The New Left And Radical Counterculture

Recently Ralph Nader spoke to an enthusiastic and supportive audience at Columbia College. Nader spoke about the very same issues he lectured about in 1968--corporate rule, environmental protections, military-industrial complex and unjust wars, equality and access to education, women's rights. It was an increased awareness that overtook the young people of the sixties counterculture movement. This awareness led to a social outcry against injustices in politics.

The SDS wanted to participate in their own destinies, and to get away from what they saw as serve limitations in an undemocratic society. They wanted “simplicity in registration and voting, unfettered dominance of wealthy, property requirements, literacy tests and poll taxes.” (6)) Individual people were no dependent solely on themselves, but as part of community, and being part of

This thematic standpoint in return provides ground for a second major theme; the 1960s was home to the birth of civil rights movements and forever changed the American idea of the status quo. To a large extent, it is agreeable that that the 1960s serves as the era that led to activism in the US. Anderson is able to confirm and strengthen his standpoint by the fact that it was during one of the greatest milestones of the 1960s, the Vietnam War, that for the first time in the history of the US, the government was subjected to criticism and attacks against their “ways”. This can be evidenced by the fact that Americans, which were majority college students, took to the streets to protest government action. At the time, the policies and actions put forth by the government were seen to be very secretive and wrong. Citizens were hastily informed about the need to stop the spread of communism at the expense of capitalism. Not only were government policies seen as corrupt, the government had kept the American society in the dark concerning the actual situation in Vietnam. There seemed to be no cost that was worth retreating from Vietnam. Draft calls were constantly increasing and the war itself began to result in federal expenditures, deficits, and inflationary pressures ( Anderson 90). For some Americans, the war not only damaging, but unfair. Mexican Americans were the poorest and

While 1968 was a turning point in American history from Liberal dominancy to strict conservativism through divided opposition, moral panics, war propaganda, the promotion of fear surrounding governmental power and backlash resulting from violent protests, the current Republican attacks on diplomacy, women’s rights, immigration policy, backlash of school shootings and the right’s refusal to consider any further gun control, combined with media that is not as easily controlled as in 1968, has created the possibility that the remaining Yippies and New Left Radicalists of the past will see their efforts come to fruition with the election of a democratic socialist, Bernie Sanders, making him the Democratic Nixon. Just as in 1968, the 2016 election year will be a year in which Americans battle over the definition of American culture and identity in a globalizing

These radicals address the issues in America today, but they let the problems expand even more over a certain period. This leads to the inequality suffered between rich, working class, and the poor. They do not exactly have a detailed plan to help unify the entire nation of America where everyone prospers. Our discontent with progression overall in America today is relevant; however, there is not a detailed political agenda to strive towards reaching the goals we set to become a superpower as we once were during WWII. The radicals even consider a simple idea by the people to be a far left or far right-wing idea. The dislike towards each other’s belief politically are tearing us apart. We are in a state in which bipartisanship has increased vastly compared to previously. Our political sphere has a purpose for gaining respect, dignity, and identity for our contribution, yet we need to show love and compassion for who the person is, not judge them by their beliefs. Through this, the trust in human nature can be revived once again and exponentially grow our economy in

By the 1930’s, the anticommunist network had expanded, and begun to strengthen. The struggles brought on by the Great Depression and the political partisanship from the creation of the New Deal; Communist Party involvement in unions became a political issue. Instead of Liberals and Conservatives blaming each other for the country’s woes, they could instead turn their blame on to the Communists, just like the businesses. The opposition to the New Deal and the American Communist Party’s adaptation of Stalin’s “Popular Front”

The modern-day American Left isn’t as bad as all that, but its ideology about the past is more or less the same. Hence the statement issued Thursday by Seattle Mayor Ed Murray calling for the removal of all “symbols of hate, racism and violence that exist in our city.” Murray is at least consistent, as he includes not just Confederate symbols but also a well-known statue of Vladimir Lenin. These symbols, Murray says, represent “historic injustices,” and “their existence causes pain among those who themselves or whose family members have been impacted by these atrocities.”He is not interested in the history of the statues themselves, the people or events they depict, or “what political affiliation may have been assigned to them in the decades

In terms of the amount of political upheaval that took place, the 1960s is probably the most fascinating decade post-World War II to study historically. To understand how the country was almost at the brink of collapsing, one must survey one of the prominent political actors during the decade: the student movement. According to William H. Chafe in The Unfinished Journey, the student movement emerged from the feeling that President John F. Kennedy’s “insistent call for the young to fulfill America’s unfulfilled promises” was a mandate for action. Yet, the conclusions made about the student movement in the 1960s are still contested today. David Steigerwald, author of The Sixties and the End to Modern America scrutinizes the student

The SDS criticized american society for complacency and a lack of clear goals. “Containment,” “deterrence,” and “economic growth” were all just words. These terms lack any specific mechanisms to help the american citizen, not to mention the poor black man or woman. The SDS saw a society in need of change. They advocated for structural change, political, social and economic through political channels leading to a fully democratic state with equal representation and a domestic focus, smaller military. The crux of the issue laid in the political stagnation of the two party system. The two party system forced constituents and politicians to classify all of their views into one of two groups. Then the two parties refused to compromise on their positions preventing progress. Underneath the stalemate was heavy influence from private sector corporations. Lobbyists donated money to political campaigns that supported the company’s best interests. To keep support from lobbyists and their political party, politicians had to vote along party lines rather than their actual

There is a growing sentiment that nationalist and conservative political parties are increasing in popularity and influence around the world. While this may be true to some extent, it is arguably the rise of the “New Right” that is gaining significant momentum in surging popularity and influence at this current time. While it is easy to suggest that nationalist, populist, conservative and even fascism is becoming more mainstream and acceptable in modern society, it is important that the New-Right is differentiated from the current group of “right” leaning politics. This paper will identify and discuss what is the new-right and what makes it different from other forms of the political right, as well as examining the cause and as contributing

On September 11th, 1960, the founding members of the Young Americans for Freedom (YAF) published their basic ideologies of in their “Sharon Statement.” Two years later on the June of 1962, members of the Students for a Democratic Society at their retreat published their political manifesto in a paper known as the Port Huron Statement. Despite their differing political views, both political youth groups centered their criticism on the same target: the American government. An analysis of both documents revealed that both believed that positive change could only come by the youth, because only they saw the real flaws of the current system and have the ability to make a difference.

Prior to the countercultural revolution of the 1960’s, the legal experimentation of psychedelic drugs were widely researched for the treatment of alcoholism and various mental disorders. The term psychedelic means “mind-manifesting or altering” and was given to hallucinogens like marijuana, LSD, MDMA, and psilocybin in 1956 by psychiatrist Humphrey Osmond (Taylor 1). The studies grew rapidly but medical progress was quickly halted because of the legal ramifications in response to the hippie culture and escalated pressure of other governments. People strongly object to such experimentation with little practical application and questionable ethics thus fueling the controversy in regards to the continuation of the psychedelic research. Although

The Anti-Liberal movements of the Pan-Germans, Christian Socialists, and Zionists were all small culturally, or economically alienated radical groups that felt neglected or rejected by the Liberal parties social limitations and ineffectiveness, thus creating a new political culture that rebelled against reason and law.

cultural values of their parents and refused to assimilate into the established social and moral

Those looking for communists revolutionaries with red flags standing on barricades in the west will remain disappointed. The communists became progressives, minority interests replaced those of the workers and equality, diversity and multiculturalism is the new ‘quiet revolution.’