THE MYTH OF THE GREATEST GENERATION
JIM SMITH, PORTSIDE - They stopped a war, ended racial segregation, set off an explosion of creativity in arts and music, and changed the world. The World War II generation? Think again. It was the much maligned generation of the 60s that did all this, and more.
While we respect the generation of our fathers and grandfathers, we cannot pretend that their achievements during WWII had the breath or depth of the achievements of the 60s generation of their sons and daughters. Every nation invents myths about itself. Some of the biggest whoppers have to do with World War II. It's true that the generation called the greatest fought fascism and were on the winning side. Yet 80 percent of the war against Germany was fought on the eastern front by the Soviet Union. The Russians, beginning in 1941, fought, retreated, and ultimately overcame the greatest war machine in the world, the German army. The U.S. and the British fought on the European continent against the Germans for scarcely 11 months. The U.S. did bear the brunt in the Pacific against a much inferior foe, Japan. That engagement ended not in glory, but in the shame of using atomic weapons against a civilian population for the only time in history.
Of course the WWII generation should be praised for playing a role in the defeat of fascism, but here at home they left racial segregation and Jim Crow laws untouched, and allowed home-grown fascism in the guise of McCarthyism to grow into the biggest threat to our civil liberties of all time, the Bush regime notwithstanding.
Why is the 60s generation the greatest? Because it tore down a lot of walls that needed tearing down. The Freedom Riders - both Black and white - invaded Mississippi without the support of the U.S. Army or National Guard. Some were killed, many were beaten. Yet they were the vanguard of a movement that succeeded in changing laws, and the way people think. They exhibited just as much courage and heroism as did many WWII troops being ordered to advance on enemy positions.
The same thing happened in the fields and barrios of the Southwest. Tens of thousands joined Cesar Chavez's struggle for the rights of farmworkers. And in the cities, mass marches, strikes and demonstrations did for Mexican-Americans and Puerto Ricans what the civil rights movement did for Blacks.
Gay Liberation made the headlines on June 28, 1968 when gay and transgender people stood up to police harassment at the Stonewall Inn in New York.
The Women's movement flowed from millions of women entering the workforce in the 60s, and from women intellectuals taking on the male establishment.
The American Indian Movement was reminding the rest of us that they had not all been victims of genocide and were again capable of fighting for their land and traditions.
The student movement began at UC Berkeley in the early 60s with militant demonstrations against the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), and went on to fight for free speech on campus. . .
The 60s generation made one mistake, and it was a whopper. We thought the millennium had arrived, that the Age of Aquarius was upon us, where peace would replace war and love would replace hate. We underestimated those who had a class interest in keeping millions working meaningless jobs to feed their burgeoning profits.
In large parts of the U.S., especially the mid-west and the south, the 60s cultural revolution had hardly penetrated. Here a love-it-or- leave-it silent majority remained that could easily be manipulated by conniving politicians and corporations. . . .
In the end, the 60s generation had stopped a war, made racism a dirty word, and showed us how to dream of peace, equality and a better world. We may not have set the world free, but our greatness lies in the fact that we tried

10 Comments:
Revision, revision, revision. Every polemicist distorts events to serve his own agenda. Fact is, most historically significant acts are performed by individuals for their own reasons; reasons that seem good to them at the time. How that affects the wider world, and how much it matters is subject to endless reinterpretation forever after.
speaking of revisionism, what happened to the three comments that once preceded the one above?
Not swollen-headed enough with delusions of their own grandeur, the boomer demographic now wants to usurp the mantle of "Greatest Generation" for itself. Sheesh, what fucking hubris you Woodstockies are possessed of.
Since the three missing posts turned out to be really of a piece, we will try again:
The victories of the sixties were the crest of a progressive wave that began almost two generations earlier.
>How easy is it to dismiss the women's suffrage movement that culminated in ratification of the 19th Amendment on August 18, 1920?
>What of Asa Philip Randolph and the Pullman Porter strike of 1925?
>Did not the black pride movement have antecedents with Marcus Garvey's founding of the Universal Negro Improvement Association in 1914?
>What about the fights to prevent child labor?
> What about the union movement?
""---40 hour week?
""---minimum wage?
How long a list is necessary to make the point?
What really is the truth?
"History is hard to know because of all the hired bull shit, but even without being sure of 'history' it seems entirely reasonable to think that every now and then the energy of a whole generation comes to a head in a long fine flash, for reasons that nobody really understands at the time---and which never explain, in retrospect, what actually happened."
---Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas Hunter S Thompson
If nothing else, the good doctor's book stands as an indictment of the sixties generation for failing to continue on:
"And that, I think, was the handle---that sense of inevitable victory over the forces of Old and Evil. Not in any mean or military sense; we didn't need that. Our energy simple would prevail. There was no point in fighting---on our side or theirs. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave...
So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of eyes you can almost see the high water mater mark---that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back."
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas Hunter S Thompson
What happened to the three comments is that when Sam cross-posted this article to the "Underviews" sub-page, the Undernews comments disappeared. This happens over and over and all the conspiracy nuts go crazy every time. It's a problem with the software.
It's also a problem with Sam, in that he apparently doesn't care about, or perhaps even approves of, the effect.
He once noted that reader comments used to consist of factual corrections; he seemed to be mourning the increase in political comments.
Particularly those that don't toe the approved 'progressivist' party line; and frankly, I'm not really sure anymore just what the term 'progressive' as it's bruited about on this site by its supposed adherents even means, most of the commenters don't really seem to either, if their posts are any demonstration of the muddle-headedness of their philosophy (a probably too-grandiose term for the farrago of conspiracy-mongering and racists-under-every-rock ranting I see with discouraging frequency here).
not to mention the apparent lack of ability to defend or define their ideas with any degree of thought or clarity; when taken to task, the best most of them seem to be able to offer by way of reply is some variant of "fuck you, shut the fuck up and get off of this site if you disagree with, or question anything you've read her, or anything i think".
The 'Greatest Generation' sure as all get-out doesn't seem to have spawned a generation of comparably 'great' intellects, it would seem.
I personally find it rather curious that when one accesses the archived stories, the 'Undernews' header disappears after about the first four months worth of material. All archived material then comes up under the various sub-heads (City Desk, Eco, Flotsam & Jetsam, Mideast, etc.). And the comments from the original 'Undernews' page that the stories appeared in have not been 'folded into' the sub-head pages. They are simply not there. I reference the archived material frequently for this site, and I can tell you that up until recently, this event was not the case. I don't know about conspiracy, but something fishy does indeed appear to be going on. Any suggestions?
One thing's for sure; I don't think it can any longer be credibly denied that Mr. Smith definitely *does* delete and censor comments from Undernews, and not just for reasons stemming from legal concerns either... I find it very hard to take seriously any longer his championing of the First Amendment, in light of little hypocrises such as that, so frankly it doesn't really flabbergast me as much as it does some readers here that he continues to flog mainstream hacks such as John Edwards, et al., as opposed to genuinely independent and alternative Presidential candidates. Too many years inside the Beltway would seem to have taken their toll; but that's not at all unusual with these self-styled "Sixties Activist" sellouts, now, is it?
Post a Comment
<< Home