Our "Sixties Generation"

[marcus]

I've been thinking about the Sixties for a long time. I realized the
importance of that era while it was happening. Although I can't
pinpoint the exact moment, I knew early on that my friends,
classmates, and I were part of a unique group. I have never
wavered from that certainty. It is not a belief centered in elitism,
or
feelings of superiority, but rather one centered in the idea that the
Sixties Generation has a purpose. This generational calling is
difficult to define in its entirety, but it contains three core
beliefs:


1. The pursuit of money is at the root of most problems.


2. Violence does not solve conflicts.


3. What we do to the Earth affects us all.


Before the Sixties ended, this calling was part of a group unity and
effort. After the Sixties passed, it became an inner urge based upon
individual accomplishments.


During the Sixties, there was much ado made about the "generation
gap". It's true...there were vast differences between us and our
parents. They were children raised during the worldwide economic
depression of the 1930s. Then, as teens and young adults, they were
thrust into a war which maimed and killed many of them. In their
desire to put it out of their minds, they strived for the "good
life". Their concept of that goodness was based upon material
abundance, and they vowed that their children would never lack for
wanting.


The World War II generation emphasized materialism over freedom, and
conformity over independence. Security became more important to them
than equality. We, their children, objected to this. We began to
wonder about the priorities of life. Although the homes, toys, TVs,
cars, and trinkets satiated us as children, by the time we reached our
teens and young adulthoods, we began to realize that devoting oneself
to materialism was an empty ambition. There had to be something more
to life. We began a search to find out what that was. That quest
led to a great chasm between the values held by each generation, but
throughout it all, we still loved them, as they did us.


Some have proclaimed the World War II generation as the "greatest
generation". Others have called the Sixties Generation a "self-
indulgent generation". Neither statement is true. Both generations
were affected by war. Both generations were in transition. The
product of each transition was at odds with the other... but not the
people themselves.


"Conventional wisdom" dictates that the Sixties Generation must repent
for the deeds of their youth. It assumes that the pursuits of those
times were wrong. Of course, everything was not rosy during the
Sixties. Euphoria did not reign supreme. While sailing through
uncharted waters, mistakes were made during that period of
unparalleled integrity. However, we must not forget that Sixties Gen
stopped a war, made tremendous gains in racial equality, released a
spirituality unfettered by the repressive nature of religious dogma,
and demonstrated that the Protestant work ethic was in conflict with
the "pursuit of happiness". Honesty and openness were hallmark
values of the Sixties...there is no need to apologize or repent for
them.


No one I know wants to turn back the clock to 1968, but based on
conversations with others from my generation, I sense a longing for
the spirit of the Sixties. This desire isn't merely the sentimental
memory of childhood which affects every generation as it ages. What
happened to young people in the Sixties was over and above the normal
rebelliousness of youth, beyond the usual search for identity, and
more profound than just being hip.

[ARON KAY]

i am an old unrepentant hippie yippie flower child /jewish road warrior of
the 60's born on 11/14/49. we are a generation of kids conceived after the
second world war. our parents largely wanted the best for us since many of
thei cohorts died due to war...they went after the american dream in order
to give us something they thought they couldnt have!!! we witnessed a world
that was changing in many ways which appalled our parents. the advent of
television gave the baby boomers a vehicle which exposed them to a new
forntier as envisioned by then president kennedy....we were the children who
patronized the beatnik cafes in the late 50s and 60s in search of a way to
break away from "old-fashioned values" i still recall seeing beaniks in
venice beach rubbing shoulders with retred european jewish commies along
the boardwalk prior to the big cultural explosion that was on the way///
we were dealing with the twist, motown , girl groups, hootenanies, civil
rights marches as a prelude to it all. what shifted gears was 11/22/63-the
kennedy assassination jolted an entire generation's innocence///that led to
the beatles, folk-rock and psychedelic music which were new forms of
expressions for us. the pill led to freer sex in our teens....causing the
puritanal mores from the 50s to go down big time...our statement was make
love not war or fuck for peace. which appalled our parents like my mother
who was a jewish concentration camp survivor having a fit when she found out
i was doing it with a black girl from my english class..now its no big
deal!!! but them the shock had to happen for the change to take place...
well its 40 years ago, we still miss those daze!!!!those were/are the daze
aron pieman kay
OBAMA, BUSH-THE SAME OLD SHIT
DOWNLOAD AND SHARE"CHICAGO 10" BY
CLICKING http://www.pieman.org/chicago10.htm

[Pearlie]

Excellent Marc.

I'm always pondering the sixties too. Been doings so since the
seventies.

However, to me, hipness WAS profound. Hipness during the 1960s meant
“awareness.”
Hipness didn’t mean clothing trends or being cool. Yes, clothing,
attitudes and posing were extensions, but hipness indicated insight to
the wrongs in the world. We sensed things in ways the older generation
could not sense. Thus, although drugs were often used to enhance
that aware state of mind, no drug could actually bring one the
consciousness we were born with. Today’s pot smokers are just doing
it to be cool. There’s no depth or extension. Our brand of hipness
was expressed through clothes and attitudes that did not involve
designer labels.

Unfortunately, our mass awareness seemed to dissipate as soon as the
calendar changed to 1970. Out of nowhere folks began wearing platform
shoes and going to disco’s. I personally felt very lost and
depressed by the mindlessness and decadence that took over. We were
in our twenties, and the younger boomer end was not “hip” in the same
way. They weren’t hip at all. They were simply fashionistas.

The play “Hair” currently on Broadway recaptures the times, and I
strongly recommend it. There was a program on PBS a few years ago,
about a high school in the Midwest (don’t know the name) who put on
the play (without the nudity). Notably, the actors who participated,
all obviously in their teens, were said to be profoundly affected by
everything in the play. The lifestyle, the communalism, the
expounding of love, the protestation of war, the attitudes toward a
generation that would never get it. The current Broadway cast is said
to be affected similarly. Unfortunately few members of other
generations have gotten it. Not like we did.

Hipness is different from “coolness” which, to me, means you don’t
give a shit about anything except yourself. Beatniks were hip. We
were the spawn of beatniks.

I guess the reason I’m making a big deal of the word hip is because,
in my book, (which will never be published) the main character refers
to hipness as “awareness.”

Pearl

[marcus]

On Sep 20, 11:39 am, Pearlie <bpnacaw...@aol.com> wrote:
>> However, to me, hipness WAS profound.  Hipness during the 1960s meant
> “awareness.”
> Hipness didn’t mean clothing trends or being cool.   Yes, clothing,
> attitudes and posing were extensions, but hipness indicated insight to
> the wrongs in the world. We sensed things in ways the older generation
> could not sense.   Thus, although drugs were often used to enhance
> that aware state of mind, no drug could actually bring one the
> consciousness we were born with.  Today’s pot smokers are just doing
> it to be cool.  There’s no depth or extension.  Our brand of hipness
> was expressed through clothes and attitudes that did not involve
> designer labels.

Yes, I was using "hip" to mean being "cool" in that sentence.

>
> I guess the reason I’m making a big deal of the word hip is because,
> in my book, (which will never be published)  the main character refers
> to hipness as “awareness.”
>

Hey, c'mon, don't give up...your book will be published someday...just
persevere.

[Pearlie]

thanks.
The final product is a too long --a historical fiction set in the
60s. I was told there is no market for that. I'm not comfortable at
fiction. Poetry was my strength, but you can't pay rent on poetry.
After attending a writers conference, I was discouraged. The
publishing world is bitchy and scary . I'm not the kind they want. I
heard agents say things like, "if the first sentence doesn't grab my
attention, I throw out the manuscript." I've read hundreds of books
where it doesn't get good until one is well into the book! I've
rewritten the first sentence a thousand times to grab them. These
rewrites don't even grab me! Then you have to "pitch" your concept to
snobs who wield glitzy power and look at you like you're crazy for
approaching them. I'm sure you know all that. I'm not cut out to
play those games, I'll probably end up self-publishing for my own
satisfaction. Been tweaking this mansucript for around five years,
without moving forward.

It would mean >

[marcus]

Most honest attempts at describing the Sixties are hampered by a
commonly accepted description made during the past 25 years. By the
early 1980s, it became a popular media pastime to cast the Sixties in
a negative light...particularly the progressive political and social
movements of that period. The backlash of Reaganism, and religious
fundamentalism, soon became the "conventional wisdom" about the
meaning of the Sixties. The political motivations by those
reactionaries included a cultural war against what they termed,
"secular humanism". Aside from winning converts, one of their goals
was to convince people that the ideals, beliefs, and values formed
during the Sixties were responsible for most of society's ills.
These forces trivialized, marginalized, and often demonized the
accomplishments of the Sixties Generation. In addition, the
government and military, unwilling to acknowledge wrongdoing,
succeeded in blaming the 1960s peace movement for the United States'
defeat in Vietnam by taking the focus away from war to a repudiation
of Sixties youth culture.


During the late 1970s and early 1980s, the ownership of newspapers,
magazines, radio stations, and TV networks increasingly fell into the
hands of major corporations without previous ties to mass media. The
danger of this concentrated power over the news we hear was outlined
by Ben Bagdikian in his book, “The Media Monopoly”(1983). Bagdikian's
alarming predictions about a few conglomerates controlling the
distribution of information have come true.


Often, the Sixties are portrayed as an arcane time when young people
had to "get it out of their systems" before they became responsible
adults. Frequently, TV reduces an entire era to a stereotypical
sitcom plot in which young people find their elders' love beads and
bell bottoms in the attic, and everyone has a good laugh about hippie
clothing. Occasionally, TV will offer up a special or movie
featuring
a Sixties theme, but the intent is to make money from musical
soundtracks and nostalgia product placements, rather than an in-depth
look at the times. When books are published, they are usually
compendiums compiled by historians, or journalists, too old to have
been children of the Sixties.


Therefore, the truly motivating goals of the Sixties...love and
peace....empathy and tolerence...fairness and equality... are treated
as mere offshoots, instead of the guiding forces of a generation that
they were.

[Pearlie]

Marc, As of late, your writing's on fire ! Have you thought of
writing a book on this topic?

[marcus]

On Sep 21, 2:59 pm, Pearlie <bpnacaw...@aol.com> wrote:
> Marc, As of late, your writing's on fire !  Have you thought of
> writing a book on this topic?
>

Ya never know.

But, regarding your writing endeavors...don't listen to the
naysayers...they've got you believing you can't do something before
you even try.

Stick with your fiction...try sending a sample chapter or two to small
presses. Perhaps, try sending some material to a literary agent as
well. Subscribe online to Writer's Market.

[marcus]

When did the Sixties begin? When did the Sixties end?

There are two basic answers. The usual response is 1960-1969, but for
those people who begin decades with years ending in the number "1",
the Sixties might be from 1961-1970. However, I have a third answer.
My beginning and ending dates for the "Sixties" are not confined by
the limits of a numerical decade. For me, the Sixties spanned the
early-to-mid 1960s through the early-to-mid 1970s. To put it in terms
of recognizable events, the Sixties began around the time of Martin
Luther King Jr.'s "I Have A Dream" speech in August 1963, and ended
during the months surrounding Richard Nixon's resignation from the
presidency in August 1974. Therefore, the "Sixties" were a cultural
period from 1963-1974.

I use the term, "Sixties Generation"("Sixties Gen"), to describe the
millions of Americans who were born from 1940-1960, and experienced
the Sixties as young adults, teenagers, and children.

Many historians apply the demographic label, "Baby Boomer", to some of
the people I call "Sixties Gen". They use this expression because of
the high birth rates which occurred in the United States from
1946-1964. Indeed, there was a "boom" in the number of babies born to
the generation who fought World War II during the aftermath of that
war. Hence, social scientists and economists have relegated the
offspring from that generation as "Baby Boomers". Although this term,
and it's definition, are utilitarian within the discipline of
demography, it is a poor choice in names when considering the
influences on young people during the Sixties.

Previous generations were identified by the major experiences,
influences, and conditions they shared in common during their
formative years. Referring to Sixties Gen as "Baby Boomers", because
their parents reproduced in large numbers, is useful only if the act
of being born can be considered a uniquely shared generational
experience. Obviously, no generation can be described in special terms
simply because they were born. Since the cultural decade of the
Sixties was the major unifying shared experience for people born in
America between 1940-1960, "Sixties Gen" is a more appropriate name
for them.

Additionally, the term "Baby Boomer" only serves to infantilize a
generation not permitted to honor or recognize itself as contributors
to our society.

[Pearlie]

Your third response is more widely held than you think. Music
soundtracks events and delineates better than calendars. For me, the
60s began, with the British Invasion and ended with Nixon’s
resignation. Likewise, the 50s began midway in that decade with Elvis
and Allan Freed’s Rock and Roll. The sugary pop sounds of Bobby
Rydell, Bobby Vinton and all Bobbies were eradicated by the Beatles,
along with the apron-clad Donna Reed, Doris Day squeaky clean Pat
Boone mentality.

I don’t think any one can say the sixties began in 61 and ended in 70.
I know I’ve said the world changed the moment the calendar flipped to
1970. I was being rhetorical. Their break up symbolized the decline
of idealism.

Calendars are man-made. But, trends and events follow their natural
clock. Style and quality of music reflect every era. Every
generation identifies with events they live through Most of us who
lived through the sixties, would probably agree that the heart of the
sixties began ticking with JFK’s assassination and culminated after
Viet nam ended, 18-year olds got the vote and Nixon resigned.

Man-made calendars and time-keeping holds us to appointments,
schedules, etc. they keep us in line to cope, coordinate, organize
and collate us into life’s stifling shuffle. Likewise, braces of
religion, national boundary and race have us believe what we do has
importance. The things that “bend (us) out of shape by society’s
pliers.” (Dylan, Its Alright Ma) As John Lennon said: “Life is what
happens to you when you’re busy making other plans.” Chances are
life would be more fulfilling if we didn’t have to measure every
living moment.

What our generation is labeled, really doesn’t matter. Not everyone
who was of age during the period experienced the 60s with equal
fervor. I knew lots of "square, straight" kids my age. They did not
protest, pay attention to music scnenes, smoke pot or think. What is
important is the pulse of the time. Call it hippiedom, the
counterculture or baby boomers, it give the movement that took place
greater mass—even if every single boomer did not participate.
(Unfortunately that lack of interest that won out.) I’ve always been
proud of the spotlight on boomers.

If one thinks about it, the need by demographers to label generations
probably became important after us. Our existence resulted in
demographers retro-labeling generations older and grasping to make up
names for all generations younger than ours.

[Pearlie]

I meant the Beatles break up in the second paragraph in my above
rant. .

> > to our society.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Pearlie]

You say that........."Previous generations were identified by the

major experiences,
influences, and conditions they shared in common during their

formative years....."..

I think we should look at ourselves a little more objectively and
admit that many of our good intentions resulted in negative by-
products.

Boomers have been expansively identified with their many major events
--more so than most, I'd say. Hasn't the media been marking the 40th
of Woodstock, celebrating The Beatles remasterings, the Moon walk?
the 40th of every '68 assassination and protest riot was also duely
noted. Same with 67s summer of love, Sgt Pepper and Haight Ashbury.
Aren't today's media executives mostly boomers? Unfortunately the
selling-out greedy fix that occured in the seventies still pumps
through the veins of most broadcasting exec. I think its safe to say
that the corporate gobbling-up of small business that grew gargantuan
in the last 30 years was implemented by greedy boomers. Inspired by
Pac Man, no doubt. We are all guilty of greed in varying degress. I
remember in the 70s wanting a better Stereo, designer jeans, a better
car, a walkman. We all fell into materialistic temptation. Not at all
in line with communalism and Mother Earth love talk. When my kids
were babies we spent and spent and spent, buying things to keep up
with the very Joneses we criticized in the 60s. .

Did you catch Tom Delay, Republican asshole, dancing to Wild Thing on
Dancing with the Stars. Clearly he had the same influences as you and
me. My contention is that too many of us were insincere. I know
people who grew up at that time who view the sixties as no more than a
nostalgic passing phase. For many it was nothing more an a very
unusual coming of age. So many boomers lost thier way, became
confused and ended up conservative.

As to our generation getting only negative attention and no credit:
My kids (whom I had late in life) have been explosed to everything
about my generation with overkill. My daughter wishes she lived in
that time period. Art, film and media courses (in high school and
college) today use the sixties in their lesson plans. Considering all
my kids have been taught in school about that era I'd agree, it is
still not enough. Our impact is notable. My son has had so much ad
nauseum 60s thrown his way (from his parents as well as school) that
he has absorbed the ability to anyalize and be cynical about the world
with a completely different apporach. The world conditions my kids
live in is different from ours, and thus they cannot appreciate our
idealism. They see it as childish, in fact. The workd is corrupt
in ways today our generation never envisioned. This is the world in
which our children and grandchildren live.

Also. I don't think it can be denied that today's social degeneration
is a direct result of boomers' derailment. Our ideal of free love
became today's vulgarity. Our use of mind expanding substances is
todays rampant drug use. I watch kids in the suburban high school
district (highly ranked in the country) my daughter attends apptoached
by drug dealers five feet away from school grounds. The principal--
aboomer--does nothing. Unfortunately, many of yesterdays flower
children became today's perverts. A lot of the good awareness that
happened in the sxties, still echos into today's world, but we can't
deny that much went astray because of our carelessness. Our carefree
do your own thing way resulted in children and grand children who
value very little.


"-----Additionally, the term "Baby Boomer" only serves to infantilize

a
generation not permitted to honor or recognize itself as contributors

to our society.---"--

Our generation is not honored or recognized by conservatives or the
older generation. That's never going to change. Our numbers are large
enough to honor ourselves for our many accomplishents. Those of us
who shared a vision, know where we stand. .

Also your above statement reminds me of when Ringo once said in an
interview that the Beatles were always refered to as "the boys" and
never as "men." Imagine, Ringo, who holds a place in history unlike
any other, complaining of how the world perceives him. Because our
generation was young in ways like none before it, we actually
infantilized ourselves. Note our superficial need to look, be and act
young forever, and what it teaches our children. Hardly anything
about the things we preached but didn't practice.

[marcus]

We have been on this merry-go-round before, and you know that I think
you, and your writings are great, but on this issue, I just think you
are waaaaaaaaaaaay too hard and harsh on the Sixties Generation.

With all due respect to you and your views, which I value and mostly
agree with, you've fallen prey to the what those who retaliated
against the progressivism and ideals of the 1960s wanted us and future
generations to believe about the Sixties.

Without trying to sound like a broken record (or a scratched CD?), we
took the "establishment" by surprise in the late 60s and early 70s.
Here was a generation questioning the very foundations that most older
Americans bought into, lock, stock, and barrel...e.g. questioning
whether materialism was THE ultimate achievement in one's life,
questioning religious dogma on many aspects, e.g. sex, equality,
treatment of the poor, questioning whether the United States was the
savior and policeman-of-the world. They were caught off-guard, and
started to look at the "pocketbook", and how our attitudes might
affect profits...the bottom-line...and they didn't like what they saw.

Then, they found the Sixties Generation's "Achilles heel"...despite
our great efforts at alerting the nation, and the world, about the
American War Machine, and America's neglect of its minority groups, we
did not have a cohesive organized backbone, be it a structured
organization, or a unified fraternity/sorority network to fall back
upon. We were young...they were old and entrenched in social and
poltical units with a long history. We were David...they were
Goliath. And although we changed the world forever more...Goliath
didn't die...he just crawled off to his cave, licked his wounds, and
came back fighting with great intensity.

And this retaliation on the apart of the Old Guard was not
secretive...it was not a conspiracy...it was well-oiled, and out there
for everyone to see. When a majority of Sixties Gen was just into the
beginning years of being adults, having kids, planning their
futures...THEY POUNCED. I point to one thing...it wasn't necessarily
THE beginning of the attack on the Sixties, but it's a good
reference. In the early 70s, CEOs, and other representatives of major
corporations began an organization known as the Business Roundtable.
Their goal was to smash the goals, and laws that they felt infringed
on their ability to fleece America as they had been doing since the
end of World War II. This mentality, presented by the Business
Roundtable permeated Corporate America like a fast spreading virus.
What followed was the 1973-1974 contrived oil embargo...sending
paychecks to buy gasoline, while we waited in lines at gas stations
for hours(only to find out later that there were truck and tanker
ships with plenty of oil to be refined, but ordered by "guess who" not
to deliver) to go to work, or whatever endeavor we were involved in
(perhaps an offshoot of our Sixties values). Then, of course, those
who controlled the wealth on Wall Street decided it was time for
inflation, wages to be cut, and unemployment. That era of 1973-1974
took the wind out of the sails for many of Sixties Gen. I remember,
vividly, careers broken, dreams shattered, lives put on hold...trying
to scramble for jobs totally unrelated to what they were trained for,
or aspired to. Some made it out, but many dreams were never recovered
again.

Soon, thereafter, Big Business aligned itself with the Christian
Fundamentalist movement (Falwell, Robertson and others of their
ilk...remember the massive "I Found It" bumperstickers on cars in
1976?...who also were trying to blame Sixties Gen for the supposed
moral decline of America), and they in turn snowballed their efforts
with the Radical Right fringe of the Republican party. This outfit
began to infiltrate Hollywood, and the media. They began to gobble up
the major News networks, and spread the very lies which many believe
as truth today...that the Sixties Generation, on its own and without
being coerced by contrived economics, SOLD OUT. And a lot of people,
from the older generations, and some from ours started to believe it.
Then came the movies, like "The Deer Hunter" and "The Big Chill" which
reinforced the false notion that the Sixties Generation had just been
a big group of babies, only self-indulgent, who really didn't believe
in peace and love after all....and they were unpatriotic to boot.

Then came the three-headed monster(Big Business, Christian
Fundamentalism, Rad Right)'s white knight on a white horse...the empty-
headed, misanthropic, but smooth-talking Grade B movies, and cowboy TV
shows, Ronald Reagan. He filled a nation with talks of restoring
pride in America...all the while stating that this supposed pride had
been sullied by the Sixties Generation anti-war, peace, civil rights,
and women's liberation movements. And many people in this nation,
tired of economic woes, believed it. The Reagan Republicans
accomplished the major snow-job of the American people in our
country's history. They became so powerful that Democrats, fearing
that they never would be re-elected became a compliant party. As we
can see this lasted for over 25 years, including the Clinton
presidency, where the Democrats tried to out-Republican the
Republicans. It all began with Reagan, and isn't quite over yet,
despite the election of Obama (just look at his opposition...Reagan is
their patron Saint).

And we, the generation of the Sixties, became a casualty...the media,
and the right-wing politicians started blaming every social ill on
us. You even echo that in your reference to drugs... as if every
person from the Sixties became drug-dealers, or became yuppies, or
sell-outs. The myth kept self-perpetuating itself until those who
either didn't live through those times, or were part of the WWII
generation who wanted to believe that their children had gone astray,
or those who only had the Reaganites as their official source of
information (the teens and young 20 somethings of the 1980s and early
90s), now believe this as gospel.

But, I'm here to tell you, Pearlie...that although, yes...there were
some who did only believe in Sixties ideals because they wanted to get
into the pants of that hippie chick or guy, and yes, there were some
who very willingly, without much thought, decided to becoming the
"company man" like dear old Dad, and yes, some for whom the Sixties
was just a fun time with good music...there were many, who used those
Sixties values, ideals, and accomplishments to form not-for-profit
agencies, local community organizations, and individual companies who
treated their employees like people, and not cattle... and most
importantly, they never lost faith, and conducted their personal
lives, and the rearing of their children in accordance with what they
came to believe was good about the Sixties.

I know that I have mentioned this before, but I believe that if any
"doubting Thomas", or someone so firmly enveloped into the Reagan
years propaganda, were to pick up a copy of Leonard Steinhorn's "The
Greater Generation: In Defense of the Baby-Boomer Legacy", they would
come away with quite a different perspective other than "all those
Boomers, they sold out, and have brought all of the bad things that
have happened upon themselves".

We were victims of propaganda, from a well-run poltical/religious/
business machine.

[Pearlie]

Wow! That was passionate! I’m unable to tackle most of what you have
just stated, because I agree with most of it. I don’t think I’m being
hard on our generation Marc. We are guilty of allowing things to go
array. My contention is we blew an opportunity. All the evils you
speak of were in place during the sixties. Yes the powers that be
changed and reshaped themselves into gargantuan, but we also lost our
form and failed to develop our own strength. .

We did not hold our momentum because of sincere lack of commitment.
Those who did were radicalized into violence. Even John Lennon said:
“But if you talk about destruction, then you know that you can count
me out,” in Revolution. For a while I felt energized to participate
in revolutionary acts that would have been considered violent, and
contradicted our peace/love edict.

Can you honestly say that everyone you knew at the time stayed up
nights thinking about the next step to shake up the system? There
was something amazing in the air for a time there. Something that
floated away.

In order to implement change, intelligent leaders are essential. The
whole thing began to unravel when leaders were jailed and there was no
one to replace them on the street. We never injured Goliath as
strongly as you believe. Charismatic seers led protests, wrote songs
and set lifestyle. If one thinks about it, the more influential
people of the time, Abbey Hoffman, Tim Leary, Allan Ginzberg, the
likes of those who worked microphones at WBAI, were NOT boomers or
Sixties Gen, as you so want to so coin. Most were born in the 30s.
The Beatles, and most dominating the music scene, were born before
World War 2 ended in 1945, thus they were not boomers. Bobby Seale,
Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, the Elsberg brothers, most if not all
of the Chicago 7 were born in the 30s. So were the beatniks and folk
singers and influentials such as the Smothers Brothers with their
daring (at the time). The sixties mindset sprang from the brow of
people who lived through McCarthyism and blacklisting. All of those
who had a hand in leading us into motion were older intellectuals.
Thus it was not a generational thing. It was a thing about poets,
writers, musicians and artists of all expressions. The thing has
always existed and always will exist. What happened in the sixties
had to do with individuals who thought for themselves and didn’t buy
everything they’re sold since birth.

We were a generation led by pied pipers in a renaissance dream. What
was wrong is that most of us were going through puberty when it
happened. We were fickle. I was 12 when JFK was assassinated and
the Beatles appeared on Ed Sullivan. Rock and Roll was already
stirring me. I knew that rock and roll was mine and that the older
generation was afraid of it. My ambition was to have a greaser do-wop
singing boyfriend, and stand on a corner holding a cigarette and
looking cool with a pony tail and tight slacks. I wanted to be the
proverbial rebel without a cause.

Enter The Beatles. It wasn’t just that they made girls scream. It
wasn’t just the music either. Their entrance changed a lot of
perspectives in a lot of people. Consider my own personal change of
perspective: Although my father was American, I was born in
Colombia. My first language was Spanish. I had an accent making me
less than a minority at my Catholic school at that time. In spite of
taunting by Italians who were also Latin (some more olive skinned than
I), I wanted to be a cool American. I was brainwashed enough to
believe that the happiest day of my life was the day I made my Holy
Communion. In February of 1964, my response to happiness changed.

Those un-American Beatles were cooler than all Americans put
together. Long hair becomes an issue. When American teenagers
accept The English Beatles as the greatest thing that could ever
happen, a self-centered dimwit prejudiced culture falters. The world
changes. The power shifts. The first generational punch at the
establishment came with the idolatry of artists other than America’s
Elvis or Sinatra. America no longer ruled the culture. Culture has
more impact than politics.

This cultural focus away from Americana is good but it has
unexpectedly negative effects. Everyone can now freely listen to
diverse genres of music on the radio. The first modification to rock
and roll resulted in FM freeform and progressive experimentation.
This widened musical and artistic tray brought about by sixties
artists resulted in separation. Where once folk, pop, rock, blues,
rhythm and blues and country ones emanated from the same radio
station, new stations focused on individual genres. Niches resulted.
You had your dead heads. You had your disco freaks. You had your
Southern Rockers. You had your Oldies station. You had your classic
rock. You had your all talk stations. Where music once united us, it
now began to divide us. Big business saw dollar signs and gobbled up
radio time, syndicating and mass marketing programming and completely
eradicating free-form and free expression.

The radio, once the voice of our generation, was finished as we knew
it. Blend in mindless disco dancing mentality. Enter a cynical
generation of younger punks, British and otherwise who did not
identify with the love peace be-in hippie thing. A new world wide
disillusionment exists. We are now in our twenties, working,
marrying, having children. Grand-children are more ruled by
grandparents than their parents. Parents force young parents into
following traditions -- religion, career, etc. We don’t really want
to but we do in modified ways. We turn into ostriches with heads
ensconced in our new found self-centeredness. The traditional
mechanism of the status quo bulldozes idealism and dreams. We smoke
pot occasionally. Sure our attitudes are less strict and we put our
feet on coffee tables, we show our kids black lights. Sure we wear
denim into our fifties. But most of us CUT OUR HAIR.

There is everything wrong with having stopped wearing the symbol of
what was underneath all that hair.

The Beatles brought over a very appealing British culture and accent
to America, but when other cultures and accents began to immigrate,
they did not melt so easily into the pot. The chunks of cultural
differences resulted in disharmony and dissatisfaction amongst scared
white Americans. New forms of prejudice began to rear their head.
This is what Fundamentalist Christian movement is about. It is white
Americans, who resent the changing face of America for developing
Hispanic, Asian, Indian, Middle Eastern features. It is their fear
that rallies around the rich conservatives, although most of them are
poor and uneducated and buy into anything that looks more like
themselves: the likes of Ronald Reagan. It is their brand of fear
and ignorance that rallies against Obama today. They’d rather align
with lies, than admit that we are all human beings.

Consider some factors that threw our generation off target. Charles
Manson, Altamont. The deaths of Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim
Morrison. Yes the Beatles break up. MLK’s and JFK’s
assassinations. Kids being constantly stoned. Militants in the
counterculture. But the main factor that eradicated the dream was
merging into the social mechanism and hoping someone else would
continue the fight for change.

I remember just walking down the street or being on a subway, seeing
another “head” and giving them the peace sign. However, this didn’t
happen everywhere or everyday. I lived in Queens. In high school, I
was part of a handful of kids who felt what I was feeling. Often I
was pretty alone and used to get away to the Village to meet up with
others like myself. People who thought along those lines, were the
ones who ran away to San Francisco, found a commune or Greenwich
Village. Yes there were great numbers of us who shared a vision, but
it does not include every single person who came of age during that
time. This is what I’m arguing. Not everyone our age turned on,
tuned in and dropped out. Many who did got lost. It was a bit of a
high wire act without a net.
Was everyone our age connected by events and circumstances during the
sixties? Yes. We all can identify with the same music, the same TV
shows, the same assassinations, the same Vietnam war, the same racial
conflict. But not every single member of our generation was outraged
enough to want to work for change.

No David is strong enough to fight a Goliath that covers the entire
planet Earth. That is an idealized myth, as is every other alleged
truth in the Bible. I was brought up Roman Catholic and attended
Catholic school for 8 years. Nuns beat us and punished us for silly
wrongs. Despite that, do you honestly believe that most of my peers
didn’t remain psychologically tethered to what they were taught since
birth? It’s the steel wool baby booties are knitted from. This
powerful mechanism has been in place since before the Greeks and Romans
—since cavement cliamed power. Power, politics and money are the
enemy of the human spirit regardless of governmental style. I’ve
come to believe injustice is a lesson in life all humans must endure
and that Karma is always at play and that everyone will eventually get
their own.

There’s a certain energy in youth. I catch that familiar cynicism in
my teen children. But there are too many niches in today’s world to
focus and feel one is making an impact. Theirs is a new rebellion
without cause. Although there are so many causes out there, there are
no leaders.

I didn’t get married till my mid thirties, while most of my friends
did. I watched life’s obligations change them from carefree to
uptight “responsible” humanoids. I avoided marriage because I knew
that the moment I became someone’s wife, I’d stop being who I was.
I’d lose myself. Becoming a mother would put me in a role that
contradicted my freedoms even further. I would be in a position of
authority. Someone would look to me for guidance. I did not feel
prepared for that until it happened by accident. I have idealized the
sixties for my children till I am blue in the face. My hippie
attitude actually rules in my house. There is in fact anarchy. I
don’t think that has anything to do with fighting the establishment, I
think it has to do with survival. I appreciate all of your passion,
however, it makes me assume that you went on to participate in
ventures that involved altruistic objective. If you did, I honor
you. Realistically, not many could do this.

As you say, we took the establishment by surprise, but I think we took
ourselves by surprise as well and therefore failed to see our own
power. The world-wide phenomenon of youth standing up to the
establishment was unprecedented.

Yes. to quote you “...there were many, who used those

Sixties values, ideals, and accomplishments to form not-for-profit
agencies, local community organizations, and individual companies who
treated their employees like people, and not cattle... and most
importantly, they never lost faith, and conducted their personal
lives, and the rearing of their children in accordance with what they

came to believe was good about the Sixties. “

However, I think you are idealizing the numbers who actively
participated. As we aged, there weren’t many of us who had the
wherewithal to form not for profit agencies. Most college grads
donned Yuppie suits. I saw it happening all around me. Although
grabbed by materialism, most of us have altruism in our hearts. I
don’t consider myself as having given in, though I worked in a white
collar world before becoming a stay at home parent. I don’t consider
I’ve fallen prey as long as I think and see and recognize the
propaganda surrounding. . .

[Pearlie]

Above. Around paragraph 13 I meant to say JLK and "RFK" & please
excuse my usual of typos and grammar.

[marcus]

On Sep 28, 12:12 pm, Pearlie <bpnacaw...@aol.com> wrote:
>

"But the main factor that eradicated the dream was
merging into the social mechanism and hoping someone else would
continue the fight for change."

This is what I object to the most about what you have to say. The
message her is that what happened to the Sixties Generation was its
own fault.

Granted, as we both agree, there was no organizational structure for
Sixties Gen to fall back upon for support, but to blame what you see
as the disintegration of "the movement" on the movement itself misses
the point, and more dangerously plays into the mindset that those who
did there best to destroy the Spirit of the Sixties would love for us
to believe. It strikes me as a kind of generational "self-loathing"
to blame what happened to the momentum of our generation on us.

And I'm not looking through this with rose-colored glasses. As I said
earlier, I fully recognize that not every single person born in the
years we were born, were against the Vietnam War, pro-feminists, for
civil rights and gay rights, or charged up about improving the
environment. That being said, I think you dismiss too lightly the
good work that many from our generation have done, and continue to do.

Yes, I firmly believe that there was a unified concerted effort to
derail the momentum and spirit of the Sixties Generation by the
extremely powerful and wealthy Unholy Trinity(that I mentioned
before). they succeeded politically, but what they could not stop
were people who took their universal ideas, and applied them on a
smaller scale...locally in their communities...or on behalf of a
certain oppressed group. This is nothing to sneeze about. There are
thousands of organizations, some non-profit--some not, who have
worked tirelessly over the past 30-35 years for their neighbors,
towns, cities, counties, states, and sometimes nationally. They don't
have high profiles (I mean, afterall, look who controls the media),
but they have made an impact.

There is still an often unspoken Sixties bond with these folks, and
more importantly, a Sixties link with the generations that have
followed, who work for these people and organizations, and believe in
the work they do.

Instead of chastizing everyone for not having "kept the flame", let's
be thankful for the millions who have, despite the tremendous odds
against them, as victims of the Culture Wars since 1980, and the FBI
infiltrations of the 70s.

The people united can never be defeated.

[Pearlie]

On Oct 3, 12:20 pm, marcus <marcus...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Sep 28, 12:12 pm, Pearlie <bpnacaw...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> "But the main factor that eradicated the dream was
> merging into the social mechanism and hoping someone else would
> continue the fight for change."
>
> This is what I object to the most about what you have to say.  The
> message her is that what happened to the Sixties Generation was its
> own fault.
>
> Granted, as we both agree, there was no organizational structure for
> Sixties Gen to fall back upon for support, but to blame what you see
> as the disintegration of "the movement" on the movement itself misses
> the point, and more dangerously plays into the mindset that those who
> did there best to destroy the Spirit of the Sixties would love for us
> to believe.  It strikes me as a kind of generational "self-loathing"
> to blame what happened to the momentum of our generation on us.
>

There is no self-loathing here. I’m proud of what happened back then.
I'm proud to have participated. If there had been more to
participate in, you would have seen me there. I’m proud that all of
what happened still lingers in my mind. I only wish it would have
lingered in several million MORE minds. As I said, MOST IF NOT ALL
who led the movement were OLDER than boomers. Do you dispute this?
If you agree that there’s no organizational structure for “sixties gen
to fall back on” its no wonder idealism could no longer roll forward
cohesively—without leadership(my initial contention—.)

This is a ridiculous argument. I loved every efin thing about the
sixties. I loved the leaders, the proposed freedoms, The idealism,
the music and every form of expression which pushed toward political,
social, philosophical, open-minded thinking promise and change.
Clearly where we disagree is that you feel it went on with “millions
of us” carrying on through altruistic venture on a small scale. I’m
saying there weren’t millions doing that. If there were, where are
they? Please show them to me. You have this sixties group on Google
and if you can show me more than a dozen participators, who actively
contribute and comment INTELLIGENTLY on social issues, I’ll eat these
words.

Let me clarify that I have never denied or “dismissed lightly” the
fact that many of our generational peers have carried on various and
sundry fights for justice. Obviously the idealism train did not
completely derail. OBVIOUSLY many of its cars stayed on track and
went on chugging and chug on today. It is this train that got Obama
into office. It is this train that keeps environmental awareness on
the conscience of those who can rationalize. It is this train that
allows gays the freedom to be who they are. It is this train that
sees through the lies being spread at town hall meetings and it is
this train that smells Reaganomics bullshit and the Bush Senior/Bush
Jr/Cheney evil crap.

However Marc. The train lost too many passengers who decided to get
off to masturbate on platforms of materialism, (perhaps hoping to
amass enough to share with others in communal living down the road?
I’m not saying those who abandoned the cause did it on purpose. Look
Marc it is phenomenally outstanding that an entire generation stood
up together for a few years. It is a rise that can never be forgotten
and that will hopefully happen again. I’m saying that nature is self-
centered. I’m saying nature took over. I’m also restating that NOT
very many were dedicated. Even priests and nuns who take vows
stray. This is NOT being harsh on my generation. This is being
realistic.

I’m saying our idealism became warped and we allowed it to become
warped. It got swallowed up by Madison Avenue. Hipness became a
commercial. Young became the thing to be, look and smell like.
There is not one item of style and fashion whose “free young image
cannot be traced back to hippiedom or Rock and Roll. Our hipness
became so malleable our slang idioms were adopted by Conservatives and
squares. Our attitudes were absorbed by a society that did not
understand the original symbolism of long hair, mind-expansion through
drugs, nor distrust of the established powers. I have heard my
Republican, Reaganite conservative father in law use the term “bummer”
and “gig”. It makes me want to throw up in his face.

.
Once the war was ended, and Nixon resigned and we got the vote.. young
people barely ever exercised the right (to vote. ) True. There
weren’t many worthy of a vote. Why would that be? The first time
youth EVER had a say in an election just happened with Obama. God
damn it Marc, it was our own fault because we no longer had leaders
nor generated leaders.
.
You give the enemy, which I never denied exists, too much credit for
intelligence. They took over because it seems to be the nature of
entire populations to sit back and allowed them to. That is the way
repression generally gets its way. Unfortunately, we wear a
democratic costume and people tend to sit back and relax in a world
where millions led by little people in seats of power go
unchallenged. Hitler, Castro, Kim Jong Il, Ahmadinijad, etc.


And I am not chastising my generation. That is innacurate. I am not
an enemy of something I wish would return. I am not denying a sixties
bond. As you sayt: “The people united can never be defeated. “
that is true, IF THEY SHOW UNISON...

You ARE looking through glass colored gleasses, because the fact is,
that we did not stay united. We remiinisce about the old days and we
tell our kids about Woodstock and the chicago Nat'l convention, and
Ohio, etc ..we do that in a united way, but we let go of each others
hands in order to swim in life's ocean.

[marcus]

On Oct 3, 8:30 pm, Pearlie <bpnacaw...@aol.com> wrote:


 As I said, MOST IF NOT ALL
> who led the movement were OLDER than boomers.  Do you dispute this?
> If you agree that there’s no organizational structure for “sixties gen
> to fall back on”  its no wonder idealism could no longer roll forward
> cohesively—without leadership(my initial contention—.)

First of all, to any who are reading this(assuming that anyone other
than Pearl and I are reading this), Pearl and I are friends. We've
known each other through emails and writings for a few years. We are
having an animated discussion here, but we like each other...we're not
mad at each other. Pearl is a great person, a true Sixties person in
every sense of the word...this is really a minor dispute within the
great realm of all things considered, but we both feel passionate
about our positions. I just wanted to make that clear, in case anyone
reading this thinks we are "enemies".

OK, now back to the subject at hand. I do not dispute that there were
some organizers and leaders of the various social and political
movements of the Sixties who were older, but one thing you might not
realize, although I think I've posted it before, is my definition of
what age group is part of the Sixties Generation. For me, anyone born
between 1940-1960 is part of that cultural generation who came of age
either as a young person or twenty-something during the Sixties, which
I consider to have been roughly 1963/1964 - 1973/1974. I don't go by
the demographic definition of what a "Boomer" is, or strictly by the
actual years comprising the 1960s. Therefore, I recognize that many
of the leaders were born 1940 and afterward, and yes, obviously
others, like Abbie Hoffman (for ex.) were born earlier, however there
were many leaders on college campuses who were closer to our age,
including returning Vietnam Vets...they were the organizers...the ones
pumping out the underground newspapers etc. Many of the older folks,
like David Dellinger (for ex) were inspirational and influential, but
they also lacked an organization for young people to occupy because of
t McCarthy era infiltration tactics(COINTELPRO) making them weaker.

>
>  I’m
> saying there weren’t millions doing that. If there were, where are
> they?  Please show them to me.  

Obviously, I don't have a list of names, but these folks are all over
the map, in many communities across the United States...in schools,
advocacy groups, local politicians, environmentalists, farmers, youth
leaders, non-profit agencies, credit unions, weekly newspapers,
etc..

>
> Let me clarify that I have never denied or “dismissed lightly” the
> fact that many of our generational peers have carried on various and
> sundry fights for justice.

The values and attitudes of our generation has permeated our culture
to the extent that many Americans of all ages don't realize where it
came from. I'm speaking specifically, but not only, of the varying
"empowerment" movements which have led to equality of the sexes and
races, with laws backing it up.

However Marc.  The train lost too many passengers who decided to get
> off to masturbate on platforms of materialism, (perhaps hoping to
> amass enough to share with others in communal living down the road?
> I’m not saying those who abandoned the cause did it on purpose.  

Pearl, this is where you confuse me...on the one hand, you say that
you don't blame our generation for its "failings", but then you do.

I used to be quite harsh towards those who I felt had "sold out". I
started feeling this way as early as 1974.1975, although I'm not sure
that I could have articulated it as such. But, by the early 80s, when
I saw what Reagan was doing, I realized that I had been too hard on my
peers. It wasn't their fault...the cards had been stacked against
them. And I know you tend to downplay this, but don't underestimate
the force that rose together and united to fight the progressivism and
societal attitudes of the Sixties Generation. By the early 80s, I
realized what had happened to the supposed disintegration and "selling
out". They had been forced out by economic means. Some gave up...
some gave in, but others went back to their local communities, and
began to put into practice a "think globally, but act locally" mindset.

[Pearlie]

On Oct 3, 11:54 pm, marcus <marcus...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Oct 3, 8:30 pm, Pearlie <bpnacaw...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>   As I said, MOST IF NOT ALL
>

>
>
>

> >  I’m
> > saying there weren’t millions doing that. If there were, where are
> > they?  Please show them to me.  
>
> Obviously, I don't have a list of names, but these folks are all over
> the map, in many communities across the United States...in schools,
> advocacy groups, local politicians, environmentalists, farmers, youth
> leaders, non-profit agencies, credit unions, weekly newspapers,
> etc..
>

I want a list of names! LOL

>
> > Let me clarify that I have never denied or “dismissed lightly” the
> > fact that many of our generational peers have carried on various and
> > sundry fights for justice.
>
> The values and attitudes of our generation has permeated our culture
> to the extent that many Americans of all ages don't realize where it
> came from.  I'm speaking specifically, but not only, of the varying
> "empowerment" movements which have led to equality of the sexes and
> races, with laws backing it up.
>
> However Marc.  The train lost too many passengers who decided to get
>
> > off to masturbate on platforms of materialism, (perhaps hoping to
> > amass enough to share with others in communal living down the road?
> > I’m not saying those who abandoned the cause did it on purpose.  
>
> Pearl, this is where you confuse me...on the one hand, you say that
> you don't blame our generation for its "failings", but then you do.
>

I don't see what is confusing about my stating that NOT ALL of our
generation participated in or had enough commitment in them to
continue the movement. My question to you is, how many people that
you know... freinds, relatives whatever, who were your peers back in
the sixties (and obviously continue to be peers) how many of them can
you talk with today about that movement. How many of them ponder our
effect on the world? How many of them went on their merry ways and
look back on the time with no more than empty nostalgia in thier
eyes. Perhaps I'm frustrated by their lack of expression. My very
best friend in the world went through this thing with me, but she is
as shallow as a wading pool when it comes to talking about these
matters. She was/is a gigantic Beatle fan. Her Beatlefandom is the
only passion I see she holds to this day. When I do bring up the
xisties, she'll say things like "where did everyone go"" And ths is
where I agree with her.

I know you're saying that our giant army went on quietly marching on
in thier own communities fighting the good fight. We had very
insubordinate views. This unsobordination is not easily tolerated by
the status quo. I say, this shy subtlety you speak of doesn't exist
as vastly as you claim. I have kept in touch with a few people who
look at me like I have two heads when I bring this stuff up. My key
point is that they were NOT passionate enough back in the day to be
passionate today. Unfortunately, even John Lennon said the dream is
over. --which I didn't agree with then and don't now. As long as
there are people like you and me, the dream is not over. BUT I
remember so many participating in protests, and rallies and be-ins. I
remember them sharing joints. What happened to the majority of
them??? I don't think they are all still singing "He ain't heavy ,
he's my brother." Again...many kept up the watch. But. Many more
looked the part but were not sincere players. How many other ways can
I phrase that I witnessed long hairs cut their hair, turn middle-of-
the-road, don 2 piece suites, go to work for corporations
contradicting what they fought for thanks to nice attractive
salaries? Salaries understandably essential for paying for engagement
rings, feeding newborns, meeting rent or mortgage and getting caught
up in a bigger materialistic cog than even our parents. Let's face
it Marc, my mom, at 92 spent less than I did. She saved. Taht
generation does not find it essential to own an HDTV, a PC, a cell
phone or get cable. While I have credit card debt. Was this "selling
out?" I think it is. I was guilty of it myself!. i can only assume
you are one of the commintty leaders you speak of, who helps the
homeless, runs a soup kitchen.Organizes for Darfur.

Clearly Marc and I are fighting semantics here and not each other.
Man. you're making me exhausted, Marc.

[marcus]

I never thought I would say this 35 years ago, but I think your
longing to see 55-65 year olds out on the street everyday with
banners, and marches, and "taking it to the Man" are unrealistic.
People change because their bodies change, their family and financial
circumstances change, but they still retain many attributes born of
their youth, and address those concerns in different ways...ya know
"different strokes for different folks".

I can think of several old friends, now in the field of education, who
use techniques that became popular during the Sixties to get their
instructions across, in addition to talking about what really happened
during the Sixties, which their students won't find in their history
books. Personally, I am friends with a woman, who helped to start an
"alternative" federal credit union, which gives loans to people, and
self-starting companies, who ordinarily wouldn't be able to secure
loans, and which gives money back to the community in other ways. It
is now unbelievably popular and successful, having won many awards,
and touted for it's push for employers everywhere to give employees a
basic liveable wage. I know a woman who operates a successful
alternative and holistic health practice. I know a man who wrote a
very controversial, yet highly regarded book about AIDS, who is now a
successful independent film maker, making documentaries born from the
experiences he had as a young man in the 60s and early 70s. A couple
of folks, former classmates, who are always in the forefront of
Leftist lobbying of Congress in Washington DC. Acquaintances who have
made local agriculture competitive with agribusiness, starting CSA's,
(community sponsored agriculture), who have one of the most successful
Farmers Market in the Northeast....and have even started a local
bartering currency that keeps wealth within the community, without
taking "dollars" away. A woman, who practiaclly brought the concept
of recycling and re-use to her community to the point where they are
creating less and less garbage in their quest to make our world's
environment fit for us and future generations. Several friends,
including yours truly and my wife, who were very active in the anti-
Iraq war movement, all of whom have grey and white hair, and are less
than ten years away from Medicare eligibility.

I'm sure that if I picked my brain, I could think of more examples.

But, the point is this...if I...a virtual nobody can count that many
friends and acquaintances as transforming what they learned during in
the Sixties to productive lives for themselves and others
now...multiply that times everyone you and other Sixties Gen people
know personally past and present (friends, casual
acquaintances,.coworkers, parents of children's friends, relatives
etc) and you can see where there are many many people
(thousands...maybe millions) who have tranformed our times, who did
not give up their Sixties dreams, but channeled them in different
directions fior the betterment of them all.

And they did it despite the oppressive regimes trying to keep them and
their spirit down.

I know that you are tired of hearing me saying this, but run, don't
walk, to your nearest book store, or go to Amazon.com, and purchase
Steinhorn's "The Greater Generation". He has charts, polls, etc. all
taken from very reputable sources showing how Sixties Gen, sometimes
quietly, sometimes without fanfare, sometimes boldly and loudly, have
changed our society. It is sobering...you will be impressed...you
will scratch your head, and say "Wow, I didn't know that 'we' did all
that."

Take care, Pearlie.

Marc

[Pearlie]

Okay, Marc, I'm tired. I'm gonna let you win (for now) LOL. I will
resume this discussion refreshed and fortified with facts and figures
after I get out of the hospital. I will have a lot of time to think
and will be jotting down any revolutionalry thoughts on hospital
sheets. I will pull out my IV needle if there is no pen around and
write with it. I will then prove to you beyond the shadow of a doubt,
that although our generation was unique, original and Yes... the
greatest generation that ever was or will be, NOT ALL of our peers had
a conscience. I will provide names and addresses of the 78 million
who watched the Beatles on Ed Sullivan and then went on to watch
Bonanza. By the way, I believe I recommended The Greater Generation
to you ...check your records, emails, files, etc.

btw. I didn't say I longed to see 55-65 year olds protesting... but
why not?

[marcus]

Pearl,

I think you may have misunderstood me, I don't think that every person
who belongs to our generation had/has a social/political/revolutionary
conscience. But I don't think that it's too far-fetched to believe
that at the very least, 1/3 (possibly more) of our generation took
away those Sixties values to heart, and practice them, in some way,
today.

I first read Steinhorn's book in 2005.

Now...if you read it, how can you possibly be disagreeing with me? ;-)

Good luck and good health,

Marc