Sixties Liberalism Article Review
Many years may have passed, but our actions today, just like in the earlier days, are governed by statutes which are upheld and articulated in the amendments that make up the bill of rights. The laws enacted, regardless of the provision, are bound to receive resistance and critics; they are various movements that come up to resist or support their enacting, example the call of the planet protection can be credited to the discussion on how to protect our planet better. The focus below will be on a review of an article by summarizing and highlighting the author’s opinion while offering my insights.
To begin with, the author sheds light on the civility that was enacted in 1942 and still upheld in the 60s; it accommodated uncivility in some aspects. As asserted by the author, the uncivility resistances stemmed from the civil rights movements that employed direct non-violent actions. Also, people used the Mahatma Gandhi lack of violent conflict in the 1906 campaigns and relied on the Gospel notion that one should love their enemies. Additionally, the author talks of the various forms that the protest took, which challenged both the civility complexity and the caste system. Unfortunately, while the non-violent protest was said to yield results, the whites claimed that they were attacking civility; the need to protect themselves shifted the peaceful protest to becoming violent ones. The author also talks of the counterculture movement whose advocates attacked the compromises and restraints of the civil society by valuing authenticity and not civility. During this period, as stated by the author, the lifestyle changed the lifestyle from the way of clothing to the use of drugs; it tried to enact new civility. Lastly, the author asserts that the issue of order and freedom has been handled today as a result of the institutional decorum, which is said to be problematic when there is a universal, equal rights commitment.
The author has undoubtedly articulated his views on the 1960s, and the change that happened and its effects on today’s society. I agree with him on various points; first, the author has highlighted the reasons that direct non-violent actions shifted to violence was by the oppressors viewing them as brutal. The evidence of this is depicted by the unrest that law enforcers employ when they feel threatened. Also, the author states that the counterculture that ended in the 1970s was a period that challenged the civility, and the use of drugs was enhanced; this is true since people termed the drugs as substances to free themselves from the civility upheld. Additionally, it was during this period was associated with the hippie lifestyle not only in the dressings and use of drugs but in the general outlook. The need to redefine sexual codes is also related to this movement. Lastly, the changes evident today, just as claimed by the author, were attributed by the decorum by the Supreme Court.
From the above discussion, the 1960 changes contributed to the American culture shift today, while some words were considered inappropriate today we hear them across the various media platforms. Also, the critics of the way of life then termed the adoption of a different way of life as immoral this is also evident in our society today. The author has also emphasized the shift of the non-violent protest to the violent ones; in today’s society, people are resolving to peaceful protest, but just like back then in the event the oppressors feel threatened, everything turns to the worse.
Farber, David R. 1994. The Sixties. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.