Sixties: A Time of Change

¶ … Sixties: A Time of Change and Strife

The 1960s were an incredible decade, marked with change, strife, and success. From this decade, we can learn that success does not generally occur without a little bit of strife and change. One of the most significant changes in society during the 60s was the civil rights movement. This movement was in full swing in the sixties and actually had fuel from the fifties. The greatest leader for the civil rights movement, Martin Luther King, emerged in the sixties and took the movement farther than it had ever been. Along with racial unrest, the country was also experiencing unrest on college campuses. Students were protesting the Vietnam War and their voices were ones that simply would not die down. Sit ins and protests became just as much a part of the evening news as did the war itself. The protests were significant because the student protesting were the very ones being drafted to fight in the war. The protests became in integral part of the decade for they demonstrated the power of a collective voice. From this sense of empowerment came the counterculture movement of the sixties where sex, drugs, and rock and roll ruled the day. Women, too, were facing new challenges with the sixties as many began to work outside the home. Demand for better pay and equal treatment were the foundation of the women's movement. The sixties was simply a decade of turmoil. Across the globe, Europeans were fighting for freedom. Germany was simply too divided to stand and from within, protests spoke out against communism. The legacy of the sixties is one that speaks of strife, mayhem, and change. What we learn from this decade is the fact that change comes from turmoil. While Martin Luther King spoke of nonviolent protests, he was remembering the violence heaped upon African-Americans. Across the globe, Germans fought for that same freedom in a different way.

One cannot mention the sixties without mentioning Martin Luther King. King was an eloquent pastor who became leader of a movement because he appealed to the masses through messages from the heart. With passion, King spoke to thousands of African-Americans to work for their rights in a nonviolent way. King's words were powerful because he lived exactly as he spoke. He was a man able to reason with others simply by speaking with them. He also knew that violence would get his people nowhere. Even from a jail, he wrote about nonviolent action as a way to secure the rights that African-Americans deserved. King wrote nonviolence does not mean to humiliate or defeat but win through understanding. King's words hit the heart of many African-Americans and he even arranged a march in Washington D.C., where 250,000 people met and showed their "support for civil rights and racial harmony" (Davidson 1170). King understood the need for protests but he also realized that control was a significant aspect of protests. Things could get out of hand easily and this was not what King had in mind for racial harmony. Violence, he said, does more harm to the cause and, more than likely, more harm than good in the end. King was a leader and a spokesman that was able to articulate what a group of people was feeling and what they needed. He was gifted in that he had the ability to speak to all with a sense of understanding. He was truly one of the most compelling voices of the sixties.

The role of the student took on a new meaning in the 1960s. The unsettling war in Vietnam set the stage for this change in the form of protests and sits ins. According to David Farber, the first protests appeared in the form of "teach-ins." This movement began in 1965 at the University of Michigan and was so popular that the idea spread to more than 120 colleges and universities by the end of that year. (Farber) These groups alerted the rest of the country to what was happening in Vietnam. The students wished to "open up discussion based on their own research and inquiries. Many students and faculty came away from the teach-in experience with a growing skepticism about the veracity of mainstream perspectives on Vietnam and an increasing distrust of the men who were managing the war" (Farber). This was a movement that was not going to go away because the students were directly involved with the war. The unrest was something that could not be kept quiet and before long, new of the protests were appearing on the news along with the news of the war. Organizations sprung up from thee protests in an attempt to enlighten students. For example, the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee and Students for a Democratic Society were two groups that emerged from this movement. Their efforts in the protests were quite remarkable in that the government could not make them go away. Student protests might not have changed Washington's mind about anything but they sure did make them open their eyes to the fact that they could not close their eyes and hope Vietnam would go away because it would not. The protests did force politicians to address it even though they had no clear-cut answers or solutions to the problem. The protests also demonstrated the power of protests. They illustrate that they can be useful in getting information to the people.

From the 1960s sprang a counterculture that seemed bent on supporting unconventional ideas like peace and love instead of war and fighting. The counterculture of the decade is perhaps one of the most prolific because it stems from a growing mindset that emerged from the civil rights movement. Young people across the country were abandoning their parents' ideals and adopting their own, which included new ideas regarding music, fashion, and drugs. The days of the straight-laced teenager seemed lost in the mire of the 1960s. As more and more young people became disillusioned from the war, a growing idea to overthrow the establishment was bubbling under the surface. Young people wanted to speak out against the ways of the world that lead to this war, which was greed and materialism. Therefore, in protest, many youth turned toward "spiritual, nonmaterial goals" (Davidson 1183). Timothy Leary was one of the most popular leaders of the day with his notion of turning on, tuning in, and dropping out of school. Leary was a Harvard psychology professor who followed his own advice and left college. Many followed suit and "embraced poverty as a superior way of life that afforded time to experiment with music, sex, and drugs" (1183). Unconventional drugs were a part of the fringe society in the 50s but their use "dramatically increased" (1183) in the 60s. Drugs were the ticket to open the inner mind to a "higher state of consciousness" (1183). Much of this can be traced to Leary, who experimented with mushrooms, and LSD. Harvard dismissed Leary and he joined the "psychedelic lecture circuit, going from college to college describing the joys of drug use" (1183). For many who were uncomfortable with using LSD, marijuana was the drug of choice, which by the end of the decade, was widely used on college campuses across the United Stated. Davidson notes that the counterculture movement resembled many past movements that attempted to break free from traditional ideals and work toward more utopian movements. Those submerged in this culture lived in communes and attempted a life of living on les and scrounging for materials. Sexual freedom was a characteristic of this movement of liberating members "from the repressive inhibitions tat distorted the lives of the 'uptight' parents" (1183). Protests against parents and any type of establishment seemed in order from the younger counterculture. Music was also a force in the movement that had an impact on youth. John Lennon might have been one of the loudest voices speaking out against the Vietnam War. The more he spoke, the more he became a symbol for the counterculture. Lennon was not afraid to speak his mind and it worked out that he could also sing it as well. Songs like "Imagine" and "Give Peace a Chance" revealed how Lennon felt about the war and his music convinced others that he was on to something.

Women also began to turn down a different path in the 1960s. The women's liberation movement began in the mid 1960s and dealt primarily with the inequalities that women faced in the workplace. It would only seem natural that women be affected by the many changes that were occurring in the country. At the beginning of the century, women comprised of only 20% of the workplace but within 50 years, they were half of the workforce. This change can be blamed on the "shifting composition" (Bailey 1019) of the economy. By 1950, more than 30 million jobs were in the service sector and women took these jobs. As a result, they became the principal employment beneficiaries of the "emerging post-industrial era" (1020). The change was not all positive, however. Bailey notes that the social and psychological transformation that followed women working outside the home "mounted to tidal-wave proportions" (1020). While women working outside the home in the urban age were not too terribly different from women working outside the home in the agricultural age, the movement raised questions about women's roles, family, and the workplace. The feminist movement was born from a mentality that women did not need to sty at home. Once they were in the workplace, however, they complained that they were expected to bring home the bacon and cook it as well. Feminists protested against sexism and even went up against historic giants like Yale and West Point. It was not long before women were seen flying airplanes and traveling in space. Feminists also railed against tradition organizations that judged women for their looks such as beauty pageants. They burned their bras and attacked advertisers that demeaned women in any way. Feminists formed the National Organization of Women to work for the civil rights of women.

Inspired by the student protests in the America, students in German universities were organizing protests against traditional administrations in the country. Sit-ins were very popular as well as attacks. For example, the Axel Springer Group was attacked by students in a protest. Some of these groups had Marist ties. The student claimed that opposition was necessary to ensure that the people were being represented fairly. Thomas Streissguth maintains that the students "organized small groups to press their demands for change" (Streissguth). There were many "left-wing" (Streissguth) West German magazines that "openly favored the Communist governments of eastern Europe . . . To attain a Communist society like that of the Soviet Union and East Germany, the leftist students -- and a few journalists -- called for the violent overthrow of non-Communist governments" (Streissguth). The Baader-Meinhof Gang is a case of how prolific the student protests became. The gang was responsible for several robberies and bombs protesting the communist control of East Germany. In Eastern Europe, students were also inspired by the protests they were seeing. In Poland, for example, student protested for free speech rights, which were restricted by communist power. Nikita Khrushchev was removed from power because of such protests.