as per your request

[John Underwood]

Defendant: The Seed
Issue: Good v. Bad
The problem with the trial we have going on here is that there is no judge, there is no jury. What we have is a continuous loop containing arguments and testimony from both sides. Though some questions may be answered and minor details cleared up, there is no resolution (verdict) in sight, nor will there ever be to the satisfaction of everyone.
The architecture (and intent) of this site is designed with the Seed as defendant. If we are going to continue to hold court, why shouldn?t it be the other way? Why shouldn?t The Seed be the complainant?
Why did you fail The Seed? What did you fail to do? Why did you fail your parents? Why did you fail yourself? Why didn?t you benefit when so many did? What was (is) lacking in you that made The Seed experience was so negative, while others only have positive memories?
How many people?s lives have you personally destroyed who may have been helped at The Seed, but the influence of your attitude prevented them from ever having a chance?  
Do you believe you?re are God, so omniscient that you can answer the previous question with complete confidence? Or are you so arrogant that you just don?t care? Have you failed at everything? Have you been successful when no self-examination is required? Have you failed when responsibilities charged to you were not to your liking? Why did you allow your thinking to set you up for failure from day one? Why are you still failing to comprehend? Why do you choose to point your fingers at others instead of yourself? Are you living in such denial, buried in false pride that you fear swallowing it might lead to asphyxiation? Is separating yourself now from the good The Seed did self-affirming, ego satiating? Are you capable or willing to honestly answer (to yourself) these questions today?
Maybe the most important question is, why are you even here? ...to engage in some contrived pseudointellectual debate that exists only for its own sake? Are you ego driven, is jealously a motive, do you ever, ever take time to challenge your own thinking? And finally, if awareness, enlightenment can simply be gained from life (as so many of you propose), without the intervention of a prominent catalyst, how do you explain the state of the people, the nations, the condition of planet earth today?
Okay, enough of this. There were a few questions I found in reading recent posts that I would like to attempt to answer. The program lasted as long as it lasted. Initially, two weeks as a newcomer, three months as an oldcomer. (Not a lot of those) For those sent by the court, two weeks as a newcomer, six months as an oldcomer. (A few more of these met the time frame)
Someone asked if I was asking for forgiveness because of the Socrates quote. I?m not asking anything, except the aforementioned questions. This is a principle that I believe in applying to my own life. (And no, I?m not in the one-hundred percentile group, obviously; if I have days where I?m in the upper 80s, I feel pretty good, they?re not common, but I?m still working at it, everyday, and getting better, of course that?s always been the case) Coercion! Of course there was coercion, we wanted people to stay. As for those 18 and over without court order, we could not make them stay, contrary to what has been stated here. We would, however, attempt to have the person?s parents intercede. If this worked they stayed, if it didn?t they were gone. To answer another question, living in Broward County, my path has crossed maybe 200, give or take a few, former Seedlings in the past 25 years. As I related to GregL on the phone, only one had anything negative to say to me. He chose to get in my face, spouting not so nice things, at a softball game about 15 years ago, I remembered him well and was not surprised. One out of 200 or so, and he was drunk at the time. ?Get out of your head,? simply was/is synonymous with ?Wake up and smell the flowers,? though I gather some of you had a problem staying awake period.
As I told GregL, I will try and post on this site occasionally and answer legitimate questions where genuine information gaps exist. Becoming a part of the day to day debate, I just cannot do, don?t need to. Finally, I reread my two initial posts today and found that many of the answers to questions continuing to be asked I?ve already answered.

[marcwordsmith]

There is no trial going on. That's just your way of framing the situation, John. It's a discussion, and you are merely being asked to answer for yourself in a situation where you don't hold the whip. Of course the frequency and quality of your participation are up to you. (Maybe a few of us WOULD like to lock you in a room for a few weeks, and deprive you of sleep, and shout in your face, etc. but alas . . .)

Your questions above are transparent diversions, and insulting ones. "Why did you fail yourself, your parents, the Seed?" etc. Who failed? What do you mean by failed? Failed what? Does the fact that many of us look back on the Seed with anger indicate that we "failed"? That's a heck of an assumption. "How many people?s lives have you personally destroyed who may have been helped at The Seed, but the influence of your attitude prevented them from ever having a chance?"
Gosh. Now we're the ones who've destroyed lives? With our ATTITUDES? Boy are we powerful!

"And finally, if awareness, enlightenment can simply be gained from life (as so many of you propose), without the intervention of a prominent catalyst, how do you explain the state of the people, the nations, the condition of planet earth today?"

Good grief. The intervention of a prominent catalyst???

Okay, you did ask one valid question. What are we doing here in this forum? Why are we here? I can answer that one for myself, but it's only my own answer. (Unlike the Seed, I don't assume--Godlike--that my answer is everyone's answer.) First, I'll admit I don't altogether know the complete answer. But for what it's worth: The Seed was a deep trauma in my life. I feel healed from it, but there's a way in which it still fascinates me, because it was such a powerfully negative experience. Having been away from Florida since '79, I think back to the Seed but I don't have any contact with anyone else who went through it, so it's interesting to compare notes, and especially fascinating to see what YOU or any other staff member might have to say.

Every time you post, I find it rather enlightening frankly. So thanks for posting. Your rambling, thunderous, self-righteous post above speaks volumes.

Oh, and I'll give you credit for answering one question straight on, the one about how do you know how many kids benefitted vs. how many didn't. You say you've run into about 200 grateful Seed graduates over the years. Fine. Presuming that's true, it's a good answer. But honestly, John, I don't trust anything you say. For example:
"The program lasted as long as it lasted. Initially, two weeks as a newcomer, three months as an oldcomer. (Not a lot of those) For those sent by the court, two weeks as a newcomer, six months as an oldcomer." Come on, man. Those were MINIMUM times, not fixed schedules. But maybe that was just a typo or something . . .

okay enough of this. gotta go.

[cleveland]

Wow, John, my stomach crawls when I read your post. Oy vey...

No, I am quite successful. I am a good member of my family, community and am a parent myself now.  And I was a super-loyal, full time Seed kid for 7 years, pal. So...

What I am here for is to fully understand an experience which informed my life from age 19 t0 26, representing one third of my life and all of my early adulthood. This is the same scrutiny I applied to examining my (traumatic) childhood. Remember, Socrates, and the unexamined life?

Woe to all who disagree with you. I have put The Seed on trial in my heart every day. Sure, there are partisan posters on this site, probably actually a near balance. What is wrong with that?

There are Seed folks posting here that want to discuss their experiences WITHOUT a controlling central force or whatever you called that (what are you talking about?)

Please, go read George Orwell, OK? Please work to develop a sense of irony and nuance...jeez...

Love ya!

Walter

[marshall]

quote..................
"Defendant: The Seed
Issue: Good v. Bad
The problem with the trial we have going on here is that there is no judge, there is no jury. What we have is a continuous loop containing arguments and testimony from both sides. Though some questions may be answered and minor details cleared up, there is no resolution (verdict) in sight, nor will there ever be to the satisfaction of everyone."
...................................
Good vs. Bad? Hey, you forgot 'The Ugly'!  :grin:

I agree. I've studied comparative religion for years and frequented internet message boards of various faiths and smaller cultic groups and the discussion here is very similar to what goes on there. I don't think this is a coincidence. Like marxist communism, the Seed seems to function as a secular religion for many. Though there was no emphasis upon or discussion of the nature of God or eternal life, the Seed did try to fill many areas that we usually regard as religious. It claimed to provide a meaning & purpose to life and promoted a specific set of beliefs about what is good vs. bad. Just as in religious debates between believers or nonbelievers, there is no resolution. In our case, it's more like believers vs apostates. These sorts of debates tend to be even nastier. For instance, Mormons tend to be more forgiving of other religions but really harsh on former mormons. Same with most other groups. The very existence of those who believed but fell away from the faith constitutes a strong source of doubt and threat to the believers. Those who reject some or all aspects of the program are apostates. Many evangelical christians that I've observed, when confronted with those who claim that they were once born-again and saved, but are now atheists or muslims, etc. tend to respond that those who converted were not 'really' born again, were not 'true' christians and not actually saved. Compare this to your suggestion that anyone who is critical of the Seed "Just didn't get it". From my own reading here for the past 2 or 3 years, I suspect the majority here are not junkies or alcoholics.  Most of the posters here are not Seed screw-ups or those that failed to complete their program. Most of us seem to be graduates of the Seed.

I don't think it's a case of Good vs. Bad though. If you read carefully, nearly everyone here...even the most venom spewing critics...have stated that there were good aspects to the program. Similarly, even the most forceful defenders of the Seed (such as yourself) have stated that there were bad aspects. If you conclude that anyone here who has any criticism of the program on any level at any time are part of the 'seed is bad' group...you might consider whether Lybbi or Art or other staff might put you in that category as well due to your own criticism and disagreement with them. My own views and evaluation of the program is an open and on-going process. My initial doubts and problems emerged while I was still an oldcomer and have evolved over time. I'm open to anything anyone has to say about it, good or bad.

quote..................................
"The architecture (and intent) of this site is designed with the Seed as defendant. If we are going to continue to hold court, why shouldn?t it be the other way? Why shouldn?t The Seed be the complainant"
...............................................
 I assume you mean the intent of Ginger and Greg in creating & hosting the site. I don't think anyone is holding court either. I have no idea why this metaphor springs to your mind...other than perhaps reading here makes you feel personally prosecuted and arouses the need to defend yourself. I confess I didn't really expect that sort of reaction from you though. It's more understandable from someone that spent 20 or 30 years giving their life to the program like Lauderdale. Like many of your fellow graduates on this site, you broke with the program too. You disagreed with certain points and chose to leave years ago. Given this, I am surprised that you still identify with the program so much that you feel personally attacked by any criticism of it. Being uninvolved with the Seed for so many years, I would have guessed would give you more objectivity or at least the ability to bear crticism of the program without needing to lash out as you have.

You might not realize it, but many here are torn between handling you with kid gloves and responding actively to your challenges. Why? Many of us would be happy to hear your side and your version of events. Some fear any challenge might cause you to leave. You were in a very privileged position in terms of both time (you were in the very early Seed) and control (you, along with lybbi seemed to act as managers of the seed, with art as owner / founder)and have a unique perspective.

 Most here have treated you with respect. Greg has even created a folder where you can answer questions or offer your views without fear of being personally attacked or challenged. (Even Ginger doesn't get a folder like that! :grin: ) In return, you respond with more name-calling, comparing yourself to others, insults, broad, unfounded assumptions and hyperbole. While leaving those questions untouched. Did I dream it or didn't we use to have raps about why we compared ourselves to others?

 Perhaps we all started on the wrong foot in some way. Before posting again, take a deep breath. Try to refrain from trying to address the entire site as if we were one homogenous 'them' vs. you. If you would address any of us on a one to one basis & stick to criticizing or debating ideas offered here rather than a series of ad-hominem attacks, you might find that it isn't so unpleasant and others might return the consideration.

There's another option that many strongly pro-Seed graduates that read here might seriously consider. You could easily start your own on-line group. It doesn't have to be as sophisticated as the fornits site. I think MSN, Yahoo and other portals offer web space for private message boards for little or no cost. I've seen crazy sounding groups listed...left-handed dyslexic republican mothers against rap, maybe?  All of you could agree to only let pro-seed people join and delete any content you dislike. Why not? You would not have to read any dissenting views or attacks against the seed. No talk of korean brainwashing or cults. You could even have raps of a sort. (a chat room might be better for that come to think of it.) It could all be positve and uplifting. Endless talks about all the good you've done and people you helped. You could feel free to compare yourselves and talk derisively about all those druggie assholes and all the people 'out there' that just aren't as good as you that just don't get it...especially those failures over on fornits!  I'm only half kidding here. That does seem to be what some of you want or expect here. Only one side presented, no dissension, no disagreement. Give the idea a try and see what develops. See how long it takes for the same us vs. them divisions to  begin to spring up within your clique...before a few posters decide to break away and start their own group...or before your leaders begin to disagree amongst themselves and leave.

Or we could just stop dividing ourselves up inwardly along those lines here and just listen to each other without self-righteous condemnation of 'those' pro-seed zombies and 'those' anti-seed losers.

Personally, I like the pro and con views here. The disagreeing views can be instructive as long as we remember they're just views. From my pov, the truth has no need of being protected from dissent or criticism. It doesn't need censorhip. It is good to question, to look without fear of where the inquiry may take you.  The rest of what you wrote (the questions)  could easily be turned back to their source as well. Especially:

 "Why are you still failing to comprehend? Why do you choose to point your fingers at others instead of yourself? Are you living in such denial, buried in false pride that you fear swallowing it might lead to asphyxiation?"

Myself and others have answered the
question 'why are you here' numerous times. Just because you dislike or disagree with the answer, doesn't mean it wasn't addressed.
BTW, as to the Socrates quote, nearly everyone here that has offered any disagreement with the program has at some point made it plain that they have forgiven any perceived wrongs connected with the seed.  Maybe you just need to forgive yourself.


[ This Message was edited by: marshall on 2005-09-02 17:09 ]

[marshall]

Remember the Dr. Kaiser song that you created? Most of the group was in the building...seems it may have been close to christmas. Art was out front doing his schtick and he called you (John) from the back. Art explained that you'd written a song about the Seed's official psychiatrist to be sung to the tune of the old Armour hotdog song / commercial. I still recall the look on your face when he asked you to sing it for everyone. Seemed like a combinaton of embarrassment and disgust that art would ask such a thing.  I remember the song:

Kaiser
Dr Kaiser
What kind of kids like Dr. Kaiser?
Fat kids, skinny kids, kids that climb on rocks
Tough kids, sissy kids
Even kids with crooked cocks
love Kaiser
Dr Kaiser
The Doc kids love to bite!


I'd been on the program less than a month and we were outside sitting on the ground. You were leading a rap and it turned to how lazy we were before theseed and how much better we feel about ourselves now that we're more active. I raised my hand and related. I went on about how lazy I was and how bad that made me feel physically from getting no exercise. Then the kicker, I went on to say how much better I'd felt after a few weeks spent in prison! How the cutting bushes and digging ditches made me feel so much better. Nearly everyone in the group raised their hand to tell me where I was at...probably because nothing pre-seed was ever supposed to be good...especially not prison, fer crisake. You motioned for everyone to put their hands down and proceeded to support what I'd said as being true. Maybe you could relate from your own time in Raiford?

Anyway, I was grateful. I can't recall a single instance where you were unkind or insensitive to me. None of my disagreement springs from any personal animosity. It IS possible to disagree with people without wanting to bomb them to dust, send them to hell, villify them as 'other' or 'those people', or even dislike them. You shouldn't take any of the stuff you read here so personally. That might help you actually examine whether any of it has any validity. Maybe it doesn't. Maybe anyone that criticizes or finds fault with any aspect of the program is as deluded as you assert. Or maybe not. The sort of self-examination that you proposed might be profitable to all of us...no exceptions  Take care.
[ This Message was edited by: marshall on 2005-09-02 17:00 ]

[Anonymous]

The Seed had an official psychiatrist?  What did Dr. Kaiser do?

[Napolean Bonafart]

They're all ungrateful and pussies.

I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life, I absenteed myself from Christian assemblies.
--Benjamin Franklin, American Founding Father and inventor

[John Underwood]

Dear Marc and a little for Walter, ?hell, anyone who wants to bother reading it,

This may be my last post without first hiring an interpreter, an editor of sorts, to rewrite what I say, so that is more easily understood by some of you. The irony here of course is that after being called arrogant, condescending, etc. you put be in a position where it is necessary for me to write an analysis of my post so that you may understand it. So here goes, read slow if you must. This is sarcastic.

The questions in the above post were not meant to be taken literally. They were an attempt (and a very mild, gentle one at that) to make the point that anything or anyone put under the scrutiny The Seed, myself and others are put under here, probably wouldn?t fair very well, and that most stories have, at a minimum, two sides. And yes, I do see them even if I happen to be standing on only one, ?one and a half, maybe. This is not sarcastic.

Transparent diversions? -  They?re obviously not transparent enough or I wouldn?t be writing this. This is sarcastic.

Irony?, nuance?, I know for myself that just because I fail to always see things, it doesn?t necessarily mean they?re not there, but don?t tell me what I do see isn?t there. Read more closely. This is a little sarcastic.

And George Orwell? I hope you aren?t referring to Animal House, appropriate as that may be. Damn, I wish I hadn?t said that. Now I?ll have to write a completely new post to explain what that means. This is sarcastic.

Of course those were minimum times I mentioned, just what exactly did you think ??lasted as long as it lasted,? ?Not a lot of those,? and ?A few more of these met the time frame,? meant? This is not sarcastic.
This is why I need to hire an interpreter to assist some of you. This is sarcastic.

Thunderous, Righteous? I think I like that, thanks. (I?ll get back to you about whether or not this is sarcastic)

Locked in a room, sleep deprived, yelled at ? been there done that more than once.
The last time was 34 ½ years ago, cold turkey kicking a pretty substantial heroin habit in solitary confinement on a frigid concrete floor in, what was then a fairly well known, unit of the jail called the dungeon. No bed, no lights, no food, only the cops who would come around once or twice a day to laugh and kick you just to make sure you weren?t dead. This is not sarcastic.

?and the casual manner words like trauma, torture are used to describe The Seed experience?
Never mind, if sitting in a drug rehab for a few months, a year, ?whatever, traumatized you, then I confess, I can?t relate, I can try to empathize, but the fragility of your delicate psyche is truly something beyond my comprehension. A bad experience, maybe, one you wish you never had, okay. This is not sarcastic.

I?m sure that I omitted a few points, but not to worry, next time I?ll have the nine year-old that lives next door come over and put my thoughts into his words. His name?s Kevin, a great kid that I believe you?ll find very helpful. This is sarcastic (I hope).

[John Underwood]

Did I just read my post and say Animal House? Yes I did. Farm not House, though now that I think about it, could this be a Freudian Slip?

[John Underwood]

Marshall,
How can you expect the composer of the Dr. Kaiser song not to be a little sarcastic?
I just read your post and there is a lot I would like to say in response, but not tonight. Too damn tired, ...but I will.

[marcwordsmith]

hey Marshall, Love your thoughtful posts, but just a small personal note of disagreement. I do think of myself as entirely anti-Seed, but I hardly think I've been "spewing venom." That is to say, I do have an absolute position here. I think the Seed stunk and there was no excuse for it. I agree that it's fine to see the good and the bad and ugly, and to have mixed feelings, and life usually comes to us in ambiguous colors. But that doesn't mean we have to have mixed feelings about everything. I did share long ago that a couple of staff members--Clay in particular--were very kind. There were a number of kind human deeds I witnessed in the Seed. Kindness can happen anywhere. But the institution itself . . . I think it was evil. Is that venomous?

As for John's last post, whew! John, you're so complex and deep. (Sarcastic.) When you asked "Why did you fail The Seed? What did you fail to do? Why did you fail your parents? Why did you fail yourself? Why didn?t you benefit when so many did?" were these questions "not meant to be taken literally"? Wow, no wonder I didn't "get it" in the Seed! I still don't get it!

When you asked "Are you living in such denial, buried in false pride that you fear swallowing it might lead to asphyxiation? Is separating yourself now from the good The Seed did self-affirming, ego satiating?" was this your "very mild, gentle attempt" to make a point? (Perhaps, come to think of it, it is mild and gentle compared to the language used in the Seed, but that wouldn't look so good in print, would it?)

And was THIS one sarcastic???
"And finally, if awareness, enlightenment can simply be gained from life (as so many of you propose), without the intervention of a prominent catalyst, how do you explain the state of the people, the nations, the condition of planet earth today?"

Is the "prominent catalyst" alluded to above The Seed, God, or . . . perhaps yourself? I mean, as you can see, I'm lost. There are just so many levels to your depth and subtlety that escape me entirely.

I can't help but suspect you were suggesting that the Seed might have actually "saved the world" had it flourished. WERE YOU???

Your answer to the question of whether or not coercion can truly be a method of "enlightenment" or "raising awareness" was this gem:
"Of course there was coercion, we wanted people to stay."

Wow, that is deep! Or was it sarcastic?

Yes, my delicate psyche was traumatized by the Seed. You call it "sitting in a drug rehab for a few months, a year, ?whatever." Yeah, sure. Come to think of it, that's all it was. I just had to sit around for a while. (Sarcastic.)

Hey John, I did raise sleep deprivation and mind control (constant haranguing, "Get out of your head!" "What are you thinking!" etc. etc. . . . the disallowance of a moment's private reflection) as salient issues. Will you ever address them, I wonder?

Oh wait a minute, you did address them, very succinctly:
"?Get out of your head,? simply was/is synonymous with ?Wake up and smell the flowers,? though I gather some of you had a problem staying awake period."

Yeah, what was wrong with some of us, that we couldn't stay awake? What was our PROBLEM? Hm.

As for the locked room and your heroin habit, yeah, I get it now. It sounds like The Seed was made for people like you, who had no life, who really did need a whole new ego structure in order to survive. If everyone who came to the Seed had been that desperate, perhaps it would have been a good thing.

But did you also have a desperate need to see all the high school "druggies" in the same light you saw yourself? (not sarcastic)

Finally, John, I keep wondering . . . what exactly WAS the "the potential of The Seed, the dream" that you refered to in your initial post to this site? Seeds all over the world, sledgehammering "brotherly love and be your own best friend" into unwilling adolescents? Or perhaps the whole world would have BEEN the Seed? People power tripping each other all over the place, punctuated by sanctimonious speeches about how much love they feel?

Yeah. I wasn't feeling very angry at you personally, John, as I said earlier, before you posted. But your posts do piss me off. Congratulations.  Your own denial goes soooo deep. I doubt anything anyone writes here will ever get underneath it.

[marcwordsmith]

As for applying the same level of scrutiny to ourselves that we do to the Seed, I don't think this is the forum for it. That "point" is a red herring. We apply scrutiny to our own selves in the privacy of our own lives, within ourselves and with our loved ones. This page is about the Seed; therefore that's what we're talking about.

[rjfro22]

marcwordssmith,
                              It's easy to to rip people apart 30 something years ago.  Get over John Underwood, he was just a very young man at the time helping people,
doing what he thought was right. You know exactly what " get out of your head meant" staying out of the shit, it meant no more and no less.  John Underwood was just a small part of the seed, the seed was there before him and it was there after him. I was never close to John but I don't  remember him ever demeaning anyone, I remember john had a sadness about him, at least that was my feeling, he was a bit serious. I hope he is doing well today,  Now that I think about it John was a great guy, he help save lives, he dedicated part of life helping people, thats more then most of us can say, he didn't have to be there.
. We all know the seed worked for some of us and some feel it  did us an in justice, well blame that on your parents that put you there.  This site is beginning to get mean ,  I hate to see people leave it.

[marcwordsmith]

Small correction: I'm not ripping John apart for 30 something years ago. I'm responding to his postings on this page, August and September, 2005.

Yes, you're right, John did seem sort of sad. He was not the worst staff member, not by a long shot. There were a few flaming sadists, but he certainly wasn't one. He was rather kind to me personally. He sang "Moon River" to the group, and he probably afforded us more than half the rare moments of genuine levity we enjoyed there. Okay. If I've introduced an element of meanness here, I was unaware of it. But maybe I'll back off.

I disagree with you though about the meaning of "Get out of your head." How do you know someone's "in the shit" just because they're looking spaced out and inward? But hey, we've been over that one, huh?

[GregFL]

here you be!

Welcome back John!