis]

Purpose: offer non-religious routes or add skills.
Steps: for clients who cannot accept the theistic framing, consider a secular prejudice-reduction approach that treats bias as a habit, such as Devine and colleagues' prejudice habit-breaking intervention, which combines awareness of one's own implicit bias, concern about its effects and regular use of bias-reducing strategies; in a 12-week study it reduced implicit race bias, most among those who were concerned about discrimination or reported using the strategies [source: Devine, Forscher, Austin and Cox 2012, abstract]. A popular summary describes the habit-breaking as detect, reflect and reject [source: Big Think; secondary]. Other options: mixed-race dialogue groups, anti-racism education, or individual values-based work. Keep any RA attendance voluntary alongside.
Watch for: substituting reading for behaviour change.

B9. Adapting RA principles in a clinician-run group [synthesis]

Purpose: for clinicians asked by an agency or congregation to run something RA-like.
Steps: do not use the RA name or kit without obtaining it from Buford and honouring its covenant [source: UCC 2016]; set ground rules (own experience only, no fixing or debate, confidentiality, right to pass); use a fixed opening, one focus story or step per session, a closing intention; build in a separate space for participants of colour if requested; agree a referral route for anyone who becomes distressed.
Watch for: a clinician-run group is a therapeutic group with clinical duties of care; it is no longer a peer fellowship.

5. Handling problems

The RA sources name only a few difficulties (marked with a source); everything else is [synthesis].

Denial and resistance to the premise. Organisers report participants who resist ideas like white privilege, which they treat as denial to be addressed [source: Mother Jones 2017]. Response [synthesis]: in therapy, do not argue the label; start from a specific moment the client already regrets and work outward. If the client cannot accept "I am a racist" at all, RA is a poor fit; use B8.
Self-selection: those who most need it don't come. Organisers note voluntary groups draw people with subtler prejudice [source: Mother Jones 2017]. Response [synthesis]: never mandate RA; for a client sent by an employer or court for overt racist conduct, use a structured professional intervention and offer RA only as an optional extra.
Shame spiral, depression, suicidality. [synthesis] Repeated public self-labelling and daily repentance can feed global self-hatred in shame-prone, depressed or scrupulous (OCD-type) clients. Response: move from "I am bad" to "I did this, it had this effect, I will do this instead"; time-limit daily review; pause attendance if mood worsens; do a standard suicide risk assessment if hopelessness or self-harm thoughts appear, and safety-plan as usual, including crisis contacts such as 988 (US) or Samaritans 116 123 (UK and Ireland).
Harm to members of colour. [synthesis] Hearing biased thoughts disclosed, or being expected to absolve or educate, can retraumatise. Response: B3 preparation; debrief after each meeting; support the client to step out or try another group or format; raise concerns with the facilitator if the no-fixing rule is used to silence their reactions.
Religious mismatch. [synthesis, building on the published prayer and God-language: UCC 2016; Episcopal Diocese of NC] Secular, non-Christian or religiously harmed clients may disengage. Response: name it up front; offer B8; some may take part while translating "higher power" for themselves, as in other twelve-step fellowships.
Clumsy adaptations and alienation. Reporters noted leftover alcohol wording in the adapted readings and called the method a work in progress [source: Mother Jones 2017]. Response [synthesis]: normalise it; focus the client on the sharing and steps rather than the text.
Confidentiality. Some members use full names, journalists have attended and photographed meetings [source: KQED 2016; Mother Jones 2017]. Response [synthesis]: advise first name only; warn that disclosures may not be protected and could reach employers or others; avoid disclosing specific incidents involving identifiable third parties.
Non-adherence (stops attending, skips steps). [synthesis] Response: explore what happened at the last meeting; check for shame, boredom or a rupture with a member; renegotiate (a different group, a time-limited series, or individual work); do not treat dropping out as moral failure.
Rupture with the therapist. [synthesis] Clients may experience the therapist as judging them as racist, or (for clients of colour) as minimising. Response: name it, own your part, ask what the client needs; check your own reactions and seek consultation, especially across racial difference.
Using RA to fix someone else. The original model is about one's own racism; the Oklahoma City variant explicitly admitted those dealing with another person's [source: PC(USA) 2017; Christian Post 2017]. Response [synthesis]: if the goal is a partner's or relative's bias, consider couples or family work, or a series that welcomes affected people.
Performative or absolution-seeking participation. [synthesis] Attending to feel virtuous, or using amends to be reassured. Response: ask what has changed in behaviour; apply the B6 amends safety check.
Legal, workplace or disciplinary exposure. [synthesis] Written admissions or amends in a live complaint can have consequences. Response: suggest the client take advice before written admissions; keep therapy notes factual.
No group nearby or group no longer meeting. [synthesis; no group confirmed active since 2022, see Section 1] Response: phone host churches (Sunnyvale, Concord, Oklahoma City) to ask whether a group still meets; consider whether a congregation would request the kit; otherwise use B8 or a clinician-run group (B9).

Sources

Sources:

Not public [uncertain]: Buford's RA kit, Statement of the Problem and Solution, covenant and adapted AA booklet (distributed privately to host congregations; no official programme site).

← Previous · V-110Parents Anonymous Next · V-112 →Pagans in Recovery