Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Politics In General An offer of an approach

Over the past several days I have  made several references to my life circumstances during the 1960. What started among some of us, upset by the surrounding government/political environment as a series of "be-ins" and the gift of LSD, nd later became called "hippies" or more colorfully and maybe accurately "love children".

We were by definition loosely organized, loosely formed and only gradually did some of us become politicized. For the most part, that was the result of governments trying to suppress us and then attacking us. We had no interest in forming or joining a party or any group that had as its purpose anything more complicated than signing, dancing and making love.

Even before this, of course, there were those who sought to change our culture through political means. Their numbers grew also in response to the opposition of governments at all levels. For at least two years these two elements did not have much to do with each other.

The "politicos" made inroads into and eventually tried to take over the so-called hippies. SDS and others wanted to augment their vision with the rather different, but seemingly similar vision and effort. They were successful in that they were taken seriously by the establishment and hippies just ridiculed.

As you can tell, certainly by now, I was in the former group -- I was and still am a hippie although I prefer love child.

I was among others that rejected politics and especially any kind of recruitment. We had broken loose and were not interested in reattaching to anyone. This produced quite a lot of friction and disagreement.

It is my opinion that those of us outside the ordinary retain this dichotomy and its results. It makes useful conversations about public matters difficult and is the source of much confusion and misunderstanding among us.

We love children were naïve, unprofessional and not aggressive for the most part.  It takes great patience and guts to live in love and peace. I do my humble best but have not encountered anything better. Humans have been trading who is "right" forever.

Imagine living in love as much as we can. Not a stupid "do what you want" kind of love, but your parents love(d) you and they were not pushovers. Maybe we can nurture and parent this world and each other.

What do you think?

I went to one SDS meeting back in 68 and was immediately repelled. I was all for sex, drugs, and rock & roll but eventually found a much more acceptable niche as a Democrat. I outgrew the drugs, sex with my wife was the best I ever had, and my taste in music has broadened considerably. Still a Democrat, though.

As a Woodstock '69 alum I think I understand what you are saying.
And, as noble (in a very good way) as I think your approach is, I cannot hope that we can live in love while so many around us live in hate. We are all different, and in ways that would surprise those who consider themselves different. I believe that those differences are in fact our bond as part of the human family. But it seems that there too many that think otherwise.
Recent events prove that we, as a species, are not evolved enough to understand the strength of the love in your approach.
I also believe there is strength in numbers. I think organized societies get more done and can be more helpful to the individual than not. Obviously, the way we have currently organized our society here in America is not working. Creating new paths (civil rights, for example, which include not just LGBTQ rights or the rights of POC but the rights of every single human) is a vital issue and history shows us that we only get those rights by fighting for them. The system will never "go quietly into that nightmare" to paraphrase Dylan Thomas. Time is NOT on our side. And more importantly, for people of our age, the legacy we leave behind should be one that allows future generations to move forward toward a more loving society and not the opposite.
The aim of your approach I agree with. I just wonder how we will get there.