Wednesday 20 September 2023

Why did the sixties/ seventies counter-culture makes things worse instead of better?

At the time of the late sixties and early 1970s; there was a general feeling that - even if the specific content of the counter-culture (e.g. mysticism, radical politics, 'mind-expanding' drugs, astrology, tarot, magic, neopaganism andwitchcraft, crystals, geomancy, flying saucers etc.) was not valid, and was risky to health and sanity; such activities might well serve as a first step towards a genuine answer to the problem of alienation and totalitarian bureaucracy (The System).   

But this did not happen, and instead the counter-culture became the New Age, and converged with mainstream-leftist socio-politics; usually by embracing the sexual revolution through its continual mutations, and then picking the wrong side with later Litmus Test issues that were being used strategically towards the totalitarian world government that eventually emerged into the open in early 2020. 

There were what, at the time, sounded-like reasonable and plausible arguments as to why the negative critique of The System, and the attempt to achieve an integrated wholeness of personality, were beneficial in themselves and would tend towards even better things. Experience, however, showed that in general this was not happen, is not happening. 

The reason is quite simple, which is that socio-political movements such as the counter-culture are operating at a relatively superficial level, beneath which are metaphysical assumptions concerning the nature of reality. 

When these assumptions (which are usually unconscious, and/or regarded as being empirically-derived - e.g. from 'science' - rather than the assumptions they actually are) are such as to sustain the totalitarian-System, then that is what will emerge; no matter how seemingly radical may be a person's surface opinions and lifestyle.   

That, I believe, is why the sixties radicals became the bureaucrats of the 80s, 90s and into the millennium. And why this process continues. 



Robert Brockman II said...

"Why did the sixties/ seventies counter-culture makes things worse instead of better?" -- because said counter-culture and newage was sponsored by state-level actors (often in intelligence) who had been corrupted long before. The roots of all this trace to Crowley and his crew. "It was all bad from the beginning."

Jay Dyer and friends have more details on this.

dearieme said...

"Why did the sixties/ seventies counter-culture makes things worse instead of better?"

Because what was actually sought was girls who wore shorter skirts and said "yes" more often. Instead of such simplicity the whole thing became freighted with pseudo-intellectual gibberish which appealed mightily to pseudo-intellects.

Bruce Charlton said...

@d - In retrospect it seems clear that hedonistic consequence-free promiscuity was just a snare to get the masses onto the slippery slope of sterile mutilations and druggings of the current phase of the sexual revolution.

Avro G said...

It seems to me that the “counter- culture” was always a wholly owned subsidiary of the satanic global mafia that runs the “west.” E.g., the LSD craze that was largely fed by the CIA. Manson was likely run by them, too, though he perhaps got out of control. Or maybe not. There is some evidence that they were involved in certain religious movements of that era and since, particularly the so-called “Jesus People.” We can only speculate how many other schemes they were involved in. When I say “they” I include the spook agencies of all the anglosphere nations including Canada where a lot of the research was done. It looks to me like they started out in the fifties seeking how to create Manchurian candidates and grew ever more ambitious until they set a goal of nothing less than creating a whole Manchurian society/planet where every soul on earth could be unconsciously controlled and their minds and memories filled and erased at will from a central location. I think we’re not quite there yet but that’s what they want.