Attitude toward 60s clue to ideology

[etv78]

I've heard it argued that a person's attitude toward the 1960s offers a big clue as to their current political bent. It was:

Positive=Democrat
Negative=GOP

Do you agree with this, by and large? (It fits me FWIW-Democrat with positive view of the 60s)

[Trinopus]

Interesting... I can see it, but I think the correlation is loose, and has exceptions.

Liberals celebrate the advances of the civil rights era, yet mourn the assassination of JFK (and RFK) and strongly disapprove of the war in Vietnam. To many of us (I am a liberal and damn proud of it) it was an era of great promise, much of which was not realized. The military-industrial complex and the entrenched powers were too strong, and derailed our progress.

I would guess that conservatives would see the era much the same way: a lot was good, and a lot was bad.

Still, we got to the moon, and that is a gigantic plus. A thing to be celebrated. It was a very good era for technology!

[Captain Amazing]

What about those of us who don't really have strong opinions? I mean, from what I've read and seen, it sounded like a very angry decade that people my parents' age tend to get really worked up about.

[etv78]

Trinopus-I think the theory WRT 'nam is: liberals laud the protests, conservatives loath them.

[BrainGlutton]

"The '60s" is a historical period, not an ideology. Does "for it" mean you wish you were still living then and "agin' it" mean you're glad it's over, or what?

[Chronos]

Anyone who has significant firsthand experience of the Sixties is now retirement-aged, a demographic that heavily favors the Republicans. So a correlation will be hard to find there. And anyone who doesn't have firsthand experience, it seems hard to believe that their opinions would have any real relevance.

[gamerunknown]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

"The '60s" is a historical period, not an ideology.

The French have a word for those that treat the spirit of the 60s as an ideology, the "soixante-huitards": or in the prerogative, the soixante-huitard artarrdés (which is quite humorous: they are decried for wanting to return to a bygone era by reactionaries). It's fairly interesting to note the true contentions of the era. Quite a degree of revisionism has occurred in popular culture. Growing up, I certainly thought that the focus was on free sex and drugs (though I figured that was as an alternative to war). In reality though, the issues were more substantive.

If I encounter someone that blanket opposes the spirit of '68, I ask them whether Spain should still be celebrating Hitler's birthday in Churches.

[Jonathan Chance]

I don't buy it. It might be true for the boomers who lived through it but not for all.

I, for one, as a democrat, think the 60s 'ideology' (still a bad word for it) was destructive and largely unproductive. It's EASY to oppose and attack. It's soothing even. But it's much harder to work and co-op.

And, of course, the simple fact is that what's considered the '60s ideology' was a very small part of society as a whole. For all that the mass market idea is marches, peace love dope and such the vast majority of people, young and old, just got on with their lives and weren't too involved in such things.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by Chronos

Anyone who has significant firsthand experience of the Sixties is now retirement-aged, a demographic that heavily favors the Republicans.

Hey, I resemeble that remark. I'm not retirement age, and I had first hand experience with the 60s, and I rarely vote Republican these days.

Keep in mind, kids, that "the 60s" lasted roughly through the Watergate scandal and/or the end of the Vietnam War, which takes us up to about 1973. That's the yeart I started college, so I think I qualify as someone who was there.

As to the OP, I think those who say it doesn't apply to most young people are correct. For anyone 30 or younger, I doubt they even have any real idea of what it was like. Just like I don't have much of idea of what it was like for folks who lived through WWII.

[etv78]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

"The '60s" is a historical period, not an ideology. Does "for it" mean you wish you were still living then and "agin' it" mean you're glad it's over, or what?

For it=Applaud the results (women's movement, Civil Rights, gay rights, left Vietnam)

Against it=opposite of above

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by etv78

For it=Applaud the results (women's movement, Civil Rights, gay rights, left Vietnam)

Against it=opposite of above

I daresay those against it would offer a completely different list of results. (But, they would actually be thinking of those listed above.)

[Tethered Kite]

If it feels good, do it?

Don't trust anyone over thirty?

Bad ideas.

One common theme of the Sixties was the idea that every group had a voice. And did they exercise that! All the way from the Black Panthers to the Grey Panthers.

I, also, heard the "Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll" message as the solution. But I'll cut myself some slack given my tender age. What teen wouldn't be drawn to such an easy fix?

Seeing the failure of so many ideas implemented to elevate us all has definitely made me a more thoughtful and more moderate person.

I've had time to watch the political/social swings that take place every twenty years or so and sometimes I just scratch my head and wonder why humans can't ever seem to hit that heathy spot of all things in moderation.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Tethered Kite

Seeing the failure of so many ideas implemented to elevate us all . . .

But, they have not failed to elevate us, though they might have failed in other respects. Ours is now a far more elevated culture, morally and even mentally, than it was in the 1950s.

[Oy!]

You know how "liberal" is practically a dirty word these days? Well, back in the mid-sixties, 'conservative' was the dirty word. Johnson beat Goldwater 60-40. It wasn't just the results etv78 lists: Medicare came into being. Poverty was discussed as something that we might work together as a nation to fight, not as a moral judgment on the poor (The Great Society). We started to recognize that we were polluting the air and water, and here's an amazing thing: people actually accepted factual evidence, and acted on it! We passed laws to make the air and water cleaner, and they worked. In a surprising twist, businesses actually managed to survive this enormity of demonic regulation.

Taking "the sixties" as a period starting, oh, roughly in 1961 and going through Watergate, it was a time of enormous social change. At the beginning of the sixties, in most parts of the country, 'nigger' was a very common and reasonably acceptable term among whites, as were many other assorted terms for various ethnic, national or religious backgrounds. People who were in favor of civil rights were called "tolerant." Think about that. We were "tolerant" because we didn't think African Americans were lesser humans.

The women who, had they been born in 1960 or later, would have become doctors, lawyers, executives or engineers, mostly became instead secretaries, nurses, or teachers. Business men having mistresses was such a widely accepted part of life that movie comedies were made based on that premise, and happily married women laughed. But reliable birth control was only newly available, so "nice" girls were only starting to discover that recreational sex was possible, and nice boys discovered that they didn't have to go to a hooker to get laid.

I was born in 1956, so I was a kid during the sixties, although I was fairly politically aware for a kid. A lot of the hippie ideology of the sixties was silly and/or self-indulgent crap - old rationalizations wrapped up in new rhetoric, and topped off with the eternal "You can't understand!" whine of youth to its elders.

But there was a lot going on during the sixties that had little or nothing to do with the hippies. People were serious about public service, and there wasn't the current assumption that government was either incompetent or corrupt, and probably both. In particular, middle-aged women woke up and realized that they wanted more from life than obsessing over the details of housework and gossip, and they went out and got it, or at least what they could, given that they had spent the past couple of decades being SaHMs.

Here are the lyrics of an honest to god hit (Wives and Lovers) from 1964:

Originally Posted by B.Bacharch and H. David

Hey, little girl, comb your hair, fix your make-up, soon he will open the door,
Don't think because there's a ring on your finger, you needn't try any more.
For wives should always be lovers too,
Run to his arms the moment that he comes home to you.
I'm warning you,
Day after day, there are girls at the office and the men will always be men,
Don't stand him up, with your hair still in curlers, you may not see him again.
Wives should always be lovers too,
Run to his arms the moment he comes home to you.
He's almost here, hey, little girl, better wear something pretty,
Something you wear to go to the city,
Dim all the lights, pour the wine, start the music, time to get ready for love.
Time to get ready for love, yes it's time to get ready for love,
It's time to get ready, kick your shoes off, baby....,

Things changed a lot in the 60s. And the conservatives looked at it and said "Never again." They've spent the past 40 years building the magnificent edifice that is today's Right Wing, and whose single greatest value is party/ideology over all.

[John Mace]

I guess everyone's a liberal now, since we all love Mad Men.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

But, they have not failed to elevate us, though they might have failed in other respects. Ours is now a far more elevated culture, morally and even mentally, than it was in the 1950s.

And, yes, I am taking into account here all the widespread drug problems and everything else that the '60s ushered in. On balance, all pluses and minuses added up, ours is a more elevated culture now than it was pre-'60s.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by John Mace

I guess everyone's a liberal now, since we all love Mad Men.

Please explain that point for those of us who don't watch it.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

Please explain that point for those of us who don't watch it.

It's all about life in the 60s. But it was mostly a joke, because there isn't much counter culture stuff in it. Yet.

SPOILER:

We're all routing for Sally to go all hippy on her mom at some point.

[etv78]

BTW, I was born 1978, for reference. I'd (culturally) date the "60s" from Brown to the fall of Saigon.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by etv78

BTW, I was born 1978, for reference. I'd (culturally) date the "60s" from Brown to the fall of Saigon.

"The 60s" is all about white people. Only a few black people, like Richie Havens, were there. It started with the free speech movement in Berkeley.

[detop]

I read somewhere (can't recall where) that the 60's started with JFK's assassination and ended with Nixon's resignation.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by detop

I read somewhere (can't recall where) that the 60's started with JFK's assassination and ended with Nixon's resignation.

JFK's death didn't realliy ahve anything to do with the 60s excpe that LBJ ratcheted things up in Vietnam. But Kennedy might have done the same. I'm still going with Berkely Free Speech Movement(1964) as the real starting point, although it's not like a switch was flipped. Dylan released Blowin in the Wind in early/mid 1963, as one point of reference. Beatles arrive in US in 1964.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by John Mace

"The 60s" is all about white people. Only a few black people, like Richie Havens, were there. It started with the free speech movement in Berkeley.

Yes . . .

The Theme Park Version of the Swingin' Sixties includes: "free love" and beehive hairdos, hippies and southern sheriffs, Psychedelic Rock and girl groups, marijuana and the pill, sexy male spies in tuxedos and sexy female spies in leather catsuits (or in miniskirts with go-go boots, or in leather miniskirt catsuits), the Charlie Brown Christmas special, Peter Fonda dropping acid in a graveyard, prim newscasters speaking in clipped tones about those wild youngsters having too much fun, and everybody doing "The Twist". In Britain it includes the rise of Carnaby Street (inevitably accompanied by The Kinks' "Dedicated Follower of Fashion"), Mary Quant (the Mother who Made Miniskirts Mainstream), Harold Wilson, the satire boom, and a bunch of Buccaneer Broadcasters demolishing The BBC's radio monopoly. It was all about the music: Mop-topped mods and cock-walking rockers all the rage, and the British were cool for the first time in recorded history. Except to the British, who were way into India. The Sixties gave us Woodstock, three days of peace and music. And then a little later, Altamont, roughly six hours of skull-cracking brutality set to music.

Of course, much of this great music was made in the context of political unrest: Escalation of the Vietnam War was met with a powerful protest movement, admired to this day for stopping the war dead in its tracks just nine years later. President Kennedy narrowly averted an end-of-the-world nuclear showdown, then was shot dead. Medgar Evers, Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X gave voice to the Civil Rights Movement, and then were shot dead. Robert F. Kennedy renewed the country's spirits with a message of hope and unity, and then was shot dead. Really, the only important political figure who survived the 60s unscathed was Tricky Dick. This was the era of COINTELPRO, with Government Agents surveilling, infiltrating and discrediting Anti-War and other groups to the point of sowing distrust and paranoia among these groups to Philip K. Dick levels.

<snip>

That's what you learn watching TV and movies about the Sixties. No Sixties Montage is complete without them. If not set to Jimi Hendrix playing "All Along the Watchtower," then "Get Together" by the Youngbloods.

But if you watch TV and movies from the Sixties, it's as if half of that stuff never happened. Some of the Sixties' landmark events, such as the Stonewall Riots in 1969 that kicked off the gay rights movement, were barely acknowledged until the 1990s. Our cultural memory has selected The Grateful Dead and Aretha Franklin from a musical landscape that had a lot more Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass than seems sonically possible; and the squares of the first half of the decade actually dressed a lot cooler than the hippies of the latter half, who frankly come off as a little grimy. A standout example of this is The Andy Griffith Show whose title actor portrays a Southern sheriff and in which not a whisper of the civil rights movement is mentioned.

Not only that, I cannot recall a single black character, even a bit-part or a walk-on or an extra, in The Andy Griffith Show.

Which might actually be Truth in Television. Mayberry might have been a Sundown Town.

[John Mace]

The Andy Griffith Show wasn't much about the counter culture. It was anything about the counter culture. It was the culture.

[Exapno Mapcase]

None of the rest of the "Sixties" happens without the Civil Rights movement. None of it. The Sixties were not about hippies. There were very few hippies anywhere in the 60s, and I include metro San Francisco. What we remember is how the culture swerved in the 70s because of Vietnam and Nixon and rock. Still, the riots in inner cities that started in 1964 - earlier than everybody remembers - were a much bigger topic when I was in high school, i.e. through 1968, than Vietnam was. King's assassination was the major event after Kennedy.

As a loose generalization, I do agree with the OP on this. You can't ask for a perfect correlation - there aren't any in anything.

I disagree with Oyl on one thing. The country was never really liberal during the 60s. The 1964 election was a total anomaly, driven by the continuing trauma of Kennedy's assassination and Goldwater's successful impersonation of a crazy man. The country started turning right after Johnson got the Civil Rights Act passed in 1965 and it stayed there. The Republicans won every presidential election until 1996, with the exception of the Watergate anomaly of Carter in 1976.

Civil Rights. Civil Rights. Civil Rights. That changed everything and that's the key issue that brought the rest of the changes along in its wake, including the politics of the country.

[John Mace]

Nope. Vietnam War, birth control, and rock music. Oh, and drugs. None had anything to do with the civil rights movement. Rock n roll certain was influence, if not derived from, black music, but that wasn't about civil rights.

The US was still a very segregated society in the mid 60s, and the whole counter culture thing had very little intersection with the civil rights movement.

[Tethered Kite]

The Midwest college I attended had an active Civil Rights contingent, of both Black and White persons, by 1967. And for the first time in my memory of this area people of color were taking leadership positions and speaking out.

VietNam protestors were turning out for marches by the thousands (as compared to our recent OWS march which consisted of about fifty people.)

And the second-wave feminists ideas were being tested.

Maybe these things were more apparent in contrast than for those of you who lived in more diverse areas. But for many young people in the Midwest it was a time of introduction to new ideas. And new cultures.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase

I disagree with Oyl on one thing. The country was never really liberal during the 60s.

Well, actually the country was liberal -- not liberal suddenly, but liberal still -- in the sense that most white Americans still believed in the "American Consensus" that had prevailed ever since FDR, and that consensus placed a high level of confidence in government to solve problems. Even the GOP mostly accepted the New Deal as a fait accompli -- the likes of Senator Robert Taft, who saw it as "socialism" and wanted to roll it back, were regarded by most as cranky. What changed in the '60s, among many other things, was the rise-to-respectability of the new movement conservatism -- at least, that process began in the '60s (not really completed until 1980). See Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus, by Rick Perlstein.

[LouisB]

I was present for the 60s, am now retired and am still a Democrat. But, I didn't really learn to intensely dislike Republicans, or the Republican party at least, as i do like a few individual Republicans , until relatively lately. Specifically, the G.W. Bush era and nothing about the current Republican attitudes has a chance in hell of changing my mind.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by LouisB

I was present for the 60s, am now retired and am still a Democrat. But, I didn't really learn to intensely dislike Republicans, or the Republican party at least, as i do like a few individual Republicans , until relatively lately. Specifically, the G.W. Bush era and nothing about the current Republican attitudes has a chance in hell of changing my mind.

Until relatively lately, the partisan divide in America did not map so closely onto the ideological divide. Before the 1970s, each party had its liberal and conservative wings, and "Democrat" and "Republican" were more in the nature of tribal affilliations than ideological labels. But Nixon's successful "Southern Strategy" in 1972 began the process by which white conservative Democrats migrated to the GOP (many of them by way of George Wallace' American Independence Party -- Nixon, in '72, picked up Wallace's voters/states from '68), and liberal "Rockefeller Republicans" were driven out of it or marginalized.

[Captain Amazing]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

Not only that, I cannot recall a single black character, even a bit-part or a walk-on or an extra, in The Andy Griffith Show.

Which might actually be Truth in Television. Mayberry might have been a Sundown Town.

I don't think that's the case. Anyway, there was only one speaking part played by a black actor on the Andy Griffith show. In one episode, "Opie's Piano Lessons", Rockne Tarkington played a former pro football player who comes back to Mayberry to run his father's store. There were a bunch of black extras, though, in crowd scenes. See here:

http://www.bookguy.com/Mayberry/BlacksInMayberry.htm

I think part of it is just that there aren't, in real life, many blacks in Western North Carolina, and were even fewer in the 60s. It's a pretty white part of the country.

[XT]

Do you agree with this, by and large? (It fits me FWIW-Democrat with positive view of the 60s)

No. I think it's overly simplistic and tells you little. I know a lot of hard line Democrats who don't have a positive take from the 60's. I can't say I know any Republicans who have a positive take on the 60's, but then I don't actually know all that many Republicans, so it's a pretty small sample size.

Personally, I was a kid in the 60's, and my main memories were decidedly mixed. What I remember most was snapshot memories of the Vietnam war (very negative for me, since most of them were of the news and fighting, which always seemed very scary to me as a kid) and the space program and moon landing (very positive), all of which I saw on neighbors TVs, since we didn't have one of our own until (IIRC) sometime in the 70's. Other than those two impressions, I don't really recall a lot of the iconic 60's stuff (there weren't a lot of hippies in South Tucson in the 60's, for instance ).

-XT

[septimus]

IMO, answer to OP's question is Yes. But the Phenomenon of "The Sixties" too complicated to summarize easily; it varied in time and space. A powerful Civil Rights movement emerged long before Flower Power; and the Hippies followed, to some extent, in the footsteps of the Fifties' "Beat Generation."

And "Flower Power" ended all too quickly. It seemed that the gentle hippies of the late 60's were partly replaced with thugs in the 70's. (Indeed the Altamont Concert of December 1969 might be a convenient dividing point.)

In my own memories of that time, it's hard to be sure how much was the era's true uniqueness, and how much was typical for any impressionable University Freshman. Can anyone recommend good on-line article(s) summarizing this era, for me to read 45 years after I lived through it?

Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase

None of the rest of the "Sixties" happens without the Civil Rights movement. None of it. The Sixties were not about hippies. There were very few hippies anywhere in the 60s, and I include metro San Francisco. What we remember is how the culture swerved in the 70s because of Vietnam and Nixon and rock. Still, the riots in inner cities that started in 1964 - earlier than everybody remembers - were a much bigger topic when I was in high school, i.e. through 1968, than Vietnam was. King's assassination was the major event after Kennedy....

I disagree with Oyl on one thing. The country was never really liberal during the 60s. The 1964 election was a total anomaly, driven by the continuing trauma of Kennedy's assassination and Goldwater's successful impersonation of a crazy man. The country started turning right after Johnson got the Civil Rights Act passed in 1965 and it stayed there. The Republicans won every presidential election until 1996, with the exception of the Watergate anomaly of Carter in 1976.

Civil Rights. Civil Rights. Civil Rights. That changed everything and that's the key issue that brought the rest of the changes along in its wake, including the politics of the country.

I agree with most of this, but with two nitpicks. Average hair-length may have continued to grow during the early 70's, but there were plenty of hippies appearing in the Bay Area starting about 1967. I myself recall standing on the corner of Haight and Ashbury, with Dylan songs playing and free LSD on offer.

And the President elected 1992 was a registered Democrat.

[Exapno Mapcase]

Originally Posted by septimus

I agree with most of this, but with two nitpicks. Average hair-length may have continued to grow during the early 70's, but there were plenty of hippies appearing in the Bay Area starting about 1967. I myself recall standing on the corner of Haight and Ashbury, with Dylan songs playing and free LSD on offer.

Haight-Ashbury, sure. But that's why I specified metro San Francisco, which contained 4,000,000 people about 1% of whom were hippies.

And the President elected 1992 was a registered Democrat.

D'oh! Stupid typo.

[Tethered Kite]

The comments about the moon landing and the Vietnam War on TV prompted a thought. For the first time in history, unless they had been physically present, people were actually able to see the decisions their politicians were making right in their living rooms.

Whether that affected support or disapproval for their politicians it must have had an influence on their choices.

[etv78]

Originally Posted by Tethered Kite

The comments about the moon landing and the Vietnam War on TV prompted a thought. For the first time in history, unless they had been physically present, people were actually able to see the decisions their politicians were making right in their living rooms.

Whether that affected support or disapproval for their politicians it must have had an influence on their choices.

Vietnam was considered the 1st "living room" war, going a long way toward public approval.

[MOIDALIZE]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

Yes . . .

Escalation of the Vietnam War was met with a powerful protest movement, admired to this day for stopping the war dead in its tracks just nine years later.

I really hope this is sarcasm.

[InterestedObserver]

It seems to me that in so far as we in the U.S. are still divided along ideological lines over some of the same core issues that dominated the 1960's, there is a correlation between one's view of that decade and one's ideology.


Just pay attention to how "liberals" and "conservatives" of today respectively characterize the 60s.

The Left tends to see the period as a time of great social, political, and environmental progress, achieved against the backdrop of racism, war, police abuses, sexism, assasinations, and general violent resistance to change on the part of the "establishment" and "mainstream" society.

The Right tends to view (and bemoan) the time as a decade-long attack on decency, morality, and the social order. I have heard them many times characterize the 60s as the beginning of the collapse of the country, a process they consider to be on-going.

So many of the issues/things the current Right-wing in the United States widely stands in opposition to (overtly or not) are straight out of the 60's; feminism, desegregation/civil rights, gay rights, the pill, sexual liberation in general, drug use, the "welfare state", unionization/economic/workplace activism, anti-militarist sentiment, protest, the environmental movement, spiritual exploration, a rejection of the old institutions and conventions.....

Here in 2012, the Right in the U.S. is still, to a large degree, fixated on sexuality/birth control/abortion, "morality/decency", promotion of "conventional" Christianity/opposition to other religious/spiritual practice, drug use, workplace/economic rights, government powers of environmental regulation and social program administration, and yes, racial issues (e.g. the near universal hostility from the Right towards the OWS "dirty hippies" who should take a bath, cut their hair, and get a job, and the likewise near universal scorn for Trevon Martin and support for George Zimmerman on the Right.)

It's not just the old geezers who lived through the 60's and didn't like what they saw then...if it were, we could just wait for them to all die off.

The Right-wing view of history is constantly perpetuated and passed on to the next generation(s), much in the same way the revisionist history of the U.S. having been founded as a "Christian nation" or the still common interpretation of de-segregation as a violation of states rights.

People like Newt Gingrich and Glenn Beck teach this version of history to all who will listen. The ideological divisions represented by such interpretations of history comprise the core of the "conservative" identity (and, though possibly to a lesser extent, the core of the "liberal" identity).

These basic ideological divisions still exist and in virtually the same form as they did 40-50 years ago. We are still, as a nation and as individuals, having the SAME arguments.

[BigAppleBucky]

Originally Posted by etv78

I've heard it argued that a person's attitude toward the 1960s offers a big clue as to their current political bent. It was:

Positive=Democrat
Negative=GOP

Do you agree with this, by and large? (It fits me FWIW-Democrat with positive view of the 60s)

It certainly was an exciting time to be alive.

Much idealism gone to waste in that decade. Cynicism had completely taken over by the end of 1972. Overall I'm not particularily proud of my baby boomer generation and it started going wrong in the 60's.

I hope the world never sees the turmoil of 1968 again. The Tet offensive, the assignations (Andy Warhol, MLK, RFK), My Lai massacre, the Chicago convention, Prague Spring, unrest in Paris and Mexico City, etc.

Great music in '68. Probably the very best year for rock music.

http://upchucky.com/JukeCity/1968/juke.htm

[New Deal Democrat]

I feel ambivalent about the 1960s. I feel ambivalent about many things. I like ambivalence. It prevents fanaticism.

What is depressing to me is that the end result of the hope, enthusiasm, and idealism of the 1960s has been a country dominated by the Republican Party.

[River Hippie]

Question Authority!

Proud to be a Democrat.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by BigAppleBucky

. . . the assignations (Andy Warhol, MLK, RFK) . . .

Yeah, that was one legendary hot three-way! (Warhol's film of it is almost impossible to find nowadays, for some reason.)

[Oakminster]

I was born in '65. Love the music, love hippie chicks (I married one), support civil rights, and otherwise like everything....groovy. But I ain't liberal.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by River Hippie

Question Authority!

Sez who?!