A thread on the Counterculture of the 1960-1970s.
(In the proceeding thread all references to counterculture will be to the 1960-1970s interval)
Not only is the Counterculture an interesting phenomenon in itself but it also holds genealogical significance if one believes that the tide of culture, from that time, have lead to the current culture we(Americans and other Anglosphere) have today. But what specific significance am I referring to?—the revolt against standards; this event was undoubtably one of the most unique and significant in history.
There is no want for slave revolt narratives(which libtards love masterbaiting to) in the annuals of history, yet there was never a time in where a mass revolt against higher culture was perpetrated by the children of that higher culture. Typical slave revolt narratives show the unwashed slaves rising up against the clean and well manner masters. The culture of the master is alien to them, and this is why they can so easily dispose of it; the only significance it has to them is it’s relation to the master. But what if they had gotten a taste for the fruits of civilization, would they have been so eager to see it all burn? Of course not. Yet we see in the counterculture this exact inclination. Thus we can understand its essence.
To demonstrate my point compare the hippie to his middle class father.
The father has clean-cut gelled hair, sharply dressed, good manners, good hygiene, ect. Now let’s look at the hippie.
Messy hair, poor clothes, unhygienic, vulgar, and a druggie.
Now my example may be abstract but it nevertheless gets to the point: the counter culture was a revolt against standards; a revolt against— manners, hygiene, hard work, discipline, and healthy social structures. If I were to name off these attributes to you without any context a picture of modern America would present itself in your mind. Fat pajama wearing Mexicans on their way to Walmart to buy more ZOGslop.
Now to clear some misconceptions: the counterculture was neither a revolt of youth(vitality) nor a revolt against conformity. Starting with the latter point I will, unfortunately, draw from American tv tropes. One trope is of the conservative character having a refined unique hobby, on the lower end with things like stamp collecting, to the higher end with ships built in bottles.
This makes sense, only an austere person would have such refined and meticulous hobbies. Now why have I gone on a tangent about ships in bottles? To demonstrate that the culture from which the counterculture revolted was not as conformist as it seemed. Under the veil of uniform suburbia awaited a significant number of assiduous hobbyists. From Ham radios to crafting all sorts of neat doohickies, they were anything but conformist. A paralelle to make is the modern Japanese; uniform business suits parading through subway stations on their way home to some niche hobby.
Now to address the point on youth: the counterculture was not an outbreak of creative vital youth culture. The current left wants you to think that they are the youthful punk rock fans revolting against their conservative conformists parents—which is false in that they are just as, if not more, dogmatic, conformist, and (some how) older(less vital) then their parents. Can the same be said about the counterculture? The drugs of the counterculture were marijuana and LSD. They took these to relax and have a “trippy” experience. Now for any of you whom have ever been around potheads, do they seem real energized to you? No, they kind of look half dead. They act stupid and not responsive. Does this look vital and youthful to you?
Well it’s not. Certain drugs could could be argued to be youthful, but marry wanna and acid are not those drugs. Look up at this picture, do you feel a youthful vibe? Kinda reminds you of 30yo bearded soyllenials, doesn’t it?
In conclusion, the counterculture was a revolt against standards by the children of a higher culture and that won, standards are no more. (Now would an amarnite please make this a thread?)