We were idling away the evening on the balcony, drinking wine and talking about everything from the Keith Richards book to Medicare cuts. Our neighbors – she a renowned blues singer deeply engaged in progressive causes; he an accomplished painter, musician and entertaining raconteur – were just paying a warm, friendly social call.
But when I happened to mention that it angered me that many today consider our generation, the Sixties generation, a failure, I set the singer’s eyes ablaze. It was like I’d reported nasty and untrue gossip about her family. In a sense, I had.
When she got home, my friend emailed me an impressive list of accomplishments and accomplished people that have not yet been matched by our successor generation. Among them: Steve Jobs. Stevie Wonder. Civil Rights. A war ended by popular protest. Gene splicing. The space program. Sir Tim Berners-Lee and his invention of the Web. Environmental consciousness. Feminism. Habitat for Humanity. The Peace Corps. And my favorite: frozen margaritas.
So what’s to criticize? The most common complaint is that the Sixties Generation was at bottom self-indulgent, that its idealism was selfishness in disguise, that it gave up the disguise for material gain and political apathy.
The hard-core punk band, Seven Seconds, sang in their 1983 song, “Clenched Fists, Black Eyes”:
We’re aiming for a different goal,
Succeeding where the hippies failed.
But one thing’s sure and you can bet,
We’ll be more than a drugged-out threat!
Or, let’s take the criticism from one of my generation’s own heroes, Joni Mitchell:
My generation was ready to change the world but when the baton was passed on in the seventies (the hippie movement) fell into a mass depression. We degenerated into the greediest generation – the hippie, yippie, yuppie transition from the sixties to the seventies to the greedy eighties. My generation dropped the baton and spawned this lackluster generation.
There are a lot of myths – and a great deal of historical confusion – about the Sixties and that generation’s legacy. It’s often overlooked that conservatives, in America and around the world, launched a vicious, well-funded attack on the values and the people responsible for revolutionary changes – feminism, Civil Rights, Medicare/Medicaid, etc.
There’s even a specific memo written on a specific date – the infamous 1971 Lewis Powell memo to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce – credited with launching that campaign. Powell, subsequently appointed by Richard Nixon to the U.S. Supreme Court, was alarmed by the size of the chorus for change:
The most disquieting voices joining the chorus of criticism come from perfectly respectable elements of society: from the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals, the arts and sciences, and from politicians. In most of these groups the movement against the system is participated in only by minorities. Yet, these often are the most articulate, the most vocal, the most prolific in their writing and speaking.
In other words, we didn’t drop the baton, as Mitchell suggested. It was stolen from us by a well-organized counter-revolution that led to Thatcherism in Britain and Reaganism here. Trust me, neither “ism” was our idea. We fought against them and we’re still fighting against them.
Nonetheless, there’s truth to the idea that some of the creative energy of the Sixties dissipated in the Seventies and Eighties. Many were demoralized by the killings at Kent State and Jackson State. We celebrated Nixon’s resignation, but Watergate was an ugly spectacle that left a bitter taste in our mouths.
Also, Powell said something in his memo that deserves attention. Only a small percentage of Sixties youth actually participated in the movements for political and cultural change. In other words, the “Sixties Generation” was a far more complicated beast than many assume. I mean, both Karl Rove and I are of that generation. For decades, Rove’s been paid millions to destroy the reforms of the Sixties and marginalize the values that led to those reforms.
That leads me to a fair criticism: the wealthy and successful members of my generation, even those who held on to values of compassion and responsibility for others and oneself, failed to confront the counter-revolutionaries effectively. While the Right built an unprecedented communications infrastructure, we too often trusted that we would succeed simply because our cause was right and just.
I suppose this generational, rhetorical tug-o-war will get more heated as the efforts to dismantle Medicare and Social Security continue and more boomers turn 65.
I’d just like to remind people that it really was altruism that drove the struggle for Civil Rights, for equal rights for women, for a safety net for the least fortunate among us.
Hell, none of us thought we’d ever turn 65. To pretend, like pundits at ABC, Newsweek and elsewhere do, that our selfishness is behind our opposition to the dismantling of Medicare is a cynical lie perpetrated by right-wing extremists who can’t stand it that America’s better angels lead us to take care of one another.




248 Comments












Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Wait, I thought Al Gore….. oh yeah, my bad, he invented global warming. But he’s still fat. So there. That proves. Something. To someone.
I coulda shoulda put Al on the list too.
Bravo.
Very well said sir.
And we need to call them out on that lie whenever it surfaces.
Only 2 U.S. prez from the 60s, and miserable failures, both of them.
It clears things up to know that my generation, the Boomers, consisted of two very different cohorts, with contrasting political views. This has created the false impression that my cohort “sold out.”
I’m an early Boomer. My cohort were the protest generation, the hippies, the flower children, etc. To a great extent, this cohort gives the 60s its indelible image.
But my cohort was soon followed by an entirely different one. These were the people who came of age in the 80s, and their worldview was 180 degrees different from ours–even though we were all technically Baby Boomers.
Therein lies the answer to the mystery of what happened to the 60s. The people coming up in the 80s were the ones who thought greed was good. Politically and socially, they were the Roundheads to our Calaviers. These folks were only too anxious to sell out. Even bigger than my cohoert, these folks voted Reagan in, and down the tubes we went.
Because of the turnaround of the 80s, people say the Boomers sold out. But it’s inaccurate and simplistic, like most of what is said about my generation.
PS: An earlier comment calls Bill Clinton a failure–an odd thing to say about a man who was tied with FDR as most popular President of the 20th century. He is one of ours, you know.
Treason on Steroids
The bad: Many associate the 1960s with ‘the hippies.’ And many of those hippies are now bitter and angry people, with senses of entitlement and pacified by their own excesses.
The good: People cared enough to protest. There were well populated protests. There were popular songs. Hollywood participated. Even Nixon was a 1960s radical (Clean Air ACT, created the EPA, clean water, etc) because of social pressures). In those days, popular opinion trumped what the business community and the Chamber of Commerce wanted.
Good morning Glenn.. I also am of that generation and I feel that the right has been winning the Class War since St Ronnies time but of course they have very deep pockets and can out spend us any day of the week. We have been on the slippery slide to the bottom since we had an actor in the White House. Just look at what he did to California and then to the nation. Then California elects another actor and look at how bad California is suffering with unemployment at 11.9%. All these failed policies Must be changed so that once again we care about our fellow Americans many of whom are suffering from the rights economic mishandling of our Government to enable the rich and take from the poor and give their money to the rich.. St Ronnie’s GREED has led to our downfall.
the only cure I can see is to make all elections both national and local funded with public money. It is the only way we can right the path of our country…
Good sentiment, weird list.
I was referring to Clinton & W, our cohort. (Technically, I’m 2 years older than when the BB started.) W was a known failure all along. Clinton recognized as one after the fact, bc he’s the one who turned the Ds far far to the right.
As for O, I don’t even consider him as part of the BB, though he just sneaked in, being born in 61 and the technical end iirc are those born in 1964.
When looking for things to put blame on, generalizing and generalities are usually a good first choice.
Nice one, in general.
We often forget that we invent our categories, the “Sixties Generation” for instance. We’ve done worse. As many scholars have now pointed out, we even invented racial categories.
In the case of the Sixties, the failure to look deeply at the complex personalities, motivations, ideological differences, etc. etc. creates a very twisted picture of the era. It’s a picture convenient to authoritarians who use it as a straw-man, a symbol of excess, violence, self-indulgence etc.
And who since then would be a success? Ronald Reagan was the biggest failure in 200 years, having engendered the process that in 30 short years collapsed 180 years of careful, government overseen, building of a globally competitive American manufacturing industrial base begun by the founders, principally Jefferson et al. selling it all off unrecoverably for short term profit and destroying the national economy, contracting out the government into endemic corruption, and bankrupting the place permanently on the specious theories of a bunch of libertarians from Chicago, the “free market” and the “service economy”.
I completely support full public finance of elections at all levels. In fact, in that friendly conversation I mention in the piece we all agreed that we were unsuccessful in curbing the power of money in politics, and that lack of success has hurt the cause badly.
Can’t say the U.S. has had its share of good prez, can you.
On edit: A cliche about power corrupting comes to mind.
What, you don’t like frozen margaritas? :)
I couldn’t agree more. That’s why I find it doubtful that there will be any meaningful or wide-spread protests in this country no matter how bad the economy gets or how oppressive or regressive the government acts. As long as all the self-absorbed assholes have their iPods, iPads, and the latest G4 cell phone, they don’t give a Flying Fuck about anything. They’re too busy working their thumbs, Tweeting, getting drunk, fucking each other, and living off Mom and Dad.
I was born in ’48 and just turned 63. To me, most people born after 1980 walk around holding a mirror in front of their face. It’s all about ‘me’!
There are more possible moves in a chess game than atoms in the universe (link available in the lobby after the thread closes).
Similarly there are more defining moments for The Sixties cohort than for, like, y’know, all other generational cohorts combined.
Eat your hearts out, envious bastards, and wash them down with sour grapes of wrath.
no I don’t particularly like Steve Jobs or Tim Berners-Lee. Prefer Stewart Brand or Woz.
I included Jobs et al because it’s often forgotten that he is a boomer. The web’s credited to later generation. I’m with you on Brand and Wozniak. Could have just as easily mentioned Woz.
And Reaganism has become a form of ideology. Especially supply-side economics, which has failed miserably except for those at the very top. Like other ideologues, supply-siders insist that their idea hasn’t failed, it only needs to be applied with even greater force.
Yes – get the money out of everything and then start a new soulcalism where capital is shown it’s place – at the end of the line.
I guess I am technically on the edge of the Boomer generation. What I perceive is that serious enablers of Nixon weren’t brought to justice and burrowed deep waiting to try again. This time, I say we get it right.
Agreed Glenn W Smith and aptly put.
A basic idea that is lost among many caught up in the march to freer, less regulated markets in the last 40 years is that capitalism is not altruistic.
From corporate policy or even professional ‘ethics’, lobbying to wall street and back to Washington, and out again, a country that forgets what altruism is for, could conclude that greed was good. Thereby limiting what good could mean to the exclusion of other ideas. Like altruism. Not charity exactly or other euphemisms like ‘handouts’ or ‘giveaways’. But real altruism. By the people for the people.
Yes, like public financing of elections at all levels.
You forgot the Gay Liberation movement — which debuted with a vengeance in 1969.
The 60′s were about a lot of things but the most important, IMO, is “The Personal is Political.” This was the heart of omen’s Liberation, Gay Liberation AND the Vietnam war — because there was a draft and lives were on the line. The war continued into the 70′s but was ground to a ahlt by the peopel of this country because of what we discovered about ourselves in the 60′s. What we must never forget is the fact that “Let The Sunshine In” isn’t a Big Smiley Face plastered over everything. it’s wish from the gut.
1967 was My Favorite Year. I was 20, “Out,” meeting and mingling with all sorts of people (Andy Warhol, Jean-Luc Godard, Tony Bakeland) and putting my career as a writer on the fast track. I was suspiciou of eerythig and everyone. Ad that attitude has helped me miantain my sanity over the long haul.
Listen to this foundational 60′s text in several parts of YouTube.
The Boomer left scorched earth for Gen Xers and the Yers. And their presidents were horrible too. Oilbummer, Slick Willie, Bush Jr. Not a stellar list.
With the three covered-up meltdowns at Fukushima and the stupidity of genetic alteration which also destroys the environment and our bodies fairly fast as compared to instantaneously in the event of a nuclear event, folks should be running, not walking, to soulcalism right now.
“Poison Fire: Eco-philosopher Joanna Macy speaks on the spiritual challenges of nuclear power and nuclear weapons” (video)
Aye, here’s the rub about the self-aggrandizement of the 60′s left.
Steve Jobs wouldn’t exist without either the transistor or marketing both which were discovered by older generations.
Stevie Wonder — claiming one individual’s talent as the creation of a generation seems pathological.
Civil rights — again ignoring the generations of work done by activists in the South. This is exemplified by the common knowledge of Rosa Parks as a tired woman who said no rather than the truth of her long activist past and the organization that was in place prior to her courageous act.
The war ended by popular protest — really, the anti-war movement stopped the Viet-nam war? Do you really believe this? It seems that anti-war movement died at Kent State when many of those in the peace left saw first-hand how the State was going to deal with them and immediately retreated into realms of separation be it academia, communes, religion, or capitalism. You were either tired of fighting or completely ignorant of the long violent history of this nation. Either way, the anti-war didn’t stop the war, and even more fundamentally, didn’t stop the ideology that has allowed more imperial wars to occur.
Gene-splicing — if your generation wants to take credit for that, go right ahead. I suggest that you watch this video and think about that.
The space program — So it was all those teenagers and toddlers of the 50s and 60s riding rocket technology pioneered in Nazi Germany. Baby boomers are time travelers too.
Environmental consciousness — So you can ignore the Thoreau and the transcendentalists of the American literary tradition, or the various religious sects in America that practiced forms of environmentalism, or pre-Green Revolution agricultural practices, or Native Americans, or the anarchist tradition (even Taoism). Yours was the first generation to discover this knowledge or truth?
Feminism — many feminists are aware that feminism didn’t start in the 60s, so I think they might be taken aback by this idea. But I won’t speak for feminists, as I’m sure they can speak well enough for themselves as to the success of the protest generation.
Habitat for Humanity — I don’t know enough about this organization to make any comment, except to say it reaches back to a much older communitarian ideal that is in reality fetishized in post-industrial capitalism
Peace Corps — a program created by a WWII veteran that has had several generations of young adults contribute to its success (but you were first, I know, and that’s what is important).
Tim Berners-Lee, web — so someone from your generation invented a new printing press, a new tool. A tool is only as useful as it is used, and it appears that when many in your generation create “content” to talk about the importance of your history, it becomes an exercise in “why is everyone always picking on me,” in the words of a novelty record from your distant era of conformity. I have a feeling that Berners-Lee isn’t so egotistical about his contribution to the development of humanity, as he understands the history of the internet and his place in it, rather than having this flawed misunderstanding of history, whereby everything people my age did and what I did personally was completely justified because it was necessary to lead to this new age of enlightenment, which suspiciously looks worse than the old age that we were being protected from. The Baby Boomers, and especially those peripatetic leftists (you know white, middle-class), are highly narcissistic about what few victories they achieved in the name of social justice and barely dealt with ideas of economic justice at all.
Frozen margaritas — let’s get fucked up in a highly branded and corporatized arena while we listen to some music that changed the world after we spend $300 on tickets and stand in line for our drinks. Yeah.
It’s almost like you guys really believe all the media clap-trap that has been produced over the eons celebrating your exceptionalism and your failure. Most of your generation was unwilling to sacrifice itself and wanted to live in the cognitive dissonance of “guns and butter” America. Should there be that sacrifice in a revolution? I don’t know, but it seems to me the courage of the Syrian people, as many other peoples, stands in strong contrast to stateside Leftists of the late 60s and the 70s. And
You disengaged, as you simply thought that you were better than that. And now you revel in your ignorance as justification for promises made by previous generations. And you refuse to admit, that the world you leave behind, and the America you leave behind, is fundamentally sick, and poisoning the lives of your children and grandchildren whilst many of you are still having your nostalgia catered to. And what do you do but remain craven and defensive.
I did the entire sixties experience. Drafted in 1966, I served during the Vietnam era but not there. Got out and became the roadie for a SF hippie rock band. Saw live and hung out with many of the legendary musicians of the day. Probably one of a dozen or so hippies who lived every word of the Frank Zappa line, “I will move to San Francisco, I will become the road manager for a rock band, I will sleep on floors and catch the crabs and smoke an awful lot of dope.”
My nephew, 25 years younger than I, tells me that his generation’s music sucks next to mine.
In the seventies my buddy Gary Fisher (a former Grateful Dead Party Krew member) and I had an idea for cross-country bicycles. We started a bike company called MountainBikes, and changed the world again.
I do not have much of an opinion other than to observe that the force for women’s right/equality has been largly successful (grads, prof’ls, etc) and the Civil Rights struggle as well. The Freedom Riders being celebrated this weekend for very good reason; people died, and those who were injured continued right on, and others joined. May not be perfect, but an awesome piece of progress.
Yep. After Kent State (for lack of any authoritative timestamp) the hardcores dropped out and migrated to the Northwest, or they became social missionaries as essentially pro bono lawyers, teachers, underground newspaper workers, and such. The ‘culture’ was bereft of its former health, and the into-the-vacuum Yuppies pounced on the diseased body politic and sucked it to death.
I’m not Karl Rove’s protege or anything, but to this socialist there’s a lot more true than false in the claim of that generation being a failure.
I fully think that my generation (born 1982) has a unique perspective on this because we’re the lucky beneficiaries of having to deal with an economy and political system that the sixties generation helped destroy (but not before they enriched themselves and took all the good jobs!).
Especially the claim that they ended a war. Yeah right. Vietnam didn’t end until 1975, a date by which most of the generation in question had already sold out the principles they were lying about having. They traded radicalism for careerism and the promise of “success”. But I slightly digress. Hell, as late as 1972 Nixon was trying to drum up war support among the “silent majority” and making runs into Cambodia and Laos. It took us literally being driven from the country, escaping by rooftop helicopter, to end it. Nothing to do with protests, everything to do with the North Vietnamese Army and the Vietcong. It was like the protesters weren’t even there.
White sell outs trying to take credit for the success of the Civil Rights movement? Again, please. Sure, maybe it helped, but it’s a documented historical fact that it was black activism, and specifically fear of black violence, that drove LBJ to sign the Civil Rights act. This was an African American accomplishment.
Really, though, it’s the bigger scope of history that shows what a failure the boomers were. It’s not a coincidence that wages stopped rising in the 70′s, after the most selfish generation in American history were easily co-opted by the economic system. It’s not a coincidence that this country has failed to solve even one big problem since the Nixon administration. The issue is as simple as this – on all of the issues and values that the sixties kids pretended to care about, every single one of them is magnitudes of order worse than the boomers found them. Corporate hegemony. The environment. Civil rights. Equality. All at historic lows.
And the boomers that so thoroughly and self-evidently failed at stewardship point the finger at my generation for being all about ourselves and not getting involved. Well, we are kind of self involved. Because we had the best teachers for that – our fucking boomer parents, the original fat selfish American. That and it’s really hard to think about bigger issues when you can’t even survive economically because your parents didn’t care about your economic future.
Baby boomers. The most failed generation in American history. And yet, at same time, is the first generation to preen and pose and gloat about how great they were. Just sad.
but the loss of altruism extends even to the dignity of any other humans. Like prisons for $$ for immigrants, like the proliferation of tasers for ‘crowd control’, like the escalation of health care costs and draconian insurance schemes.
It’s never a good idea to indict an entire generation.
Ah, so this comment wins. Almost makes me feel inadequate in my posting.
He’s wrong. What is he, 40? That would make sense.
The “hip” contribution that led to a lot of the freedom on the internet was in its protocols and the method for creating them (RFC’s). The people formulating them, and their methods, were influenced by the “Whole Earth Catalog” people via contacts between Palo Alto and Woodside. Much before WWW — ca. 1969-1975, ARPANet/Internet days. Don’t know where you would find links on that. my typing is spent for the day.
I’m only indicting those of the boomer generation who want to see themselves through a generational lens, rather than understanding that humanity, and all the socio-cultural artifacts that come about due to our species’ special talents, exist among various orthogonalities and continuums rather than ageist and jingoist self-delusion. Sorry, if that wasn’t clear.
e: grammar
Okay, but Mort Sahl (b. 1927) used humor to say worse about us.
I made love AND war in the sixties. Love is better.
Wow, you have some issues. But your historical analysis is so flawed there is really no place to begin. I’ll just speak for myself: I’m still in the struggle, still trying to advance my values. And I know personally thousands of my cohort who are also still at the barricades.
Thanks, but I don’t think we will ever “win” this argument until the last self-proclaimed 60s radical is dead.
Or, in other words, long live the Black Panthers!
Maybe the Usenet archives (formerly dejanews, now Google Groups)?
There are very few presidents who are really good. Most of them are only recognized as such years later. I don’t know whether Clinton was really bad or not – most of his stuff was promptly shut down or dismantled by Shrub.
I don’t think Obama is a boomer; he didn’t really grow up in the 60s, he’s more of a 70s kid.
Among my generation, Depression babies, the ’60′s bunch are called “children playing at being adults.” Probably unfair but given that other than the Nam War, that generation grew up knowing little if any hardship which has made many of that group, perhaps, want to escape into a life of ease, and, more telling, have the attitude that our present ‘problems’ are someone else’s fault, so don’t think about them.
We, I, spent our formative years too well aware of the hardships of others literally witnessed on our front door steps, followed by WWII, the killing War (60 million world-wide, in fact.) Our men, millions of them, returned from battlefields forever scarred and they lived with us which made war very real. (Today, it’s anything but real.)
Point taken. For the record, I’m 59 years old and neither live in the past nor base my identity on the year of my birth. I’ve met many people my age who are selfish hypocrites, along with many others who have tried hard to be good spouses, parents, and neighbors. And yes, I share your distaste for those who indulge in generational exceptionalism.
I’m sorry you feel that way. Your analysis is simply wrong.
Self centered, much?
Grow up, learn more history, and develop some actual perspective on life and the universe (hint: you are not and never will be the center of it, any more than any of us).
Whimperbang, the point is not nostalgia. It’s not ageist. It’s my belief that the “Sixties” have been negatively defined as part of a coordinated assault on MY values, which I still hold to and still fight for. God knows there were and are idiots among us. I don’t know the source of your anger, but I think it’s misplaced.
I think you owe us a list of your personal accomplishments. One of those ‘cast the first stone’ things, generational contemner.
The sixties experience made me one of the toughest people of my current age of 65 that I know. It gave me the tools and ideas that led me to a life experience that I wouldn’t trade for anyone else’s.
I’m still a hippie. The hair I still have is long, and I don’t shave. I own my business because I don’t care for being anyone’s employee.
My work ethic comes from being a sixties roadie. If you didn’t do the job, you would let your best friends down. I was never drunk, in jail, or too stoned to do the job. I never missed a show. Never. I can and still do put in long days of hard physical work, because I’m lucky enough to be able to.
The sixties generational theme of thinking outside the box led my friend and me to the idea that became the modern mountain bike. I still ride a bicycle at a very high level of performance.
If I’m not the luckiest S.O.B. who ever lived, I’m close enough for my own purposes.
Did the Vietnam war with it’s division of the country end ???? Big news to me.
Our loss is missing the point in time to destroy the Magnificent Mindless ‘Merican Murder Machine , we had it on the ropes and they learned their lessons from how we beat them. The draft brought in non believers into the MMMMM who destroyed it from within and without ie. fragging. The press showed the business end of the MMMMM, which has been erased today. There was the fairness doctrine of opposing points of view on OUR airways being presented. We had mechanical lever machines which recorded the votes honestly, though there was tampering with the delivery of the vote totals happened.
The bloodlust of the war mongers is more powerful than any of us imagined back then then, they turned the guns on us at Kent state in the open. No one was punished for the murder of Americans peacefully protesting the illegal war.
The wounds of the war were fatal to the constitution of the United States.
How is my analysis wrong? What are you even willing to admit might be right?
You grew up in the light of tele-vision and true mass media and propaganda. You were a generation highly abused by the culture, and you acted out, defensively and histrionically, but accomplished little real change. Why is it wrong to point that out? Why is it wrong to state there has only been regression politically and terms of personal power and autonomy (economic and social security)? The 60s were a failure, but you had the mass media to endlessly soothe you and make you feel like you were successful. The spectacle of capitalism, a spectacle criticized by the Situationists of France, for instance, but a criticism that is never applied to American leftism. This is highly weird, especially in light of the ubiquity of broadcast television.
Plus there are many other avenues of criticism. I willingly criticize my time and generation. Hell, people my age just pulled the greatest rip-off ever, you know, the one leading to this conversation about generational obligations and the like.
But I am simply wrong?
I too, still weep over what Raygun did to CA, destroying the state from the colleges to public education to the death of unionism.
All to beat back the hippies, n Mario Savio’s bullhorn in Berkeley.
A pox on his legacy, that horrid man actor POS.
That would a good place to start… I had an account on the old ARPAnet back in the days via Stanford… No where near as useful as today’s intertubes!
I worked for Xerox during the rollout of networks/ Internet sure was a fun time to be working… Met lots of very smart and interesting people…
This must be one of the envious bastards someone alluded to up above.
Just looking to poke a stick in the cage are ya . . .
At times, I can be self-centered, but in no way do I see my original critique as about me. It is about castigating the woe is me nostalgia that ex-hippies or whatever have about the good old days.
Hunter S. Thompson, someone who thought about the place and context of the events that were occurring in the spectrum of human existence whilst still being here now. Many of you look back at that high water-mark and worship that instead of flooding the world with change, because many of you are afraid. You let fear win.
That, is all just too kewl.
Right on, hoss, n thanks for telling the story.
A couple of things. First, where did I say anything about “whites” taking credit for Civil Rights? Those African Americans who sacrificed their lives and their loved ones for the cause were in many cases “boomers” themselves. So let’s eliminate the segregation. Since this is the anniversary of the ’61 Freedom Riders, let’s remember them, too.
http://www.npr.org/2011/05/04/135985034/freedom-riders-reflect-on-50th-anniversary
Also, the condemning of that generation doesn’t serve the values I think you want to advance. The negative characterization of those years has been driven by the Right, a broad Right that hated Civil Rights, that hated Medicare/Medicaid, that hates the very values of responsibility for ourselves and for one another. Tactically, you risk carrying their ammunition.
Your broad historical generalizations are way oversimplified, making it seem as if we were all just empty clones of one another who failed in precisely the same way at the same time. We are a diverse people, some good, some bad. And some of us have never quit fighting. To paint with your broad brush is inaccurate and unjust.
Sadly, generalizing about Americans in any generation but especially mine- post WWII baby boomers- refers to the “average” person discounting the real exceptions. No talk of this period can discount the efforts of African Americans of all ages whose unwarranted but persistent belief in unrealized democracy. They inspired other, more privileged, hard-working allies to be ready to feel a portion of the pain, to be willing to learn empathy. That selflessness from those who had less and more together fueled the ever-present anti-war movement into a nationwide movement for the first time in our nation’s history. Randolph Bourne would have been delighted with the energy and work.
Someone needs to poke you with sticks. A very Zen thing, I guess.
Let’s take the one about Stevie Wonder. We claim credit for the music. We invented a lot of music. Music went from 1200 recordings in 1966 to 2900 in the first 6 months of 1967. The experimentation was record breaking. Never been repeated. Did your generation do that? No. But you dissed it. Without the facts. Or the internet. Our generation really did innovate in ways that created an open forum for information, created that spark among those putting the system together. You won’t give credit. In film. The sixties created huge experimentation here and in Europe and in South America. In humanitarian groups. MSF, AI, were formed by people questioning methods at the Red Cross and wanting to speak out on Biafra. Those organizations still exist. Still function. What have you done? Tell us bangwhimper.
I agree Glenn.. Feels to me he is one of those paid ones!
Great, great diary Glenn thanks so much for posting it.
Larue go here and do what needs doing.
Hows things in Sacto?? Clouze here and dam cool…
You fail.
“All the way up, coach, with a red hot poker.”
-Robbie Benson
You are asking challenging questions that, however much I might disagree, lead in the end to a productive conversation. I hope.
You write this:
I don’t believe it was a high water mark. And I do not worship those times, or any other times for that matter. I believe it was a start, a start that drew upon the efforts of many who had gone before.
However, I do think there are some who do. I agree with you that it kind of dismisses subsequent generations in a very insulting way.
Once again, I am trying to save the values and some of the accomplishments (Anti-Voting Rights measures now all the Republican rage, for instance), and create even further accomplishments towards a more open, egalitarian world.
Yep, did and done.
Just another shit disturber on our long n winding road.
I also joined FDL yesterday, so, I’m feelin more n a bit smug about myself than usual . . .
*G*
Best to you n yers hoss, get that garden growing!
Any sign of the nestling fledglings yet?
But it is alright for you and your friends to unself-critically paint with an even broader brush about the contributions of your generation? I shot down your friends’s list of Boomer accomplishments, easily, because it represents a very real type of white, middle-class, post 50 years, lefty lack of any serious historical consciousness.
What needs to be acknowledged and accepted and admitted is that your generation, while endlessly celebrating itself, forgot to win the war, or even most of the battles. Yeah you guys were the first to get real high and fuck in the streets, congratulations. That is fucking awesome. But there was some real work that needed to be done, and you didn’t do it, because you were cognitively captured by broadcast media. You were a generation raised in a Dark Age, an age that celebrated and promoted ignorance over thoughtfulness. But you refuse to reflect or embrace that darkness. You have already achieved the apogee of human existence. That is why immortality literature was popular. That is why the ideas of Timothy Leary got a wide hearing, etc.
I am free to criticize the culture and its “accomplishments.” Many greater thinkers than I understand that there are deeper historical currents within civilizations. That real change comes about through mass change, and that was the real work given up by the Left in the 60s. And organizing is cynically coopted by TPTB for their own short term gain. The tools that had been developed and used for a century to advance social justice in this country were roundly abandoned in the 60s, except by a few radical exponents.
Yes, ass-rape jokes are always hilarious.
And obviously bred to write good writing well.
We (I mean Us) ought to make a Mario Savio Day on the calendar.
As someone has said you seem very angry. I remember the 60s too and I remember the civil rights act and the time I spend on campus at least trying to support that and then the terrible times when three of the best were slaughtered. And I do remember the time we rode those German rockets and stood on the moon. Probably not enough and not good enough. So I have to think about your thoughts some. I think I became less motivated in the seventies and especially with reagan. I suspect many of us did. That silent majority thing was hard to beat, as were guns. So I will go off and try to reboot my old brain.
Oh one other thing: Viet Nam. At least until today, I liked to think we helped with that too. But at my age I get confused.
I was born in 1944 so I think I’m a bit ahead of the millions of people that you lump together to blame for your troubles. The post war boom was a great time for white American males like me. If you don’t count the fucking Viet Nam war my young life was a piece of cake. So eat your fucking heart out. I didn’t live for you then and I don’t live for you now. At 66 arthritis, emphysema and macular degeneration have slowed me down considerably. Gloat while you can. Your next.
The world is fucked up when we get here one_outer. Nobody has been able to fix it yet.
The nest is nit in the same tree this year and I only see them every coup[le of days. But the amle did stop twice to cacaw at and folled me around the yard from tre to telephone pool and back again.. I got some pictures of him but haven’t updated my flickr with them but did post this one of a recent visitor who stole my neighbors Koi!!!
Best to you and your sweetie also my friend..
I joined FDL a long-time ago. I just mostly lurk.
I’m tired of these boo-hoo diaries and comments about the Second Greatest generation. Yeah you know what you did and it was great. But what did it do, what did it change, what did it accomplish? Was that personal victory meaningful, to your neighbors, to your town, to your state? Was it meaningful to Oklahoma? or Myanmar?
But since I haven’t participated until now, I should be ignored. And subjected to a brand of humor that is abusive. I think that says more about your generation than mine.
A lot of not quite true stuff (MIT professor Sir Berners-Lee makes a proposal for a transfer protocol and the use of that protocol gets the media to call him the inventor of the Web – it is good to have good media – the truth is J.C.R. Licklider of MIT in August 1962 “invented” the internet via a paper “Galactic Network”, and in 1965 working with Thomas Merrill, Roberts connected the TX-2 computer in Mass. to the Q-32 in California with a low speed dial-up telephone line creating the first (however small) wide-area computer network ever built that I actually was on – indeed IBM had workstations that I used that year at 40 baud and 256 max character transmission! The domain name idea was early on and TCP/IP was around for decades and in the expansion of DARPA NET to the world in the 90′s it was made the standard – funding for the expansion was via Gore -proposing that funding in 85 and getting it in 88) – our “TimBL”, did indeed propose HTTP for the “world wide web” in March 1989 – – - the rest of the “facts” you put out likewise need a bit of detail).
But your basic thought – that all stand on the shoulders of those that came before is quite true. However the 60′s were the protests “that made massive change” era – and that is something that was earned in the streets and by dedicating time to confrontations to help the poor and discriminated against. I suggest the fire did not die in any of us – but was tampered down so as to have kids, the house, and a job to pay for those things. The following generations did not “waste their early years time” with social change work, preferring to get to that job that paid for things. Of course the activists existed and exist in every generation, but it was the 60′s that had the scale that made for large change – something I attribute to the media not being totally controlled by the rich and corporate – remember “independent news operations”?
No, I don’t remember as I have only grown up in a time of propaganda.
The great tragedy of the 60′s was the new left turning the left in general and the democratic party in particular into a vehicle for unelectable nonsense, thereby ending thirty years of progress and eventually bringing in the era of movement conservatism and Ronald Reagan.
I’m thinking specifically of the loss of trust in government (sure LBJ and vietnam did their part), loss of belief in progress and above all a loss of belief in governing. The liberal movement went from being dependable, mainstream stalwarts of the middle class and working people into being conspiratorial college kids suspicious of what “the man” was up to now – never really made much difference from that point on if “the man” was a liberal or a conservative. “The man” can never be trusted, he’s never on your side and he’s always a traitor.
It’s no coincidence that we’ve only had three democratic presidents since the 60s, or that none of them have ever been kosher enough for the remnants of the new left.
I hope your misplaced anger subsides one day.
Your generation is not the first nor the last that has paid with blood in the streets. This doesn’t give you any more authority than my generation. But that authority is what is really important, the legitimacy, that authenticity, rather than the idea of “Let’s burn this motherfucker down.” You spend as much time defending the failure that is the United States and your place in it as you do advocating and acting for change. Because, you know job, kiddoes, and a mortgage, you know those trappings of the middle class kept alive by a system of global domination that we really don’t have a problem with. A boycott here and a petition there and maybe a rally during lunch, that will really change things. It is more important for me to participate and promulgate the system that I desire to change and live in a space of powerlessness, than to change the system, and to get others to help me with it.
I notice the propaganda but it doesn’t rule my world. Humans have seen much technological innovation in the last 50 years mostly just to mechanize 1800s industrial and mercantile systems but have we seen the human potential revolution that many of us long for? The question I ask of myself incessantly throughout the day is “What am I doing, and can do better, to bring on that revolution in human consciousness?”
Yeah, I know. I don’t mean to be harsh. I like to think that not living for the future is the problem, as you say you didn’t live for me. I don’t know why just me though.
In the end no one will be able to claim they changed the system. It’ll just collapse under it’s own weight. But at the same time the end began historically at the beginning of the working lives of that generation. If it’s the system that’s to blame, as I generally hold, than it doesn’t make a lot of sense to blame the people for it. But what I can and do blame them for is the self-aggrandizement and sense of entitlement to recognition.
It’s impossible to quantify the huge resentment about sexual liberation and sexual freedom, aka ‘free sex’, that just happened to just happen during the Sixties. It would have more zeroes than a comment window can hold.
Well, that puts my kids in the Boomer generation, and it’s hard to see their connection to the movement generated in the 60′s. They were raised by parents exploring alternative life styles but the result is, while nowhere near the current conservative movement, I would classify them as right of center. Yet we their parents, born before 1940, are not considered part of the “Boomer” crowd, but nevertheless, were participants in it.
Well, them of us that ain’t, ain’t daid yet.
You seem mighty fiesty, now, whimperbang, and yer ideas ain’t all wet.
You will allow that some of us did not cash in and pig out? That some of us have continued to be engaged with those who arrived on the scene later than we did? And, you will prolly be willing to say that some of the ideas that resonated and remained with just about everyone “here”, at FDL, above a “certain” age, ain’t bad ideas?
But do you imagine that the entire generation of the “bommers” deserve to be villified and held as the principal cause of what has happened?
Frankly, it is the clever and the calculating, and each generation has more than its fair share, I assure you, who are sociopathic and at heart, fearful and desirous of unchallenged power and unassailble wealth. Your generation will have as many, proportionally as mine.
My question to you, and realize I live in the now, as presumably so do you, my question is this: Do you imagine that those of us who understand, regardless of generation and cultural mythology will, somehow, be able to work together, unafraid to change the world, starting with ourselves?
DW
I should note that in 1965 we had “BASIC” on that terminal – running the commands at the receiving end and getting the results back at the terminal – can we call that “cloud computing”! :-) To be fair in 1967 we tried to have computers talking directly to other computers, sharing drives and printers, and that had a lot of problems that had to be worked out over the years (despite IBM selling a lot of “back to back” configurations). I do like the fact BASIC was everywhere in 65, being taught as a computer language at Dartmouth and elsewhere by the late 60′s, but for some reason, good media no doubt, being associated solely with Microsoft these days.
It’s not anger, it’s realism. I’m way beyond anger at this point, you know, the point popularized by self-help books of a bygone era, that point of acceptance. This is the shit cake I have been handed, and I’m going to have to eat it. It doesn’t mean I have to accept the toppings that different individuals have been creating for years. It doesn’t mean I have to accept the patter of a generation going to its grave as important. Your very being changed the world, big deal. How many people have suffered and died because of you being? How much blood do you have on your hands right now, with child slaves mining the metals for your computer processor to the underpaid hirelings working in a call center in India (where they test only the cutting edge in managerial theory). Where does your responsibility lie? These are deep and radical questions that aren’t asked by many people these days. How do we change that which is deeply screwed?
It’s funny how you guys knew what was going to transform the world. I think of the scene in the graduate where the main character is told to go into plastics. Plastics and the use and embrace of them globally have and are having immense impacts on the environment and human health. Its like you knew what was wrong with your parents, but you went ahead and embraced it anyway. I’m always struck by the lack of irony during that period.
That’s it? You hate old people because they are nostalgic for their youth? You will get over that.
Hunter Thompson is an excellent choice of voices from that time. Relevant to this time as well because he looked beneath and beyond the surface of things. Joe Bageant (recently deceased) is another good source and has written about Hunter Thompson among other things.
I grew up listening to my parents stories about the dust bowl and the depression. I loved those stories and so I told youngsters about my younger days (born 1944). I found out younger folks don’t want to hear it so I don’t talk about it when they are around. Perhaps other seniors should do the same.
Those are really interesting thoughts. Back then, if you were over 30 you were not to be trusted. That kind of thinking put up a wall between “liberals” and everyone else. Fron there it was easy to set up the silent majority to oppose anything progressive. Thank goodness at least a few things got done, like civil rights and medicare. The curtain came down with Reagan as the left disintegrated.
True as to “blood in the streets” – indeed around the world May 1st is dedicated to those workers that died fighting for employee rights – of course May 1st is not celebrated in the US except for a small plaque in Chicago that commemorates the killings on May first that are the basis for that date being a holiday around the world (our gov killed the workers at the request of a rich person and his corporation).
Most at FDL never stopped totally all activism – perhaps tamped it down – perhaps not – indeed some like myself have had periods of unemployment that were the result of not hiding our sympathies.
The sad fact is that the urge to help the poor, to challenge the rich and corporate, is at a low ebb since Reagan. I’ll let you place the blame for that.
I saw a Koufax-Drysdale Sunday doubleheader at Forbes Field (August 1965).
What’s your prize if you DO win?
Before reading this thread, this boomer was seriously contemplating joining FDL. But if FDL is to serve primarily as a battleground for intergenerational warfare, well, I want no part of it. I’ll be dead soon enough, political consequences aside. Life’s way too short to engage in this kind of poo-flinging.
Hasn’t that always been the case? It may not be so much so for the USA, but I think and see that it is so around the world.
It is not that I such much vilify the generation as so much vilify the triumphalist BS that many of the generation tell themselves. You know, that whole lack of any humility, any recognition of reality.
It used to be a joke amongst my friends, that most people over a certain age would always tell you that they had been at Woodstock, even though this was not certainly true.
“I fully think that my generation (born 1982) has a unique perspective on this because we’re the lucky beneficiaries of having to deal with an economy and political system that the sixties generation helped destroy (but not before they enriched themselves and took all the good jobs!).”; WTF? You are so off base and mistaken it’s hard to comprehend.
First of all, the ‘hippies’ were a minority of the population of boomers. Second ‘all the ‘good jobs’ has more to do with the capitualization of government to corporatists than any ‘generation’.
And the only reason ‘Nam lasted as long as it did was Nixon’s lying. The protests DID cause Johnson not to run again.
This ,”and specifically fear of black violence, that drove LBJ to sign the Civil Rights act. ” is also mistaken; ask Bill Moyers. And it was the deaths of white Freedom Riders that awakened white sympathy to the black activism.
“It’s not a coincidence that wages stopped rising in the 70′s, after the most selfish generation in American history were easily co-opted by the economic system. It’s not a coincidence that this country has failed to solve even one big problem since the Nixon administration.” ;don’t blame that on the ‘boomers’, point your finger at the Repubs and Nixon. I happened to be someone who was able to live ok on the streets at that time but when Nixon came in ,everything changed. Look at the history of what happened to the food stamp program.
And I don’t know anyone who claims the boomer generation was ‘the greatest’ such an accolade is usually reserved for those who fought in WWII.
Another thing; when has anyone of YOUR generation ever put together something as successful -numbers of people co-operating in the midst of bad weather and planning by promoters and absolutely no violence despite the deprivations- as Woodstock?
Sheesh, your sense and knowledge of history is abysmal.
I’ll probably get banned because now someone is threatening to tug on the purse strings, because they find certain aspects of free speech distasteful, you know, like the aspect of critical thinking. But don’t let me interrupt you as you play your power game of implications.
I wasn’t at Woodstock.
Sure, backlash against various social changes were a big part of the conservative comeback. Sexual liberation, civil rights etc all cost the democratic party. But we still kept making progress and now it feels like the backlash is finally starting to fizzle out. A black man is president and a majority of americans support gay marriage for the first time.
But there’s a large subset of progressives that cant handle power, and specifically being in power. It’s the guys and gals that feel that their thing is not getting fooled by the man, not being anyones tool. That one can only be satisfied if one gets to bitch and moan at the man at the top. Thats a state of mind that is made for living in a state of endless opposition, endless marginalization. It brought us McGovern (and Nixons triumf), the Ted Kennedy rebellion (and Reagans triumf), the naderists of 2000 (and Dubyas triumf). That’s the legacy of the New Left – college kids that didnt want to go to Vietnam and decided that the man in charge was always the enemy since he once tried to send them there…
There were massive anti-war protests coordinated globally in 2003. So yeah, I think if we wanted to organize a free rock concert we could. Maybe we could even do a global rock concert, since those have been so successful at changing anything about the current power structure.
Go on youtube and you will see numerous comments from ‘younger’ people who hold the sentiment that the music was better, for instance Marvin Gaye.
Yes, the accomplishments of the 60s you mention were in reality the accomplishments of the very man that the New Left was created in opposition to. The last old school progressive before the hippies wrecked the movement.
SBtheYDD, please don’t be discouraged about FDL because of one troubled commentor. Perhaps we shouldn’t have engaged him/her. Such sad abusive language is not usual around these parts. In this case I thought I could clarify some things for her/him. It was worth a try.
I’d also like to say to you that I am only defending certain values based on community, empathy, responsibility for one another. There are plenty of people championing those values in post-boomer generations. I have learned a great deal from these engaged younger folk.
I hope you will continue to come here.
The Sixties Generation was not monolithic, as the assholes would like us to believe when mocking the idealists. The idealists did not turn into self-centered materialists. The people who fit that profile in later decades were those same people in the 1960′s. They may have joined in anti-war protests for purely selfish reasons or (more likely) cursed the antiwar protesters while getting their draft deferments (like Dick Cheney) or pulling political favors to get into the National Guard (like G.W. Bush).
Did Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield (Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream founders), for example, lose their idealism? No, and neither did countless others. They had influence beyond their numbers and not all of the changes they brought about have disappeared. They did make the world a better place, but not as good a place as they hoped. The bad things were not unintended consequences of them getting their way, but the result of conservative reactions against them.
I WAS and can be seen in the film atop a water truck. Yeah, there were a lot of ‘wish I’d been there’s’ saying they were and when there’s 500,000 people actually there, it’s understandable that they’d say they were there rather than at Altamount.
Don’t let this thread but the sole point of judgment; drop over to MYFDL and you might find your joining is worthwhile to you.
I think there is something to be explored about the American Left’s struggles with power, either having it or endlessly opposing it. And it’s quite trans-generational.
You say: But at the same time the end began historically at the beginning of the working lives of that generation [the sixties].
No the end began long before- when it became clear to newly minted Americans that unity of nation would require the hypocrisy of the ages. Not particular to this nationhood but certainly not necessary folklore.
Thank you. I have not forgotten what you said in another discussion. I have it written on one of the peace flags I made:
“Of whom shall we say, ‘He has no humanity.’?
Thanks Glenn.
Sure, I know I’m way simplifying things. But it just feel like such a shame coming out of the FDR-HT-JFK-LBJ era. The right was beaten down, completely marginalized and we were perfectly fine with having power and willing to live with the imperfections as long as steady progress was made. Then came Vietnam and we turned into something that was rock’n'roll and rad but couldnt govern or really change the lives for real people.
I’ll echo Glenn: “I hope your misplaced anger subsides one day”; sad to see someone so bound up in their own frustration and cynicism.
Three bullets, free love, drugs, and war and it all changed.
And I had such ‘drummed’ into me growing up; it’s sad that that period of time isn’t better remembered as it was only war that brought the economy out of the depression, especially after FDR cut what is now called ‘quantitative easing’ out of the picture of ‘recovery’.
The spirit of the “Sixties” was killed at the ’68 Democratic convention and it was killed by the national Democrats led by the Democratic mayor Richard Daley and his police state mentality. It’s the same wing of the party that gave our generation Rahm Emanuel and Barack Obama which wanted to pull the plug on the “hippie” movement for all the same reasons (i.e. MONEY and more money) that Emanuel and Obama (and Clinton… and yes, even Jimmy Carter) diss the left.
It is the national Democratic Party that fought, continues to fight and to ultimately abandon the egalitarian hopes of the ’60′s generation.
FDR’s New Deal Liberalism was destroyed by the National Democrats, who swallowed the koolaid of neoliberalism and have never looked back since, despite the pretty populist lies they trot out at election time to gain progressive votes that they immediately abandon with impunity once elected.
Fuck the Democrats.
De-elect Obama.
Vote progressive third party even if it doesn’t yet stand a chance against the entrenched and corrupt duopoly.
Fuck the Democrats.
I was! I had just finished term in the Army, got home and my friends an extra ticket for the three day event for $18.00 best money I ever spent.. We didn’t stay for all 3 but only for 2 of them… And whimperbag I am not lying little one..
It’s the rule around here, depending on the ox though.
Call me illiterate, but I didn’t find anything sad or abusive about whimperbang’s commentary.
Sure, but the first bullet brought in the Great Society, civil rights etc. Who knows what the other two did. Maybe everything would have turned out pretty much the same. And the backlash was probably inevitable in any case, see: Dixiecrats and the southern strategy.
But if your telling me that the progressive base in ’55 were all about conspiracies, snark, cynicism and maximalism I aint buying it.
(The great) Paul Krassner (born 1932) at the mic at a Woodstock reunion:
“How’s everyone doing!”
“I can’t hear you!”
“No, I really can’t hear you!”
I think whimperbang brings up many good points. Intergenerational warfare is the last thing we need but that too was my first thought when I started to read through the comments. One thing that has always bothered me about the 60s folks is sense of sanctimoniousness. In working with them, organizing, and being arrested at times too I have had to listen to my share 60s ‘war-stories’ and of how my generation is a complete loss.
In the end, I do blame the 60s generation for becoming so mindlessly co-opted and setting the stage for raygun666. The damage of Viet Nam and Nixon were extreme. The inward navel turning transformational bullshit though was perhaps even more tragic because it allowed the descent into proto-fascism and envmntl collapse to gan traction…and now where are we? We have more work to do than ever, and the worst enemy we have now is the realism of moving past our denials…to cynicism and fatalism.
Good discussions but to co-opt one of your favorite 60s proverbs: Don’t shoot the messenger
What you call anger, frustration, and cynicism is my passion for the history of ideas and for the truth. So much of the failure of the 60s as an idea was the unwillingness for participants to look at what they had done honestly.
Yeah Woodstock was great, but what did it change? How many of those people at the concert went back home and changed their personal worlds?
Woodstock was entertainment and spectacle, first and foremost, and was about selling albums for all the acts. Even if the concert wound up being free, it was a commercial for music, fashion, and a lifestyle. What you don’t see in the movies and documentaries, etc. is any freaking political speech or even a call to action. It was a great big hippie lovefest. It happened and wasn’t sustained. Therefore it failed, died on the vine, withered away. Maybe it formed some seeds, and maybe we will see those sprout, but it hasn’t made most people’s lives any better.
Symptomatic. Case in point how New Lefties killed mainstream progressivism. The people who think Jerry Rubin did more good for peoples lives than Lyndon Johnson did.
What was the “unelectable nonsense”?
or Kennedy did more good for peoples’ lives than Johnson?
Well, I certainly think he wenr out of his way to critcize the 60s left. It was a little sad and abusive. Hell, I don’t think the 60s was populated by godly liberals that we all should idolize. But they did some good and advanced some causes. Many of them were assholes. I think Sherwood was more balanced in his critical views. I do think though that the left has not really been able to regain its strengh (after the killings and 1968),maybe b/c we just would rather fight with each other or tell the older generation how fucked up they were, doncha know?
E.g. McGovern, Carter primary challenge, Nader.
The thought that the democratic party should be a vehicle for pacifism. Not only a party pacifists prefer, but that it should be a pacifist party and still get to hold government in the worlds biggest superpower. Etc.
Could you elaborate?
…trying to reconcile
I felt the air go out of the political component of the movement after the Sterling Hall bombing.
To view the 60s primarily through a politicl lens is a mistake. Politics was not at its core.
The first bullet got us Viet nam along with those other things and it forced LBJ out. (ps I liked LBJ except for that “minor” transgression.) I know Kennedy sent troops to that place but I don’t believe he would follow that up with 500k more and ignore what was happening on the streets. I have no idea what was happening in 55. You would have to fill me in. So Nixon came in and the great society died.
No, your anger, frustration and cynicism are anger, frustration and cynicism. If you had a passion for history, you’d know more history. As Mr. Smith pointed out, there is so much wrong with the assertions about history in your initial post, that they can’t be covered. To pick one black Panthers were baby boomers.
When I was young, Jim Crow was the law in my state. Women had 3 career choices, teacher, nurse or librarian. My generation did a lot to lower those barriers.
You miss Smith’s point. The reason this matters is that we didn’t fail. The changes we worked for have been largely reversed by a well organized, expensive counter-revolution. The “failure” of the sixties is the failure of liberalism. The two failures were manufactured as a set. They are both lies. Many of us believe that destroying myths about the sixties is a necessary part of a return toward progressive policies and creating the opportunities your generation deserves.
Please join me in moving forward in a direction it seems we both want to go.
Your impressions of Woodstock are pop filtered. Woodstock in fact was the culmination of a ‘hippie’ movement, not the start of anything. It was the proof-of-concept of all the popular mythic history about the music and the ‘kids’ who gravitated to that festival. The ‘festivals’ that came after were never going to be the first and foremost of anything.
The festival that made Woodstock inevitable was the Monterey Jazz and Pop Festival in 1967. What can one say? OMG.
Yeah, we all know the story. Vietnam created hundreds of thousands of rebels against anything and everything and it was all about not having to go die in a jungle somewhere to keep a set of hypothetical dominoes in place. I’m just suggesting that you guys helped throw the Great Society out the window in the process. Sure LBJ as well. The confederates. But your little state of perpetual rebellion ever since is also a part of the story. There’s no hiding from that.
Wow, you can’t take a little abuse, even though that notion of abuse is debatable. Considering that is a basic behavior (the powerful abusing those with less power)in power relationships, no wonder the contemporaneous Left has no backbone. No wonder so much of what you set out to do failed. You old guys make these arguments to easy for me. You suffered, I’ve suffered, everyone has suffered.
Get over your hurt feelings. Go out there and be the change you want to be. Use the nobility of your age to an advantage. Suffer, suffer violence, blows, and the loss of freedom. And tell the world about it, and suffer being ignored. You are not as important as you think you are. Welcome to this new reality, the same one it always has been.
e: clarity
My family was experiencing the new south in Houston, Texas, in the mid-sixties. It was the reality of a President Lyndon Johnson that brought school integration, the War on Poverty, Title I in 1965-the implied recognition that racism and economic inequality should be addressed together in government programs- that forced the country toward democracy. And would also doom it when it started to work. I was a teen, but my parents and their friends thought Kennedy could not have made that connection. It was the mantle of the world’s biggest superpower and the easy heroism of macho politics that took our eyes off the prize and the wind from our sails.
Aye, I accept that my impressions are pop filtered. But there hasn’t ever been a counter narrative offered up to express what it was truly about. Sex, drugs, and rock’n'roll is what I and almost everyone born after that festival associate and know about it. Those who have different POVs don’t readily offer them up.
Whimperbang- Yes, we did offer different POVs: Democracy, non-violence, desegregation, community, anti-imperialism, Civil Rights… and my music, soul from Sitting on the Side of the Bay to War What Is It Good For?
You left out the love and Peace that was infectious at Woodstock. Everyone was was your brother or sister and were treated as family. everyone shared all they could with their fellow attendee at the festival That experience/feeling of oneness was never duplicated again by no generation None!
It sure was a great way to come back to America after two years overseas making sure your young ass had a place to grow up in..
The irony has been lost upon you. Yes, technically the Black Panthers are baby boomers, but see, they’re African-American, therefore really not part of the same thing as white boomers, which while not specified, is obviously what the original post implies in boomer victories.
You see, the Black Panthers understood that. They understood that they were segregated and powerless, even in “liberal” enclaves. That’s why they followed cops in CA around with guns (until open carry was outlawed). They understood the power structure viscerally, because they were abused by it daily.
For all the white kids horrified by Jim Crow, many more African Americans were arrested and abused and killed in fighting it. And it took the political genius of LBJ to get the civil rights act passed.
So I may be ignorant of your personal history and the way it colors your perceptions of the past, I do feel pretty certain I am learned and aware of the history of the 60s, since I have been endlessly exposed to stories and media related to it since my freaking birth.
One other criticism I have of the 60s through a political lens is the personality cult stuff. My generation supposedly lacks leaders, but I see it differently. I see it as an active, although perhaps unconscious, response to what happened to your leaders. I read about cointelpro in high school, I watched as the elan vital was changed by media into something grotesque typified by that crazed hippie guru in Philly who murdered his girlfriend while setting up his own little cult. The violence that is America grew and grew and became part of the natural scenery. No more hitch-hiking because of the serial killers. MC5 turned into Seals and Croft, and the ghettoes never went away. Meanwhile, potential ‘leaders’ were trying to relearn the tenets of hardpan street organizing and the continuity of struggle that pre-dated the 60s. And many of us I think chose not to become leaders, but to continue to work selflessly. Not all of my generation went on to become wall st bankers.
And while we may lack leaders I know a hell of a lot of semi-anonymous types who work non-styop to save what we still have and protect that which needs protection.
In terms of Glenn W. Smith’s original statement though I think it is awful how some media and the wingnuts use the hippies to justify their own barbarity.
I really don’t know who you are blasting with such a broad, sweeping condemnation, but it sure seems like self-justification for whomever you represent – even if that’s just yourself.
Most of the folks I hang with, or work with (at a non-profit charity), have no problem acknowledging the ills of America and most of the Western world these days, and are saddened to have to die and leave this all behind with little change for the better.
However, America is somewhat on a suicidal path due to unacknowledged greed, and the mendacity that shelters that most deadly of the seven deadly sins, so in
10075 years or less there will be no America, probably only the Chinese and the Indians due to sheer population mass. They will be left to salvage whatever they can from a partially flooded and much warmer world.My ’60s idealism says they might have a chance to turn things around, my late ’70s nihilism says that there will be so much human-caused worldwide suffering by then among all organisms that the earth (pardon the anthropomorphism) will be glad to be rid of the human species, or some human survivors will be reduced struggling in a Mad Max-like world and will thus not be in a position to destroy the earth much more.
Is that craven enough for you?
And, BTW, who do you represent?
Check this out
The Paris Commune
You weren’t first and only generation to equality, liberty, and fraternity.
With you in this one.
And also here in America with Eugene Debs and all the passionate people destroyed by the Palmer Raids.
I represent the sans-coulettes and hedge fund traders. I contain multitudes.
Why must I be representative of anything?
Who did the Athenian gadfly represent? or the Nazarene?
I question authority, including authority that masquerades as received wisdom. Especially that authority, as it seems innocuous when it is in toto highly coercive.
WE are ALL going to have to serve as CONSCIENCE, even using ideas as old as humanity itself, whimperbang, and, as you point out, knowing some of that history (and suppositions about pre-history) helps with perspective and necessary humility.
I’m rather certain that you agree.
DW
No shit Dick Tracy it was just the best example of 200K + people getting together for three days of music, peace and love with virtually no violence.It has never happened again as greed took over this country.Thank you conservative asswipes . It was by no means a commune and was never meant to be one?? It was a festival celebrating music and love!
Exactly, that has been my entire point with this.
How we must treat the American 60s as the only time ever in the history of humanity that the apogee of existence, thought, and feeling was reached.
The paris commune wasn’t a commune in the sense of your era. But thanks for taking the time to actually broach the veil of ignorance that surrounds your memories and feelings and to seek some understanding and common ground. You are the one who said
You guys may think you have invented the WWW but you sure don’t like to use it. I gave you evidence to the contrary (of course, there wasn’t amplified rock music during the Paris Commune, so maybe, in some technical sense you are correct, but of the idea you were trying to communicate, not so much).
Yes, that “end of history” thing is not something to find rapture in …
However, some of us old guard will be standing against the coming neofeudalism, can we count upon you to join us?
(Already know the answer, just pulling your told ya so.)
No war but class war!
;~DW
To understand the ’60s you need to look at the ’50s and see what we were rebelling against. The conformity and authoritanism spawned the Beat Generation, the Civil Rights Movement and the Enviornmental Movement. The Beat poets, Dr King and Rachel Carson were not from our generation but they inspired us to carry on their battles.
The intensity, rage and power of that era was not sustainable and had to transform into something else. The biggest mistake we made was to think that a political party, the Democrats, would carry on and expand that idealism.
We can take credit for helping change Amerika for the better in many ways but we didn’t finish the job. We had to rejoin society to live and raise families while the PTB regrouped and developed ways to undermine the progress that had been made.
The generation that followed us enjoyed many of the freedoms that we helped establish but those freedoms are under attack today by a much more organized and well funded cabal.
The most important thing we had then was people power, power that was feared by the ruling class. They no longer fear the people they rule and until a new generation rises up and seizes that power nothing will change.
Has the class war ever stopped? Isn’t it a feature of capitalism?
Oh it’s all a shit cake you’ve been handed. Funny how those corporations using conflict minerals who had an average age of 28 aren’t the responsibility of the 28 year olds, and the baby boomer George Bush makes an entire administration regardless of the GenX Monica Goodlings (literally) filling the ranks. 57% of your generation believes torture is just fine. Most seem to blame their parents for all that goes wrong in the world, previous generations were told that at 30 they were responsible for their own face. You are a perfect exemplar, bangwhimper.
We is of similar mind, whimperbang, and I’ve enjoyed your thoughtful iconoclasm, as you have extended the “debate” in ways necessary, if uncomfortable.
I definitely look forward to your comments and perspective in future.
DW
This is a very nice summary of the 1960s and the complexities of the Boomer Generation.
The blowback from the establishment for the “sins” committed by some of its children in response to an irresponsible and immoral war is obvious: cocaine to replace marijuana and psychedelics, cotton-candy disco and Son et Lumiere to replace any politically tinged music. Shorter haircuts, longer working hours. This really gathered steam in the eighties, with Rambo and Wall Street and an endless stream of propaganda to counter films like Easy Rider and TV shows like Archie Bunker. The Cocaine Importation Agency flooded the streets of LA with crack, and the entertainment establishment began pushing a nascent Gangsta Rap just as Hip Hop was starting to express itself politically. This favoritism for violent, hollow, venal, pop music was fomented through the reverse-psy op known as the PNRC, which probably helped sell more NWA records than anything else: thereby cementing the image of the angry black man, in turn reversing over a decade of advances in civil rights.
They are Erasing the 60s – make no mistake. What the establishment once burned their fingers on and subsequently recycled in order to reap nostalgia profits from it is now shredding and throwing into the oubliette. The 60s will not even be a hazy mirage for generation Y: it will be removed from the lexicon.
- George Bernard Shaw
” That’s why they followed cops in CA around with guns (until open carry was outlawed). They understood the power structure viscerally, because they were abused by it daily.”
‘They’, i.e. African Americans were followed around and beaten up on a regular basis in S CA by white authoritarian types, some Birch Club members, their affiliates, Goldwater fans and other groups of course. Nixon was a son of Orange County and Reagan announced his campaign in Philadelphia Mississippi for famous reasons. George Wallace tried to shepherd him some boomers and Billy Graham too. Dixiecrats became Republicans and Pat Robertson et al won an invisible army. For the power and the glory? I fear there is no inherent wisdom in the authority that some might crave or their fear might crave.
Nice, verra nice, indeed, magavtelanata, you have the delineated the history and shown the future.
Namaste.
DW
Name three things you accomplished for common folks – you as opposed to people working within the democratic party?
The ‘great tragedy’ of the sixties was that the conservatives were successful in killing democratic and spiritual leaders and never held responsible for their actions.
BTW, Glenn, another riveting post, always appreciated.
One notes that you’ve kept the interest of folks for quite a spell, today.
Supreme good on ya.
DW
Are you saying that if you were not working within the democratic party then you did nothing? Well, I think that politicians respond to their base and to what people say – not nearly as fast as we like – but without support it is unlikely it would get anywhere.
That was a tragedy too. But it’s just one more aspect of the New Left pathology believing that the only real heroes are dead people. Saints that will forever remain infallible – in contrast to living politicians who are always traitors…
When did I say it wasn’t my responsibility or anyone else? It is everyone’s responsibility, and everyone’s hypocrisy. I am cognizant of my participation in a system that is designed to exploit human beings, animals, and the planet at almost every node of interaction.
For every Ben and Jerry’s, there are 10s of 1000s of companies and organizations using exploitation either directly or indirectly. Go to Chili’s and participate in abuse. Basically, consume anything produced by a factory and participate in abuse. We are all complicit and that is how the global capitalist order draws its strength.
I think the point of your argument is now that the 30 year olds are in charge. But the average age for a Congress person is 55 and for Senators its 60. If I recall, one can’t even run for Congress until they are 30 years old. But assigning a specific age of responsibility is a pointless sideshow to the real problems. And that is everyone’s complicity in an abusive system.
No I was asking you to give a couple of examples of real accomplishments of the ultra rad New Left. Something that Jerry Rubin and Abbie Hoffman got done for actual, real people.
Voting rights, Free Speech and enviornmental laws are some of the progress that came from this era although they are under attack today.
Who are the “ultra rad New Left”? I am not sure who exactly you are attacking or why?
Ah, sorry got you mixed up with wayoutwest since you responded to my response to him. My response was really to his implication that the Hippies/New Left got stuff done while the democratic party failed. I think in reality it was the other way around.
I think you are now getting a little silly. A 30 year old is most certainly responsible for his well being and part of that is what and who he votes for. If he wants to kill medicare, he can vote for Paul Ryan’s candidates. Otherwise, he stands with us or someone less radical. His vote is not bound to the 60s or what those people did or did not do. Last election the republicans won a huge victory. And they are wanting to cash in on that. Don’t like it, then vote tem out. Why do I get the feeling you want to blame the 60s for what you control?
I tend to think the hippies were most unfortunate but not everyone from that era were out there with them. In fact, some wanted to distance themselves.
Except for such accusations as we did nothing but fuck in the road.
Yes, there were some provocations deserving of thought and response. And I’ll keep thinking.
I think i understand the frustration that sherwood and whimper are expressing but it is directed at the wrong people. Your anger should be directed at the powers that are destroying the progress we made in this country.
To stand up to power in the ’60s meant that you exposed yourself to being gassed, being beaten, being shot and then being arrested, not always in that order.
We were young and naive and we had way too much power but we got shit done and had a lot of fun doing it. There is nothing like the power you feel when you join with thousands of others and stare down the men with guns and survive.
No, I implied no such thing. You are projecting. In answer to some of your challenging comments, I explicitly ask that you stop the segregation.
Granted.
Thanks so much, DW. I hope it’s provocation to more thought, more conversation, greater action. But it’s nothing without this community, which I am forever grateful for.
Not to split hairs, but Steve Jobs (born 3/’55) and Tim Berner-Lee (born 6/’55) are a bit too young to have been bona fide hippies.
Those two are roughly the same age as me, and like others of the late baby-boom generation such as Johnny Rotten (born 1956); Bill Maher (’56); Matt Groening (’54); Spike Lee (’57); to name but a few random notables, we experienced the historical events of the 1960′s second hand, mainly via television, and the stories told by our parents or older brothers and sisters.
We certainly were (mostly) aware of or even influenced by those events and ideas, but we were still children when the Kennedy’s and M L KIng were assassinated. Icons like John Lennon and Bob Dylan were born 15 or more years before we were. I was still in middle school when Kent State took place, and the war in Vietnam, as well as the draft, ended in 1973, before Jobs or myself turned 18.
Personally, I admired the values of the counter-culture as a kid, and I certainly reaped many of the benefits of the progress made by those who envisioned and fought for those values, (not to mention the sex, drugs and rock and roll that trickled down to my younger generation by the mid 70′s).
Similarly, I suspect that Steve Jobs, for example, would not have envisioned the personal computer as he did without influences popularized in the 1960′s such as Eastern philosophy and psychedelics. But these cultural innovations found their way to most of the young masses in the 1970′s, in the wake of the battles of The Sixties.
For what it’s worth, the internet and personal computers to a large degree sprung from the same generation that brought forth Osama Bin Laden (born 1957) and punk rock.
Why Don’t We Do It In The Road
I wasn’t the first to say it. I’m all for doing it in the road. There’s nothing wrong with that. But there are whole other dimensions to “doing it in the road.” Alas, subtext died on the streets of Chicago too.
No get me right. The conservative forces in society – scrupulous business, bigots, warmongers – are the Great Satan. It was never my intention to suggest otherwise. But imho the New Left enabled the Great Satan more victories than necessary by pulling the progressive movement into a place where we had no power to do good. No credibility and no power.
Guys like Rubin and Hoffman never accomplished anything more than getting high and entertain. And they wrecked a couple of things as well.
I’m not saying there isn’t a place for avantgarde, partying and experimenting. There is. But that place is necessarily gonna be marginalized. You cant both be indie and mainstream at the same time. Real change that affects many people require going mainstream. That’s why the New Left has so precious little to show for getting hit over the head. Except perhaps getting Richard Nixon elected to the white house.
So true.
Sherwood at 109, you said,
. I have to disagree. That was Power’s public face. The money simply retreated back into the shadows. Now they’ve re-emerged stronger than ever. Their weakness this time is their own hubris. They’ve openly declared war on the world.
I was born in ’56; too young to be a hippie, but witnessed events unfold. Changing the common perception that “citizen” still meant only white men was no small feat. That was one battle. The war still rages.
I think one of our greatest achievements has been to raise Millenials such as whimperbang who are able to “see on a global scale” the injustices we fought to get merely acknowledged in this country. I am so honored to have been part of their process! I look at it as part of passing the torch and the logical next step in raising human consciousness.
A friend and I have been discussing the possible cosmic role of the Millenials (whimperbang, my kids, most of the Near and Middle Eastern activists, etc.). We agreed that these young and ready warriors will probably enact the change we helped initiate, but on a global scale. It’s breathtaking in its scope and portents. We hope they can do it without experiencing using or receiving excessive violence.
Right now there is great frustration, cynicism, and determination in Millenials. Many are impatient. Their challenges are great. We are finally reaching Critical Mass. These are their years of discerning and maturing so I hope they don’t spend too much energy focusing on past failures without learning how to correct their own actions accordingly.
With Millenials’ innate consciousness of being part of the human group, their international connectedness through today’s technology, and their keen sense of justice, their power and its impacts can be phenomenal. Of course those who resist them can also use the same tools.
That’s just another way of describing us having the power but losing it. When we lose the power to do good, bad things happen. Our enemies prevail for a while, for 30 years in fact.
Your right, its classicism, not just racism, implied by your post. The idea of a counter-revolution, when there was no revolution, smacks of this.
The point is that there were real revolutionary ideas being fomented, ideas that have been historically disparaged, because the idea that one can take back the original power of the state, violence, and use it to defend their autonomy and the autonomy of their community, is something seen as crazy and out of the norm in the mainstream. At some point, the overwhelming majority of leftists gave up fighting, because they didn’t want to die, understandably. They had that as an option. Many African-Americans didn’t and still don’t. As well as many of the poor.
I’m not a Millenial. I am older than the children. They are still growing. I put down my roots to draw up stories from the past for them and I spread my canopy to protect them harsh light of reality, until it is time for me to wither and become food for their thoughts.
Please explain how the New Left enabled the Great Satan.
I think Nixon was our last Progressive president not because he was a progressive but because he feared the Left and hoped that by signing progressive laws we would back down from our goal of replacing Capitalism.
The yippies at the ’68 convention. Humphrey would have been a more Progressive president. McGovern. The Teddy rebellion of ’80. Mondale and Dukakis paying the price once the dems were thouroughly discredited by the prior New Left siliness just described. And then once again the echo of mistakes past with the lost 2% in 2000.
Say what? More likely, their kids needed braces.
and wayout – what do you think you accomplished? What did yippies accomplish? A more liberal Nixon? Yippies didnt do that. FDR, HT, JFK, LBJ and a sh-tload of hard work made Nixon as progressive as he was. The New Left did for progress what the teapartiers and Glenn Beck are doing for conservatism right now. It discredited it.
I see. It was one_outer who was born in 82. And there I thought your reading of Hunter S. evidence of precociousness. Ha!
Thanks for stimulating thought-provoking reading today. What kind of stories do you tell when you’re not initiating debate?
We IS lucky, Glenn, as was (and is) our generation …
The community, here, doth oft times represent the best … at least in terms of possibility and the range of discussion … when the cussin’ doesn’t hijack the thread.
And look, we’ve got younger souls involved in the discussion.
Glenn, you’re growin’ on ‘em.
You got their curiousity aroused.
We dirty old hippies ain’t done yet …
Sly influences, happy serendipity, music that moves the feet … thought that moves the mind, and some things which touch the heart.
Good stuff, Glenn, I be thinking …
DW
No, the point of naming 30 is that there’s an end to the time when you can complain about your parents and act like a teenager and pretend that your problems were handed to you and you are a victim.
The original argument wasn’t about our generation being perfect. It was about it not accepting the ‘blame it on the sixties’ crap we’ve been hearing since Reagan anymore. You are one of the people dishing that crap out. It serves no one but the hard right wing. People who refuse to grow up from GenX who find the argument convenient need to know that their servicing the hard right wing. If that suits your interests, so be it. For the rest, take the time to find out what did and didn’t really happen then, and why it is that the hard right wing wants that era so desperately erased from the public commons, suppressed from the public discourse, and deleted from the collective memory. It has to be pretty worthwhile if they have gone to this much trouble to make sure you think it’s that bad.
WE have their curiosity aroused!
I’m not a boomer either. I belong to that middle child of a generation.
I didn’t get braces, and my mother worked a line in a non-union TV factory before becoming a medical records/ admitting clerk. I was a bit hyperbolic with that statement, but in some ways it is true. It is especially true in light of the sacrifices occurring in a place like Syria, and it is disheartening to see there is no organized help coming from the emasculated Left in this country.
It must be nice to have that middle class option. I don’t and many people I know don’t. One reason I don’t post on the Internets is because I have to work a shit job in a shit state to pay my bills and revel in my iconoclasm. Today, I had nothing to do, so here I am, shitting up a thread.
I’m sure it was a great time. I don’t doubt that. But you lost, and you think you won. And you have been led to think that you have won, when you have really lost. And now instead of taking responsibility for your failure, now it is people like me who serve the interests of the hard right. But it is framed in a way to talk about my lack of maturity (a specious argument at best) rather than actually talking about what was accomplished, especially politically. I’m not blaming the 60s, as much as questioning how important the 60s really were. Definitely less important than the 30s, the 40s, and the 50s in the development of things like the welfare state and the national security state.
I think what is Orwellian about the 60s is what is considered the acceptable narrative of what a great time in history it was, all the while a war killed millions of Vietnamese and 10s of 1000s of GIs. Like every other of history, it was a bloodletting.
“It was a great big hippie lovefest.”
Yes, exactly. The operative word is love. The hippies discovered that it is natural and effortless to love one another. And blissfully intoxicating. This is the most subversive, most dangerous idea there is. The call to action you are looking for is the call to love one another. Are you up for that?
LBJ made Nixon progressive? And who are these progressives from that era we discredited?
We didn’t think we were being heard in the White House but Nixon admitted later that we were coming in loud and clear.
Buy the way. Thanks for joining the conversation BangBang. Keep coming back.
That was the point of my comment.
You are correct that we lost the War but we won some important battles.
The ’60s was a great time to be alive and it was a dark time too. There are some things that Time Life can’t convey about that time, there was magic in the air and we could feel its power.
I’m sorry we didn’t deliver the better world we imagined that job falls to another.
As conservative as they were, I still prefer the War 2 generation over the Steve Jobs generation. The former at least had a sense of the Social Contract, the latter is, mostly, about making money. Steve Jobs is the perfect exemplar of the boomer mentality, along with his corrupt cohort Bill Gates. Both evil, amoral capitalists. But then we’ve had them in every generation. I’d say there’s one difference: many boomers, not all, do not believe in shared sacrifice. This is a major failing and why we have so many amoral banksters and politicians now running the show.
Thirty years of progressive political and policy victories had pushed the overton window so far to the left that Ike’s and Nixon’s terms were yes more progressive than Clinton’s.
Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and americans appreciation of them made Nixon a progressive president. Barry Goldwaters 23% loss in 1964 made Nixon a progressive president. Hoffman and Rubin and the New Left helped Nixon win in ’68 and win by 23% in 1972.
And really, is that the best you got to show for the New Left? You “made” Nixon “more progressive” in the abstract? I’ve been asking for some concrete accomplishment by the New Left that improved the lives of real people and that’s all you got? The Old Left had Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Civil Rights, 90% marginal taxrate on the highest earners… You got some secret Jedi magic and wild parties.
Wow Glenn almost 200 comments!! You sure kicked off quite a discussion!! As always you type powerful ideas and sentiments.. Just another good reason to join FDL and support such informative posts and discussions..
Ya never know what ya just might learn about the Big Bad World out there….
So you are blaiming the Yippies for Humphrey’s loss in ’68. You must realize the Left has always been a small minority in the US. You also disregard that our best voices had been silenced permanently by ’68. ’68 was Law and Order and ’72 it was the Silent Majority that brought Nixon to power.
No I’m not only blaming the Yippies. Vietnam, the Bobby Kennedy murder, etc many factors. And of course, Vietnam helped creating the New Left. But Rubin and Hoffman turning hell lose on the Democratic convention certainly didnt help. Left wing terrorism didn’t help. And above all you had so precious little to show for it.
Yeah, the American version of noblesse oblige has morphed into “no obligation”.
What does “shared sacrifice” even mean? It appears to refer to sacrificing income and services, yet the majority of people don’t have high incomes Sacrifice is intrinsic for those with low incomes.
Are we “sacrificing” you know, People, so that the gods of commerce and war can continue to smile upon us? I notice we are not talking about sacrificing our military footprint around the world.
Somebody needs to just yank the dang band-aid off so we can see what the wound really looks like.
Then how come we got SS, medicare, medicaid passed? When we work together and sell to the american people instead of tripping on the holier than thou cloud, sh-t gets done
I’ve always thought that one of the greatest achievements of the 60′ is that we survived them. I thought many times that our country was on the virge of being torn apart. The Long Hot Summers of race riots, Kent State, The Draft (that was one lesson the PTB learned, never to fight an illegal war with draftees). Let’s not forget that it was also the hight of the cold war and we were the generation that practiced ABC defense in school.
Those of our time who were on top of the list to be the leaders of the Left in the current times were mostly destroyed by the then-PTB. Shot by police, imprisoned for drug possession, (remember when pot was a two-to-life felony),or simply bought off. (I’ve always thought that any given band’s best album was their first. After then they are creating product generally.)
Remember how “Easy Rider” ended.
But for all the hype about the 60′s, the majority of boomers were silent by-standers or far to the right. That a few thousand leaders backed by a couple of million hippies could do what really was achieved is quite something.
whimperbang: “I am entitled to MY free speech, but you are NOT entitled to yours.”
Now there’s a message you can be proud of.
That’s the kind of silver tongue that would get a DFH some action back in the day
“The spirit of the “Sixties” was killed at the ’68 Democratic convention and it was killed by the national Democrats led by the Democratic mayor Richard Daley and his police state mentality. It’s the same wing of the party that gave our generation Rahm Emanuel and Barack Obama which wanted to pull the plug on the “hippie” movement for all the same reasons (i.e. MONEY and more money) that Emanuel and Obama (and Clinton… and yes, even Jimmy Carter) diss the left.”
That’s how I remember it, too, that and the assassinations of MLK, JFK and RFK. And the students at Kent State. And my four brothers who at any time could have been eligible for the draft. And thousands of body-bags returning from VietNam.
It was a time when peaceful political protest on campus (a la MLK, Ghandi, etc.) was countered by violent protest from the State, and the State won. They were the ones with the guns and power to arrest.
And meanwhile, there was sex, drugs, rock and roll entertaining the free spirits in Woodstock and SF/Bay Area. Thanks so much for the help, btw.
A helluva thread, Mr. Smith. whimperbang is seriously pissing me off, but that’s to his credit. I celebrate his pushback, but he is a bit myopic. And whipsmart. Hope he stays around and the mutual beating that will ensue will temper the steel that is FDL.
Hey, whimperbang – I’ve wanted to lie about Woodstock attendance, but I never had the temerity. I do claim that my parents locked me up during the festival (I was in Trenton, NJ.) That’s a bit of an exaggeration as well.
Great stuff, and I love me some DWBartoo…
Whimperbang wins. All of us who believed in moral and social justice were apparently complete failures. We have been told this repeatedly over the past decade from Presidents to bullying citizens so it must be true. What is the point of reading this type of B.S. here other than to further demoralize?
So true speakin, we didn’t deliver the Utopia or we sabotaged the Liberal agenda, either way we get the blame.
No, I never said we won. You serve the interests of the right when you demonize what happened, that’s all. You don’t even know what happened, and why it’s talked about. All you know about is the war? Do you know about the rest of it? Did you respond to my comment about Biafra? Do you even know what Biafra was? No. Go google and see if you can fake it. Start with the term “poster child”. Do you know what happened to create the internet? Do you know why there was a wholesale attack on the counterculture? It existed for hundreds of years, why attack it now? Do you even know what it’s like to have radio station that isn’t attached to a mega-corporation?
You aren’t understanding. I can accept all the failure you want and still have done something you’ve never even tried to do. Why don’t you try failing yourself for a change? Maybe you’ll learn a little adulthood.
Nahant, I hope you return to the thread to read my thanks for your consistent thoughtful comments, challenges, support and all around engagement with this community. I’m so honored to get a chance to post my Sunday pieces, but I think the real value comes from the community engagement with them.
Really, thanks for having me!
Anyone who feels that they have to analyze the sixties — from something they read — wasn’t there.
Time passes, shit happens. Things change, and no one could have anticipated stupidity on the scale of Reagan and Bush-Lite. They didn’t cause the decline of the country, but they are examples of it.
Humphrey would have been more progressive? Humphrey was a nameless, obedient hack, which is why the party leaders preferred him to the more popular McCarthy, who was trying to make a name for himself. The danger of showing that only the leaders decide had to be covered over with the fake reformer McGovern, who was an even more shamless hack advanced for the purpose of demonstrating that the party had been “reformed” and dumping the election to flush the party of McCarthy leftovers and discourage anyone else thinking about going it alone.
Carter actually tried to defy the party in seeking the nomination without their approval, but once he was president the Dems in Congress colluded with the Republicans to destroy him.
Walter Karp anticipated and there was nothing stupid about it: it was a well planned and executed usurpation.
They contributed greatly to the decline and to making it easier for their successors to finish off the leftovers.
Reagan especially made government business-friendly and business forever grateful for the invitation to loot the fisc.
Humphrey was a pioneer in fighting for Civil Rights and arguably a hero for the same reason. Humprey at the 1948 democratic convention:
Humphrey, as much as anyone, helped drive the bigots out of the democratic party and end a great injustice that millions had suffered under for generations. But he never went to Woodstock and he helped send you to Vietnam so that counts for nothing then.
Wikipedia:
He was whip in the Senate that passed all the Great Society legislation. Arguably the most progressive Sennate of the 20th century.
His one sin was being a foreign policy hawk and wanting to keep sending your sorry ass to Vietnam to fight for some dominoes. That was a mistake some dem politicians made in 1960s. But you guys, you’ve been in a state of perpetual rebellion ever since, to justify that you were right in refusing to go to war under a democratic president. Fact still is that these guys accomplished so much for working americans and minorities in a couple of years that you guys weren’t even close during the rest of your lifetimes. On the contrary, you helped bring the backlash.
You’re asserting a secret conspiracy by the PTB to install McGovern as the democratic candidate, knowingly aiming to lose big so that the heroic DFHs would be flushed out of the party? Here’s wikipedia:
Sounds to me like the kids that didn’t want to go to Vietnam in 1968, still didn’t want to go in 1972 and they did grassroots work for McGovern and got him nominated. Then when their antiwar, draft dodging amnesty candidate went down in flames, they turned around and blamed it all on the establishment, unwilling to accept the fact that their shennanigans were quickly turning the democratic party into something that was unelectable.
The Ted Kennedy primary never happened?
Wikipedia again:
Oh, that sounds… familiar.
Pre-Reagan,I was at a Law School Commencement when the speaker humorously envisioned a Reagan Presidency….pure fantasy, dontcha know, including the # of Supreme Ct appointments….everyone groaned but no one took him seriously. What I recall is the ridicule and humor. Who knew?
Just for the record.
The Democrats, Johnson and McNamara, specifically, initiated the “war” in Vietnam based upon a blatant lie. (Whether Kennedy would have done so is unknowable, but he had allowed “active” American “advisers” to continue operating within Vietnam and had been intrumental in the assassination of Ngo Dinh Diem …)
The Gulf of Tonkin “incident” did NOT happen as Johnson, McNamara, Rusk AND Humphrey asserted.
Humphrey HAD, once upon a time, championed civil rights, but he ran on the war platform and that platform was cognizant of the fact that the cost of that war was especiallu high for young black men.
Humphrey was deep into his flack-itude by ’68 and more than willing to allow violence to quell dissent and reasonable, humane objection to the war machine.
Humphrey had become a timid, emtpty shell possessed of ambition but no integrity.
I needn’t rely upon Wikipedia in order to say those things, as I observed them with me own little eyes … and pondered their meanings when many seemed … uninterested, unconcerned, and preoccupied.
DW
It’s funny how the guys who claim that “no one could have predicted” are often the same guys who deep down know they share some blame for allowing sh-t to go all Pete Tong..
Exactly. They were all strong progressives getting sh-t done, but they also wanted to send you guys to die in the jungle. You didn’t want to go so you rebelled and decided that all mainstream progressives are “the man”. You’ve been rebelling ever since, and by coincident we never got much done from that point on.
Was there any specific thing in Humphrey’s platform that you can point to that was unacceptable from a progressive POW – except Vietnam?
In my opinion, sherwood, Humphrey was a “go along” kind of guy, the war, which was mindless and totally destructive of trust and respect of humanity, was premised upon two notions, the “dominoe theory” which was, in essence, merely an extention of the Doctrine of Manifest Destiny, it was about world domination and the development of the “unitary” executive which had been going on since the use of atomic weaponry in WWII. Humphrey was no visionary, and, as I said, he was willing to allow the war to shift huge resources into profiting corporatiions like DOW chemical who made napalm and agent orange, which was the second “intent” of that war, ostensibly to control Southeast Asia’s resources.
I objected, and continue to do so, to the destruction of actual, genuine democracy, the rule of law, AND real flesh and blood human beings, sherwood, and your suggestion, repeated again and again, the my generation accepted neither reason nor tolerance is tiresome, arrogant, and wrong.
The war perverted everything and those who alinged themselves with the “establishment” were callous in their diregard of life, of reason, and of basic common sense and common decency.
I stood against the war, refused to be drafted and am proud, to this day, to have been “determined” to be “morally unfit to serve” the nation as it “was”. When the nation is destructive and mindlessly wasteful, then individuals must say “NO!” and refuse to go … along.
If you do not and cannot understand the power of the war mentality, after having seen the “run-up” to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, when Bush used the “argument with the big stick” saying, “If you are not with us then you are against us” …then you are either not paying attention or your “agenda” is not about trying to understand, but merely to childishly criticise and refuse to see things in actual context AND rational human perspective.
I do not disagree with some of your comments, and do NOT hold my generation OR myself to be better or wiser than others, but my sense is that you, sherwood, do considder yourself not only better and wiser, but posssed of the notion that you can say and do whatever you want, like some spoiled and unpleasant wee ruffian who would rather bully with words than stand for principle and humanity.
Sherwood, things Are WORSE now than they were in the sixties, not because of the “hippies” but because the sociopathic few have elevated themselves, in their own minds, above the rest of us whom they make sport of and abuse as it pleases them.
Have you noticed?
If so, then what are you, as an individual DOING about YOUR insights and understandings.
What is your personal “history” of actually supporting what you imply are YOUR ideals?
Willing to share, or are you “fulfilled” spouting simplistic nonsense from your comfortable chair?
DW
No it’s not about who is the better man or the wiser man. It’s about what’s good for the progressive movement, advancing progressive values and implemening progressive policy. Imho the New Left didn’t deliver on those, in fact they did the opposite. They helped the enemy. Rubin and Hoffman helped the enemy by not having a clue and shooting us all in the foot.
I’m concerned about the legacy of the New Left continuing to sabotage improving our country. You don’t have to stand up for the yippies and the New Left, but if you do you deserve imho to be (metaphorically) shot down, so we learn from our mistakes and don’t continue pulling stupid sh-t like e.g. voting Nader in ’00.
Exactly what I said: It was all about Vietnam and being drafted; everything else went out the window, everything else was worth sacrificing on the altar of the Unjust War. So much so that you cant even 50 years later be fair about who actually delivered on everything else you purport to stand for and who didn’t deliver.
The guys that wanted to elect a pig for president made it easier for those sociopathic few to succeed. The -ssholes were always around, but when the american people were faced with the choice of a bunch of assholes and a bunch of clowns, they chose the assholes.
Very much so.
Trying to do my damndest working for the benefit of progressive values and policies and keeping the movement together.
I don’t need to prove my pedigree to you. Maybe the truth hurts, but that’s life buddy.
It’s been “interesting”, sherwood.
WHAT have YOU done to advance what YOU have implied, are your principles?
As you’ve not said anything in that regard, I ask you what is YOUR purpose?
What positive advances have YOU, personally, committed yourself to?
What do YOU do?
Until you put your efforts “up” for appreciation or consideration, I remain singularly umipressed with your criticism.
Reality, which we both face, doesn’t give a tiny crap about opinion but it does, sometimes, change when action is “applied”, diligently, regulary, and with conscience.
Are you willing to try, to work together with those whom you may regard as nothing but abject and total failures?
If you’ve no desire to work with us, then we shall simply have to continue to muddle along, somehow, without you.
Are.you.willing?
DW
DW
Sherwood, I’m an all-American mongrel and proud of it.
You seem rather lacking when it comes to actually sharing anything but bombast, you got any humor in there, anywhere?
Frankly, sherwood, I’ve seen no substance, nothing but words and semantic evasion of direct personal questions that are intended to find common ground, which, if we are to succeed, together, all of us, we MUST seek and find and then … appreciate.
DW
“Truth”?
And only you are possessed of it?
You’ve shown me no truth, sherwood, merely, the back-side of hot air, miserable invective, and a haughty and superior sensibility that remains tightly closed to views and perspectives that are not, exceptionally, your own.
I do hope the world improves from your efforts, because, at some point, you will have to take responsibility for how you interact with others whom you might well consider are your allies and for the quality of the world around yourself.
What are your better ideas and what do you, personally do, besides talk?
Those seem reasonable questions to me.
Do you disagree?
DW
I’m happy for you.
Plenty, but not while I’m being serious. Changing the subject and attacking the messenger is indeed indicative of “evasion” and I don’t wish to encourage that.
That’s kind of rich given the fact that the accomplishments of LBJ and HH and those that came before wrt domestic policy are well known and what happened in 1968, 1972, 1980 and 2000 is just as well known. Even more rich, considering me having posed the question many times by now what the New Left have actually accomplished and no one apparently willing to step up. Speaks for itself re: substance.
In addition I also offered a coherent argument about the merits of the New Left and the merits of the mainstream progressivism that preceded it. I’m sorry if you felt personally slighted by that. Note that my invectives (where they were used) were never directed at you, but at the New Left as represented by Rubin, Hoffman and what followed.
If you want to stand up for the New Left why don’t you just make a positive case for their accomplishments?
Well, I appreciate that. And I’m all for finding common ground. I’m just not that interested in getting personal, hope you’re ok with that.
As one of the 60′s generation and veteran of many personal and group experiences, my perspective then and now is that this generational stuff should stop… kids are kids; middle-aged people are middle-aged people, elders are elders…together a society and culture is made.
America did not work together very well.
I think America’s democratic faltering steps – backwards and forward- come from allowing power-brokers to effective alienate the generations. There were not enough middle-agers and elders to translate youth’s natural and enthusiastic, personal response to the draft into a full analysis of the War, as such. Patriotism is a great weapon against intelligence and it stupifies the naive or undecided. The depth of American Racism was more entrenched in the halls of government and largely unexamined in the general populace than now; few power-brokers had the core experience, belief or inclination to expand the Civil Rights struggle into a full-blown democratic upheaval. Any “adults” who breached the age divide were marginalized or demonized just as the kids. Any young people who jumped the age divide were targeted with the heavy guns of the powerful. Real life example: Mayor Dennis Kucinich.
You have a strange fixation on Jerry and Abbie as if they were the leaders of the whole rebellion. They played a part and brought some theatre that the press picked up on but they were not that important.
The Counterculture was not about politics it was a rejection of politics and Amerikan exceptionalism. It was about the evolution of the human spirit and seeing the world and humanity in a new way.
Then and now the greatest threat to humanity is Imperialism and Capitalism. You and others seem to still believe the delusion that some political agenda will save the world. If you had been paying attention for the last 40yrs you would see that the opposite is true.
Sherwood when this nation is at war, the nation is defined by its warlike “sensibilities”. The first casualty is reason, followed by truth, and they are closely followe by humanity.
Do YOU not understand that our “new” endless warfare defines and delimits us?
That it tortures our soul as a nation and as a society.
The endless war has brought us the patriot act, a diminishmdent of civil liberties and an assault upon our fundamental humanity. It will also bring us consequence.
Is your view so closed that you cannot see these things, that you cannot grasp the truth of them?
If your view of progressiveism is to belittle all those who disagree with you, a lot OR a little, then you shall be rather alone in your march “forward”.
Yrur bonafides DO matter, BTW, for that is the basis upon which trust and respect MUST be built.
DW
Well we have to choose whether we want to litigate every single event in politics from 1960 until 2011, to be able to have opinions and try to support them with facts, don’t we? I offered my opinion about what imho was the great tragedy of the 1960s from the viewpoint of someone who want to see progressive policies reign supreme. The yippies and the 1968 convention are obviously relevant because that was the point at which progressive politics and the democratic party started to become a freak show in the eyes of what was to become the “silent majority”.
Well the counterculture sure chose to inject itself into politics, e.g. 1968 convention. I’m highly doubtful that the counter culture types of the 60s and 70s would agree that they werent about politics. Are you implying that “Everything is political” wasn’t the sentiment du jour?
Well I’m not sure I subscribe to the notion that Capitalism is the greatest threat to humanity. If you’d put it like this “rogue capitalist and unconstrained self-interest are the greatest threats in our country to a humane society” then sure. A subtle but crucial distinction; the former makes for a political platform that was unelectable, and for good reason.
But in summary, I proposed my view of how New Left influence on the progressive movement made it unelectable, and I offered a few examples of that. Nitpicking about the focus on Rubin and Hoffman offers no alternative explanation of why progressives achieved so much between 1930 and 1968 and so little from that point forward.
Unjust and misguided wars do indeed corrupt the fabric of democracy. The New Left was indeed right to protest the Vietnam war. I never tried to argue otherwise. But it’s also true that an across the board pacifist platform will never win elections nor wield power in a country that is the world’s no 1 superpower. Such a platform will by necessity remain on the margins and every other good that is part of that platform will as well. Bombing the pentagon will never enjoy majority support. That’s the hard facts of life that the New Left could never quite grasp. So the inevitable compromise for a movement that want to be able to do good is that military power should be restricted and used wisely.
True, and people should fight for all of our civil liberties back. Some of that fight can be pursued within a mainstream political movement and some of that fight should be pursued by individuals and organisations that can operate with less constraints than the mainstream can. But it’s unreasonable to expect one of the parties in a two party system to go e.g. full out pacifist and feel betrayed otherwise. And therein lies the folly of large parts of the New Left.
It’s not my objective to belittle anyone, only to make the case that the level of influence the New Left got in the progressive movement ultimately ended up hurting the ends progressives were fighting for. That doesnt mean that I dont agree with much or most of New Left values. I just think we went about stuff wrong and it ended up hurting us all.
No, that’s wrong. Maybe that’s a precondition for you to be able to trust anyone or take their views under consideration. If that’s the case fine. You only have to say “I don’t know or trust you so your opinions are of no consequence”. But from my POW, if you’re not able to consider the case I’m making on the merits without having me flaunting some battle scars first, I couldn’t care less.
“The Counterculture was not about politics it was a rejection of politics and Amerikan exceptionalism. It was about the evolution of the human spirit and seeing the world and humanity in a new way.
Then and now the greatest threat to humanity is Imperialism and Capitalism. You and others seem to still believe the delusion that some political agenda will save the world. If you had been paying attention for the last 40yrs you would see that the opposite is true.”
Quite frankly, the first two statements are of the sort that really gives credence to what whimperbang says in my eyes. How does rejecting politics, and political agendas, actually deal realistically with either in any way that actually makes peoples lives better? I think that’s actually part of the problem-that without any significant institutions that actually speak for the perspective that you hold politically, power has instead been held since the 60s either by people that wanted to reverse everything that happened then, or by people who are basically careerists who mouth the words and do whatever is convenient and profitable for themselves otherwise.
What I’ve been seeing for the past 40 years is this: I don’t know if a political agenda can save the world, but a terrible one certain can wreck it-and the kind of opposition to it (a significant strain of which has emphasized not having a political agenda) that I’ve seen has pretty much failed so far.
Interesting Icon, you seem to disagree with me and then go on to validate what i said.
I believe that Capital’s capture of Party Politics and our form of representative government are the reasons we are losing our Democracy. All of the worst aspects of predatory Capitalism and Imperialism have come home to claim the final prize, total control.
While MENA and South America are rising up against the Beast we are reduced to being impotent observers and consumers unable to do much more than complain about the situation.
No, I am not validating what you are saying. If you are interpreting me in such a way as to do so, then you are interpreting me incorrectly.
For one thing, American democracy itself is often vastly overrated as a concept. When did capital NOT control it-during the vast tracts of time in which both political parties accepted slavery, unionbusting, and segregation?
For another, you mention South America and the MENA uprisings. At the same time, none of that is in any way the rejection of politics that you consider the 60s an upstanding example of-as much as it’s a rejection of a certain kind of politics-which left most of the population immiserated, robbed, and oppressed. I’d wager that the people in those countries where their revolts, electoral or otherwise, were successful, would think of themselves as more involved in politics than they ever were under a tight neoliberal yoke.
In comparison, if you really think that the 60s were a revolt against politics and towards spiritual awakening, then I think that this underpins much of what is wrong with the left today for a lot of reasons. For starters, I’ll say it again as clearly as I can so it can’t be misinterpreted. Again:
Ignoring politics doesn’t make politics go away.
Furthermore, I think that one legacy of the 60s has been a phenomenally fractured political discourse in the left. This isn’t any kind of sneer at ‘identity politics’; as a black man I’d be a hypocrite if I did that. What I’m saying instead is that the left in the United States is afflicted with the kind of conversational shutdown that would hopefully occur in the following questions asked of Sherwood:
“If so, then what are you, as an individual DOING about YOUR insights and understandings.
What is your personal “history” of actually supporting what you imply are YOUR ideals?”
Perhaps a slightly different emphasis on the first question would make the point:
“If so, then what are you, AS AN INDIVIDUAL DOING about YOUR insights and understandings.”
As compared to “AS PART OF A GROUP”-and there’s the fracturing that I’m referring to. Generally, the ideology that I often seem to see is that change only comes through individuals-which overlooks the very obvious fact that the people that don’t want change don’t just advocate conservatism as individuals-they have institutions that do a lot of their work for them. At the same time, it also dismisses the idea that a valid point could come from someone who doesn’t have the bona fides that DWBartoo is apparently looking for, and limits the spectrum of ‘people whose ideas are worth considering’ essentially to those whose ideas have worked in the past-without asking whether they’re working now.
First i think you mistake the revolts in MENA for political movements, i believe they were mostly spontaneous uprisings against repression of the human spirit. Politics will following these rebellions and will probably undercut and destroy much of their spirit. This is because the nature of present day political structures.
I never said that anyone should ignore politics nor do i believe many people from the ’60s did we rejected the status quo.
You are correct that the Left is fractured but it is not because of our rejection of the status quo it is because we returned to work within the system and believed the Democrat party could be used to further our goals.
What i’m doing now is apparently waisting my time debating people who believe the Hippies are to blame for their problems, i also try to correct people who believe that Black people get all of the welfare and Mexicans get all the good jobs and don’t pay taxes. I’m not having much success with any of those kind of people but i have a few years left and i won’t stop trying.
You’re asserting a secret conspiracy by the PTB to install McGovern as the democratic candidate, knowingly aiming to lose big so that the heroic DFHs would be flushed out of the party?
Yep. For the first time in history, the unions were’t told to support the Democratic candidate, which was their primary function.
In the end, McGovern succeeded in winning the nomination by winning primaries through grass-roots support in spite of establishment opposition.
And then the party withdrew financial support. Nixon knew what was happening and took advantage of the situation by refusing to campaign and release funds for GOP members running for contested congressional seats (winning by a landslide with the lowest voter turnout in decades) in order to prune his own party. Dole opened his mouth, “Oh, they seem to be battening down the hatches!” for which he was promptly fired by the RNC.
No one who supports an unnecessary war is truly a progressive, because unnecessary wars have always been the weapons of first choice for crushing progressive movements. The Spanish/American war was the prototype, Wilson improved on that with the Espionage Act. Since Wilson, whenever a Democrat promised progressive reform, he delivered a war instead.
The No True Progressive argument, huh?
Look, while warmongering is by necessecity not progressive policy, which wars are “necessary” is a matter of judgement. Johnson and the democratic establishment of the 1960s erred in their judgement and they paid the price, which was appropriate and just.
Trying to pretend that Johnson was not a “progressive” president in other areas, e.g. domestic policy, is disingeneous.
Sure, the Vietnam war was the number 1 issue for that generation because who cares much about civil rights, medicare and medicaid when you’re scared sh-tless of being sent to die in a jungle. I get that.
But building your whole political identity around that historical fact aint healthy – not for a movement that tries to provide many good things not only moderation from sending young people to die in vain.
McGoverns lack of establishment support was a consequence of them being p-ssed off at the outcome of the McGovern Commission, itself forced by the actions of the New Left. It’s predictable that when you start a civil war within the party – as opposed to pursuing incremental reform – that can result in electoral losses and other bad things.
That was stuff the “establishment” was well aware of, and thanks to that they had been incredibly successful in effecting social change for decades. The New Left threw such concerns out the window because they were p-ssed off about Vietnam; the results were not surprising.
So, as one would expect: a conspiracy theory based on the omnipotent “man” (in this case the Dem establishment/PTB) machinating events behind the scenes, based on a grain of truth related to how ones own f-ckups resulted in sadly predictable outcomes.
Translated from conspiracy-think: A fractured movement sometimes couldn’t and sometimes wouldn’t get out the vote and a large part of democratic voters stayed home because they were disgusted or frightened by the freak show and the democratic platform (smeared as “amnesty, abortion and acid”).
Sherwood, by what stretch do you imagine that none of us cared about and stood up for civil rights in the fifties, sixties, seventies, eighties, nineties, and so forth right until this very day?
Or health care?
I KNOW what I did, have done, and continue to do with regard to those issues, and many more, besides. Presumably, sherwood, you have SOME history of personal, in the flesh, support of these issues? If so, then speak to it. Should you dare.
Regarding Vietnam, I objected to senseless killing for profit and glossy ribbons and bombastic career advancement for behind-the-lines military brass and I happened to know, in some depth, the history of southeast Asia. Clearly, if America were true to its founders’ hopes and intentions we would certainly have supported the legitimate desire of the Vietnamese people to be free of French colonial domination, that is if we had been courageous enough to be honest and examine our own past history, yet you imagine me “frightened” because I said I wouldn’t engage in the furtherance of empire?
If YOU wish to have others agree with ANY of your opinions, then YOU shall have to find a better and more civil approach to the rest of US.
Do you think that you are encouraging anyone here to join with you?
Fundamentally, you are handing us a huge, noisome load of intellectual crap.
You wish your ideas to be taken on their merit, yet YOUR arrogant behavior and accusatory “style” provide the rest of us rather ample evidence of how you actually “operate”, which likely bothers or concerns you not in the least.
So, ultimately, sherwood, given all you have said, your best advice, distilled (or “cracked”)down to its essense, to the rest of us is simply to vote straight Democratic … forever, because they really do have our best interests at heart and they are also incredibly smarter, wiser and more clever than the rest of us?
Presumably you have no problems with Obama and the current crop of Democratic politicians?
Doubtless, you find the “platform” of Obama to be completely and throughly “progressive”?
For, if you do have ANY reservations or even questions about policy and the eventual effects of policies such as endless war, the destruction of the rule of law, the inhuman use of drones, and the embrasure of torture, then, by your own definition, you will be to blame if things get worse.
If things do not get IMMEDIATELY better, soley as a result of YOUR breathless support of the all-wise, all-knowing Democrats, then I shall hold YOU personally responsible, henceforth.
Starting now.
I fully expect to see that immediate and palpable improvement that we CAN believerate in, sherwood, now that you have proven, to your own, apparently smug, satisfaction, that the rest of us are to blame for what did not happen … already.
I am “looking forward” with great and eager anticipation to exceptionally good, happy, and golden news, sherwood.
And, not to worry, I shall ask you, in detail, for the each day’s improving betterment each and every time I chance to encounter you on these threads. I mean it’s not like the jungles of Wall Street or anything “bonus” like that.
Well, good night … and we all expect … VERY good news tomorrow, sherwood.
(Don’t disappoint us, sherwood, else you can, no doubt, imagine what will happen?)
Happy daze are here again …etc.(Come on, you know the Dem ditty … at least, hum along …)
;~DW
I never accused you of not standing up for civil rights, health care or any other progressive policy. The problem here is that you’re confusing my proposition that the zenith of the New Left coincided with the nadir of progressive real influence in american politics because the New Lefts strategies for achieving policy victories was misguided with me accusing you of not being a Tru Librul (c).
I’m not. I’m not accusing you of anything, not even of subscribing to being a New Leftist. You get to choose your own identity. And you don’t have to agree. IMHO it’s a pretty clearcut case though – the new left were not as successful as the old left in achieving progress, and the main problem is the quite pathological antagonism towards governing, power and progress. That’s my view. You don’t have to subscribe to it and you don’t have to feel that I’ve attacked you.
I’m a private person – I don’t even have a facebook account and I don’t share my personal history on the internet unless I feel like it. Your lacking ability to have a discussion about an issue without feeling that you somehow got the right to demand me to share private stuff is annoying. And it’s also a fallacy, e.g. Ad Hominem. Most of all it’s an indication that your not comfortable with talking about an issue on the merits.
Now I see what got so far upp your -ss. It was the perceived implication that everyone who was a hippy/new leftie was somehow a coward that didnt dare going to war. That was not my intent. But I did express myself rather carelessly a couple of times and I know the accusation was out there at the time so I should have known better.
So let me clarify: I didnt mean to imply that each and every person that was against the war or new left or hippie or yippie or leftie in general in the 60s wasnt against the war on principle but were only trying to save their pink -sses. I don’t believe that at all.
And I agree 100% re the legitimate desire of the Vietnamese people to be free of French colonial domination.
What I was trying to say was that the presense of the prospect of going to vietnam and the nature of the war etc shaped the nature of the New Left and focused it’s activities on ending the war in such a way that other causes suffered and above all getting elected and passing reform suffered. Holding power suffered.
It’s not about flinging accusations at individuals, it’s about trying to determine what works and what progressives can use going forward. And I believe going forward and making progress requires leaving the 60s, the New Left and the Vietnam war behind.
I usually try to stick to the subject, make my case on the merits, and reserve snark and snide remarks for people that shot at me first or engaged in bothersome volumes of sophistry.
I may however have said stuff about groups (i.e. yippies, the new left, young people in the 60s) that you or someone else felt were hurtful. It was not my intent to hurt or shame any individual, and if I did I am sorry. My beef is with a way of going about things – specifically achieving progress – not with you.
No, my advice (not that i have any illusions that it is of greater than anyone elses advice) is to pursue different strategies and to look at what you want for the society you live in.
If you want the U.S. to be an absolulutely pacifist state or only engage in warfare when our border is breached, for example the, that platform is unlikely to be picked up by any of the two parties in a two party system. Because that platform is unlikely to prevail in a country that is a de facto super power.
What you can then do is to pursue that end outside the two party system, through interest groups, by advocacy etc.
When you vote you should vote for the party or representative that is closest to your own position. If you’re a one-issue voter you should vote for that party or representative even if it/him has no credible path to power. If you’re not a one issue voter you should vote for the party/representative that promises to deliver more of what you want than the others and has a fair shot at getting it implemented.
But you knew all that already, right?
Bullseye. No big problems, some smaller problems. On the whole a great improvement considering what came before.
“Completely” and “thoroughly” feels like hyperbole. “Completely progressive” is not really all that useful as a yardstick since it’s kind of an obvious setup for nirvana fallacy.
I’d put it like this: On domestic policy Obama has signed the most progressive set of legislation since LBJ.
On foreign policy Obama is kind of a War hawk re Afghanistan & the ObL raid & afpak predator drone strikes. Macro, he got some GHWB / Nixon real politik tendencies, combined with some Carteresque idealism, belief in working within the U.N.. / international framework; promoting human rights etc.
I’m pretty fine with most of it. He inherited a lot of stuff that guys like Clinton and Carter never had to deal with – e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan and Al Qaeda. He’s done ok with those imho, and above all – he’s done exactly what he said he would while campaigning.
There’s something to be said about a lot of WOT policies, civil liberties etc. Macro picture, the worst stuff from the Bush years is gone, and that makes all the difference to me.
But there are some stuff that neither political party is willing to touch and that doesn’t sit right with me (e.g. Guantanamo, some of the Patriot Act stuff, etc). I wish there was a principled movement working on building public support for ending those. But there isn’t at the moment. There’s only e.g. Grenn Greenwald and people at FDL who are often so misguided, dishonest and all about attacking the president, that I could never support them with money etc.
See above. We should take note of the fact that by all appearances us “torturing” people has been ended by Obama. No Bradley Manning doesnt count – that’s just silly, and symptomatic of stupid New Left-style shooting oneself in the foot.
Use of drones yes there’s a discussion to be had there. I’m conflicted.
Destruction of rule of law, not sure exactly which one of the usual complaints you’re referring to but if:
- Bradley Manning, then I don’t agree with your premise. It hasnt been established by GG et al that rule of law was subverted.
- Guantanamo, then I kind of agree but blame congress.
- Patriot Act, then I kind of agree and blame both parties and Obama.
- Killing of Bin Laden and drone strikes etc, then I dont agree. It’s arguably no breach of international law / the Geneva Conventions. But there are other issues.
Strawman and general appeal to ridiculousness. You could, but I’ll consider you a loon and j-ck-ass.
At this point you’re just happily w-nking away, and I wouldn’t want to disturb you while you’re enjoying yourself.
You’ll go “Neener-neener-neener”?
Happy days are here again
The skies above are clear again
Mmm mm mmm DFHs why so incohe – erent?
Happy days are here again