Che What?
From a recent letter to Newsweek:
Personally, I'm a big fan of the 60s. There were great strides made in civil liberties, racial and sexual equality, and personal freedom. And all that amazing music....Back in the late '60s, we stood right on the precipice of true change for the better—we said that we believed in no more going to war, ending poverty, protecting the environment, eliminating the nation's racial and social divides, and saving our souls. Forty years later and the '60s are cold and dead, the '70s blocked out in our collective consciousness like some embarrassing moment, and Martin, Bobby, Che, the kids at Kent State and Jackson State, those noble self-immolating Buddhist monks and Czech student Jan Palach gave up their lives, and for what? Men and women who passed me joints on the beaches of southern California and whispered pledges that "things will be so much better when we take over" now drive SUVs, wear designer coats and don't give a damn about Dick Cheney or that their cell-phone records are not private. Cindy Sheehan is derided for having a broken heart, and these same boomers who protested the Vietnam War in college (while applying for military-service deferments) voted against John Kerry and apparently raised their kids to do so as well. We were right there and it was within our reach. What a bunch of phonies we proved to be.
At least that's how I feel most of the time. But then I read stuff like this letter and I'm almost forced to say good riddance. (Except that I'd guess every age has ninnies like this guy.)
posted by LAGuy @ 1:20 AM
5 Comments:
These same sentiments were much easier to digest coming from Lawrence Kasdan in "The Big Chill.:
Every generation has a a vocal, if minority, contingent that are positive they know much better than the generations that proceed them. Being young, however, they almost always know a lot more about what they are against than what they are for. There were war resisters in WWI (rightly so in my opinion), WWII, Korea and so on.
But meaningful change and progress does not typically (ever?) come from the 16-25 crowd. How old was Martin Luther King when he was specifying and making Americans re-examine their attitudes toward blacks? (I think he was in his 40s, but certainly in his 30s). The leaders of the American revolution were by and large in their 30s and 40s.
I think there is something to be said for other societies, particularly Asian cultures, that require youth to respect elder generations, and garner some experience before presuming to lecture those who came before.
You want them to garner experience before lecturing us, Denver Guy, but this guy shows you can garner years and not garner greater understanding.
I believe Martin Luther King, Jr. died when he was 37.
King in his 20s was an organizer in the civil rights movement, but almost all the most memorable work he did and speeches he gave were when he was in his 30s.
Post a Comment
<< Home