Dissecting Leftism - Grouchy Old Cripple - John C. Drew - NewsBlaze - Rebel Pundit - Right Wing News - Ritely
Yeah. It also turned sour when the hard drugs came into the scene. I don't know the answer. What I do know, is that our laws don't prevent anyone from doing any drug they choose, whenever they want to. If preventing drug use was the goal, it's been a complete failure.It's too late to turn back the clock, but I think the approach to drugs should have been to shame people out of using them. If drugs were around, (which they already are), and they were looked at as something that losers do, I think less people would use them. Kind of like picking your nose in public. It's not against the law, but most people just don't do it.Of course, using drugs is yet another thing that the left has worked hard on, to present as cool.
My point was, it was the LIBertarian view of turning the other cheek to what others do that exacerbated the 60s drug era.Had they cracked down on the movement early on, like arresting the older hippies introducing the drugs to the teenage girls and returning the girls to their parents.Who knows, we may not have had a Clinton era scourge on the country in the 90s.I remember reading an article in the mid 60s where the older guys pushing drugs at the time were admitted Marxists doing the work of the USSR.
Maybe they didn't crack down in CA, but they sure did in the rest of the country. When the Nixon administration classified marijuana as a schedule I controlled substance, young kids around the country were being thrown in prison for small amounts...even a single roach. Lives were destroyed.It backfired. By the time Nixon resigned in shame, a lot of people had run into the arms of the left. It's a hatred for the right, that still continues today.
It was a different time, all drugs were viewed with contempt.Were they wrong? Looking at the state of the country today, Hell no they weren't, but they at least tried to stop it, now we have even bigger issues to be concerned with than the destruction of the American family/culture, we have our very way of life on the precipice of destruction.No, I don't fault anyone for trying to preserve our culture for future generations. I believe it's safe to say if 1960s America had seen where we are today, they would have made a lot more changes.
We're easing toward disagreeing again. Preserving the culture is one thing, but for the most part, the hippies were a bunch of harmless idiots; and Nixon passing laws that hung a felony around their necks and imprisoned many of them for years, (over simple possession), was a really bad idea. He went against what his own advisors told him.I think that Nixon helped to breed the rabid hatred that we see from the left today. The hippies graduated from college and started taking our schools. It's been a slow progression, but guys like Nixon helped give birth to people like Bill Ayers, and the guy we have sitting in the white house today.
It wasn't Nixon policy, it goes all the way back to 1914, he merely kept it alive, he and Congress both, ignored the recommendations of the Shafer Commission.But I'm talking about a much earlier time, nearly a whole decade earlier, back when hard drugs were always associated with weed users, the two were virtually inseparable and crime was a known element with those that used drugs.No, Nixon is not to blame, States like Az had the toughest laws on the books for weed possession, but to put all the blame on one incident in history is kind of silly.
So it's our culture from the 50's that we should preserve?Not the moral degradation from the 20's? Or the lawlessness, booze and prostitution that marked the gold rush? Not our culture from when we enslaved people, and bought and sold human flesh?
So what's your point? You blamed Nixon for something he had nothing to do with, granted he was no Conservative, but he didn't do what you claimed.Society had seen what damage drugs can do to it, and they wanted no part of it, it had been that way for decades.Now that society is collapsing, you seem to want to simply throw in the towel and claim it's a freedom to abuse ones body?Is that what I'm getting out of this conversation, that people have a civil right to do any substance, that Govt has no place in upholding the social mores of society?Give that some serious thought, society is nothing But, social mores and values agreed upon and held together by Govt.
My point is, that by reclassifying weed as a schedule I narcotic, shooting hippies at Kent State, turning fire hoses on them and beating them for protesting, Nixon became more of a fascist, than a role model for conservative values. If we add in the "value" system that created J Edgar Hoover, government imposed racial segregation, etc., it's understandable that the left got organized and sought to "remake" that system.I'm a conservative, but I'm also a realist. The hippies should have been laughed at, but tolerated. The movement would have dissolved without Nixon going after them. The communes fell apart when they realized that they had to work, and that zero centralized authority led to chaos. Even the drug thing crashed in large part; it was fun and games when they were just smoking weed, but when people started overdosing on heroin and jumping off buildings during bad LSD trips, the fun kind of ended.For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. When Nixon made it a priority to wipe the hippy scourge from the face of the earth, they went from being a bunch of pot smokers, to an organized militant force; one that we are still dealing with today....and losing.
+Geeez K, get your history straight, no wonder you're confused about why we are where we are today.Again, Nixon had nothing to do with Kent State University, it was the mayor that asked the Governor to roll out the NG.But like I said before, 90% of the Nation was against the hippy moment, it was a slap in the face to American culture, and the fact that they were associated with drugs made them a scourge of the planet.But to now just give in and accept bad behavior as a freedom is ludicrous, it plays right into the hands of the leftists trying to destroy the last vestiges of morality in this Nation.
At this point, all I'm worried about is our financial plummet and the shredding of our constitution. It's fine to stick by your guns, and say that people that smoke pot should go to prison, or that abortion should be illegal, or that we need to return to 50's era morality, but no one that runs on those things will ever get elected. Frankly, I don't care what people do, nor am I interested in calling for government imposed morality on social issues. It's too late for that. If we allow Obama and whoever his successor might be, to complete the destruction of our economy, we're all toast anyway.
You never did point out what you disagreed with in my post, it is all factual.
I'm not disagreeing with your post. Drugs were indeed looked at with contempt.As long as society looked down on drug use, including pot, it would have remained taboo to use them, and the number of pot smokers would have remained fairly small.When Nixon voiced his open contempt for hippies, and made possession of small amounts of pot into a felony that carried prison time, he blew it. I know he didn't have anything to do with Kent State, but his policies did.The hippies, for the most part, came from decent families, as did the kids that were shipped off to Vietnam, and they all had parents. Between kids being shipped off to Nam and kids being sentenced to prison for weed, Nixon became the figurehead of a hardline right wing establishment, that was out of control.By the time Nixon resigned in shame, and the Vietnam disaster was abandoned, drugs and hippy liberalism had gone mainstream. Kent State was a catalyst, as was our failure in Vietnam, as was the invention of the birth control pill, along with other things. The country had changed, and the days of bobby socks and flat top crew cuts were over. Many of the former hippies, cut their hair and headed straight into academia......where they remain today.The plain fact is, that hardcore social conservatism isn't going to sell, nor can it be forced. On the other hand, I think that fiscal conservatism, along with a push to restore guaranteed constitutional freedom for everyone, is an easy sell, and will get conservatives into office. To hell with the gays, pot smokers, women getting abortions, etc. They don't matter right now.
I remember this time quite well, LBJ was actually the cause and effect, it was under his administration that caused the hippy generation, the social reversal of what was considered normal, it was his administration, through the DOJ that concluded more that 85% of crime in the US was related to drugs.Nixon merely inherited the mess that LBJ created. But keep in mind, all this was taking place in a small window of time, the fire was already raging, the drug culture was underway, Nixon had two options, fight or retreat, he fought hard and history only looks at who lost the battle, not the one who exacerbated it.Nixon had few qualities, but he didn't hate the country, nor was he a racist like LBJ, in fact Nixon really didn't do all that great of a job, but I'm not willing to lie about history and place the blame where is does not belong.Nixon was between a rock and a hard place, the country's very social fabric was unraveling in one single decade and he at least was willing to try and save it.I think if the 60s had any clue as to what the future held, the country would have taken a very different path, but we didn't.Now with the ability of hindsight of the last 50 years, how does that bode for the next 50?My guess would be collapse, and like Nixon, I'm not willing to concede, like him, I too will make a concerted effort to stop the communist grasp around the neck of the country, and if that means voting for people that are willing to fight drug crime and hold Conservative values, then so be it.I will never bend over and accept the degradation of the country like so many are willing to capitulate and give it over to the leftists.I agree we need to pick our battles, but we don't have to surrender any either, that's how you lose wars.