Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - marshall

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12
31
The Seed Discussion Forum / More Trivia
« on: November 24, 2005, 10:43:00 PM »
quote----------
" In a very real way the life style of drugs was sort of a peer pressure cult too. It dictated how you dressed, what you listend to, how you acted, who you hung out with, pulled you away from family and there were rules and little special behaviors (hand shakes and peace signs). I always thought the point was that we were brainwashed to some extent by that culture to begin with."
-----------------

First, welcome to the forum. I've really enjoyed reading your posts too. What you're describing here as the drug culture also describes virtually every social group through-out history. The 20's flappers had their own music,lingo and styles, the 50's greasers and today's kids have their own lingo, music, body-piercing, etc. It isn't unique to the drug-culture and could even be applied to american culture itself.  It also very much describes the culture of the Seed while I was there.

 " It dictated how you dressed, what you listend to, how you acted, who you hung out with, pulled you away from family and there were rules and little special behaviors.." That also describes the Seed through and through. I understand the idea was to use  peer pressure to counteract peer pressure. This can produce marked outward changes in whatever direction the group chooses. The method of conditioned thought-reform can be used to achieve any end. It can create good, conforming communists, make homosexuals (outwardly) into straight people, achieve conformity of belief and behaviour in religious groups. It all amounts to substituting one form of conditioning for another..without honestly examining the reasons and motivations behind conditioning itself. I question the whole idea of using coercive peer-pressure to modify behaviour of any sort.

Many people have benefited from groups like Scientology, SGI buddism, Hare Krishna and even the most bizarre and controlling groups have some good points or ideals. I view the Seed in much the same way as I do many of these sects. Such groups usually not only claim to have 'an' answer....but 'the' answer. This results in the type of one-size-fits-all approach prevalent at the Seed and similar programs.

Finally, I note that once again someone (yourself) who has battled on-going and recurrent addiction issues since the seed program credits that program with saving your life and testifies to it's effectiveness. In my view, that belief and conclusion is itself likely a result of the program's conditioning...or 'brainwashing' if you prefer a stronger term. I too parroted this part of the party-line for years after graduating the program. I only suggest that you apply the self-inquiry / honesty that was touted by the program to the program itself. Can honest self-inquiry and examination actually result from peer-pressure and conditioning? It's sort of like threatening to torture someone unless they love you. You might be able to get them to show outward signs of affection or speak the words you want to hear, but geniune love can't be produced via threat or coercion. Neither can genuine awareness be the result of comparison and belief. Self knowledge is not a form of conditioning and can not arise from any conditioning, however idealistic or well-intentioned. It arises from understanding the nature of all conditioning itself. Not just druggie culture conditioning as opposed to straight-world or seed conditioning...but includes examining so-called patriotism or nationalistic conditioning and various forms of religious conditioning and belief as well. Take care.

32
The Seed Discussion Forum / Day 18 - Moral Inventory - 8/15/75 (Open Meeting)
« on: November 17, 2005, 08:59:00 PM »
...but it's not Me.  :???:

I found one of my moral inventory notebooks while cleaning a closet a few weeks ago. Reading through it, I felt nauseated and ashamed. Ashamed that I could have been so weak minded and easily manipulated. The writings don't even sound like me. They sound like sound-bites from raps...bits and pieces of various staff members personalities.

===quote:------
"my mother told me she'd been reading them and found them to be very disgusting"
---------------

I cursed much more in the seed than I ever did prior to going there. Every other word was 'F*ck', f*cking,' shit, etc. I think staff thought this showed real inner strength..."I was a F*CKING WHIMP!"...the women / girls were especially prone to this macho way of talking.

Maybe I was just unusual, maybe others really expressed their own thoughts and feelings in their MI's. I have trouble finding an original thought or phrase anywhere in mine. It's like someone had given me a personality transplant. And this is what they called learning to 'be yourself'? I was learning to be the person they  (art, staff and group) were molding / conditioning me to be. My m.i.'s  were just the regurgitated words of staff.

Reading through the MI's of my early months there, I'm still amazed that I wasn't completely taken-in. I sure sound brain-washed to me now. It's scarey. I've often wondered what the factors were that allowed me to escape that heavy-handed conditioning. Funny, but I think my family's value system played some part. I was taught as a child to question everything critically..not just to believe or accept because someone said-so. The same  thing that caused me to question and become disillusioned with much of the drug-culture before I went to the program, also caused me to question the Seed ideology. Another factor was probably all the reading I did on my program. Whatever the cause, I'm profoundly grateful that I didn't fully 'get it.'  

Over all the months of my inventories, two themes keep recurring. I chastise myself over and over for listening to 'space music' and fantasizing about chicks. I guess it was just a losing battle. 30 years later, I still love my space music (mainly floyd & the moody blues) and I married a chick!  :lol: I am thankful that I was able to go to the Seed instead of languishing in a Georgia prison, but I'm just as thankful that I didn't get stuck in that seedling mindset.

33
Tacitus' Realm / WORLD CAN'T WAIT- Drive Out Bush Regime
« on: November 02, 2005, 12:40:00 AM »
I just read this book. Absolutely fantastic and I highly recommend it to anyone that finds the present administration scarey.

http://www.buzzflash.com/reviews/05/rev05050.html

"America 2014: An Orwellian Tale" by Dawn Blair

Here's a link to an excerpt from the book:

http://www.progressivesource.com/Page.html

(Note: Antigen, you are especially likely to enjoy this book. The drug war and drug policy are integral parts of the book. If you get a chance to read it let me know what you think.)

34
The Seed Discussion Forum / I was in the Cleveland Seed and went to Florida when it clos
« on: October 19, 2005, 12:42:00 AM »
I did get the distinct sense that we were not supposed to masturbate at all. No one ever said this explicitly. Instead, I frequently heard staff and oldtimers speak negatively and harshly about "fantasizing about chicks" or "getting into your head about chicks". I suppose it's technically possible to masturbate without fantasizing but I never had much luck with that. I recall one guy even feeling guilty about having a wet dream and he asked a staff member what he should do. "Enjoy it." was the reply. The reason given was that you have no control over such things. But purposeful, conscious masturbation was a different matter. Every guy I talked to got the same impression as I...it was a no no.

I went 'without' for my first couple of months at the Seed and then decided to heck with it. This resulted in feelings of guilt and I'd never experienced even the slightest guilt feelings about masturbating before the seed. My moral inventories are full of lines berating myself for fantasizing about chicks. It created a war within myself & shame where there was none before.

My guess is this puritanical aspect of the Seed came from Art's (& other staff members) catholic background. Whatever the source, it was a twisted aspect of Seed ideology.

35
The Seed Discussion Forum / Dear Art,
« on: October 09, 2005, 10:49:00 PM »
Ginger, I watched some interesting shows on the History channel this past week that you might enjoy. They've been doing a whole series on drugs. Last night's episode was on Ecstasy and LSD. I was finally able to see and hear that Bobby Dupont guy you mention here. They interviewed him for the piece. The History channel is usually pretty good at giving both sides of any controversy and they did well here too. The show interviewed several people that suggested that the drug war was really declared against the youth culture movement / new left rather than just drug use. J. Edgar Hoover suggested to Nixon that a good way to undermine the anti-war movement was to concentrate on arresting as many as possible for drug violations. I got a good sense of how the anti-drug panic of the times could have easily spawned programs like the Seed. Your description of it as a culture rehab rather than a drug rehab was right on the mark, imo.

They also interviewed the head of Narconon who claimed that a single dose of LSD ruined his life (he was a math major) and caused him to become a 'barefoot hippie dropout'. (I'm not sure how he accounts for folks like Bill Gates or Steve Jobs though. I've read that both imbibed acid heavily in college.) Others had several negative things to say about the drug war in general. These were respected officials, not junkies. History channel often replays these sort of programs so if you haven't already seen them you might still be able to catch them.

BTW, I tried again yesterday to find that Meadowsweet herb you mentioned. No health food store around here seems to have heard of it.

36
The Seed Discussion Forum / Dear Art,
« on: October 09, 2005, 08:02:00 PM »
Lauderdale, I think you're missing Jupiter's point. An "Honorary" doctorate is absolutely nothing like a real doctorate. Jupiter isn't denying that Art received an honorary doctorate. She's merely saying this is as meaningless from an academic / scholarly standpoint as Mr Cruise's claim to be an expert in psychiatry. If you doubt this simply research the topic yourself.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

"An Honorary Degree (Latin: honoris causa ad gradum) is an extra-ordinary academic degree awarded to an individual as a decoration, rather than as the result of matriculating and studying for several years. An honorary degree may be conferred by an institution that the recipient never attended. The degree itself may be a bachelor's, master's or doctorate degree ? the latter being by far the most common. Usually the degree is conferred with great pomp and ceremony as a way of honoring a famous or distinguished visitor."

from this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorary_degree

37
The Seed Discussion Forum / Dear Art,
« on: October 07, 2005, 10:42:00 PM »
Thanks for the clarification. I saw what you were getting at in regard to defining the word 'cult'. That's why I posted that link. It explores the problems assoiciated with trying to define it and gives several points of view. I do think there's more to it than just coercion though. The Seed seems to have become less overtly coercive as time went on yet more controlling and self-enclosed. Perhaps the coercion simply became more subtle.

You mentioned the In-group Out-group thing in another post. I remembered reading about in- groups and out-groups, the psychology and sociology associated with this when I returned to school as an oldcomer. I also recall that it struck me at the time that it was very descriptive not only of the 'drug culture' but that it was also descriptive of the Seed itself. Us vs Them. Those druggie assholes, etc. Us, special, chosen seedlings with more insight and awareness. Reading and thinking about that was one of the cracks in the wall for me. 'We' can't be special and good unless we compare ourselves to 'them' that are common and evil. All of it seems to arise from insecurity and ego.

Ironically, the relation between these (insecurity and ego) was an insight gained from the Seed raps. I simply applied some of the same rigorous honesty that seemed to be reserved for our druggie past to my seedling present. Like jgar and others have said, I also learned from much that was discussed at the Seed. I think I gained more from it after I left the program though. It was only then that I began to sort out what seemed true and useful from what seemed cultic, mistaken or just irrelevant. If I'd remained involved with the group I think it would have been difficult to form my own ideas about things and grow. We were bombarded with a one-sided or narrow interpretation of such concepts as honesty, ego, images, love, relationships, etc. and told not to pick and choose.

38
The Seed Discussion Forum / Dear Art,
« on: October 07, 2005, 09:06:00 PM »
Quote
On 2005-10-07 06:49:00, cleveland wrote:

"In my era the Seed was a relatively benign place in terms of the 'bad stuff' and had some real benefits for people - the 'good stuff.' So depending upon where you were coming from as a kid, and where you were going, the Seed either had some benefit to you, or a possible down side, if you lost the opportunity to go to college or get married or other good things that might have been coming to you. It is all relative. It seems to me that in the Seed during a rapid growth period (the early 70s) things got a little crazier, and also in later Straight or other offshoot programs (man, kids are getting abused - and I am not talking about eating PB&J sandwiches - I mean rape, physical abuse,etc.)



See, I think the heart of the debate here revolves around human nature. We need to belong! To the degree that we make compromises to belong, we are acting 'cult' like. Almost every human activity, when viewed from the outside, looks ridiculous. So if you dropped down from Mars, and observed a High School marching band, a middle school lunch table, a corporate meeting, a Marine Corp. bootcamp, a married couple arguing, whatever - it would all look absurd. Remember your first day of school? Remember seeing all the cliques, jocks and nerds, cheerleader and freaks, greasers, whatever it was when you were there? Or the first day of a new job? Maybe you are more social than I am, but to me it takes me a while to warm up to new social situations - to decide what parts of me don't 'fit in' and to choose to display them or not.



So whatever cult you choose - be it AA, Baptist religion, the Green Party, NORML, Jews for Jesus - or maybe it's just the cult of your family - to some degree we ALL make compromises. We HAVE to. Don't tell me you don't bite your tongue sometimes with your spouse or your kids to keep the peace or to avoid embarrasmet. Well, when I was a Seedling, avoiding conflict with staff or protecting Art's aura of invincibility was just as important to me.



Now, if we can all agree that our human activity is all a bit cult-like, than we can drop the argument about is the Seed a 'cult.' What we have left is the degree of COERCION. To the degree that I am coerced to follow the dictates of my family, religion, job or friends (and there will almost always be some coercion - even if it's just subtle pressure to conform) I will come to a point where I will sacrifice my humanity. But that will be different for each of us. Joining a street gang or becoming a cop or a Marine has a different standard and intensity than having lunch with my aunt, but it's really just a matter of degree, isn't it?



WE can still debate the value of the Seed or similar programs, but I think it's important that we recognise that both good and bad can come out of this human need to belong.



"


Hi Walter. I agree that there are serious questions about where you draw the line in various human behaviours as to which group is or isn't a cult or how cultic it is. There is no real agreement amongst sociologists or psychologists about this either.

Here's great link that explores this issue of "what is a cult?" in-depth. It took awhile to slog thru it all but it was informative.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult

Wherever you choose to draw that line, it does seem that the Seed became more cultic as time went on. Yes, that is a value judgement on my part...which is why I said from my own pov. I grew up in rural Kentucky surrounded by some form of this.  Lots of my extended family members became involved with small churches headed by charismatic preachers. Many of these guys were very definite about what sort of behaviour was expected in their church. If you didn't conform, you were banished from the church and shunned...much like the Seed. My aunt and uncle were told to get rid of their TV...it's an agent of Satan. No make-up or pants for women. No long hair or beards for men. No rock music...only gospel. Theologically, you were expected to agree with the preacher or leave. Sound familiar? I think that this may be one reason I quickly became disillusioned with the Seed. It looked like the same crap in a different package and struck me very much as a sort of religion.

Again, I have no problem with adults choosing to do this as long as no overt coercion is involved. I've found similar behaviour in some followers of eastern gurus. There are cases where the all-knowing guru chooses your spouse and vocation. He or she (most are male) is regarded as semi-divine or perfect and never to be questioned. As you point out, it's human behaviour and not tied to chrisitanity, hinduism or self-help groups. I simply have no desire to be involved with any group that is cult-like to that degree.

And yes, it's a matter of degree. The rotary club may be cultic to one degree and the people's temple cultic to another. In my view, the Seed seemed to travel along those lines from mild in the very beginning to extreme near the end. We all make compromises, but the degree to which we compromise in order to belong does make a difference. It can be like saying; 'well, everyone is basically selfish...it's human nature. Therefore it's OK for me to rob this bank." or " Since all institutions or groups (including families or this website) are cultlike to some degree....there's no difference between being a member of AA and Aum Shinrikyo." This is how the assertion that 'this website is a cult' strikes me. Perhaps we should jettison the C word entirely and come up with a different way of describing cult-like behaviour. It's like the term; "Brainwashing". It has such strong negative connotations and no-one seems to agree on what it means.

It should be emphasized that criticism of the Seed program does not = attacks on the people. John noted that some of his defense of the Seed resulted from his close feelings of friendship with fellow seedlings...as if criticism of the program meant denunciation of the people we care / cared about. I don't think that is the case with most of us.

39
The Seed Discussion Forum / Dear Art,
« on: October 06, 2005, 10:58:00 PM »
Your post made me think that people could also say similar things about the Marine Corps. If you were growing up in a bad neighborhood surrounded by hard drugs, gangs and frequent shootings...then either voluntarily joined or were drafted (the bad old days!) into the Marines, you could easily make the claim that joining the Marines saved your life...that you'd be dead or in jail if not for joining.

On the other hand, if you were a kid in a middle-class suburb worried more about getting a high SAT score than drive-by shootings or shooting drugs...& then you joined the Marines (or were drafted)..it would be equally as plausable to claim that joining ruined your life...especially if you found yourself being shot-at...or had little if any effect upon your life. If you were KIA, it would not only have not saved your life, it would be the cause of your death.
Neither person would be lying.

The problem is the 'one size fits all' philosophy. What's good for one might be harmful to another and irrelevant to yet another depending upon our life circumstances. And as Walter pointed out in his post, it is really impossible to know what caused what or whether the Seed saved your life or made it worse. My own life circumstances were such that the Seed at least saved me from serving 5 years in a Georgia prison...and if you'd ever met JJ, you'd know how grateful I am for that!

(JJ was a cock-eyed black guy about 6 1/2 feet tall serving a life sentence for murder and was especially....uh...fond of young white boys that he often attempted to 'seduce' with a butcher knife stolen from the prison kitchen. I narrowly escaped his affections, but given longer time, he might be my life-partner by now. :cry2: )

40
The Seed Discussion Forum / Dear Art,
« on: October 06, 2005, 10:30:00 PM »
Great thread everyone. Lots of thoughtful posts.

-------quote-----
"The seed did change alot for the better as time went on it moved on. Maybe you shoud too."
--Ft lauderdale
-----------------

Interesting. You and John U. are in direct disagreement on this point it seems. It is not so simple as getting worse or getting better, imo. It depends, as always, upon your pov and what you consider as being better or worse. Like Greg, John and others I wasn't actually there in the later years so I can only go on what I've read here from those such as yourself that were. From my own pov, the Seed indeed got better in some ways and worse in others. The biggest improvement to me is the voluntary nature of the later program. No more forcing kids against their will into the program. You also mentioned that hardly anyone got yelled at in group anymore...plus the lack of smoking. I have 0 problem with a bunch of adults getting together and deciding to form a new religion or follow anyone they so choose. This goes for the latter day Seed as well as for such fringe groups as the heaven's gate. As long as no coercion is used...the courts aren't ordering anyone to join up and wear black tennis shoes...then it's their own business. That's a big plus. It's just not my cup of kool-aid and I'd run from such a group as fast as possible.

On the other hand, (again from my own pov) most of the other changes were for the worse in that the Seed became more overtly cultic (elevating Art to near faultless divine status it would seem), status oriented and self-enclosed. If you or others do not regard Lybbi or Art determining who can and can't have a relationship or get married or what sort of career you can have or whether you should have kids or requiring everyone to always be on their program or...well the list is long....as being cultic, then there are (to you) no such things as cults, period. To me, there's something distinctly sick and neurotic about the latter Seed program. At least when I graduated, you were expected to go out and live your own life and make your own decisions. Kudos to John for that at least.

[ This Message was edited by: marshall on 2005-10-06 21:08 ]

41
The Seed Discussion Forum / Dear Art,
« on: October 05, 2005, 03:19:00 PM »
So Straight did not have a c.c. (to use Gingers shorthand) slant to the program? My mistake. I got that impression from reading bits and pieces from people that were there. So you could be like a Hindu, Buddhist or Atheist and the Straight program was ok with that?

42
The Seed Discussion Forum / Dear Art,
« on: October 05, 2005, 02:39:00 PM »
I specifically recall that Art did not believe that Jesus was the son of god or divine in any sense. He often spoke about this in the group. He used to say that Jesus was a great rabbi, but that's all. As to whether he was an atheist, I have no idea. I've wondered about the religious angle of the Straight / Seed split too, since Straight became a very conservative christian group from what I've read. I also remember born-again oldtimers coming to group and relating about finding Jesus. If Art happened to be present, he would take pains to point out that this wasn't necessary to get straight or stay straight and was just their personal choice. I give him credit for being much more tolerant of religious diversity than groups like Straight and some of the other later off-shoots. As long as your primary religion was the Seed, you could embrace any other faith.

43
The Seed Discussion Forum / I was going to write Dear Greg, but even titles seem it be m
« on: October 02, 2005, 10:53:00 PM »
So, is this the one we're talking about?

http://stage.findtuition.com/college.ph ... it&lr=tuit

http://www.fmu.edu/

BTW anon, YOU are part of "this site" too. It's like saying; YOU stupid americans! Given the wide range of opinions & points of view expressed here, I'm dumbfounded how so many are able to lump every poster together as 'this site', etc.

44
The Seed Discussion Forum / note to Jupiter Survivor
« on: October 02, 2005, 03:56:00 PM »
Quote
On 2005-10-02 10:35:00, GregFL wrote:

"
Quote

I mentioned the guy at one site that constructed 5 alternate idenities and posted under them all. His purpose seemed to be to multiply his influence there...make it seem there were large numbers of posters that agreed with him or shared his pov.




We have had damn little of that here, I can assure you.



Not none,but very little.



"


Yeah, I wasn't saying that we had lots of folks using multiple monikers...rather that using the anon option can function in the same manner. Anon can post 50 times per day and it might seem that 50 different people share the same pov...when it may only be one or two. Obviously this applies to both sides of the pro-con seed divide that prevails here most of the time.

45
The Seed Discussion Forum / note to Jupiter Survivor
« on: October 02, 2005, 12:34:00 PM »
Greg, I think Jupiter is probably referring to all the Anonymous posts of late. At most sites the majority of anon posters are trolls. Here, my guess is they are mostly regular posters that want to express an opinion without revealing themselves. There are lots of pluses to being able to post anon, but some negatives too. I mentioned the guy at one site that constructed 5 alternate idenities and posted under them all. His purpose seemed to be to multiply his influence there...make it seem there were large numbers of posters that agreed with him or shared his pov. Interestingly, it was a religous board and the guy is the leader of a small cult. It also makes it more difficult to maintain the flow of dialogue when there's lots of anons. Anons don't have to worry about being consistent from one post to the next either.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12