Sunday, July 27, 2014

The Sixties: the Great Unraveling

Why the pushback failed.
If you really look at the LBJ thing, it is more likely that Gerald Ford was involved if LBJ was. FWIW, I don't think there was a broader conspiracy. Oswald was the lone gunman. A very lucky nut.
What of the grassy knoll? My guess from watching Zapruder is there was a second gunman. First shot got President Kennedy in the throat in front; second blew the back of his head off. Legend has it new presidents are shown uncensored Zapruder by the deep state. "Any questions? Good."
Audio analysis shows that there was no shot from the grassy knoll. I think we have to go with the evidence we have. As for the ejecta from the head-shot, I have worked on cases dealing with head-shots where there is an explosion out the entry wound, not the exit wound. Brains are funny, and when they get hit like that, they liquify and can come squirting out in weird places (ears, nose, mouth, etc.), not just the exit wound. There are simpler and more plausible explanations for everything. No need to go Dennis Hopper here.
OK. So, you say, lone Commie nut. Nothing to do with then-conservative Dallas. Maybe the lone Commie nut wanted to make conservative Dallas look bad. So, you say, this goofball was a wannabe Gavrilo Princip but he didn't start a revolution or world war. Unless you blame the Sixties on him, which I think is a stretch.

Of course I'm interested in how we could have prevented the Sixties. There was plenty of pushback from Middle America, the hardhats, Archie Bunker. So why'd we lose? I remember Middle America's change. The style change you see during "The Brady Bunch," which I remember first-run. I remember Ed Sullivan and harmless stuff like "Petticoat Junction," then the networks got rid of all that and rammed Norman Lear down our throats.
I say, lone nut, ideology irrelevant (usually is with nuts), but is is a pro-Castro nut. Not responsible for the '60s, although the assassination of JFK really marks the start of The Sixties as a cultural moment.
But 1967 still looked like me. The change wasn't complete until about 1972.
No, the change started earlier. Communist infiltration of American institutions post Henry Wallace. Emphasis on big-government and conformity over individualism (Ike saw this coming, in the form of the military-industrial complex). Cultural Marxism takes hold in the universities.
Right; space-age "progressivism."
Didn't affect POPULAR culture yet but it planted the seed.
Went off like a bomb in the church.
Like what happened with the Church, the rot was already there, already working, already preparing for its moment. Big government launched on steroids with the Great Society, almost all the weird sh*t in our culture (feminism, etc.) gets a hold then. The courts go nuts (Griswold v. Conn., leads straight to Roe v. Wade).
Right.
Family wage is destroyed by the '68 Civil Rights Act.
The left loves Hugh Hefner because he was a cultural pioneer for the sh*t.
Divorce takes off, becomes culturally okay in enough of the country. Reagan signs radical pro-abortion law in California (!!!!!!!!).
When the LEFT gets nostalgic for my era, I get suspicious. Like their show about Masters and Johnson. I was wary of "Mad Men" for that reason, but they don't misrepresent the era (they raised the standard for depicting it), and I think that "we know better now," while there, is a cover. The show is transgressive porn for yuppie women. They pretend to cheer for Peggy but fantasize about Don.
Hef is the toast of the town.
I didn't forget that about Reagan.
Exactly. The Left knows what was happening then - they where there. Cronkite turns on the military after Tet. Goldwater goes off the rails too - Reagan at least was grounded enough to pull back from the brink in the '70s.
Classic Goldwater - Brent Bozell ghostwriting - would have been a fine prez.
So, what you see very quickly is a Great Unraveling. But that unraveling has been very carefully prepped for a long time.
Like Bugnini did to the church.

'70s and '80s Goldwater was a sellout.
Yes, not just Bozell but Russell Kirk and Harry Jaffa. Jaffa wrote most of the '64 nomination acceptance speech. Yes, exactly. Hippie Goldwater went hard cultural left, and eventually supported big govt. boondoggle spending too, so long as it also meant increases in the military budget. He was about as libertarian as he was conservative by 1975, which means not at all. He turned on Reagan too - a mix of ideological disagreement and massive jealousy. Disgusting.

The Unraveling was abbetted by a combination of big business and big govt., both with their own agendas, but agendas that worked in sync with each other.
I respect Nixon to this day. He made bad mistakes - affirmative action, pure fiat money - but he was non-ideological. He did what he felt was right. Listened to the people, literally meeting the protesters, and did what they wanted, pulling out of Nam (I remember), which the Dems started.
BTW, you are seeing exactly the same thing happening now re: gay rights. It is now 1970 as far as the gay rights movement goes, to draw the analogy.
My family was loyal to Nixon (supported Goldwater too) and very hurt by Watergate. My mom met Pat Nixon.
I very much admire Nixon too, although my family hated him. I grew up in a family of union Democrats, church-going cultural conservatives but they absolutely hated, hated, hated Republicans. Voted for every goddamn Democrat who ever came down the pike.
Very Catholic of them. American Catholic. The unions, machine politics, patronage: the community, la famiglia, looking out for each other. So they voted D.
Yes, very American Catholic, Pelosi style. Sick.
Before Pat Buchanan had Nixon reach out to them after the Sixties f*cked them (Archie Bunker)... the future Reagan Democrats and, in Philly, Rizzocrats.
I remember as a teenager, when I learned about abortion, being absolutely revolted at my family's support for the Democrats. If we really believed the Catholic stuff, how could we vote for monsters who support the killing of children? Well, guess what? Out of all my cousins, I'm the only one who practices my faith. The rest of them figured out what the True Family God was, and it wasn't Jesus Christ.
Bet that story's legion. Peer-pressure liberals with a family TRADITION of voting D. The part of the Cathedral who has ethnic Euro last names. Yuppie Catholics. That was Villanova 25 years ago.
Right. Love, love, love PJB. Man is a prophet, being preaching the good word since 1968 - and he was dead right in 1992 about what NAFTA and the rest of the New World Order BS was going to do to the country. We live in the world he told us would result. But of course, he's a racist nut who hates gays, so he should be shunned.
Voted for him in the '96 primary and proud of it.
Yeah, I don't think my family is all that unique in American Catholicism. I voted for PBJ in '92 and '96, almost pulled the lever for him in 2000 but voted for W. Read most of his books. If the country had listened to him back in the day, what a much better place it would be now.
I voted Libertarian my first time in '92.
But again, big govt. & big business didn't want PBJ's vision for the country. They want us to be India or Mexico. Right, they have no loyalty to America or its citizens.
I have Right From the Beginning. Read some of it.
Ugh, I don't vote libertarian. Wasted vote. Every vote libertarian is only a vote to help the Democrats. Spoiler party. I tend to view it as a false flag operation, designed to help Democrat. When you poll libertarians, they are almost all dopers, sex perverts or autistic omegas. Much more likely to vote Democrat than Republican.

Read his books on the economy and foreign policy. You won't be libertarian afterward.

Big business and big government couldn't care less about this country. Davos, UN, NAFTA, etc. Mexicanize the population and rule from the top.
I actually don't read libertarian sites these days. They opened my eyes but they're really tiresome anti-authority lefties.
Yes. Libertarianism is a mental disorder.
My layoff: broke British company outsourcing to India and the Philippines to make crap for a quick buck.

Gary Johnson stood head and shoulders over Obama and Romney so I stand by my vote. A real pol who deserved a chance.
Libertarianism makes some good points, but ultimately it is just nuts.

Yes, that's all they want, a quick buck. No allegiance to place or people, no appreciation for a way of life, for the dignity of work and the idea of an independent citizenry. Make the quick buck and make sure that the middle class is evaporated, leaving a pliant and captive serf class (mostly brown with some broken-down trailer-park whites thrown in) and a ruling SWPL upper class (lily-white with some token "diversity" to cover up the whiteness).

Johnson = pro-abortion doper. No thanks. The economic liberty always takes a back seat to the fucking and baby-killing and the dope-smoking. Libertarianism isn't about economic liberty. It says it is, but it ain't. Libertarianism is about, as Russell Kirk put it so well "sexual pathetics."
Pretty much the paleo and hardcore trad argument: the rot set in BEFORE the '50s. I still won't write off American liberty but I'm listening.

P.S. Eugene McCarthy was a Catholic gentleman nothing to do with his hippie following. Kennedy was a crook who didn't really stand for anything.
Russell Kirk was friends with McCarthy and tended to see him as a conservative, although one of the Left (a Left-conservative, along the lines of Christopher Lasch, for example).
I respect Jerry Brown for being non-ideological too.

P.P.S. The Beatles were an instrument of evil.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Leave comment