Cultish: The Language of Fanaticism

MLM speech is characterized by toxic positivity. Amway, one of the biggest MLMs, uses rhetoric to discourage critical thought, calling anything that questions the group or contributes to gossip “stinkin’ thinkin’” (170). Another famous MLM is Earl Tupper’s Tupperware, which was founded in the 1950s after World War II, when many women lived in suburbia and wanted to work. While direct-sales industries first targeted primarily white stay-at-home moms, they have found ways to tap into other groups who don’t have access to the mainstream labor market, like immigrants and students. Mormons also know the importance of direct sales and engage in this practice. This desire for self-sufficiency and entrepreneurship through serious effort comes from the Protestant ethic of hard work and the idea of merit permeating professional culture. In this way, MLMs are intertwined with religions. These beliefs even inform storytelling styles in popular culture, like the prominent theme of rags-to-riches.

Becca catalogs her experience with Optavia. She knows it is a scam, but she needs the money. She began because she wanted to lose weight after the stress of her husband having blood cancer, quitting smoking, and suffering from depression. Her mother-in-law offered her the opportunity to be a coach with Optavia if she posted pictures of her weight-loss journey on social media. Becca saw this as a win-win, but she now notes some of the questionable practices of the company, like being unable to state what company it is on social media, forcing trauma bonding on members, and offering members authoritative titles for which they aren’t fully qualified, like “health coach” (185).

Companies like Mary Kay, another MLM, use the models established in earlier direct-sales industries, like the idea of a Husband Awareness Plan that lets women purchase items in discreet ways to avoid their husbands knowing.

Amway, like many other MLMs, forges a culture of codependence that makes workers feel like they really love and support each other, but once a member leaves, that bond completely falls away, and members realize they were never really seen or loved for who they are.

Some people may be more prone to joining MLMs than others due to differences in gullibility, impulsivity, and thinking. There are two major kinds of thinking for the purposes of this discussion: System 1 thinking, which is immediate and relies on instinct, and System 2 thinking, which is slower, more calculated, and deliberating. Some people, like Montell, can sniff out a cultish group like an MLM with System 1 thinking, but she attributes these strong instincts to her experiences growing up rather than her intelligence. Obviously, it makes sense that people who rely on System 1 thinking without experiences like Montell’s could be impulsive and jump into something without realizing how cultish it is. However, there is also the case of people who carefully deliberate on the idea using System 2 thinking and still decide to join a cultish group, like an MLM. This isn’t purely a matter of intelligence or poor decision-making but a matrix of life experiences and idealistic views that could slant a person into making the wrong choice, even after careful consideration.

MLMs are structured like corporations: The people at the top benefit most, while those at the bottom struggle. This comparison isn’t one-to-one, but there are similarities between MLMs and traditional companies in the exploitation of the American Dream—specifically the belief that with enough hard work, anyone can climb the ladder to success, and if a person doesn’t, it is a reflection of their own shortcomings rather than the company’s. These notions are instilled in both MLMs and corporations through language. The subject of many jokes, corporate-speak is a language of its own that mirrors the mood of the time, with concepts like “bandwidth” and “taking this offline” reflective of the current technologies and social ideals. Not all companies that use corporate-speak and/or jargon are problematic, as sometimes highly specific language is necessary in a field to convey ideas effectively and precisely. Still, some large corporations can operate with cultish mentalities, like Amazon, which forces employees to recite its ideals using specific language, awarding the most successful a passphrase, while expecting employees to operate under harsh conditions. Montell argues that in the United States, many corporations are just a few rungs away from “the star-spangled MLM” of American capitalism (199).

MLMs haven’t been without their legal challenges. In the 1970s, there was an attempt to regulate MLMs, starting with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) challenging Holiday Magic, a cosmetic MLM. After the FTC successfully shut down Holiday Magic based on evidence of abuses of power and similarities in governance to pyramid schemes, the FTC attempted to bring charges against Amway, which was headed by Jay Van Andel and Rich DeVos, who had deep ties to conservative heads of state. When the FTC lost its case against Amway in 1979, other MLMs defended themselves using Amway’s strategy of portraying MLMs as business ventures. This case has dissuaded the prosecution of other such companies and cemented MLMs’ ability to shield themselves from accusations of being scams by enshrining legal protections for the direct-sales industry.