Quote:

How would making LSD illegal change the spiritual nature of its use? People like Timothy Leary continued to be advocates for it, and today I still see plenty of people using it for spiritual purposes. Also, I'm sure there were still plenty of people back then who took it just to get "fucked up."

---

Quote:

I think it's pretty naive to think they temporarily "unbrainwashed" themselves only to be "rebrainwashed."

---

That's fine. We just have a difference of opinion here. I believe that the ideals that the "hippies" had was closer to what is the truth about life. Yes, there were a lot of people who were hippies just because it was the cool thing to do, but that doesn't mean that the ideals that the movement had as a whole were wrong. For a short while, people had unbrainwashed themselves by using psychedelic chemicals and spirituality to remove their filter of conditioning. The government then destroyed the movement which caused these people to go back to living the illusion.

Phluck said:

But groups and subcultures of pacificts have existed since long before LSD was around. Some of them were even completely drug free, like say, the original Quakers.

---

Quote:

Could it be that LSD appeals to peaceful people, but doesn't necessarily encourage it?

---

Could it be both?

Zekebomb said:

are you saying that it was a battle between 2 forces: Government vs Van Allen Belt? and that Government won, and that was our last chance, and now Government is the last man standing?

---

Quote:

Also, what do you make of the fact that the Hippie Love Movement didn't succeed, even though it was fuelled by LSD, wonder of wonders? Why isn't Timothy Leary King of Planet Earth? To me it looks more like a bunch of hippies, jaded and disillusioned with the status quo, took a cool drug which made them see trippy shit and have trippy ideas, and individually they may or may not have improved their lives immeasurably, but collectively they were uncohesive, scattered and disorganized. They lacked any specific direction, and that's why the movement failed. indeed, I think that calling 'it' a 'movement' is a luxury provided by our distant historical vantage point.

---

I've already explained this. It didn't succeed because they made the drug illegal, harassed and arrested people in the movement, used the media to promote the government's slant on the movement, created the DEA, etc..

Paradigm said:

I think the most ridiculous thing is to assume that the government is powerful enough to stop a movement like that through prohibition. Everyone here understands that making something illegal doesn't stop people from doing it. Government is way too ineffective to actually succeed in goals like that. Hell, they can't even balance a budget, let alone stop a movement.

---

Huh? They did it. The government can use the media to make people believe anything. You know that, Paradigm. If you're constructing a building and someone comes along and steals your blueprints, can you still make that building even if you have the tools? No, you can try, but you just end up making a fucked up building because you can't remember how it was supposed to look.

Paradigm said:

In a sense, you're right about the government stopping the movement, but it did so by giving in to one of its main goals: withdrawal from Vietnam. Without that war to protest, the hippies lost their central purpose.

---

Vietnam ending took away one of the biggest purposes of the movement, but the media and the DEA are the biggest reasons why it lost it's way. Ask Chinacat about the DEA's impact on the Deadhead scene. He said it was "mankind's finest hour" before "Operation Dead End". After the DEA came on tour it fucked everything up. Now imagine if there was never a law against LSD. Imagine how the scene would prosper and spread.

Learyfan said:

Quote:

Zekebomb said: Also, what do you make of the fact that the Hippie Love Movement didn't succeed, even though it was fuelled by LSD, wonder of wonders? Why isn't Timothy Leary King of Planet Earth? To me it looks more like a bunch of hippies, jaded and disillusioned with the status quo, took a cool drug which made them see trippy shit and have trippy ideas, and individually they may or may not have improved their lives immeasurably, but collectively they were uncohesive, scattered and disorganized. They lacked any specific direction, and that's why the movement failed. indeed, I think that calling 'it' a 'movement' is a luxury provided by our distant historical vantage point.

---

I've already explained this. It didn't succeed because they made the drug illegal, harassed and arrested people in the movement, used the media to promote the government's slant on the movement, created the DEA, etc..

---

Phluck said:

Are we really though?

---

Quote:

And why do we need a chemical? That seems like a bizarre assumption to me. (I could just as easily say "You can't do that with chemicals, leaders, or ideas, no, you need a quality sandwich to get that done!") It would seem to me that ideas are far more powerful than any drug.

---

Quote:

The hippies didn't even really represent an enormous segment of the population, they were just a bunch of kids who had their own music, style, and a common political goal to rally around. Within the scene there was still plenty of violence, greed, dishonesty and general nastiness. It really wasn't that much different from the flappers, or the beatniks.

---

Quote:

When the Hell's Angels got involved with Kesey's scene, did it calm them down, or just bring in a bunch of unneeded aggression to the scene?

---

I think it was moronic of The Pranksters to associate with the Hells Angels.