Quote:
Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek
The 60s was already chaotic, and that festival really ended the 60s, highlighting how bad and violent that decade was. My mom told me the 60s was a bad decade, but it was prosperous, unlike now.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by carnation
You know--most of my friends and I think it wasn't very chaotic at all. In some cities, like San Francisco--yes. If you watch 60s news clips now, you would think that all anyone did back then was protest in their hippie clothes. I lived in Houston and went to a big, racially mixed high school and although some people did drugs there, it wasn't any wilder than any other period in my life. Friends from the other Houston high schools have said the same.
Same for the 70s. I went to 3 big SEC universities and I saw one protest the whole time (7 people attended.) The only people who wore hippie clothes were the botany majors and they were growing their own weed around campus.
|
I wasn’t around in the 60s either, but the differences I’ve notice between the chaotic mess of now vs. back then is folks started movements and not moments. A moment last a few days to a week, and then as soon as folks start losing something of value, they stop protesting and go back to their everyday lives.
Back in the 60s, folks protested and kept protesting until they saw changes. For example, I’ll use these mass school shootings. As soon as a shooting on a large scale happens, students do these short-term walkouts, but then come back to school two days later. If you’re going to protest, don’t come back to school until they do something about the damn guns. I’d even go as far as not paying property taxes to add to a movement. Yeah, you could lose your property and you might have to homeschool your kid, but if a movement like that was done on a mass scale, it couldn’t be ignored. They’d have to submit. But the downside of it, sacrifices would have to be made. You’d have to give something up. Folks won’t make sacrifices like that today. They would in the 60s, though.