Has It Really Just Been Hippies vs. The Establishment?

[JFN1]

Could it be that all of the political drama of the 90's, and George W. Bush's subsequent presidency, come down to the fight between hippies and establishment types? Infighting among members of the "Me" Generation? Could it really be that simple?

An essayist over at Newsweek, commenting on Mr. Obama's Inauguration address, certainly seems to think so:

When Obama proclaimed "an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics," many people assumed he was sticking it to the ex-president sitting six feet away. That's true, but that's not all. The full expanse of his vision only becomes clear if we understand why he followed that indictment with the potent scriptural admonition "to put childish things aside." When he made a similar charge about the juvenilia of politics in his book "The Audacity of Hope," writing that government recently felt like a case of "arrested development," he made it clear that he didn't just mean George W. Bush. He named the Clinton-Gingrich battles of the '90s and both of Bush's elections as flare-ups in "the psychodrama of the Baby Boom generation." Obama wasn't just dissing his predecessor in his speech—he was repudiating an entire approach to politics.

I grew up in the 70's and 80's (born in '66, so I'm almost a boomer myself). I remember television shows, like Batman, Dragnet, and Star Trek, that included social commentaries on both sides of the "Me" Generation. I remember seeing news reports on hippies, and those who protested them.

The Boomers are truly a generation at war with itself, and I suppose it is not really surprising that this still unresolved fight has been expressed in our politics, our government, and ultimately consumed us as a nation, for the past 20 years. There seems no end to the fight; hippies and establishment types will soon be battling in nursing homes across the country.

The era of boomer politics is finally coming to a close, with the ascendancy of Mr. Obama and his contemporaries. The writer at Newsweek believes Mr. Obama not only ushered out the age of boomer politics, but has set us back on the path our Founders intended:

In its place, he offered a distinctive way of thinking about post-boomer government. Whatever else his address might have been, it was the furthest-reaching community-organizing speech in the history of community organizing. He celebrated those "who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom" and took a swipe at "those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame."

So this is what social conscience looks like. I'd almost forgotten. I believe the essayist has nailed Mr. Obama's intent, and it is really up to the rest of us to jump on board and make it possible. I felt that many of the wounded feelings and fights that erupted during the primaries between supporters of Ms. Clinton, and everybody else, symbolized an era of brutal politics filled with nothing but self-interest and drama. This period has been marked by a lack of progress in many areas, and even some strides backwards. Certainly the resurgence of religious fundamentalism in this country can be seen as a step backwards, for it affected so many things in our country - science, ethics, and our sense of community responsibility.

Will Mr. Obama change politics? Yes, I believe he will. But he is going to have to do so in an arena filled with individuals who have been fighting with each other for forty years. The fight between the hippies and the establishment will continue. But thankfully, the reigns of power have been forced from their hands, and hopefully the fight will no longer be capable of doing damage to our nation, our planet, and our beloved human race.

[Ishoutandscream2]

1. Yes, the crew cut kids are in battle with the long hairs

As Bill Clinton said (and I'm paraphrasing), "If you thought a lot of good came out of the 60's, you're probably a democrat. If you thought the 60's didn't do a bit of good, then you're probably a republican."

[meow2u3]

105. And if you think both good and bad came out of the 60's

...you're probably a moderate. :)

[misanthrope]

116. ...you're a realist**nm

**

[Bandit]

153. I would be interested to read what you think the bad was that came from the sixties.

Vietnam War was bad....Segregation was bad but it did not come from the sixties. What specificaly came from the sixties that you consider bad?

[NRaleighLiberal]

2. Interesting take. Even at 53, my wife and I feel like hippies that our establishment neighbors

(republicans all) just don't get. If hippies are those who believe in change, progress, pushing boundaries, belief in ALL people, care for the less fortunate, courageous, willing to fight for what is right - indeed.

[patrice]

12. And Freedom. Hippies are all about Freedom, even if somewhat imperfectly so.

Freeing one's self and, hence, others isn't like throwing a switch. Generations of conformity had a price.

[NRaleighLiberal]

16. YES! Thanks so much for that addition to my list!

[Cetacea]

3. Bush admitted as much in an old interview from 2000.

He basically said he wanted to squash 60's idealism and policies. I wonder if the Iraq war was in part revenge for what happened to the Vietnam war. Right wingers are still quite upset about how the US was "embarrassed" by it's losing that one. Keeping the press out of the Iraq battle fields and censoring images of dead troops was definitely a result of he Vietnam war period.

[Warpy]

4. Only the eldest boomers got to be hippies

and those born after 1955 were just wannabes who later settled for money since they missed everything but long hair and drugs, neither of which was satisfactory for the long haul.

People who try to lump everybody born between 1946-1964 into the same ethos are making a huge mistake. Younger boomers don't remember much of the civil rights struggle or the Vietnam War except images on TV during their early childhood. All they really knew about hippies came from tired old white guys trying to make sense out of them and failing.

While there are exceptions to every rule*, most boomers fall into two distinct demographics: those who were there and part of it and those who watched it on TV in their jammies before they went to bed. Our government has been fighting the former and trying to co opt the latter for the past 45 years.

*the obvious ones being the old boomers who sat in YAF meetings in college and rural beer joints growling about them damn commie hippies and the younger boomers who got the point and ended up working for peace and economic justice.

[Ishoutandscream2]

5. Agreed. Born in 61, so technically a boomer

but not in the true sense. If you're too young for Vietnam, then you don't fit in the true boomer category, imo.

[misanthrope]

118. I agree with your parameters...

...I was born in '64 but my parents' friends were the ones who fought in Vietnam.

I'm as liberal as they come down here but I have little patience with hippies as most of them I've met are better at alienating others than anything else and a great deal of them care about little more than partying and dancing to jam bands.

The liberals from that era who marched for civil rights and registered voters are cool in my book. The ones who spent all their time following the Dead, not so much.

[Greybnk48]

119. You're a "teeny bopper" like my little bro.

I loved your group (I'm H.S. class of '66). You guys were the inventors of air guitar! LOL

[TahitiNut]

122. "You guys were the inventors of air guitar!" .... Wrong.

My peers (born in 1943) and I were the kids whose "after-school" was listening to Elvis (and Buddy Holly) and taking turns playing air guitar and lip-syncing. That was the mid-to-late-1950s. We're the generation who BECAME Rock-and-Roll, too. All the greats were within a year or two of my age.

[TahitiNut]

120. Exactly!

The post-1955 'boomers' don't qualify as true Age-of-Aquarius folks. I, born in 1943, am more of a fit even though often excluded from the "Baby Boom.' The most overwhelming "common experience" is facing high school graduation like it was a ticket to Viet Nam.

[ProfessorGAC]

149. Hey, I Resent That

I was born in '56. If the draft hadn't been ended, my parents and i decided i was going to college in Canada. So, i think i'm close enough!

Gee, and i thought we were pals! Now you're cutting me out of the club! No fair!
GAC

[TahitiNut]

156. Oops

Well, as you know better than most, the norm always has outliers -- exceptions that 'prove' the rule?

As a fella born in '43, I've long experience grappling with the type-casting and 'membership' rhetoric surrounding the 'baby boom' and "don't trust anyone over 30" and such ... since us kids born DURING WW2 just don't get no respect. We got born when nobody was paying attention since they had more important things to do. We learned humility from the get-go.

:rofl:

We are pals ... forever. (There's no escape. Give up.) :evilgrin:

Funny thing about that. I say it somewhat jokingly ... but with complete confidence.

[Mojorabbit]

179. 56 here too and I agree. nt

[treestar]

165. You still do, since the boomer category is just demographic

And those were the years the babies were born.

But then the younger ones might not fit the "hippie" category. We were in college when Reagan was elected.

Though we still did have protests, but against things like nuclear power. It probably was not nearly as intense though.

[enlightenment]

10. Excuse me?

Those born after 1955 were just wannabes who later settled for money?

That is quite possibly the most superficial, irresponsible, nasty remark I have ever seen you make, Warpy. Even with the * at the end.

As as a boomer born in 1957, I could easily repudiate every word of that statement - if I cared to do it.

I don't.

I'm disappointed in you, kiddo.

[Warpy]

11. Read the WHOLE post.

Thank you.

[enlightenment]

40. I did.

You apparently didn't read all of mine or you would have seen my reference to your proviso.

You're welcome.

[patrice]

22. In all normal distributions, there are always out-lyers and I believe we're talking about

a large enough group, over a long enough amount of time, that we would see a normal distribution.

[justaregularperson]

192. This is all stereotyping. Boomers led the Reagan "revolution

Many of the one's who have screwed up the country are ex-"hippies" who sold out.

Sorry, the post boomers did not have the draft, but I have been as involved in progressive efforts as any boomer.

This topic reminds me of the "greatest generation" bullshit.

[patrice]

17. Thanks.

:hi:

[Blue_In_AK]

51. As a "first-wave" hippie, I agree with that totally.

I'm 62 now. I don't feel like I have shared the same life experiences as those who are under 52 or so -- not that there's anything wrong with that.

[Warpy]

86. No, it's a completely different demographic

and that is the point of my post.

[old mark]

142. As a 61 year old, I agree with you - we experienced the beginning of change

and the incredible resistance to it.

Gran'pa, tell us the story(again) about when you got chased buy the cops.....


mark

[lib2DaBone]

188. Many young 20 and 30 somethings... have never known anything but prosperity...

For generation X and Y and beyond... there has always been cell phones, x-boxes and credit cards.

Stay tuned.. it's going to get interesting.

[justaregularperson]

193. Not sure what world you are living in... I think they have not seen real prosperity

The 60's (Maybe early 70's too) were the most widely prosperous decade we have had. From the "Reagan revolution" on After that it was great fun for some (like older Baby Boomers) while others struggled more and more to get by and were left behind.

Folks in the 60's did not have as many "gadgets", but younger generations have far less freedom in choices and have to fight far more to survive.

One of the things that made "the 60's" possible is many could live on practically nothing and "drop in and out" at will. Even temporary jobs in this age are not a given and have to be fought for. Those in their 20's and 30's have far less choices in alternative lifestyles, traveling lifestyles, etc. Land near jobs was much more available and less expensive than now (most 5 acre parcels in my area are owned by older gens, young gens could never afford them). Jobs are more and more jails where every move you make is watched and controlled. Social life in these generations sucks compared to the 60's and 70s.

Having experienced some of those times as an adult I would gladly take that period over this one.

[annabanana]

92. Born in 49 and agree with you completely. . . n/t

[scarletwoman]

99. Great post. Another born in '49 who agrees with you completely. (nt)

[Hannah Bell]

127. The 60s were well over by 1980, when someone born in 1956 was 24.

It was the first wave of boomers who got married, had babies, & joined the rat race, voting for Reagan in large numbers; not the folks who were, at most, 24 & just getting out of college. They came of age when the 60s were already over.

I watched the most left of my supposed friends, once they left college, go right into high-paid work & buy bigger houses & more crap than their parents. The jobs were supposedly "service" jobs & the crap supposedly "green," & that was supposed to make it different, but it was the same keep-up-with-the-jones mentality they used to mock, regardless.

Bill Clinton, 1946
Hillary Clinton, 1947
George Bush, 1946
Laura Bush, 1946
Jeb Bush, 1953

etc. for the climbers of the "hippie" generation, most of whom participated only by wearing bellbottoms & smoking pot anyway.

the "movement" was taken down by other forces than people opting to make money.

[Warpy]

134. Actually, that first cohort was apolitical

once the war ended. McGovern failed to topple Nixon and Carter was seen as a southern conservative sellout and few alternatives were offered. They'd gone back to the land or gone into social work, food, or medicine and decided that acting locally was enough.

Their kids were great, but acting locally certainly was not enough.

Reagan was swept into office mostly by their parents and grandparents by promising middle class tax relief after the inflation of the 70s had pushed them all into higher tax brackets than they could afford. Old hippies were totally alienated and disengaged.

I was the only old freak I knew during that period who bothered to vote.

[Hannah Bell]

136. In 1980, voters 30-44 (born 1936-1950) were 31% of total turnout.

They went heavily for Reagan: 54%, v. 37% for Carter, 7% for anderson.

The younger folks (22-29, born 1951-1958, 17% of turnout) were more evenly split: Reagan 43, Carter 43, anderson 11%.

The youngest demographic, 18-22, born 1958-1962, 6% of the vote = 43% reagan, 44% carter, 11% anderson.


about 55% of voters in every demographic born 1950 & earlier went for Reagan.


what was typical for you & your friends may not have been for the country as a whole.

[Greyhound]

144. That's the sad truth. The republiks had the middle aged and older crowd firmly

in their corner as always. It was those right behind them (remember the "hippies with haircuts" meme?) that was the biggest change, and out of disillusion, media concentration, and greed, ushered in the destruction of the nation.

[Warpy]

152. It's unfortunate they started in 1936

Had they started in 1946, they'd have found something totally different.

Remember, also, that what we're talking about here are hippies.

[Hannah Bell]

167. there's probably a difference if you go 46-50, or if you looked at people

who identified as hippies. and the election didn't have particularly strong turnout.

but my point was, the younger folks were less likely to go for reagan, not more likely. & i believe that was the case even when you sliced the demographic '46-'55, 56----.

[scarletwoman]

157. Very true. I've been an anomaly among my own old hippie peers in that I've always voted.

I think that's because I raised in a very liberal family, among generations of lifelong Democrats for whom voting was as obligatory as breathing. I never actually rebelled against my own family, their values were already unusually enlightened for the time, so I never seriously considered not voting.

But trooping off to the polls every 2 years was pretty much ALL I did in terms of electoral politics until the late 80s. Meanwhile, I remained firmly ensconced in the counter-culture, raising my kids and keeping faith with my old hippie values of free-thinking, anti-authority, anti-war, non-materialistic, small-scale cooperative enterprises, worker-ownership, organic food, ecological awareness, etc.

"...but acting locally certainly was not enough."

I don't know -- I suppose it looks that way in hindsight, but I think it was really important that so many of us were acting locally, living our alternative lifestyles, building up small-scale alternative institutions, while avoiding full frontal confrontation with the Machine. Instead of getting our heads beaten in, we quietly seeded our sensibilities into the mainstream society around us -- a subversive guerrilla movement of patiently yeasting our communities with different ideas. All very small and incremental, of course, but I do believe we've seen many of those seeds bearing fruit over the years.

I think that there's an ultimate confrontation that WILL have to be made against the Machine, the Class War WILL have to become a hot war at some point -- sooner rather than later, imho. But the timing of this will be determined by events, and our success will depend on our catching the right wave with enough momentum to carry us forward.

For however locally we old hippies have concentrated our efforts over the decades, I'm quite sure that the larger consciousness, the spirit of resistance to trynnany has never left us, and will see us at the forefront of the Great Battle once again.

Peace and Love,
sw
:hippie:

[justaregularperson]

194. You got it right. It was the "Hippie generations" selloffs that created the Reagan revolution

The younger gens followed, but the Hippies have had it better and should have known better. I don't give them any more credit. I think this thread is all too simplistic. Reminds me of the "greatest generation" (WW2) folks who sit around talking down other generations.

Each generation has it's own responsability in the messes we have made. But the generations that grew up in the 50s. 60's 70s have experienced incredible prosperity and took for granted what the younger gens could only dream of.

I feel bad for the 20 somethings now. They may not be the most aware generation, but that is because life for them has always been this conservative controlled confusion. They have more "gadgets" but less freedom. They have more "TV" and "electronic games" but less quality of social life. They binge drink but are entirely screwed up with controls, rules, and regulations, over their every thought and move. They have far fewer options and far more mundane work life if they wish to have their families survive.

[Le Taz Hot]

140. I so disagree that those

born after 1955 were just "wannabes." Though I was born in 1955 I have to say that the Civil Rights Movement, the Women's Movement, and the anti-war movement had profound affects on me. All of is actually colored my entire way of thinking. I became active in early 1968, at age 12, after Bobby Kennedy threw his hat in the ring.

I agree that trying to lump all of us born between 1946 and 1964 is a mistake. But it is also a mistake to determine that, if one was born after a certain date they are "wannabes." It's an insult to those of us who were influenced greatly by those who were immediately behind us and TOOK ACTION and continue to do so.

[Warpy]

154. Had you read the whole post

you'd have found yourself at the bottom of it.

[Uncle Joe]

184. I tend to believe younger boomers and older boomers have far more in common as a whole

than some in the corporate media would have them/us believe.

I believe the corporate/oligarch powers that be and their mass one way propaganda machine are more than happy to magnify any sign of division whether real or imagined as a means of eroding the concept of "people power" which arose from the 50s and 60s. Their strategy of divide and conquer by dividing the boomers became apparent to me within hours after the election, when three pundits puppets on three different networks read off the same script about Clinton and Bush being the only baby boomer Presidents and how Obama was actually part of the newly recognized Generation Jones.

For younger boomers it's not just about long hair and drugs, it's a view of the world that was dramatically altered due to the sacrifices and philosophy set forth by their older brothers and sisters in the first wave of the baby boomers.

Had the older boomers not changed the philosophical environment regarding race and humanity, I doubt the younger boomers would have so dramatically supported and voted for Obama. That concept would have been too alien for comfort, I also believe that is a primary reason the corporate media will go on to lament or promote the death of the baby boomers hold on power.

In short, the younger boomers were indeed positively influenced by the older boomers and the corporate/oligarch powers that be, want the American People to forget that.

[EFerrari]

6. Obama still thinks he can negotiate with authoritarians.

That's going to cost him.

[TheWraith]

9. Given that his opening negotiating position is "I won," I think he'll do okay. :D nt

[EFerrari]

14. Throwing your weight around may be satisfying at some level

(and it satisfied ME to know he said that), but it's not a step out of the "psychodrama", is it? It's just another day in the psychodrama.

[scarletwoman]

74. "It's just another day in the psychodrama." Beautiful! Well said! (nt)

[TheWraith]

7. I would call it more authoritarian versus anti-authoritarian.

There's a lot of people who you'd never call "hippies" who are nevertheless on our side. Mark Felt wouldn't have matched that stereotype, but he still helped bring down Nixon because it was the right thing to do. For that matter, some of the people who were "hippies" turned into the "Jesus freaks" of the 1970s and subsequently into the religious right because they wanted a social structure that gave them a sense of rightness.

I think it's really about an authoritiarian power/class structure, versus an anti-authoritarian egalitarianism.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

36. You're mistaken about Felt

He was FBI scum through and through. He never ratted on the Nixon gang "because it was the right thing to do." He did it out of pique for having been passed over for J. Edgar's job, that's all.

I knew the guy. He was filth, believe me.

[grannie4peace]

41. far out!

[grannie4peace]

39. i haven't met any hippies that turned rr

:shrug:

[patrice]

8. No, it hasn't. If Hippies had ever had anything like power, how could "we" have

gotten into the situation we are in?

What on earth is your definition of a Hippie? How do you equate that with "the me generation"?

[JFN1]

13. I must respectfully disagree.

"Hippies" had the same opportunity, through sheer numbers if through no other means, to gain power just as the "establishment" types did. So hippies did have power - they just did not exercise it in a manner that allowed them to directly challenge the establishment types who ended up running things. A subtle point, I admit, but, I believe, an important one.

The "Me" generation is the same as the "Boomer" generation. The label changed to "Baby Boomers" sometime in the 80's or 90's, I think.

[EFerrari]

24. Who in the world do you think kept liberal values alive after they killed our leaders?

Good fucking grief. Don't even try to rewrite history.

[JFN1]

29. I stand corrected.

Protesting is an exercise of political power, and the protests of the 60's did make a huge difference in the unfolding of our civil rights.

My apologies.:pals:

[EFerrari]

33. I'm sorry to be so strident. But you have to remember or to imagine

what it was like for that generation to see its leaders cut down, one after the other. That is what little countries like Guatemala or El Salvador go through, never something we'd imagine for ourselves. And yet, it happened here.

I can't think of another generation that went through that except maybe in the Civil War.

Even apart from the profound loss, it had a chilling effect on people who might have stepped forward as leaders.

I hope we never go through something like that again.

[JFN1]

45. Agreed.

I cannot know what that was like - none of my generation can. It has been so long since we've had such leaders - perhaps we know why, now...

[patrice]

27. dob = '66? So, you weren't there. Sheer numbers? You are going to have to establish how many

"Hippies" there were.

And why would anyone seeking Freedom, successfully or not, join the machine in order to get Power?

P.S. There were/are Hippies and then there were/are "Hippies".

[grannie4peace]

53. i was there- the fall of '66, right near halloween

2 guys & i flew up from l.a. i had never been there before. we had a friend who said we could crash at her house if we ever came up. i remember looking out of the cab window as we came into the haight. the streets were crowded with young & old ,dressed in anything from midevil clothes to raggedy jeans & indian shirts. it was about 9pm . the atmosphere was totally magical. there were alot of hippies in the bigger cities but in most area the were only people who watched what reported on tv.

[patrice]

76. The idea made manifest that it is good to figure out what you own thing is! Wow!

I have been to SF only a couple of times, didn't go to Haight Ashbury, did party with friends I was visiting there, at the Keystone (on Shattuck Avenue) and Gerry Garcia who came down from the stage and hugged me (!) on new year's eve 1975. The line to get in was a couple of blocks long. Nicky Hopkins was there that night too; we waited a few hours, everyone was sooooo friendly and exotic, and shared whatever they had, lots of blotter acid. I met people like I'd never even seen before; everyone kept calling me Dorothy (from Kansas). Was a little freaked out the following days by all of the pills they were dropping into their coffee, tea, whatever, but that didn't stop me from trying some of it anyway. Lovely experience all of the way around.

[Cetacea]

31. Kent State took care of "direct" challenges. n/t

[Tansy_Gold]

59. Excuse me, but we've ALWAYS been the baby boomers

The "me" generation came later, though there may have been some overlap.

Think Alex P. Keaton.



Tansy Gold, 1948 boomer

[Why Syzygy]

85. Right.

This case has been made here already. But, the "Me" generation started with Raygun. If you wanted to avoid being trickled down upon, you made sure you were at the top regardless what it cost society.

[annabanana]

93. the "me" -ers are the "let's get physical" crowd.. they turned inward. . n/t

[Waiting For Everyman]

121. That term was used in the '50s. I remember it as a kid.

The boom was obviously noticed at the time, not later.

[Two Americas]

126. not so

I think that as late as 1968 there were 12 hippies in Detroit. There were thousands of us working for Civil Rights, to end the war, fighting poverty and organizing in the unions. Still we never had "sheer numbers" to achieve anything, but we were getting there. Then all of our leaders were systematically murdered. Then suddenly, everyone was a hippy and the political movement was crushed - crushed, not abandoned.

We were a minority then, despised and abused, and have been ever since.

People were calling my generation baby boomers before I was even in high school. The phrase would have died off had the right wing not continued to use to to discredit not the hippies, not everyone from that generation, no, rather to crush and discredit those who were fighting for peace and justice and human rights and who were fired, thrown out of school, jailed, gassed, beaten and ostracized for that.

Read the real history. Don't fall for the MSM narrative about this, and don't spread the right wing propaganda about it.

[Hannah Bell]

128. "baby boom" = coined in the 40s.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,856041,00.html

"me generation" = coined in the 80s.

[Cetacea]

18. Funny how people concerned with Social Justice got lumped together

with mostly Reagan "Democrats. The "Me" generation is largely an invention of the media and I am somewhat saddened that Obama buys into it. Most of the hippies moved to Vermont after the government started using them for target practice.

[EFerrari]

28. Or to Marin. Or to Canada. Or, to Hollywood or Silicon Valley.

They stayed out of the crosshairs. I'm surprised McGovern is still here to give us his viewpoint. How did they miss him.

[Blue_In_AK]

54. Some of us came to Alaska.

Now all we have to do is stay out of Sarah's crosshairs, and since she likes to shoot anything that moves, we stay busy.

[NashVegas]

30. Perhaps That Might Explain

Why Dean got sent back to the wilderness.

[amandabeech]

171. Obama has never shown a really good historical appreciation for the

post-war period. I agree with you, it is troubling.

He's a smart guy, but I think that his views of that period were colored by his experience with his Mom more than anything else, unfortunately.

I think that he needs to do some psychological work in this area, and it was one of the reasons why he wasn't my first pick in the primaries.

[proud patriot]

15. Hippies , their kids and grand kids coming of age soon

:woohoo:

[grannie4peace]

66. & i got some fine grandkids

[Why Syzygy]

19. The "Me" generation was the one of Reagan

the 80's. Not the same as Hippies.

[Cetacea]

21. Bingo.

Thank you. The hippies I knew/know were/are anything but self-consumed.

[NRaleighLiberal]

Here's the kicker for me. What are these establishment types so afraid of? And -

many of them are so-called "Christians" - but the way that they act, they have no faith whatsoever. Such a sad way to go through life...and dragging down as many as they can with them...

[G_j]

20. too easy.

meanwhile, we still have the Military Industrial Complex, that a Republican president warned about, which we "hippies" have been fighting for generations.

Now don't you think these "establishment" types represent the Military Industrial Complex, the Prison Industrial Complex, etc...?
Of course they do, and thinking of this as a "hippie" issue is a cop out, IMO.


edit to add: the civil rights movement came before the "hippie" movement, and the "establishment" it confronted, was one and the same.

[EFerrari]

25. In order for younger people to really understand this, they would have to go through

a series of assassinations of their most beloved leaders. They will never get it or what that did to us as a movement or as a nation. We still haven't recovered.

[G_j]

49. their trauma was 9-11

we tried to declare peace after losing our heroes.
Bush tried to become the hero, and declare war.

[patrice]

37. The Civil Rights Movement inspired Hippies.

As a middle-class, mid-western, white girl, I can remember how impressed I was when Hollywood types started standing up for Dr. King.

[G_j]

42. that's right

it has always been the same fight to me. I guess Obama may see more of a separation.
Still, I'm older than him.
LOL!

[patrice]

84. The things he said in his inaugural address about "old things" are clues to his mind on the topics

of "separate" and "together". You'll also notice references to "our ancestors". I think it's very concrete stuff really, about how one's true values shape your life and your life has an effect on the world and the extent to which we share any of our true values is the extent to which we ARE one in how we will affect the world. The key here is the word "true", i.e. what is honest/real (whether those are good truths or bad truths) shaping behavior and, hence, effect, as opposed to just being whatever window dressing or lip-service is current.

I think, for example, about how someone who is genuinely and truly Pro-Life will do things for Social and Economic Justice that WILL, in fact, reduce abortions, as opposed just saying "I'm Pro-Life" and leaving what that means up to the courts after the fact , and NOT doing things like supporting Single Payer Health Care, thusly increasing the need for abortions.

We shall see the real values, positive and negative, that we place on Life and people will be united, positively and negatively, by whatever their values really are.

[G_j]

90. what gives me optimism

is the amount of goodwill being expressed by the people. It cannot be underestimated, but we must make it true in our future actions.

[patrice]

96. Yes!! Thanks for reminding me not to take that for granted.

People like me, who have been around the issues milieu for so long, forget what it means as normal people become more aware.

People WANT very much to figure out and to do the right thing. They want to BE good.

One thing about Hippies, we've always believed that we/People had this in them, even if we do get a little tooooo wrapped up in whatever we are focused on at a given moment.

[G_j]

143. a window of great potential

as people glimpse the truth of Gandhi's words: "You must be the change you want to see in the world."

and people acknowledge that almost every soul desires peace and good relations in this world.

a special moment when the best appears possible

[EFerrari]

44. Where were you, patrice? My family was all immigrants from Central America

and my mom's generation could figure out why no one took him out from the very beginning.

It wasn't until later that my mom hooked up with some sisters and together they brought Civil Rights and feminist hell to Silicon Valley and to our segregated town. I was just a pre-teen at the time. Wild days. Good days if sometimes, dangerous ones.

[patrice]

73. The Kansas City area. I saw The Beatles at Arrowhead stadium and felt the world change, in 1964.

Concerts, by national and local names, have been an important part of my intellectual life ever since (that is until this last 10 years or so). I debated the proposition "There should be an international organization to control the proliferation of nuclear weapons", pro and con, all over the state my sophmore year in highschool; this sensitized me lots to the powers of government and to international issues. Seeing the picture of the Buddhist monk who set himself on fire (in Life? or Look? magazine) affected me deeply and I followed news of the war in the media, though I never actually encountered an opportunity to protest it. Messages about Free Love resonated with my Catholic upbringing and my family was kind of outsiders anyway, so the other ideas just sort of fit. Believe it or not, there was a time in the late '60s when Catholic schools taught you how to think about Social Justice. My Dad was a Union leader (he helped to start his local) and he was foreman on big construction projects who told stories about Racism on the job. Thinking was encouraged in my large family and my older brother at college lead the way at the dinner table. My husband to be (from Buffalo NY) and I were reading Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land, Miller's Canticle for Lewibowitz, Huxley's Brave New World, Orwell's 1984, Vonnegut, Alan Watts, Baba Ram Dass lots of others, including most of Ayn Rand's fiction. When my two children were big enough to allow me to get to college, I immediately found Plow Shares folks and Nuclear Freeze activities, all of which appealed to my sense of Economic Justice. I actually helped organize and lead one march and participated in another down Kansas Avenue in Topeka. After college, I taught and learned from highschool seniors mostly.

Life's challenges have pretty much confirmed what is real and what isn't.

Thanks for asking, sfexpat2000 :hi: You got me to think about how, exactly, the values got carried along, for more than 40 years now.

edited for typos

[TahitiNut]

129. Don't forget Kahlil Gibran, the Little Prince, and Jonathon Livingston Seagull ...

... as well as Zen and The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. Eric Fromm and the PDR complete the bookshelf. :silly:

[Enthusiast]

135. Patrice, what a long strange trip it has been.

Baba Ram Dass. My wife and I got to hear him in Dayton Ohio, sometime in the mid 70s. My favorite is Huxley's The Doors to Perception. I feel he had some valid insights, even today.

[NashVegas]

23. Stirling Newbury Just Wrote a HUGE Essay On This, Sort of

http://agonist.org/stirling_newberry/20090120

In the present and near present, the story is Obama. But this is the tail end, the late majority of the "S" curve. Obama is omega-phoria, because he is the bearer of bearing the end of an old curve, not the begining of a new era, but the theory that the old era can be stretched out. As was said of Wagner's music, not a sunrise, but a sunset. Obama's blazing orange and blue is not the color of dawn, but the color of dusk. His election not that of a new generation, but the last election which is "about" the 1960's. Every Presidential election since 1960 has been about the 1960's. First the 1960's as future, then the 1960's as moment, then the 1960's as undoing, and finally the long twilight cultural war over the 1960's.

Eucatastrophism produces "Ophoria" in Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, there is a brief period of late happiness, which then is the fading away of the world that it is a part of. It is written into the structure, and Gandalf warns the people of the time that there era is over for good or ill.

I am known as an Obama doubter, but those that have criticized me for being too early do not understand that this is precisely the moment where acquiesence is not possible, and is not advisable. The structure of the argument is as follows: we are at the end of an old S curve, however, unlike the smooth part of the S-curve, we were just in a frenzied period of pushing that curve to far. The easing back from this frenzied peak will produce a moment of respite - this is based on both physical and economic factors. The Obama theory is two fold, first, to shift the headroom from the frenzied peak, and to do a certain amount of cram down in the rest of the economy. It is not to restructure the economy itself. This is a two way bet: the bet is that if the new S curve appears, then the holders of the current S curve will get the benefits, since they own the equity, and if it does not, then the poor will be crammed down. The progressive movement needs to understand that this bet is, in fact, anti-progressive, and doomed to fail in the larger sense, since it is still making the "eat babies" bet. Hence, I am a doubter of Obama, because he has shown clear indications that he is not willing to use this catastrophic moment to turn towards the new S curve, but is, instead, attempting to make an omega bet.


Allow me to remind you of Mario Savio's famous 1964 speech:

"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part; you can't even passively take part, and you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop. And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcx9BJRadfw

Obama's rule will be about coaxing us past any remaining desire to thwart the machine.

[scarletwoman]

57. Bingo! "Obama's rule will be about coaxing us past any remaining desire to thwart the machine."

That's an excellent essay, thank you for posting it. This is the sunset, definitely.

sw

[Radical Activist]

81. You can't build a new movement by tearing down an existing one.

This essay is a good example of why the boomer outlook and approach has so often failed. Change is happening. This is the movement. And here you are ready to sit on the sidelines and spit on it because of some egotistical bullshit about how Obama is part of some big conspiracy against the 60's left. What a fucking waste.


"Every Presidential election since 1960 has been about the 1960's."

No. Not any more. That's no longer true after the 2008 election. Thank goodness it's no longer about the 60's.

[NashVegas]

91. LOL... PLEASE

If you going to go around writing things like what's in your header, could you find a new avatar that doesn't reflect the exact opposite?


Just sayin' ...

[Radical Activist]

95. Being radical doesn't mean I have to agree with poorly thought out opinions.

Being radical and being effective don't have to be mutually exclusive.

[Greyhound]

146. ROTFLMAO!

Oh the irony, the many levels of irony...

and the more you look at it and read it over, it becomes so ironic that it is hard to believe it is not intentional.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[NashVegas]

151. It Happens Often Enough

That it's hard to believe it's not.

[Radical Activist]

178. You respond to this

but you couldn't respond to me with a real comment.

If you haven't read the updated introduction to Rules for Radicals before go look it up. Saul Alinsky gives advice to the dispirited 1968 Dem convention protesters after being beaten and arrested. He says to start organizing so that next time THEY are the delegates and THEY control the convention. One of the speakers at the DNC 2008 convention was one of Obama's mentors who was trained by Saul Alinsky and who trained Obama as an organizer. What Alinsky suggested just happened.

The boomer generation never got organized enough to take Alinsky's advice. But in 2008 it finally happened. Those who couldn't believe in 1968 that taking over the Dem Party was useful or possible still believe that today. Being a radical activist means doing effective organizing, not sitting back and sneering at everything.

I probably shouldn't have given a long response because I'm not expecting more than another "LOL" from you.

[NashVegas]

199. Great. So Maybe

You should wear a Saul Alinsky avatar, instead of identifying yourself with someone who was willing to risk getting killed in order to overthrow capitalist governments.

[Radical Activist]

177. delete

wrong spot

[Le Taz Hot]

141. Thank you for this.

I sometimes get so disheartened to read posts from the "what-have-you-done-for-me-lately" generation(s) that claim we are the "me" generation (Reagan-era propaganda), that all of the things we as Boomers worked for were efforts of the "Greatest Generation" (you know, the generation that was just fine with Jim Crow and limits on womens rights). All of the time we've given, all of the blood, sweat and tears to be reduced to "I just wish all you people would hurry up and die off."

They have no clue and they don't want one.

Obama is the culmination of YEARS worth of activist work by millions. To not recognize that is to expect another Bush within 10-15 years because if they don't recognize past efforts they will not recognize the elements that led to things like the Reagan era.

[Greyhound]

147. This is really good, thank you. n/t

[LWolf]

162. That is a painful death, the death of that desire to thwart the machine.

Perhaps that's why I've been more adamantly opposed to what Obama offers than even makes sense to me.

Beneath all of the rhetoric, the propaganda, and the political maneuvering, I won't be coaxed. I feel, in every nerve, now more than ever during my almost 49 years on the planet, so sick of heart that I cannot take part.

[muriel_volestrangler]

197. Newberry doesn't know what he's talking about

To reference a thinker who is more appropriate for our age than we admit: it is not that there is more existence, but merely that existence is stretched out. Tolkien, writer of the twilight of the British Empire, has much to say about our state of Ophoria. It is, to note a new world in the OED, a part of eucatastrophism.
...
About six months ago, many near present thinkers were all over the "Obama moment." There is no Obama moment. Instead, there is a moment created by a convergence of forces which Obama has adopted for his own purposes. It is a eucatastrophe - an unravelling turned to good account. The more common term for a eucatastrophe is "the shock doctrine."
...
Eucatastrophism produces "Ophoria" in Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, there is a brief period of late happiness, which then is the fading away of the world that it is a part of. It is written into the structure, and Gandalf warns the people of the time that there era is over for good or ill.

He's right that Tolkien coined the word; but he's completely misunderstood its meaning. It's nothing like "The Shock Doctrine". Here's the OED definition, with 2 uses by Tolkien himself:

Esp. in a fictional narrative: a (sudden or unexpected) favourable turn of events; esp. a resolution of this type; a happy ending.

1944 J. R. R. TOLKIEN Let. 7-8 Nov. (1995) 100 For it I coined the word ‘eucatastrophe’: the sudden happy turn in a story which pierces you with a joy that brings tears.
1947 J. R. R. TOLKIEN On Fairy Stories in Ess. presented to Charles Williams ii. 83 The Birth of Christ is the eucatastrophe of Man's history. The Resurrection is the eucatastrophe of the story of the Incarnation.

Absolutely nothing to do with 'the shock doctrine'; and it doesn't include the idea that an era is over.

And, frankly, I think his ramblings about a 'S' curve with 'headroom', 'cramming' and 'frenzied peaks' remind me very much of Thomas Friedman - taking a partially useful metaphor or image, and overloading it with unexplained, meaningless bullshit until you've no idea what he's trying to say.

[scarletwoman]

26. Nonsense. Obama isn't post-anything, he's just a new brand of establishment.

[omega minimo]

34. Obama is a Boomer; hippies are the Establishment; corporate government continues unabated

Hey scarletwoman, you always know everythang!
:hi:

[scarletwoman]

71. I don't get your "hippies are the Establishment", in fact, I totally disagree. Sorry.

The REAL hippies are still hippies, living quiet counter-culture lives, raising exceptional children and grandchildren who understand that authority must always be questioned.

Hippies and Boomers are totally NOT interchangeable terms. As Warpy put it so well above, only those who were of age during the Vietnam War can truly be members of the Hippie cohort, those who came after were largely just copping a pop culture affectation that had already been co-opted and sanitized and commercialized.

The real hippies mostly slipped beneath the radar to protect themselves from the violent backlash of the Establishment; many working quietly along the outer edges of the mainstream in the decades since to continue to sow the seeds of freedom and continue the struggle against the militarist/corporatist machine.

sw

[omega minimo]

87. I agree with you and you are making my point

"The real hippies mostly slipped beneath the radar to protect themselves from the violent backlash of the Establishment; many working quietly along the outer edges of the mainstream in the decades since to continue to sow the seeds of freedom and continue the struggle against the militarist/corporatist machine."


That's true and that's why they're invisible to most people who use the word "hippies" mean the cliche Boomer unti-establishment party you also mention:

"those who came after were largely just copping a pop culture affectation that had already been co-opted and sanitized and commercialized."

Some of the previous and most of the latter -- and here's the real problem, no matter the demographic -- BECAME AND ENABLED AND REFUSED TO CHALLENGE OR STEER THE "ESTABLISHMENT."

Unfortunately for many and in DU discussions "Hippies and Boomers" ARE "interchangeable terms."



Obama pretending to disconnect from previous generations is a problem. A way to avoid addressing how we got here.

A denial and way to continue 30 years of Reaganism.

edit:


"Unfortunately for many and in DU discussions "Hippies and Boomers" ARE "interchangeable terms."

[Cetacea]

172. "Unfortunately for many and in DU discussions "Hippies and Boomers" ARE "interchangeable terms."

Yup. Great post.

[Radical Activist]

106. Time to come out of hiding.

It's frustrating that many liberal boomers have an underground mentality like the red scare is still going on. I understand they have their reasons. It's time to stop being afraid to say very liberal things publicly and to stop fighting quietly in the background. It's time for them to stop lowering their voice when they say something too far left like so many boomers I know do (and then only around like-minded friends). I believe that mentality helped lead to things like Bill Clinton and the DLC who tried to make the Democrats a party with no ideals they were willing to stand up for except being not as bad as the Republicans.

Seeing the blacklisted Pete Seeger sing at the inauguration last Sunday was very exciting for me. This is the beginning of a new political era. I hope the left will find a backbone and not back down anymore when the press and establishment try to marginalize them for expressing far left viewpoints.

[scarletwoman]

107. I'm not hiding. I've been here since 2001 getting regularly derided for being a "far leftist".

Sometimes by you, as a matter of fact.

[Radical Activist]

108. I purposefully worded my post

to make it clear that I wasn't talking about you as an individual. Making it all about you is a very "me generation" thing to do.

You wrote:
"The real hippies mostly slipped beneath the radar to protect themselves from the violent backlash of the Establishment; many working quietly along the outer edges of the mainstream..."

That's hiding, imo and I explained what I meant by it already.

And no, I don't deride anyone for being a far leftist. That's bullshit. Being liberal doesn't mean I have to agree with everything anyone else on the left argues.

[scarletwoman]

114. Yes, but I can only answer for myself as an individual. I can't answer for anyone else.

And let me tell you, I protested plenty during the Clinton administration -- LIBERALS didn't want to hear it. Most of them STILL don't want to hear it.

Unlike you, I don't conflate left with liberal.

sw

[omega minimo]

109. these are potshots passing like ships in the night

scarletwoman doesn't hide and IMHO often makes brief spot on comments in discussions that contain -- like this one --too many misconceptions to give much time to.

There are many misguided cliche views that get in the way of discussion and we're sorting some of them out here a bit.

Your post may be appropriate but misdirected.


"I hope the left will find a backbone and not back down anymore when the press and establishment try to marginalize them for expressing far left viewpoints"

You are right but may not understand why and who and when "the left" backed down.

"It's frustrating that many liberal boomers have an underground mentality like the red scare is still going on. I understand they have their reasons"

Well then please, tell us what they are. You may be talking about the ones who got distracted by traditional family life and still kept a flame in their hearts, if not daily life. Who went along to get along, as I complain elsewhere in thread.

"I believe that mentality helped lead to things like Bill Clinton and the DLC who tried to make the Democrats a party with no ideals they were willing to stand up for except being not as bad as the Republicans."

Yer right.

"This is the beginning of a new political era. I hope the left will find a backbone and not back down anymore when the press and establishment try to marginalize them for expressing far left viewpoints."

Except that it's a continuation of the same economic era and the forces behind it, forces that Obama will not --maybe can not -- challenge openly which is why...........

there is this bogus pretense as separating from the previous era, which is being used as a way to NOT examine and prevent it from repeating.

:hi:

[Radical Activist]

113. Scarletwoman wrote:

"The real hippies mostly slipped beneath the radar to protect themselves from the violent backlash of the Establishment; many working quietly along the outer edges of the mainstream..."

That's the hiding I was referring to and not her specifically. If it's my misconception then it's hers as well.

I also speak from my own experience working with boomer activists today who, as I wrote, are often too timid about publicly standing for what they really believe in. Even when they speak out about an issue they don't want to argue their own reasons for doing so but instead argue a more politically safe argument. It's a form of being mentally in hiding. The result is that most of the public rarely reads or hears far left viewpoints. That's not a misconception. It's my personal experience.

About 2/3 of young voters supported Obama. Now he's continuing his campaign organization to sustain a movement that can challenge those opposition forces. Obama is creating a new political reality and will have the ability to challenge the economic establishment in a way no President has since LBJ or FDR.

[omega minimo]

123. yer smart and aksing the right questions but aren't listening to the answers

your replies are off kilter, not directly reflecting what the poster wrote --- and in mine -- also "carefully worded" and reread before this reply -- also acknowledged points of agreement with you.......

The not-listening/antagonistic thing ends discussion and reinforces the notion that you/r demographic thinks things are "all about me."

For example:

You are reacting to my post with a story about coworkers rather than looking at what I said about it for insight or providing what those reasons you "know they have" are.

Thank you for playing

:hi:

[grannie4peace]

145. you are on the money!

[omega minimo]

168. unfortunately

[Radical Activist]

176. I think you're projecting.

You're making a lot of commentary about my comments without directly responding to them. If you disagree with something specific that I wrote then let me know what it is. I didn't feel the need to rehash things you wrote that we agree about.

Your example, "You are reacting to my post with a story about coworkers rather than looking at what I said about it for insight or providing what those reasons you "know they have" are."

You seem to think that insights in this conversation should be a one way street. Do you think I have no idea what reasons people had for going underground? People have their own reasons and there are many. Your suggestion that I need them explained to me is a condescending tangent. Your responses to me, which mostly consist of telling me what you think I don't understand, is not an approach that usually leads to productive discussion, if that's what you're looking for. Are you a teacher?

[scarletwoman]

125. Mmmm. Pot.

:smoke:

Just teasing, I actually enjoyed your post.

Yeah, I was one of those who pulled back from street action and raised a family; but I did it while working in food co-ops and worker-owned collectives and living creatively, including many years of doing the back-to-the-land thing.

I've never shied from expressing my worldview in this DU community, even though my little old hippie lefitst opinions are generally not in synch with DU conventional wisdom. I plug along with my each-one-teach-one philosophy as best I can -- I'm just not big on being a shit-stirrer for shit-stirring's sake.

I'm not afraid to say, "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss." But it gets really tiresome watching hordes of self-defined "liberals" rise up in outrage as a result.

Let those who have ears to hear... and all that.

sw

[Ani Yun Wiya]

181. I don't hide, nor am I afraid to say things.

So, how about I express an idea and you respond.

Equal pay for equal time regardless of status or occupation or where you happen to live.
The only question that I see, is what is an hour worth ?

What say you in response ?

[Radical Activist]

182. No.

Not all work is equally difficult nor does all work have equal value, and the cost of living is not equal in every area. What you're suggesting unjustly punishes those who make greater personal efforts at more difficult jobs or who choose to live in urban areas.

I also have concerns about giving so power to any government that it could mandate a national equal wage. If a government has that much control over every detail of our lives then it will eventually control our lives in other ways that are less appealing.

I'd rather see a decentralized economic system of worker-owned business and organizations. Let the workers vote for their company board of directors, owner/workers share in the profits instead of being limited to a wage, and give power to the workers in a company to decide how much each job is worth.

Obama's platform is more moderate than my ideals but I appreciate his progressive, anti-authoritarian approach to making change.

[Ani Yun Wiya]

186. So...

Economic inequality is fine by you, right ?

Why should any persons time be worth more than another ?

[Radical Activist]

189. whose idea of equality?

apparently your idea of equality and mine differ. I believe in a just and worker-controlled economy, which your scenario does not provide. I already wrote why one persons time should be worth more than anothers. Read it again if you need to.

[Ani Yun Wiya]

196. An explanation of my viewpoint.

I believe in human equality and that economic equality is a part of that.
I do NOT believe in this system that says money is more important than the person.

Why should a "minimum wage" worker have less of a voice than one whose "pay" permits something like being able to take out a full page ad in the Times or to have a period of time to speak on a radio broadcast or to mount a political campaign ?

[Radical Activist]

200. The goals you mentioned can be achieved

without setting a mandated equal wage. I believe that would create new injustices against those who make exceptional efforts at unusually difficult jobs.

Why shouldn't a worker have a voice in how their company operates, including what wages are set for each position within the company or organization? Your idea takes away that voice and dis-empowers workers. I'm a big fan of systems that empower people to make decisions democratically in their government AND workplace instead of big brother mandating a national standard for them.

[Ani Yun Wiya]

202. In my first response to you I said...

"The only question that I see, is what is an hour worth ?"

How about all workers vote on this question, instead of who gets more or less at a given workplace ?
Why do you think it is that our government disallows this kind of "voting" ?

You see every time I hear an argument that one form of work is worth more than another I am reminded of a story where "some pigs are more equal than the others" was sort of like the punch line.

*Edited to complete a thought*

[Enthusiast]

137. The hippies are responsible for the environmental

movement. And they were dead right about the Vietnam War. I was born in 1952 so I came in late to "the scene" but I made up for lost time. Look back at the voting record for the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act as an example. The Democratic Party was the party of progressive thought and action clear back then. And WE. the boomers, have carried on that tradition. And the hippies were universally in favor of advancing women's rights, civil rights (in general) and workers rights. Don't diss the hippies, please. You had to be there. We were the first group to "think outside the box" so to speak. And many of us continue to do that today.

[Enthusiast]

139. I love you, scarletwoman! You say true words. nt

[scarletwoman]

158. Thank you! I appreciate the love!

:hug:

[Enthusiast]

138. "hippies are the Establishment" No way!

The ones you call hippies, weren't hippies.

[omega minimo]

35. Obama is a Boomer; hippies are the Establishment; corporate government continues unabated

Hey scarletwoman, you always know everythang!
:hi:

[patrice]

43. I'll grant that some Hippies are/were establishment anti-Establishment, in that

if you're always defining yourself relative to what you're NOT, then you're not really something "new".

I think the Hippie heritage is still there, in it's children and grandchildren though, whom I can say from personal experience lead much more aware and revolutionary lives than I ever have. In this sense, it's not the Hippie heritage at all, but the Human instinct to Free itself as much as possible.

[DemBones DemBones]

38. True, and this obituary of boomers in politics is more

than a bit premature. Even the older boomers have a good many years left to be in power.
I will not be surprised if Obama is a one-term president and an older boomer succeeds him.

[grannie4peace]

32. we weren't at battle with our own generation, it was

the previous generation we were opposed to:hippie:

[JFN1]

46. But that doesn't explain what's happened since.

The Gingrich/Clinton wars, the liberal/conservative division, the us vs. them of our politics...seems more like a family fight, than happenstance...

[EFerrari]

47. It does in a way. The politicans that weren't interested in being martyrs

decided to slug it out in ideology, in the media. It was a way of keeping bodies out of danger. So was the flight to the middle for the leftists and the rightward movement of the whole country. Killings have consequences.

[grannie4peace]

60. the hippies were concentrated in certain geographic areas

mainly. i can say for myself that i wanted to find truth. we were lied to by the previous generation -- we were struggling with finding truth/ so were the people who weren't hippies. i was born in 46, i don't know when clinton was born but he wasn't a hippie. he was influenced by hippies but i couldn't call him a hippie

[patrice]

78. Right, grannie! Some people look at Bill and think bad thoughts about Hippies.

Bill Clinton isn't anything like the genuine counter-culture people I've met over the years.

[Fla Dem]

58. No there were battles with our own generation as well.

There was the preppy "in crowds". The the kids from the upper echelons in the community, the wasps, the country club crowds, and then all the others......the geeks, many of whom are now probably millionaires (LOL), the kids from the middle class, whose dads were working 2 jobs, the kids who were the first in their families to make it to college, the women(girls) who were expected to take the secretarial courses in high school and the men (boys) who took the shop courses. There was always a class struggle, and there still is. There were many in our generation who did not love hippies, the anti-war movement, free love, etc. Those are the ones who still resent us now.

[grannie4peace]

61. i have to say that is true also

[TayTay]

88. This was not a unique experience and it will happen again.

History is cyclical. You could make the same argument at any tumultuous time in American history. America has been through cycles of advancement and turmoil. We have been through religious revivals that left marks on whole generations. The Civil War era changed the lives of all who experienced it and deeply marked American culture. It created advancement and blowback. The World War II generation was also deeply split and it's impact accounts for the era of conflict and change in the 1960's as much as any other factor.

There is no new politics. There is the politics of this moment and this time. It will have it's chance and then give way to whatever happens in the future, as dictated by events then. There is no one solution that holds for all time and no change that holds for all time. Believing that we can affect things for all time is a belief in magical thinking. It ignores the reality of human nature.

We will never change the human nature. It is an eternal and a mystery. You can't outlaw it or pretend it doesn't exist or that we have somehow evolved out of it. It is a constant of human life. We can only plan for it, in as much as we can, and live with the consequences in the time in which we actually live.

Each moment contains the chance to do the right thing. Some will take it, some won't. That is what it all means.

[Radical Activist]

68. A majority of young voters supported Nixon over McGovern.

It was a war within the boomer generation and the hippies were never the majority.

[Two Americas]

48. we will be dead soon

Fear not.

"Hippies" is a stand-in, a convenient target. Read about the Poor People's March, the Memphis strike, read Dr. King's final speeches. Read about the DRUM Labor movement. The Civil Rights movement, and so much more - the true history of the 60's, what was really at stake, what the battles were really about. It was not about Woodstock.

"Establishment" is a stand-in too. While one side in those epic battles - those fighting for the people - is being smeared and blamed as "hippies," the murderous and tyrannical ones are recast as the benign and re-assuring "establishment."

The right wing propagandists have succeeded. They have convinced people that the last "we" generation we have seen is actually the "me" generation. They know that the most effective lies are those that are the precise opposite of the truth. The mirror image of the truth is more difficult to detect as a lie. It has a familiar shape.

[EFerrari]

50. The repudiation of authoritarian control will never die.

No matter what it's called or no matter how it's cast. The truth is, it is only a minority of human beans whose brains misfire and induce them to try to control their fellows.

We'll be fine. The kids will be fine. We just need to keep being inconvenient at every opportunity so that small minority doesn't settle into the idea that they will ever be accepted as leaders when in reality, they are anchors around the neck of human culture.

[Two Americas]

56. well said

The kids are doing great. I see so many aging people sliding into poverty and sickness and despair...

[madrchsod]

62. he understands the power is derived from the people

he learned the message when he was in chicago...he had to earn the trust of the people before they allowed him to help.


that`s what a hell of a lot of us wanted and worked for in the 60`s--- a government that is responsible to the people


yup we will be dead soon but what we pass on will never die....

[foxfeet]

72. Bingo! Well said.

The whole post, not just the headline!

[scarletwoman]

77. Whoa. "The mirror image of the truth is more difficult to detect as a lie. It has a familiar shape."

That's brilliant. I've never seen that concept put so elegantly and succinctly before.

There's nothing that Ruling Class wants more than to convince everyone that there is no such thing as the struggle of the People against the Machine. The Machine takes care of you, the Machine keeps you safe, the Machine is the source of all good things, don't fight the Machine.

sw

[patrice]

80. "The mirror image of the truth . . . " Excellent! Excellent! nt

[Tsiyu]

52. I think this is a simplistic retelling of things

Creating more division. People - and that includes politicians - are just more complicated than these two monikers - "hippies vs Establishment" - tell.

My $.02

[Telly Savalas]

63. Spot on.

It's oversimplifying things to the point of being ridiculous.

[Hannah Bell]

131. It's an old technique. Create two black & white "sides" & encourage people to identify with one.

Doesn't really matter which one, just keep people busy punching each other's shadows, while the ptb loot the silverware.

[madrchsod]

55. there`s is so much bullshit in this article

it is not even worth the effort to comment.

[anonymous171]

64. I blame Gen X, not the boomers, for this mess.

Mostly because they voted Ronald Reagan into power.

[Radical Activist]

67. haha

good one.

You're joking right?

[proud patriot]

112. Um I'm Gen X and I was 11 years old in 1980

I couldn't be at fault x( for Raygunnn

[Greyhound]

65. Your repeated use of the malapropism "Me Generation" exposes your intent, among other things. n/t

[stlsaxman]

69. The counter-culture was co-opted by "Up With People". Hey, kids-you can be "hippie-lite"

and serve your military industrial complex masters, after all!

"Up With People!"- brought to you by....

[scarletwoman]

160. You know, this is such an excellent observation, it deserves some acknowledgement.

So here is my belated, "Right on!"

I remember well watching the horror of co-option unfold, knowing exactly what it meant, and knowing that the other side had won -- for now...

:thumbsup:
sw

[stlsaxman]

170. in 8th grade we were reading "Do It!" and "Autobiography o Malcolm X" and

the like and when "Up With People!" came along we all knew who was sponsoring that garbage. yet- the nuns crammed it down our throats... at least the nuns were against the war.

oh and thanks for the belated acknowledgment! :hi:

[scarletwoman]

173. Wow, sounds quite a bit different than my Catholic school days in the 50s!

I'm glad you saw my post! :hi:

[obiwan]

70. I live on $1400 a month...

...and I have been a hippy for 40 years. No reason to change now.

BTW, I am 54.

It's not about Establishment vs Anti-/Establishment, it's about doing the right thing and the speaking the truth.

It's a state of mind. Fuck drugs and alcohol. I had enough of both by the time I was 30.

[Radical Activist]

75. I find boomer activists the most divisive and difficult to work with.

I've been involved in a lot of left wing groups and organizing campaigns. There are people who make things difficult in every generation. But I find it nearly impossible to accomplish anything productive with a group dominated by boomers.

Instead of making practical plans to get things done people argue every little theoretical point to death even when it has nothing to do with the task at hand, hours are spent on minutia, the ideological angle of everything is debated at length even when it has no bearing to anything on the table. Countless time is wasted on ego, power struggles, bickering, personality conflicts and ideological bullshit that keeps people from doing anything effective. It's very difficult and very frustrating.

I'm convinced that if you lock 12 random boomer activists into a room for a day and ask them to plan something they'll come out with no plans and bitterly divided into at least three factions.

Most often, the activists I work with who are the most useful, the easiest to work with, get the most done and who are "no drama" types are under 45 or over 70.

I'm not sure why that is. I think one effect of the red scare and 50's conservative backlash was to destroy the idea of collective action. It seems like a lot of the boomer generation never learned to work as a group. Everybody did their own thing. I suspect a lot of the more effective boomers burned out on grass-roots activism long ago, partly due to dealing with the problems I wrote about.

There are always exceptions. There are some wonderful boomers I work with who understand that the movement is stronger when they hand off leadership in the movement to new activists and a younger generation. And I even appreciate the activists who can be difficult to deal with sometimes.

[EFerrari]

166. If 50s "conservatism" destroyed the idea of collective action

then how do you 'splain the Civil Rights Movement, the women's movement, the Free Speech Movement, the Chicano movement or the Gay rights Movement? :silly:

Imho, the idealization of the nuclear family in the 50s worked much the other way. The backlash resuscitated the impulse to collective action.

[Radical Activist]

174. Those movement were largely lead

as I wrote before, by those who got the experience and training in the 30's/40's movements, most often unions. The Red Scare was in large part to remove those leaders from political action and put down the movements you mention. After many of those leaders were removed, died or dropped out, movements took a different direction. The emphasis on "me" and "my rights" became more prominent than the emphasis on "us" and "our responsibilities to each other."

Obama's inaugural address focused more on us and our responsibilities.

[EFerrari]

187. Those movements would have been impossible without boomers.

And the re-emphasis on that old American love, the cult of the individual, didn't come until after the asassinations and after the Democrats threw the left under the bus. What you are fingering is the boomer response to events far into their generation, not some kind of essential quality of boomers themselves at all.

And Obama is not the first Democrat in my lifetime to use "we" over "me". They all do.

[Radical Activist]

190. As I wrote

the movements changed. So I don't see anything you wrote that contradicts what I wrote. That's an interesting thought about why it happened.

Obama is the first Democrat President who worked as a paid left wing movement activist in an organization that is fundamentally based on "us" and collective action.

[blues90]

79. Me generation?

This essayist and then news week yet are so full of shit.

Let me just say this as on old boomer , we did what we needed to do at a time when enough was enough and this meant establishment control.

People who think things have changed all that much before the boomer's came along as far as political in-fighting is concerned are not very informed.

Good , great , fine and perfect . If the founding fathers saw the world as it is now they would leap back into their graves.

Welcome to digital gadget world .

[Initech]

82. I think its been more working class vs. upper class more than hippies vs. establishment.

I bring up one of my favorite George Carlin quotes - "The rich make all of the money, pay none of the taxes. The middle class pays all the taxes, does all the work. And the poor are there, just to scare the shit out of the middle class. Keep them showing up at those jobs!"

[anonymous171]

83. Yep.

The class war has taken a nasty turn since Reagan, but it had been raging on even before Reagan.

[Initech]

163. It really took a turn for the worst under W.

Big business and government have always been in bed together, but it was behind closed doors. Under Bush it got out in the open. Take Exxon Mobil for instance - they made money hand over fist and gas was costing upwards of $4.75 a gallon. That is what happens when you put too much stock in one commodity.

[omega minimo]

89. Misleading BS: Obama is shifting from "Greed Is Good" era selfishness, w/o challenging Reaganism

That's all that's happening.


Reagan created that "era of brutal politics filled with nothing but self-interest and drama."



"I felt that many of the wounded feelings and fights that erupted during the primaries between supporters of Ms. Clinton, and everybody else, symbolized an era of brutal politics filled with nothing but self-interest and drama."

[anonymous171]

97. Exactly.

Reagan and his Gen X fans are the "problem" that Obama is fixing.

[Radical Activist]

110. It was the boomers who elected Reagan.

The boom generation is much larger (more votes) than Gen X, many of whom were too young to vote for Reagan anyway. The boomers only voted about 50/50 for Obama while Gen X and Y voted for him by large margins. This is the first election in years when the boomers larger size didn't allow them to pick the President. Blaming Gen X for Reagan is mathematically ridiculous.

It was usually the older Roosevelt Democrats who kept the country from going too Republican. In 2008 the remaining Roosevelt Dems plus new young voters finally outnumbered the boomers.

[omega minimo]

115. It was 51% of 37% of eligble voters that elected Reagan -- what's that, about 21%?

Most folks were too discouraged to vote.



"Blaming Gen X for Reagan is mathematically ridiculous."

Well good, cuz NO ONE DID.

The poster said,

"Reagan and his Gen X fans are the "problem" that Obama is fixing'

so I won't put words in their mouth but could be that the era, including all available demographics including little Alex Keatons and their pleasant and comfortably numb sellout "hippie/boomer" Wisteria Lane parents ARE "the "problem" that Obama is fixing'?

[Radical Activist]

124. you sure?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4904210&mesg_id=4904828

[omega minimo]

132. you just confirmed it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4904210&mesg_id=4906149

[patrice]

98. Given a chance, it will be up to us to make the real economic changes. nt

[omega minimo]

100. patrice, I hear you but all the fools that went along with the BS are responsible for this mess

It's great that people are inspired but many of them are the same go along to get along folks that created this economic crises by going along with all the BS for too long.

Unless the experience changes them -- and it might -- they will go back to go along to get along ASAP.

It is their selfishness and you're right, their responsiblity to start thinking about consequences of their in/actions.

[patrice]

103. I know I'm looking for a new way of getting along and there are a BUNCH of boomers who just lost

a pretty sizable chunk of their, turns out, gross worth.

The actual un-employment rate is probably close to 10% and this recession has only just started. Cities, counties, states COULD go bankrupt. Most of the public remedie$$$$ thus far have either gone into private stuff that the banks are just sitting on, waiting to see how much MORE the People pony up, or into foreign investments in those who are actually taking our jobs away, or we are allowing them to anyway.

It's going to get worse. I'm fortunate enough to be working in an area where we ARE striving toward "new" small communities, out of necessity , communities based upon residents and workers, so I'm kind of optomistic, but I'm also kind of scared. If this doesn't happen FAST enough, other "solutions" will just repeat old mistakes, because that is what the banks WILL lend money for and this will give People, as you have so accurately pointed out, opportunities to "go back to go along to get along", rather than building NEW micro-economies.

[omega minimo]

111. all these years they told us, "people will care when it affects them"

and now it's finally got their attention -- for now.


You're pointing out the best, tho, which is some lessons and alternatives will be discovered.

:hi:

hey patrice, they're even talkin bout holding Bushco accountable! :wow:

[Hannah Bell]

133. heh - some of the folks currently gung ho for obama were gung ho

for bush's war a scant 6 years ago. my young cousin is one of them; a high-school wamonger, now a working-world "anarchist". but i know plenty of older folks who were yelling about ragheads back in the day & now are now yelling "change" instead, won't even cop to their previous convictions.

[Radical Activist]

183. Is that a bad thing?

If Obama can shift us away from "greed is good" Reaganism policies then that's a good thing. How else does he need to challenge it? Do you want him to bring up Reagan, bash him and alienate everyone who liked him? What do you see being accomplished by that?

[Froward69]

94. Summer of '69 ringing in here

Of the parents of my childhood compadres. I found Crew cut parents had better tasting cookies. however the Hippie parents had a better Vibe. nothing seemed hidden or off limits with the Hippie Parents.

over time both models of parents failed in different ways. I attest I am of the X generation. born to a weird Mix. father was a republican and mother was a democrat. Lots of fighting.

Yet realizing what Reagan was doing while coming of age... produced a whole Generation of suit wearing, Pony tailed centrist Dems. A generation that along with the money to survive, The sesame street type of Brotherly cooperation became instilled in us. Thus the underlying ethics of The WHOLE Constitution and a sense of Right/Wrong/ and Justice emerged.

Freedom is not free for either perspective.
We Share the constitution and yet Both sides are guilty of preferring one amendment over another.
Ultimately that is what does damage to our Union.

Lots of Hippies have now become the establishment. I learned American Politics is like a pendulum. and only when the extremes of either philosophical side are agitated enough do people act upon them.

[scarletwoman]

101. Your OP has inspired a great thread. The article is bullshit, however, which I think you've been

made well aware of by now.

The thing is, the Ruling Class and their faithful courtiers in the media, have their own narrative that they constantly impress upon the populace, in order to prevent the populace from taking true stock of what's REALLY going on.

Because if people truly comprehended what's REALLY going on, they'd begin to realize that the fight against the "Establishment" was indeed a righteous fight -- an ESSENTIAL fight, if the rights and freedom of the common citizen are ever going to be won.

So, best to keep people confused with false framing, with revisionist history, with simplistic narratives that leave out the entire glaring fact of the Class War.

Blaming hippies -- the tried and true strategy of the Owners for over 40 years. Too bad so many people will keep falling for it.

sw

[JFN1]

102. Oh, I hear you

and agree the fight against establishment is not only necessary, but is an old, old fight that isn't going anywhere. And I have high hopes the Internet will ultimately give us more truth than the establishment would like us to have.

[omega minimo]

117. "the Ruling Class and their faithful courtiers in the media, have their own narrative" infotainment

" War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent. " -- George Orwell

[Hannah Bell]

130. great quote. too true.

[Greyhound]

150. From one of the most eloquent progenitors of the "Boomers".

(Wrong country, but right generation. Did England have a baby boom too?)
The fact that Orwell and so many others of that era warned of what was happening and coming proves that this has been no accident.

The real hippies like you, Scarlet Woman, and my parents learned/knew this and tried. Thank you.

[janx]

104. I was born at the end of 1957, and I was by no means a hippie. The

hippies were about ten years older than I was. The "baby boom" generation spans a long time; I don't know who came up with that media crap anyway since I was not by any means a product of some guy who came home from the war wanting to create babies with his wife.


I hate the language of pop culture news. It makes me sick, and there is so much of it; it's all opinion, navel gazing, and speculation: "reigns of power have been forced from their hands," etc.--Gawd. I want to read a good novel. George Orwell might be a good choice.

[grannie4peace]

148. i read this all last night & again this am. this is why i love du

a place to have brilliant discussions. thanks for the post & all the dialog DU IS GREAT!

[scarletwoman]

155. I just re-read this thread all the through as well, and came to your post at the end.

I just have to say, "What she said!"

:hi:
sw

[jpak]

159. "The bums lost Mr. Lebowski! The bums lost!!!111"

:rofl:

[scarletwoman]

161. Dude!!!!

:rofl:

[Initech]

164. Is this uh... uh... what day is this?

[JVS]

175. Are you employed, sir?

[deutsey]

185. Your revolution is over. Condolences...

:evilgrin:

[Still Sensible]

169. It's a lot more complicated

but the essence of the argument is probably accurate. Open minded people vs. closed minded people would probably be every bit as accurate... as would forward looking people vs. traditionalists.

[Ani Yun Wiya]

180. Naw it's simple.

1. Hippies were a small, but very vocal minority within the large demographic known as the "baby boom generation".
2. For the ideals that they held they were hated, hassled and harangued at every turn.
3. They were denied full expression by their frightened peers who lacked the vision they possessed.
4. More than anythng else they were about a way of life, NOT a political party.

Had they been allowed to thrive the problems we have had for the last forty years would have been solved.

Reagan, Clinton and the Bushes would NOT have happened.

[orleans]

191. now there's an explanation!

i've been fighting "the establishment!" damn! just like when we were kids. but who became this "establishment" we speak of? the greasers? (back in h.s. it was the hippies/freaks vs. the greasers--the jocks were pretty much ignored by both groups, the "cliques"--popular kids--were laughed at by us, and the geeks didn't even have a name or title yet)

hippies and establishment types will soon be battling in nursing homes across the country
...kill me!

[eridani]

195. Re the "post-partisan" horseshit

In 1993 conservative pundit Irving Kristol advised the GOP that the Clinton proposal "should not be amended; it should be erased," because "it will revive the reputation of the party that spends and regulates, the Democrats, as the generous protector of middle-class interests.“

In 2008, the Cato Institute has stated that “blocking Obama's health plan is key to the GOP's survival. If Obama succeeds in passing health care, then people who might have been conservatives will like it, and will be more likely to vote for the people who passed it.“

See also Ken Blackwell's statements on the economic stimulus--creating jobs helps Democrats, so don't allow it to happen, period.

If Obama keeps trying to work with them, he will fail, and we can't afford that.

[Radical Activist]

198. When Obama keeps reaching out

to work with Republicans, and the public sees Republican leaders acting like childish partisans who care more about their party than their country, then more people will turn their back on the Republican Party. Whether Republicans work with him or not it's a winning strategy to try.

[eridani]

201. As long as he doesn't get his hopes up that they will cooperate

They want him to fail, period. They do not want Dems getting any credit for fixing the economy.

[Solly Mack]

203. This thread has been a treat to read! Thank you all!

Unexpected and delicious - filling. Very satisfying!