That's a beautiful tribute, Ravi. I don't understand the point of beating up on hippies. What's wrong with the world today is triumphal capitalism, militarism, imperialism -- none of which can be ascribed to any delusions or
excesses of the hippies.
[WS:] It is not beating up on hippies, Carl, but putting things in a perspective. The hippies were, for the most part a US middle class phenomenon, and to a lesser extent European middle class one. The number of people involved in this movement in one way or another was less than one percent of the world's population - the entire US population is what, about 6 percent? The most remarkable thing about them was the visibility they gained thank to the media attention they received.
So assuming that this tiny group of people had any impact on the bulk of the population of Asia, Africa, Latin America or even a big chunk of Europe that commensurate with their cultural salience, flattering as it may be, is a bit deceiving. A more accurate statement would be that it is the US and US-influenced media that have a world wide impact capable of propelling an otherwise marginal phenomenon to a world celebrity status.
Do not get me wrong, the hippies bring very fond memories from my college years (this is probably true of many subscribers to this list) - but just because something was important and influential to me and my friends does not mean it was important and influential in general.
I may also add that there is a difference between hippies in the 1960s and 70s and the regression to the 1960s culture thirty years later. To what degree the former was a fad and to what degree it was a genuine movement is a subject to debate. But it is not debatable, IMO, that the "regression to the 1960s" is nothing but an expression of political impotence and intellectual bankruptcy - a clear sign of living in the past and not having much to offer today.
Wojtek