hippies

[Red October]

do the hippies help the leftist movement? it seems like they've moved away from the activism of the 60's and 70's and now they dont do anything important to further our cause. anyone got some thoughts on this? personally, i dislike most hippies.

[Okocim]

They have a tendency to annoy me, however it's their lifestyle choice, I'm happy for them to get on with it. I don't know any hippies who are massively active other than perhaps turning up [usually late] at protests and kind of chanting half-heartedly then buggering off early - perhaps that's just my experience of them though.

If anything they give out a bit of a bad impression to the movement if all we're seen as doing is sitting about smoking weed (not that I object to weed) by the public.


also, what is with hippy clothes being so fucking expensive?

[Red October]

yeah, i've had experiences like that with hippies. it just makes me sad that we have people like that on the left. they're allowed to live theirl ives as they choose, but i wish they would be a little more productive or involved in the movement instead of being so apathetic when it comes time to do something.

[MolotovLuv]

There are people in every "scene" that don't do shit, are dumbasses or are just rich assholes trying to fit into a certain group (hence the expensive hippy clothes), but there are plenty of hippies out there who do more than a lot of people (and make their own clothes).

A couple reasons why I like hippies:

1) They smoke lots of weed and aren't uptight about hallucinogens, and that's more than fine by me.
2) They usually don't care how you look, smell, etc. as long as your cool with them, so it's not a fucking fashion competition (I've been to punk show's and been harrassed for apparently not looking punk enough, thank's MTV for turning punk into a fucking fashion show, sorry I don't have enough $$ to spend on some Hot Topic bling).

Just because hippies like to dance instead of form a fat mosh pit and spit in people's faces doesn't make them any better/worse than any other group of people. Yes they should be more active, but I think that can be said for any group.
Folks don't hate on hippys, there are more important people to worry about.

[violencia.Proletariat]

Hippies don't do anything. They live a lifestyle.

[Red October]

i dont hate them all, i just dislike alot of them and their attitudes.

[Forward Union]

Moved to learning

[BreadBros]

I dont see whats with the anti-hippy anger. In the 60s hippies were very progressive politically, albeit reformist. As others have said, they have less of a tendency to focus on material issues, which I find cool. They also tend to be fairly open and seems like they would be very accepting of a communist society. I guess most hippies today are rather apolitical, or tend to be into the veganism, peace, lifestyle type things, which sucks. Overall I like them though.

[R_P_A_S]

hahah. man have u ever been to santa cruz, california? its Hippie town! its unreal!

[apathy maybe]

Originally posted by Red October 1922+--> (Red October 1922)do the hippies help the leftist movement? it seems like they've moved away from the activism of the 60's and 70's and now they dont do anything important to further our cause. anyone got some thoughts on this? personally, i dislike most hippies.[/b]Personally I like most hippies (that I have met). They are often philosophical anarchists, they do environmental activist stuff often, they also try and live with as little impact on the Earth as possible (mostly).

(Actually should make a disclaimer, the type of hippy that I am talking about is different to the type of hippy you might be talking about. The hippies that I am talking about are generally young, 'dirty' (though quite often not at all actually), sorta a-political or Green, environmentalist, and lifestylist (they try and live their beliefs). The cleaner variety don't tend to use drugs very often (except alcohol), though the 'ferals' do use marijuana. They tend to like blockading forests and stuff.)


Originally posted by Okocim+--> (Okocim)also, what is with hippy clothes being so fucking expensive?[/b]Real hippies get their clothes from op-shops (thrift shops).


Originally posted by Red October 1922
yeah, i've had experiences like that with hippies. it just makes me sad that we have people like that on the left. they're allowed to live theirl ives as they choose, but i wish they would be a little more productive or involved in the movement instead of being so apathetic when it comes time to do something.What do you do? Turn up to protests then head down to Starbucks for a cuppa? Hope not. Hippies might do much protesting in the open, but they do do stuff (see above).


[email protected]
Hippies don't do anything. They live a lifestyle.Three things, first I guess you do do stuff, care to give us some details (organised your local union meeting, went to a rally (only 6 others turned up but shit happens), bought some cool Nikes (who cares if some poor Indonesian kid has shitty conditions)?

Second, your post is contradictory. I know you might not think dumpster diving is doing anything, but it is reducing a reliance on capitalism, meaning money can be better spend elsewhere. They do similar stuff by living their lifestyle.

Third, as I said above, they do do stuff. They blockade, they protest and they have fun (or at least the ones in Hobart and surrounds do).


Red October 1922
i dont hate them all, i just dislike alot of them and their attitudes.What attitude?

[LuXe]

I never met a hippie :blink:

Damn my stereotypical "society". Im moving to the citiy.

[An archist]

What's wrong with hippies?
I know some hippies that are active in social movements, others that are apathetic, some that don't go to protests, others that are in the front line of rioting.
don't go generalising a whole subculture.

[LoneRed]

they're cool, they're my dealers :)

[bcbm]

A purpose for hippies? I dunno... alternative energy source? They probably burn better than coal with all those dreads and grease.

[LoneRed]

and they are suppliers, they will smoke you out, with no expectation to pay back. HiYa

[Black Dagger]

hippies, do they serve a purpose?

Cannon-fodder? :lol:



Seriously though... <_<


do the hippies help the leftist movement?

The &#39;leftist&#39; movement? Yes.

The communist movement? Hell no.

The reason for the latter is that &#39;hippies&#39; are generally anti-violence/violent revolution, even if they think capitalism is &#39;bad&#39;, &#39;class analysis&#39; (heck even fem/racial/sexual analysis) is not something ive ever heard from a &#39;hippie&#39;, their perspective seems in general to be quite narrowly focused, and not usually centred on actually overthrowing capitalism and the state (even if they might talk about the government or the system), to me they often come off as liberals without the &#39;stuffy-ness&#39;.



it seems like they&#39;ve moved away from the activism of the 60&#39;s and 70&#39;s and now they dont do anything important to further our cause. anyone got some thoughts on this? personally, i dislike most hippies.

I don&#39;t dislike &#39;hippies&#39; for being &#39;hippies&#39;, ive met &#39;hippies&#39; i like and don&#39;t like, they&#39;re not a homogenous group.

As AM mentioned, some &#39;hippies&#39; do actually do worthwhile shit, though the vast majority of this is restricted to enviro stuff.

Though enviro stuff is important, the problem is that enviro stuff usually form the limit of active &#39;hippie&#39; politics, as a general group they have little to no systematic critique of capitalism, nor usually a desire to develop one - that is, they&#39;re content to stay within the enviro ghetto, not branching out and actively supporting or participating in other struggles.

[Psy]

They are disorganized, look at their numbers in Woodstock yet nothing in the US like Paris May 1968 happened (12 million workers on strike, 122 factories occupied and the University occupied).

The National Guard even shot at their ass in Kent State with Nixon saying they got what they deserved, yet the hippies in the US still didn&#39;t call for solidarity with the working class, no barricades were built in the streets, no general strike, no worker occupied any factories. Since hippies (at least in the US) have always been alienated from labor they are close to useless as a revolutionary force. After Kent State conditions were ripe for revolution but since the US mostly had hippies instead of revolutionaries nothing happened.

[Pirate Utopian]

hippies are actaully really apolitical, they just tend to have a somewhat leftist additude.

[BreadBros]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2006 09:19 am
hahah. man have u ever been to santa cruz, california? its Hippie town&#33; its unreal&#33;
Hell yeah&#33; The beach boardwalk is awesome&#33; I love that town&#33; :)

[An archist]

If you&#39;re generalising, maybe.
Though, as I said before, I know some active communist and antifascist hippies

[Clarksist]

but i wish they would be a little more productive or involved in the movement instead of being so apathetic when it comes time to do something.

Because the race riots, mass human be-ins, and the wonderful Hiaght-Ashbury Summer of Love did nothing?

Alright, so they didn&#39;t get much "accomplished". But it showed a period of time when people became excited about actually making change&#33;


In the 60s hippies were very progressive politically, albeit reformist.

They were reformist, but the thing is, they weren&#39;t anti-america. They loved america. The point was to change it so it was better. There is nothing wrong in love a nation&#39;s people, and wanting to change the nation.

-----------------------

I guess the main thing to remember is that hippies are differing people. They may act and dress a certain way, but that doesn&#39;t mean they will crop up the same.

But we can learn something from them, and that is: tune in, turn on, drop out.

[Louis Pio]

in short NO.
Just as I think any lifestyle in itself changes nothing at all whatsoever. Know alot of my old punkfriends would disagree.
This however doesn&#39;t mean I don&#39;t like alot of the people, im just allergic to "lifestyle groups".

[MrDoom]

Utopians, for the most part.

[Psy]

Originally posted by Clarksist+October 26, 2006 08:49 pm--> (Clarksist &#064; October 26, 2006 08:49 pm)Alright, so they didn&#39;t get much "accomplished". But it showed a period of time when people became excited about actually making change&#33;
[/b]
In Paris with just police brutality you got May 1968, with the hippies in the US you had the National Guard shoot at them (with Nixon rubbing it in) and there was nothing close to what happened in Paris.



Clarksist

They were reformist, but the thing is, they weren&#39;t anti-america. They loved america. The point was to change it so it was better. There is nothing wrong in love a nation&#39;s people, and wanting to change the nation.

They were trying to change the US into they myth of it once was, they saw butal imperialism in Vietnam and went after it instead of the system that created it.

[Janus]

No, they haven&#39;t really helped out the leftist movement per se except maybe for establishing some communes or providing us with pot. :lol:
Anyways, most of their lifestylist or transcendentalist stuff is more or less a personal thing and hasn&#39;t done much to actually help out the movement.

[Red October]

i geuss i am overgeneralising. most of the hippiesi know are of the suburban, expensive clothes wearing apathetic/vaguely leftist variety. here in raleigh i haven seen much evidence of a hippie presence in the leftist movement, but that could be because there isnt a whole lot going in raleigh, Nc.

[Vyru]

Though they may prefer to smoke dope than to pick up a gun and fight as comrades, they&#39;re still supporters, (and therefore part of) a leftist movement.

Give the hippies a break, we can learn a lot from them.

[LuXe]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2006 11:07 am
Though they may prefer to smoke dope than to pick up a gun and fight as comrades, they&#39;re still supporters, (and therefore part of) a leftist movement.

Give the hippies a break, we can learn a lot from them.
Like what?

[Marx Lenin Stalin]

The purpose of hippies is to promote the idea to suburban white kids that "yea you TOO can be a radical&#33; Without engaging in any of that heavy reading, activism, leaning part..."

Within a few years most hippies turn into bourgeois liberals and the capitalist media does stories about how they burned out. It&#39;s all a joke, hippies are at best a distraction.

[Pirate Utopian]

jimi hendrix was cool though

[Vyru]

*Shrugs.* They can teach us how to smoke dope properly.

But seriously, stop bad mouthing hippies. They set a lot of examples about breaking free from &#39;the power&#39; and living simply and self sufficiently.

Most of them don&#39;t give a flying fuck about what any other twat thinks of them, but one thing they do care about is the planet and environment, which is an example we should ALL follow.

Vyru

[jack_ryan]

One thing that irritates me about a lot of them is their support for pseudoscience. I know hippies who are into things like "faith" or "energy" healing, alternative medicines (which are usually either worthless, repackaged versions of regular drugs, or can actually do serious harm to you, for example colloidal silver), Atlantean magic crystals, time travel, etc., etc. It seems to them that by going against the norms of traditional science they are "breaking free", but really they&#39;re just being conned by a different set of capitalists who sell snake oils and conspiracy theory books. Not to mention that they are spreading misinformation.

Plus, when the reds show up at a peace rally they spend the whole time giving us dirty looks and whispering to eachother.

[Eastside Revolt]

Hippies in North America are just liberals.

The hippies in West Germany in the 60&#39;s and 70&#39;s were pretty cool though, they used to fight back if the police used brutality to shut them up.

[Lenin's Law]

Originally posted by Black [email protected] 26, 2006 05:19 pm

hippies, do they serve a purpose?

Cannon-fodder? :lol:



Seriously though... <_<


do the hippies help the leftist movement?

The &#39;leftist&#39; movement? Yes.

The communist movement? Hell no.

The reason for the latter is that &#39;hippies&#39; are generally anti-violence/violent revolution, even if they think capitalism is &#39;bad&#39;, &#39;class analysis&#39; (heck even fem/racial/sexual analysis) is not something ive ever heard from a &#39;hippie&#39;, their perspective seems in general to be quite narrowly focused, and not usually centred on actually overthrowing capitalism and the state (even if they might talk about the government or the system), to me they often come off as liberals without the &#39;stuffy-ness&#39;.

:lol: "Cannon fodder"&#33; lol&#33; That made me laugh&#33;

But in all seriousness I think you raise some good points: hippies are not just the "free loving-spirited" types, but they take away what could be revolutionary, class-conscious youth and turn them into psuedo-revolutionary idealists who almost always get "burned out". No one can live in a commune somewhere out in the country forever, there is a limit.

And when they do come back, they turn into complete bourgeois liberals; moaning and groaning about how the left failed them or just laughing it off as a part of "being young and rebellious" Indeed, this is just the kind of false rebellion and false revolutionary that the bourgeois and capitalists love to paint the radical left with - a bunch of "rebel without a cause" young kids, who while good natured, are just plain wrong.

Also as others have pointed out, hippies tend to be concerned with peripheral lifestyle issues (veganism, vegetarianism, animal rights, wearning "funky" clothes, "funky" hairstyles, primitivism, spiritualism, etc) instead of the more serious matters which can really work to change and transform society (ie changing the means of production, socialism)

Instead they have a very individualistic thinking that worships and promotes all this peripheral issues like veganism and largely do not have a class-conscious approach. Thus, hippies are almost always isolated from the working class and again, they are used by reactionary elements inside the working class to paint the radical left as being "not one of us", "not our kind" as by and large hippies tend to be privileged white, yuppie types that have the money (or their daddy&#39;s money) to smoke dope all day at some home or commune.

In short, hippies are not the friends of the serious revolutionary, but a distraction and obstacle to be overcome. They are a nuisance at best, but they cannot be helpful in an attempt to fundamentally transform society.

[apathy maybe]

Originally posted by Lenin&#39;s Law+--> (Lenin&#39;s Law)But in all seriousness I think you raise some good points: hippies are not just the "free loving-spirited" types, but they take away what could be revolutionary, class-conscious youth and turn them into psuedo-revolutionary idealists who almost always get "burned out". No one can live in a commune somewhere out in the country forever, there is a limit.[/b]
Stereotyping is not good ... Not all hippies live in communes. Actually on &#39;burn out&#39;, I have found that &#39;Leninist&#39; organisations tend to do this as well. So I wonder if it really is the &#39;hippyness&#39;?


Originally posted by Lenin&#39;s Law+--> (Lenin&#39;s Law)And when they do come back, they turn into complete bourgeois liberals; moaning and groaning about how the left failed them or just laughing it off as a part of "being young and rebellious" Indeed, this is just the kind of false rebellion and false revolutionary that the bourgeois and capitalists love to paint the radical left with - a bunch of "rebel without a cause" young kids, who while good natured, are just plain wrong.[/b]Umm... I can&#39;t say I have seen this before, but I tend to think that it is not just hippies, but all Leftists.


Originally posted by Lenin&#39;s Law
Also as others have pointed out, hippies tend to be concerned with peripheral lifestyle issues (veganism, vegetarianism, animal rights, wearning "funky" clothes, "funky" hairstyles, primitivism, spiritualism, etc) instead of the more serious matters which can really work to change and transform society (ie changing the means of production, socialism)Not that there is anything wrong with this, after all it is not affecting you what they do.


Lenin&#39;s [email protected]
Instead they have a very individualistic thinking that worships and promotes all this peripheral issues like veganism and largely do not have a class-conscious approach. Thus, hippies are almost always isolated from the working class and again, they are used by reactionary elements inside the working class to paint the radical left as being "not one of us", "not our kind" as by and large hippies tend to be privileged white, yuppie types that have the money (or their daddy&#39;s money) to smoke dope all day at some home or commune.OK, I agree with the first part, I see your point about "not one of us" and "not our kind", I think that you are full of shit when you talk about "privileged white, yuppie types ...". Personally I know a number of hippies, none of them are "privileged white, yuppie types" who "smoke dope all day". Some of them do smoke dope (not all), most of them are white (not all), some of them do come from privileged families (not many). You argument can easily be used (and is used) against "communists", oh they are just rich kids who don&#39;t get enough money from their daddies. Middle class white kids who go to uni. I don&#39;t believe it about communists (&#39;cause it is not true), and it is not true about hippies either.


LL
In short, hippies are not the friends of the serious revolutionary, but a distraction and obstacle to be overcome. They are a nuisance at best, but they cannot be helpful in an attempt to fundamentally transform society.Well, I would say that I seriously believe in the need for revolution, I am friends with hippies. Their methods (lifestylist and environmental protesting) have been as successful as yours. After all, I don&#39;t see a communist society anywhere about, can you?

[uber-liberal]

Originally posted by Red October [email protected] 25, 2006 11:00 pm
do the hippies help the leftist movement? it seems like they&#39;ve moved away from the activism of the 60&#39;s and 70&#39;s and now they dont do anything important to further our cause. anyone got some thoughts on this? personally, i dislike most hippies.
From where I sit, hippies are a central component to the leftist movement. And by hippie I mean an actual HIPPIE, not some damn trustafarian driving around in whatever egocentric status symbol Mumsy and Dadsy decided to send them off "into the world" (college=incubation) with.
Hippies were at the vanguard of changing the world&#39;s conciousness back in the Vietnam Era. It was these leftist students who helped bring eastern concepts like buddhism, yoga and meditation to the societal mainstream. These philosophies have some very important lessons for the aspiring Marxist/Engelist. Read the 4 Noble Truths and tell me Ho Chi Mihn and Mao didn&#39;t have these in mind. Maybe if Stalin would have studied Eastern thought and philosophy...


One thing that irritates me about a lot of them is their support for pseudoscience. I know hippies who are into things like "faith" or "energy" healing, alternative medicines (which are usually either worthless, repackaged versions of regular drugs, or can actually do serious harm to you, for example colloidal silver), Atlantean magic crystals, time travel, etc., etc. It seems to them that by going against the norms of traditional science they are "breaking free", but really they&#39;re just being conned by a different set of capitalists who sell snake oils and conspiracy theory books. Not to mention that they are spreading misinformation.
Uh, pseudoscience and folk remedies are the foundation of modern science, lest your history fails you. Why do you think people chew yew bark when they have a headache? Because it contains aspirin.
Think of it like this: we as the whole of western society have left far more valuable information forgotten in our past that we are just recently trying to relearn than we can really afford to lose. No knowledge is bad, but dismissing any knowledge as useless is dangerous and eventually detrimental.


...they take away what could be revolutionary, class-conscious youth and turn them into psuedo-revolutionary idealists who almost always get "burned out".
Pseudo-revolutionaries... maybe if they laid off the bong that might not be a problem. Ambition and herb tend to mix like water and oil in my experience.
Besides, where would we be without ideals? I say let them have their idealism, and let&#39;s not destroy that, but gently show them that compromising ideals with reality will win out in the end. Pragmatism with a side order of idealism.
And burn-out happens from too much insincerety and over-indulgence. Again, laying off the pipe might help, as well asputting your muscle where your mouth is. If hippies want to start a commune and ask you as a communist/socialist/Marxist etc... your thoughts, point out the Israeli kabutz system. Point out Hillary Clinton&#39;s book "It Takes a Village" as a step in the right direction (yeah, yeah, yeah, I know...). Encourage these comrades in ideology in their pursuit of the ideal.

[Ricardo]

There were militant or at least politically active hippies, there still are, look at the Yippies or the SDS. A lot of SDSers were Hippies, and the Weathermen, and the Yippies definately were politically active. They organized mass protests, like at the pentagon. They also fought back against the police. I&#39;m not saying all hippies were extremely active, but at least they lived by their beliefs, instead of cooperating with the system.

[EwokUtopia]

So whats with all the generalized clique stereotypes? Are we all still in High School? Who is a hippie and whos not?

[kaaos_af]

People who call themselves hippies aren&#39;t the real thing. The real people don&#39;t call themselves hippies at all. Who would? My mum was what many would call a hippy back in the 70&#39;s- they never called themselves that.

I find them immensely inspiring. A whole generation of people getting sick of mainstream bullshit and breaking free. That&#39;s a revolution. If only it had gobe further.

[Hegemonicretribution]

To consider a hippie movement as a unified thing is to misunderstand pretty much everything hippy. Personally my lifestyle (until recently) could have been considered more towards the hippie end of the spectrum...however that does not mean my politics were the same as people that I have lived in similar circumstances with.

The word hippie represents an idea, and it would seem that we all associate different ideas with this word. At the base level "hippie" is not a specific term that can tell us much about individual members of the so called group.

If you are going to pre-judge people based on the sub-culture and clothes choice hten perhaps it is you that should question your position in the left.

[An archist]

^
thanks for that comment

[AlwaysAnarchy]

Of course I support the hippies man, I AM one&#33; Hippies have created a counter-culture, counter to capitalism and many have refused to work for the man in the rat race 9-5. Many have embraced a new lifestyle and a new way of doings things that work outside capitalist culture. So in that way hippies are def helping the left&#33;&#33;

So be good to them and they will to you&#33; :)

[Black Dagger]

Dis-connecting from capitalism in and of itself does not &#39;help the left&#39;, living on a commune does not contribute to the movement that seeks to abolish the present state of things, dis-connecting is a passive self-serving stance.

Whilst &#39;hippies&#39; are &#39;embracing&#39; a &#39;new lifestyle&#39; away from capitalism, the rest of us are still struggling to overthrow it, leaving the barricade to enjoy yourself in the forest contributes ZERO to this struggle.

[LoneRed]

I agree with the above post. They are useless to the struggle for real action, for real liberation

[Marx Lenin Stalin]

fucking hippies.

[Rollo]

A lot of hippies are on the dole / welfare and are stealing from the working class.

[Entrails Konfetti]

It&#39;s like asking if Punks are useful, and it&#39;s just a music scene or lifestyle.
It really depends on the individual.

[apathy maybe]

Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2006 04:09 am
A lot of hippies are on the dole / welfare and are stealing from the working class.
LOL. Does the fact that I don&#39;t have a job, that I am a student, that I am getting loads of cash from the government mean that I am stealing from the working class?

That is funny.

[which doctor]

Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2006 12:09 pm
A lot of hippies are on the dole / welfare and are stealing from the working class.
How are they stealing from the working-class?

[Pirate Utopian]

hippies annoy me, except for jimi&#33;
besides hippies are not working class so when they have welfare they take it from someone who is.

[LuXe]

I dont know... They may be theoretically stealing some. However this is unavoidable for everyone. I would say recieving welfare is more "stealing" (taking back, lol) from the government then stealing from the workers, although the workers pay tax to the government. The rich also pays taxes, and natural resources and big buisness pours in money on themselves, thereby sharing the crumbs with the workers, who pays taxes. Boy this is complicated.

[which doctor]

Originally posted by Big [email protected] 03, 2006 05:31 pm
besides hippies are not working class
Don&#39;t make generalizations like that.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2006 03:09 am
A lot of hippies are on the dole / welfare and are stealing from the working class.
Gettin government benefits or welfare is not &#39;stealing&#39; from anyone.

[Rollo]

Originally posted by Black Dagger+November 04, 2006 10:03 pm--> (Black Dagger &#064; November 04, 2006 10:03 pm)
[email protected] 04, 2006 03:09 am
A lot of hippies are on the dole / welfare and are stealing from the working class.
Gettin government benefits or welfare is not &#39;stealing&#39; from anyone. [/b]
Yeah because paying taxes doesn&#39;t exist right?


Actual question:

Help me here, where am I going wrong?


http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/1831/1574gc5.jpg

[which doctor]

Rollo, if all the "hippies on the dole" stopped takin&#39; welfare then taxes would not go down for the working class. Besides I could say that people who send their kids to public school are stealin&#39; from the working class when they really aren&#39;t.

[Rollo]

Someone explained it to me just now. Which was a lot better then just saying " you are wrong ". I made a mistake, only human :P.

[Black Dagger]

Moreover, EVERYBODY pays taxes, remember the GST? Also ALOT of working class people receive benefits from the government... (nail in coffin).

[Rollo]

Originally posted by Black [email protected] 05, 2006 01:27 am
Moreover, EVERYBODY pays taxes, remember the GST? Also ALOT of working class people receive benefits from the government... (nail in coffin).
I nailed my own coffin. Long ago.

[Black Dagger]

Fine, i set it on fire, like Louie would have wanted.

[JimFar]

Although I was just a young tyke at the time, I am old enough to remember the original hippies of the 1960s. And leftwing activists were making the same sorts of complaints about them, that I am reading on this board. I guess the more things change, the more . . . And I even read a complaint about hippies not working and accepting government handouts&#33; Wow, that brings back memories. I would submit that all this complaining stereotyping and complaining about lifestyle choices does little more than to divide workers.

[Rodack]

Originally posted by Red October [email protected] 25, 2006 11:00 pm
do the hippies help the leftist movement? it seems like they&#39;ve moved away from the activism of the 60&#39;s and 70&#39;s and now they dont do anything important to further our cause. anyone got some thoughts on this? personally, i dislike most hippies.
I believe hippies are useful idiots and should be exploited to out advantage

[AlwaysAnarchy]

Originally posted by Rodack+November 05, 2006 05:50 pm--> (Rodack @ November 05, 2006 05:50 pm)
Red October [email protected] 25, 2006 11:00 pm
do the hippies help the leftist movement? it seems like they&#39;ve moved away from the activism of the 60&#39;s and 70&#39;s and now they dont do anything important to further our cause. anyone got some thoughts on this? personally, i dislike most hippies.
I believe hippies are useful idiots and should be exploited to out advantage [/b]
That&#39;s not really nice or helpful.... :o

[Enragé]

define "hippy"

as i see it they are nice people, relaxed, have their heart in the right place
but are too utopian and generally "grow out of it", i.e its a phase in a (petty) bourgeois&#39; life

[which doctor]

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 12:56 pm
as i see it they are nice people, relaxed, have their heart in the right place
but are too utopian and generally "grow out of it", i.e its a phase in a (petty) bourgeois&#39; life
You can pretty much say that for any college student who gets into politics to "change the world." They usually burn out and become yuppies.

[AlwaysAnarchy]

Originally posted by FoB+November 05, 2006 07:12 pm--> (FoB @ November 05, 2006 07:12 pm)
[email protected] 05, 2006 12:56 pm
as i see it they are nice people, relaxed, have their heart in the right place
but are too utopian and generally "grow out of it", i.e its a phase in a (petty) bourgeois&#39; life
You can pretty much say that for any college student who gets into politics to "change the world." They usually burn out and become yuppies. [/b]
So the right wing generalizations of us being just that IS true?&#33;?

If so what is to stop us from following the same road?

[violencia.Proletariat]

Originally posted by PeacefulAnarchist+November 05, 2006 03:17 pm--> (PeacefulAnarchist @ November 05, 2006 03:17 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 07:12 pm

[email protected] 05, 2006 12:56 pm
as i see it they are nice people, relaxed, have their heart in the right place
but are too utopian and generally "grow out of it", i.e its a phase in a (petty) bourgeois&#39; life
You can pretty much say that for any college student who gets into politics to "change the world." They usually burn out and become yuppies.
So the right wing generalizations of us being just that IS true?&#33;?

If so what is to stop us from following the same road? [/b]
Who is "us"? I believe FOB was referring to petty bourgeois students. Most of us here are not petty bourgeois.

[AlwaysAnarchy]

Well isn&#39;t this site mostly consisting of young people?? I would think many of them go to school either high school or college?? Or is this incorrect?

And FOB said "pretty much ALL college students"; he didn&#39;t specifically say a certain type of college student, he said they turn into petty bourgeois later on in life. Unless what you are saying is that you believe all college students are petty bourgeois??

[which doctor]

Originally posted by violencia.Proletariat+November 05, 2006 02:19 pm--> (violencia.Proletariat @ November 05, 2006 02:19 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 03:17 pm

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 07:12 pm

[email protected] 05, 2006 12:56 pm
as i see it they are nice people, relaxed, have their heart in the right place
but are too utopian and generally "grow out of it", i.e its a phase in a (petty) bourgeois&#39; life
You can pretty much say that for any college student who gets into politics to "change the world." They usually burn out and become yuppies.
So the right wing generalizations of us being just that IS true?&#33;?

If so what is to stop us from following the same road?
Who is "us"? I believe FOB was referring to petty bourgeois students. Most of us here are not petty bourgeois. [/b]
Yes, I was referring to some of the more bourgeois students who received their "political awakening" at college. They are the socially consience bohemian types who still receive &#036;&#036;&#036; from their parents.

[AlwaysAnarchy]

Originally posted by FoB+November 05, 2006 07:30 pm--> (FoB @ November 05, 2006 07:30 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 02:19 pm

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 03:17 pm

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 07:12 pm

[email protected] 05, 2006 12:56 pm
as i see it they are nice people, relaxed, have their heart in the right place
but are too utopian and generally "grow out of it", i.e its a phase in a (petty) bourgeois&#39; life
You can pretty much say that for any college student who gets into politics to "change the world." They usually burn out and become yuppies.
So the right wing generalizations of us being just that IS true?&#33;?

If so what is to stop us from following the same road?
Who is "us"? I believe FOB was referring to petty bourgeois students. Most of us here are not petty bourgeois.
Yes, I was referring to some of the more bourgeois students who received their "political awakening" at college. They are the socially consience bohemian types who still receive &#036;&#036;&#036; from their parents. [/b]
But dude, I don&#39;t see the point in bashing young people that turn revolutionary whie in college or for that matter...wherever&#33; It&#39;s not easy to break through the chain of propaganda in the media and in your schools and for anyone to become a revolutionary I think that&#39;s great&#33; :D Who cares what their parents do or where they received their "awakening"

It&#39;s the fact that they are awakened at all that matters&#33;&#33;

[which doctor]

Originally posted by PeacefulAnarchist+November 05, 2006 02:35 pm--> (PeacefulAnarchist &#064; November 05, 2006 02:35 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 07:30 pm

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 02:19 pm

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 03:17 pm

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 07:12 pm

[email protected] 05, 2006 12:56 pm
as i see it they are nice people, relaxed, have their heart in the right place
but are too utopian and generally "grow out of it", i.e its a phase in a (petty) bourgeois&#39; life
You can pretty much say that for any college student who gets into politics to "change the world." They usually burn out and become yuppies.
So the right wing generalizations of us being just that IS true?&#33;?

If so what is to stop us from following the same road?
Who is "us"? I believe FOB was referring to petty bourgeois students. Most of us here are not petty bourgeois.
Yes, I was referring to some of the more bourgeois students who received their "political awakening" at college. They are the socially consience bohemian types who still receive &#036;&#036;&#036; from their parents.
But dude, I don&#39;t see the point in bashing young people that turn revolutionary whie in college or for that matter...wherever&#33; It&#39;s not easy to break through the chain of propaganda in the media and in your schools and for anyone to become a revolutionary I think that&#39;s great&#33; :D Who cares what their parents do or where they received their "awakening"

It&#39;s the fact that they are awakened at all that matters&#33;&#33; [/b]
Many of them aren&#39;t revolutionaries, they&#39;re "socially conscience" liberals who support the green party, drink fair-trade coffee, participate in drum circles, and smoke pot. It&#39;s too much of a lifestyle identity and not enough of a revolutionary theory. They jump right into politics and burn out like their hippie predecessors.

[violencia.Proletariat]

Originally posted by [email protected] 05, 2006 03:35 pm

But dude, I don&#39;t see the point in bashing young people that turn revolutionary whie in college or for that matter...wherever&#33; It&#39;s not easy to break through the chain of propaganda in the media and in your schools and for anyone to become a revolutionary I think that&#39;s great&#33; :D


They don&#39;t "turn" revolutionary. They become a "communist" for a few years then graduate and it all changes.


Who cares what their parents do or where they received their "awakening"

It&#39;s very important. If you remember the famous Marx quote, being determines conciousness. While this might not apply to every individual in does apply to the bourgeois/petty bourgeois class as a whole.

[Enragé]

Originally posted by FoB+November 05, 2006 07:12 pm--> (FoB &#064; November 05, 2006 07:12 pm)
[email protected] 05, 2006 12:56 pm
as i see it they are nice people, relaxed, have their heart in the right place
but are too utopian and generally "grow out of it", i.e its a phase in a (petty) bourgeois&#39; life
You can pretty much say that for any college student who gets into politics to "change the world." They usually burn out and become yuppies. [/b]
true, sadly

(but i promise you i wont burn out ;) and if i do, put a gun to my head and shoot my brains out, not like i&#39;d have any left by then)


So the right wing generalizations of us being just that IS true?&#33;?

If so what is to stop us from following the same road?

no its not true

since we have an actual theoretical foundation for what we believe, and we take productive action founded in material reality based on that theoretical foundation, whereas the general hippie just smokes weed and is all "yo dude, give peace a chance, party&#33;"
at least thats the idea i get when i think of a "hippie"


Who is "us"? I believe FOB was referring to petty bourgeois students. Most of us here are not petty bourgeois.

no he was referring to college students in general, who are not necessarily (petty) bourgeois.



Well isn&#39;t this site mostly consisting of young people?? I would think many of them go to school either high school or college?? Or is this incorrect?

true

but what FoB said is a well known fact
most who are radical early in life tend to in the end conform, mostly because these arent revolutionary times (in most places at least)

that doesnt mean if you&#39;re a student you WILL become a yuppie, it just means that most do.

I say, prove him wrong PA, and dont go that way.
I wont either. (though technically im not a student yet)


Yes, I was referring to some of the more bourgeois students who received their "political awakening" at college. They are the socially consience bohemian types who still receive &#036;&#036;&#036; from their parents.

oh right i thought you were talking about students in general. :blush:


It&#39;s the fact that they are awakened at all that matters&#33;&#33;

the problem is that this awakening often amounts to very little, mostly because these kind of bourgeois students (i.e with rich mommy and daddy) are not working class, therefore the material circumstances in which they reside are so that it propells them away from revolutionary ideology rather than towards it.
Put simply, they lack the class background.
Now this is not to say that someone from a bourgeois background cannot become truly revolutionary, its just alot less likely


Many of them aren&#39;t revolutionaries, they&#39;re "socially conscience" liberals who support the green party, drink fair-trade coffee, participate in drum circles, and smoke pot. It&#39;s too much of a lifestyle identity and not enough of a revolutionary theory. They jump right into politics and burn out like their hippie predecessors.

yup
thats what i think of when i think "hippie"

[BreadBros]

Well, its nice to know stereotypes are alive and well. I for one commend "hippies". The hippy social movements of the 60s were incredibly important and brought civil rights struggles, women&#39;s rights struggles, anti-imperialism and anti-war struggles to the forefront of political America and had profound changes for American social fabric. So far this is far much more than the peanut gallery commenting here has accomplished.

Of course people "burn out" and "join the system". Hearing a Marxist (Im guessing) make this critique is mind-boggling. The pressures of capitalist society are such that very few can avoid the pressures of having to work and make a living. Adolescence and school-age in general puts less pressure on people, so attempting to break out of societal pressures in that time period is somewhat possible, but criticizing someone for having to go to work and feed their family is anti-worker and fucking reactionary. The fact that you guys think all hippies are bourgeois shows you know nothing about American social history and have completely bought into reactionary garbage propaganda.

I would also recommend you all either grow up, or if thats not possible, get some medical help because you all seem to have some childish desire to show how "tough" you are compared to hippies who are into "peace" :rolleyes:. Right, because desiring peace instead of warfare is some "liberal" or "hippy bullshit" and all working-class people really want is violence and "fucking shit up". I seriously wonder how many of you are here because of true adherance to leftist theory and how many of you are just here out of some teenage lifestyle choice.

[Enragé]

The pressures of capitalist society are such that very few can avoid the pressures of having to work and make a living. Adolescence and school-age in general puts less pressure on people, so attempting to break out of societal pressures in that time period is somewhat possible,

which is exactly my point, society propells you, in these unrevolutionary times, into such a direction


but criticizing someone for having to go to work and feed their family is anti-worker and fucking reactionary

i dont criticize them for that
you can work and feed your family and be revolutionary left
in fact those are "our" people

what im saying is that they often give up all their ideas and become some stiff in a suit


you all seem to have some childish desire to show how "tough" you are compared to hippies who are into "peace"

no
what i said was hippies are utopian, which also contributes to their burning out

im not utopian


Right, because desiring peace instead of warfare is some "liberal" or "hippy bullshit" and all working-class people really want is violence and "fucking shit up".

no
being a pacifist in the sense that you out of principle reject any use of force is inherently counterproductive, because that option must be open.

I see you have a flag of the CNT/FAI as your avatar
Imagine they were hippies
"What? Fight of the fascist coup? No, no&#33; Thats not good, lets go stick flowers in their rifles" (<-- which is a beautiful symbolic thing to do, but in certain circumstances not exactly REALISTIC, which is my whole point)

[BreadBros]

i dont criticize them for that
you can work and feed your family and be revolutionary left
in fact those are "our" people

what im saying is that they often give up all their ideas and become some stiff in a suit

And what I&#39;m saying is thats a false stereotype pushed forward by the elite. You&#39;re seriously telling me that all those millions of youth and adolescents across the country who could be classified as hippies in the 60s suddenly became bourgeois suits? You seriously want me to believe that all those thousands of working-class kids at state schools like Kent State protesting for peace somehow all became corporate suits? Did the hippies have some kind of miraculous class-transcending powers that allowed them all to do this? No, the reality is that the majority of them are probably still working working-class jobs today.

As for giving up their ideas, I&#39;m not sure they did. I tend to see a shitload of old boomer-aged people at anti-war protests and the such even today. What is more likely to have happened is that it appears to you as if they gave up their beliefs, because the 70s and 80s were a period of reaction where the type of popular opposition that existed in the 60s just wasnt able to happen. Of course, the elite doesnt want you to realize this, so of course they propagate stereotypes in the media and popular culture of hippies being bourgeois useless pot-smokers all in the hopes that their opposition wont be repeated any time soon.


no
what i said was hippies are utopian, which also contributes to their burning out

im not utopian

Really? Its fascinating how some "utopians" managed to lead a mass social movement that ended an imperialist war, challenged traditional racist and sexist norms and re-evaluated the entire history of the Left for better or worse. What a bunch of utopians huh? Just sitting around smoking weed all day? :rolleyes: I&#39;m glad we&#39;re different.


no
being a pacifist in the sense that you out of principle reject any use of force is inherently counterproductive, because that option must be open.

Peace is not equivalent to pacifism. I didn&#39;t hear very many people here commenting on pacifism, I heard them criticizing calls for peace. If you were to bother to take a cursory glance at a history book you would know that the calls for peace were made to end an imperialist war. And that the calls for pacifism were made in regard to non-participation in an imperialist army. Obviously pacifism as a total philosophy has been proven to be wrong. However, I&#39;m guessing most hippies weren&#39;t as concerned with sitting around and theorizing about the totality of class struggle, they were concerned with immediate material concerns: an imperialist war, segregation of races, sexism. A far better critique of hippies would be that for many of them their opposition to the war came from a somewhat national-chauvinist stance, that is, focusing more on American soldier deaths in the war than the oppression of the Vietnamese people. Regardless, your abstract theorizations are worthless. Its the same as when anarchists sit back and ahistorically criticize Maoists or Leninists for being "nasty" or violent in third-world anti-imperialist struggles. Unless you are in the jungle with a gun, or in the streets opposing the war then your opinion is completely abstract to actual reality.


I see you have a flag of the CNT/FAI as your avatar
Imagine they were hippies
"What? Fight of the fascist coup? No, no&#33; Thats not good, lets go stick flowers in their rifles" (<-- which is a beautiful symbolic thing to do, but in certain circumstances not exactly REALISTIC, which is my whole point)

A completely ahistorical comparison. The CNT-FAI was engaged in a civil war. Hippies were engaged in reformist mass social movements. Actions are borne out of material conditions, not abstract pre-thought out philosophy. Government repression wasn&#39;t to the point of necessitating bearing arms during the 60s for the most part. If it had its impossible to say what would have happened. Likely the movement would have collapsed although some segments of the population would likely have been radicalized into using violence. In fact, certain groups in the 60s, especially racially oppressed groups like the Black Panthers, DID feel that physical oppression from police and the state necessitating taking arms and they did, despite the fact that they were also allies of the anti-war movement that you disparage as being equivalent to pacifism. The point is that most of you here aren&#39;t offering any real critique of the 60s social movement, you are just reiterating reactionary diatribe.

[Orange Juche]

Originally posted by Red October [email protected] 25, 2006 07:00 pm
t seems like they&#39;ve moved away from the activism of the 60&#39;s and 70&#39;s and now they dont do anything important to further our cause. anyone got some thoughts on this?
They didn&#39;t move away from activism.

They just support Howard Dean and John Kerry, and if you disagree, they tell you you "have" to support the Democrats because thats "the only realistic option" and "anything else is helping Bush."

And a handful of them are *adventurous* enough to be in the capitalist Green Party.

[Guns of Brixton]

I lived in the San Francisco Bay Area in the 60&#39;s and 70&#39;s and went to school at Berkeley in the early 70&#39;s. That is interesting because of the close proximity at that time of early hippie movement (centered in San Francisco) and a political activist upsurge (centered in Berkeley).

The hippie movement then fairly consciously attempted to raise the movement to the level of theory. They said this:

People don&#39;t change by talk. Politics doesn&#39;t change things. The thing is to change people&#39;s life styles, withdraw from the dominant culture, form an counter culture and make revolution by focusing on social trandformation. Talking about revolution just turns people off. It&#39;s not about talking and theorizing, but about doing. Transform people first and the world will follow.

It was pretty explicitly understood that there were two different ways proposed to make revolution:

1) Social revolution represented by the hippie movement (centered in San Francisco).
2) Political revolutin represented by the student radicals (centered in Berkeley).

The hippies thought they were going to change the world.

I think that there is a philosophical core to hippies that is oriented toward, in their view, revolution by thoroughly rejecting the dominant culture, transforming ourselves within and then winning by establishing a new culture based on love, peace and enlightenment. The clearest expression of all this was the back to the land and communal movement in the early and mid 70&#39;s.

That all failed, of course, in the sense that they didn&#39;t make a revolution. But more conscious hippies will still say that the political movement failed as well.

I think it was and is all petty-bourgeois. The children of the petty bourgeoisie, intellegensia and managerial classes were all in movement at the time in reaction to the vietnam war primarily and the general economic and social displacements of the time. The hippie movement then a way for many people to maintain some kind of psychological integrety by rejecting the sharp and obvious evil of us imperialism and a hipocrytical society without having to go directly against the state.

[Patchd]

I may hold a stereotypical view of hippies, because I don&#39;t encounter any where I live (only chavs), but do most of them actually work?

[P.L.U.C.K.]

arr i like eating hippies :lol:

[MarxSchmarx]

One should never generalize about hippies.

I learned this when I once ran into hippies who considered themselves politically conservative. I think a lot of them were pro-lifers and that made them swallow a lot of the conservative potion. It was bizarre hanging out with them.

[RGacky3]

The question of does so-and-so group of people serve a purpose, is a very strangly put question. People don&#39;t exist for a purpose, people exist to enjoy their life, not for some purpose that others can use.

[RGacky3]

doublt post sorry