The general decline in standards today

[Stearmen]

Well, Bro. Powers might loan you his hippy-killing laser if you ask him nice. My biggest problem with the hippies is that they weren't *real* revolutionaries -- they were nothing but spoiled middle-class children play-acting at being radicals. The real radicals of the thirties would have chewed them up and spit them out.

Of course, there were very few true Hippies in the 60s. Most young people, even with long hair, were busy going to school, working or being sent to Vietnam. I think with every generation, the few radicals get all the history book space. How many Zoot Suits were their?

 

[LizzieMaine]

We tend to get two schools of thought whenever this question comes up. Either the hippies were a vast blight which destroyed everything good about America and are malevolently running things behind the scenes to this day or they were a handful of insignficant publicity-seekers who were so few in number as to have no impact at all and yet have somehow gotten control of the media to make it appear they were more influential than they were.

I don't take either view myself. I consider hippies to have been simply an outgrowth of a much deeper flaw in American society which had been boiling under the surface since the end of the war. If the rampaging consumerism and entrenched social paranoia of the postwar years hadn't existed, neither would have hippies. They were merely the crusty seeping scab on a much deeper sore.

As far as their media presence goes, blame The Boys. Before the end of 1967, the "hippie" image had been co-opted and turned into an extremely cynical marketing commodity, and that's what it remains to this day. As long as there's a sucker willing to buy, the Boys are willing to sell it. Hippiedom was made what it is today by simple capitalism. Some revolution.

You're right about the history books, but with one caveat: the real radicals of the thirties, especially those in the labor movement, get far less space in those books than they should get. Theirs was the most successful radical movement in American history since the Revolution itself, and they accomplished far more than the hippies ever did -- in addition to the many labor reforms they accomplished, the Civil Rights movement was a direct outgrowth of their efforts, and they deeply influenced the early development of the women's movement. We, as a society today, owe them far, far more than we owe the so-called radicals of the sixties. Their music was better, too.

 

[ChiTownScion]

The irony is that the few that I knew who were "hippies" back in the day moved on. They went on to get law degrees, MBA's, grad academic degrees, and even M.D.'s. They became yuppies, and are currently in the position to buy and sell their harshest aging white male critics several times over. I don't think that they "sold out." I rather think that they, and the times, evolved.

As Lizzie notes: the whole phenomena was the result of what was brewing in the US for a long time. That "summer of love" was a phase in their lives over four decades ago, and it's history. Heck, you have to have a pretty decent financial situation to purchase one of their former "hippie crash pads" in the Haight nowadays. There may be derelicts with long hair wandering about in any city, but they certainly aren't "hippies." Whining about hippies and how they are responsible for anyone's "downfall" is more the fodder of the stereotype geriatric suffering from incontinence and senile dementia than the fruit of serious inquiry.

They didn't "ruin" a damned thing for America: they were never that omnipotent. Avarice, xenophobia, and visceral anti-intellectualism are doing far more to render the US into a second rate nation than any flower children could have accomplished. The "boys from marketing" that Lizzie always references are certainly part of that- but like the hippies themselves, their influence is manifestation of a deeper problem. And who let that happen, you ask? To answer that, start by looking in a mirror, both individually and collectively.

 

[HudsonHawk]

Well, we'll just have to have a friendly disagreement. I blame the hippie culture for nearly all the ills of society today (excluding terrorism from other parts of the world that is).

Even the 99% of them that were ills for thousands of years before hippies?

 

[Bushman]

They didn't "ruin" a damned thing for America: they were never that omnipotent. Avarice, xenophobia, and visceral anti-intellectualism are doing far more to render the US into a second rate nation than any flower children could have accomplished. The "boys from marketing" that Lizzie always references are certainly part of that- but like the hippies themselves, their influence is manifestation of a deeper problem. And who let that happen, you ask? To answer that, start by looking in a mirror, both individually and collectively.

Bingo, right on the money. Somewhere in the history of America, we became of nation where intelligence is something to be shunned from an early age and knowing about the stats of the latest sports team or boy band became what was cool. Back in the day, Americans sought to make something of themselves. America built things, and we were a world power because of it. Now, we're content for "somebody else" to do all the gardening, the making, and the cooking while we became lazy. Was it the hippies that caused this? I doubt that. They were more or less brainless sheep who followed a creed of anti-capitalism. No, I actually blame capitalism, in part. They figured out ways to sell America laziness with useless and frivolous trash. I agree with Lizzie. Rampant American consumerism is what caused people not to have standards. Because once garbage was readily available to the masses, nobody sought any reason to have standards.

 

[LizzieMaine]

The irony is that the few that I knew who were "hippies" back in the day moved on. They went on to get law degrees, MBA's, grad academic degrees, and even M.D.'s. They became yuppies, and are currently in the position to buy and sell their harshest aging white male critics several times over. I don't think that they "sold out." I rather think that they, and the times, evolved.

I think before you can sell out, you first have to genuinely believe in something. There may have been a few in the hippie movement who did so -- a lot of that type ended up here as "back to the landers" in the 70s, and most of them have held reasonably true to their beliefs in the years since. I'm unrelentingly opposed to their views on drugs, but aside from those views they've made many positive contributions to society here. But I think it's reasonable to believe that most of the hippies were just, as I said earlier, overindulged middle-class kids from suburbia who were jumping on the bandwagon of the moment. When it wasn't "cool" to be a hippie anymore they simply reverted to the materialism-driven ways of their parents. The same thing can be said for their latter-day descendents, the hipsters. Eventually they'll cut off the dreadlocks, cover up the tattoos, go back to Flyoveria, and start worrying about their portfolios.

They didn't "ruin" a damned thing for America: they were never that omnipotent. Avarice, xenophobia, and visceral anti-intellectualism are doing far more to render the US into a second rate nation than any flower children could have accomplished. The "boys from marketing" that Lizzie always references are certainly part of that- but like the hippies themselves, their influence is manifestation of a deeper problem. And who let that happen, you ask? To answer that, start by looking in a mirror, both individually and collectively.

The darkest dark side of "American Exceptionalism" is the utter inability to self-examine. For a brief time in the thirties and early forties it almost seemed like we had overcome that mindset. Maybe it takes a Depression -- a real Depression, not a bump in the road like 2008 -- to force us to confront tough realities about ourselves and our way of life.

 

[jamespowers]

25% of the youth self described themselves as hippies back then. That is nearly as many colonists who described themselves as revolutionaries. Yet they took a whole country and moved it toward independence. The hippies took a whole country and screwed it up. I don’t care who else you want to blame that jumped on board but they were the nexus that started it in that direction and generations afterward---their rat kids and grandkids are the ones who constantly keep the standards ratcheting down. They have managed to take the wealth this country amassed over generations and throw it away on massive spending sprees. They awarded themselves generous welfare and pension entitlements which their contributions did not cover. The next generation would have to break their backs trying to pay for the hippies’ retirement. They infest Comgress and all levels of corporate structures like termites. No, they didn’t sell out. They just got in and got theirs---without regard for future generations. I could go on for pages about the deleterious effect they have had on society….

 

[Atticus Finch]

I agree that there were very few real hippies and the ones that did exist, existed before the mid 1970s...or before the end of the war in Vietnam. After 1974 or 1975, the real "hippie movement" was over.

I think hippies had very little lasting effect on the culture of our nation because there were so few of them, they had so little economic power and because their duration (as hippies) was so short.

I think to have an adult recollection of real hippies...or to have a personal knowledge and understanding of the circumstances in our country that gave rise to the hippie movement, one must have been born on or before 1960. And to really understand the movement, one needs to have been issued a Vietnam-era draft card.

Finally, I think that many of the people here who post most disparagingly about hippies are too young to have ever actually met a real one...except possibly as a child.

AF

 

[HoosierDaddy]

25% of the youth self described themselves as hippies back then. That is nearly as many colonists who described themselves as revolutionaries. Yet they took a whole country and moved it toward independence. The hippies took a whole country and screwed it up. I don’t care who else you want to blame that jumped on board but they were the nexus that started it in that direction and generations afterward---their rat kids and grandkids are the ones who constantly keep the standards ratcheting down. They have managed to take the wealth this country amassed over generations and throw it away on massive spending sprees. They awarded themselves generous welfare and pension entitlements which their contributions did not cover. The next generation would have to break their backs trying to pay for the hippies’ retirement. They infest Comgress and all levels of corporate structures like termites. No, they didn’t sell out. They just got in and got theirs---without regard for future generations. I could go on for pages about the deleterious effect they have had on society….

I totally agree. I grew up during that era (graduating HS in 1965) and watched it all unfold around me. A gutless naïve philosophy that transformed into a travesty of control.
HD

 

[LizzieMaine]

And to really understand the movement, one needs to have been issued a Vietnam-era draft card.

Unless, of course, one was a female hippie.

Then too, draft evasion, draft resistance, and opposition to the Vietnam War did not necessarily make one a hippie. Hippie culture was a very specific youth movement, originating on the West Coast and gradually spreading eastward, and not all opponents of the war identified with that movement.

 

[Atticus Finch]

Unless, of course, one was a female hippie.

Moonbeam! Is that you?!

AF

 

[Dennis Young]

The irony is that the few that I knew who were "hippies" back in the day moved on. They went on to get law degrees, MBA's, grad academic degrees, and even M.D.'s. They became yuppies, and are currently in the position to buy and sell their harshest aging white male critics several times over. I don't think that they "sold out." I rather think that they, and the times, evolved. Whining about hippies and how they are responsible for anyone's "downfall" is more the fodder of the stereotype geriatric suffering from incontinence and senile dementia than the fruit of serious inquiry.

Well this is the point I was trying to make. Those hippies did eventually move on and get their degrees, become college professors, tv execs, politicians and so forth. They ARE the boys from marketing. Unfortunately they kept their radical views and are passing it on to the next generation. I worked for a University. I know what I’m talking about. And they are powerful enough to accomplish this. The universities, and media sets the agenda in this world. (ie…if you tell a lie long enough people begin to believe that lie).
Also I take exception to the idea that I am ‘whining’ about hippies. I’m not whining. I’m flat out blaming them and make no apologies to anyone for that.
So people can bury their head in the sand if they like. It doesn’t change what’s going on.

 

[jamespowers]

I agree that there were very few real hippies and the ones that did exist, existed before the mid 1970s...or before the end of the war in Vietnam. After 1974 or 1975, the real "hippie movement" was over.

I think hippies had very little lasting effect on the culture of our nation because there were so few of them, they had so little economic power and because their duration (as hippies) was so short.

I think to have an adult recollection of real hippies...or to have a personal knowledge and understanding of the circumstances in our country that gave rise to the hippie movement, one must have been born on or before 1960. And to really understand the movement, one needs to have been issued a Vietnam-era draft card.

Finally, I think that many of the people here who post most disparagingly about hippies are too young to have ever actually met a real one...except possibly as a child.

AF

Written exactly like someone who didn't grow up in California and has no idea what hippies were or are capable of. They lasted much longer here and contributed to the decline of the ENTIRE nation. As I mentioned before, they got into politics and business. Their effect may seem small to someone far away but I know better. They were here and still are. They didn't sell out. They just moved into the mainstream and now there are hippies with money that have plenty of effect right now.
You don't realize that many of them came out here and got a FREE college education. Yes, a college education was FREE in California at one time. No tuition at all---just like the public schools. That all ended when they swarmed our schools and edited subjects for five years each though. :doh:
I have literally met thousands of hippies over my lifetime here. You don't understand them well enough until you have lived near them and have talked to them. One of them was my next door neighbor's burnout son---well, I should say SONS. Fittingly, one of them worked for the sewage treatment plant out here. After his last drunk driving conviction he got to "retire" from his job and is now another drag on the system. Multiply that burnout by tens of thousands and you have problems.....

 

[jamespowers]

Well this is the point I was trying to make. Those hippies did eventually move on and get their degrees, become college professors, tv execs, politicians and so forth. They ARE the boys from marketing. Unfortunately they kept their radical views and are passing it on to the next generation. I worked for a University. I know what I’m talking about. And they are powerful enough to accomplish this. The universities, and media sets the agenda in this world. (ie…if you tell a lie long enough people begin to believe that lie).
Also I take exception to the idea that I am ‘whining’ about hippies. I’m not whining. I’m flat out blaming them and make no apologies to anyone for that.
So people can bury their head in the sand if they like. It doesn’t change what’s going on.

Agreed. I have seen it happen here too. Just because they FINALLY got their degrees and found a job doesn't make them any less a hippie in their heads. One of my professors even remarked how some of the long haired, maggot infested types all managed to cut their hair, shave and bathe when they graduated and went out looking for a job. Hippies aren't COMPLETE fools. lol lol

 

[jamespowers]

Moonbeam! Is that you?!

AF

That was Linda Ronstadt. :doh:

 

[LizzieMaine]

Theoretical radicalism of the campus-academic type isn't the sort that will ever actually accomplish anything. That kind of "activism" is largely built around writing incomprehensible articles in scholarly journals that nobody reads except other academics. Kids might read this stuff and imagine that they're in on some big movement, but all they ever end up doing with it is writing a really deep blog post, man, at two in the morning. And when they look at it again six hours later, they can't remember even writing it.

There's really nothing radical about modern radicalism -- it can't pose any threat to capitalism, because capitalism actually sustains and promotes it as a convenient boogeyman, to be trotted out and used to scare the people when there aren't any real threats to worry about.

As I say, go back and read the radical writings of the thirties, and it's like the difference between someone who actually works for a living and someone who only thinks they do. There is more genuine, hard-fisted radicalism in one chapter of Steinbeck's "In Dubious Battle" than in all the academic neo-Marxist essays written since 1960 combined.

 

[Dennis Young]

Written exactly like someone who didn't grow up in California and has no idea what hippies were or are capable of. They lasted much longer here and contributed to the decline of the ENTIRE nation. As I mentioned before, they got into politics and business. Their effect may seem small to someone far away but I know better. They were here and still are. They didn't sell out. They just moved into the mainstream and now there are hippies with money that have plenty of effect right now.
You don't realize that many of them came out here and got a FREE college education. Yes, a college education was FREE in California at one time. No tuition at all---just like the public schools. That all ended when they swarmed our schools and edited subjects for five years each though. :doh:
I have literally met thousands of hippies over my lifetime here. You don't understand them well enough until you have lived near them and have talked to them. One of them was my next door neighbor's burnout son---well, I should say SONS. Fittingly, one of them worked for the sewage treatment plant out here. After his last drunk driving conviction he got to "retire" from his job and is now another drag on the system. Multiply that burnout by tens of thousands and you have problems.....

Agree 100%. Though we had 'real' hippies here in Alabama. But I agree with your point.

Here’s the thing about the so called radicals of the thirties. The forties, fifties and early sixties were a time of traditional family values. The forties generation has been (rightly imo) called the greatest generation. Without that generation our nation most likely wouldn’t have survived. They came out of the depression stronger than steel and as a result were able to beat back the threat of Nazis and Communists.


It was AFTER this, that things began to spin out of control.

 

[jamespowers]

Unless, of course, one was a female hippie.

Then too, draft evasion, draft resistance, and opposition to the Vietnam War did not necessarily make one a hippie. Hippie culture was a very specific youth movement, originating on the West Coast and gradually spreading eastward, and not all opponents of the war identified with that movement.

Spread like a cancer. Quite true.
Draft dodgers were not necessarily hippies. That was a single issue thing. You could be a conscientious objector and not be a hippie. You can't put Mennonites and the Amish in the same category as hippies. You would give them a heart attack. lol lol

 

[jamespowers]

It was AFTER this, that things began to spin out of control.

And that is the most salient point. After they came back they thought everything was going to be fine and watched the problems develop.....

 

[jamespowers]

Theoretical radicalism of the campus-academic type isn't the sort that will ever actually accomplish anything. That kind of "activism" is largely built around writing incomprehensible articles in scholarly journals that nobody reads except other academics. Kids might read this stuff and imagine that they're in on some big movement, but all they ever end up doing with it is writing a really deep blog post, man, at two in the morning. And when they look at it again six hours later, they can't remember even writing it.

There's really nothing radical about modern radicalism -- it can't pose any threat to capitalism, because capitalism actually sustains and promotes it as a convenient boogeyman, to be trotted out and used to scare the people when there aren't any real threats to worry about.

As I say, go back and read the radical writings of the thirties, and it's like the difference between someone who actually works for a living and someone who only thinks they do. There is more genuine, hard-fisted radicalism in one chapter of Steinbeck's "In Dubious Battle" than in all the academic neo-Marxist essays written since 1960 combined.

Shaping the minds of youths and further shaping the news through J schools does not seem to be accomplishment free. Polls taken of news outlets clearly show that over 85% of the news readers think the same. There is some effect to the propaganda.