A Sad Anniversary

[latefordinner]

Perhaps it was an excuse to party for you, but it was also a watershed moment for the history of radical politics in the US. It's all fine and good to sit back and be crotchety about naive the kids were, but the late 1960s was probably the closest the US has ever come since the civil war to widespread insurrection against the government.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps it was an excuse to party for you, but it was also a watershed moment for the history of radical politics in the US. It's all fine and good to sit back and be crotchety about naive the kids were, but the late 1960s was probably the closest the US has ever come since the civil war to widespread insurrection against the government.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is quite clearly true. However the reality of it was much closer to "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" than it was to actually wanting to change anything for the vast majority. I never made it to the West Coast back then, so I cant speak with first hand knowledge about them (except the ones who came to Woodstock), but the east coast/Columbia based group was far more focused on the benefits than on the friends. The image of politically aware and sensitive hippy's walking around with "Das Kapital" in one pocket and "Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test" in the other is highly romanticized and great for Peter Boyle's, Peter Fondas and Jack Nicholsons careers, but it is far from the reality.

[kyleb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought Phil's argument was crystal clear all along.

NCAces

[/ QUOTE ]

Please help out us 'unclear' thinkers then.

Elaborate on the clarity that you see present in his argument.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's actually quite simple. Phil is not saying that the deaths of the students at Kent State was warranted or justified. He is saying that their deaths shouldn't come as a surprise considering the abuse that the student body levied on the National Guard on that day and on days prior.

[latefordinner]

Sure I'm not doubting that your "average hippie" was more concerned with getting baked and getting laid than discussing political theory (not that there's anything wrong with the former). I'm just saying that while you perceived it as well you know, the whole wearing beads and smoking pot and having sex was nice and all, but [censored] is getting a little out of hand, other people perceived as well you know, I have nothing against the beads and pot, but if we're serious about building a revolutionary movement, it's time to start actually opposing the ruling class.

The failure of the late 60s revolutions around the world, but especially in the US, is that they were dominated by the authoritarian Left.

This mistake won't be made another time, as many of the broad radical movements forming now - from the Zapatistas to the right-wing militias, from eco-sabateurs to squatters, from anti-TRIPS protests in India to N30 in Seattle - explicitly reject authoritarian socialism and authoritarian structures in general and are organized around specifically anti-authoritarian principles - anarchists who identify as such in many cases.

[kyleb]

[ QUOTE ]
What does any of that crystal clear thinking have to do with the reality of National Guardsman firing on a group of students peacfully gathering in an open field on their college campus?

[/ QUOTE ]

You must be referring to another event, because I seem to recall reading about plenty of students throwing rocks and threats of violence being yelled at the National Guard - not only on that day, but on days previous to May 4th.

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought Phil's argument was crystal clear all along.

NCAces

[/ QUOTE ]

Please help out us 'unclear' thinkers then.

Elaborate on the clarity that you see present in his argument.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's actually quite simple. Phil is not saying that the deaths of the students at Kent State was warranted or justified. He is saying that their deaths shouldn't come as a surprise considering the abuse that the student body levied on the National Guard on that day and on days prior.

[/ QUOTE ]


TY for the clarification………

Unlike some others here who think I have been playing games of semantics, that is all I was looking for.

I didn’t get that at all, which is why I asked for the clarification.

What I got was that he was somehow attempting to justify the shootings because of the actions of “the student body”.

[ QUOTE ]
He is saying that their deaths shouldn't come as a surprise considering the abuse that the student body levied on the National Guard on that day and on days prior.

[/ QUOTE ]

If that is what Phil meant, I must agree with him.

One of the sad facts of those times is that organized, widespread anti-war demonstrations, national hysteria, and the inflammatory rhetoric on both sides of the issue was escalating to a never before experienced level. The US was keenly divided into two opposing viewpoints regarding the ongoing war in Vietnam.

Fear, distrust, and paranoia were in abundance on BOTH sides of the issue.

With those thoughts in mind……. NO, it was not surprising that the Kent state shootings happened. If not there, it would have been someplace else.

My point of view on the situation is also very simple…..

I disagree with any who attempt to JUSTIFY (vs. explaining) the shootings because of these facts.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
"Kent State was a "party school" at that time (I did a fair amount there myself) so the combination of a lot of drunk students and the feeling of having the campus being occupied by a military force was an incendiery combination."

They invited the military force on campus by their violence and the incendiery combination that set the ROTC building on fire, only a few weeks after the UCSB burning of a bank building.

I was a "dirty hippy", college dropout for the second time , and dating a Kent State coed on May 4, 1970 and within a month I had enlisted in the Army and was on my way to basic training. It was an unfortunate tragedy, but it had the opposite effect on many of us. Until then the anti-war movement was sex, drugs, rock and roll and more sex...an excuse to party. When it got to the point of Black Panthers, the SLA and kids getting killed we realized just how out of control we really were.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I agree in part. But I think that you find at least some of the largest demonstrations against the war occurred after Kent State. After Kent State, when the U.S. started scaling down it's involvment in Vietnam and the number of young men drafted started it's decline, alot of the "out of control" conduct was defused as a result.

I'd also point out that many people enlisted in the National Guard as an alternative to participating in the war. Whether or not it was appropriate to bring in the National Guard to Kent State is open to debate I think.