It's 1968 All Over Again

PJ Media ^ | July 7, 2016 | Michael Walsh

[Jim Noble]

It's 1968 All Over Again

Wrong. It's 1860.

[thinden]

"This crap in Dallas looks to be a staged “false flag” event to take away attention from getting caught red handed obstructing justice with the Bubba-Lynch meeting."

you could be exactly right!

not a peep anywhere in the news on hildabeast walking
not even a cheap shot at trump??

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***Myth: Common belief is that a disproportionate number of blacks were killed in the Vietnam War.***

I read in a NEWSPAPER at the time that a higher number HISPANICS were being killed in that war than either whites or blacks.

[Buckeye McFrog]

I was a preschooler in 1968. Yet I still recall vividly how scared my parents seemed to be.

[Fred Hayek]

The North Vietnam Namese did not beat us at Tet. Walter Krankheit beat us at Tet.

[longfellow]

They threw everything they had into that attack and it failed. The general was going to surrender but then John fn Kerry the traitor gave him hope and knew if they could hold on that public opinion would change and they could win.
And that is why Kerry is in the Vietnam War museum with a plaque thanking him for helping win the war. So yes he was a war hero, he just doesn’t tell you who’s side.

[SparkyBass]

Amazingly, I saved this editorial from 1993 about the very same thing...

No Guardrails
August 1968 and the death of self-restraint.
(Editor’s note: This editorial appeared in The Wall Street Journal, March 18, 1993.)

The gunning down of abortion doctor David Gunn in Florida last week shows us how small the barrier has become that separates civilized from uncivilized behavior in American life. In our time, the United States suffers every day of the week because there are now so many marginalized people among us who don’t understand the rules, who don’t think that rules of personal or civil conduct apply to them, who have no notion of self-control. We are the country that has a TV commercial on all the time that says: “Just do it.” Michael Frederick Griffin just did it.
An anti-abortion protester of intense emotions, he walked around behind the Pensacola Women’s Medical Services Clinic and pumped three bullets into the back of Dr. Gunn. Emptied himself, Michael Griffin then waited for the police to take him away. A remark by his father-in-law caught our eye: “Now we’ve got to take care of two grandchildren.”
As the saying goes, there was a time. And indeed there really was a time in the United States when life seemed more settled, when emotions, both private and public, didn’t seem to run so continuously at breakneck speed, splattering one ungodly tragedy after another across the evening news. How did this happen to the United States? How, in T.S. Eliot’s phrase, did so many become undone?

We think it is possible to identify the date when the U.S., or more precisely when many people within it, began to tip off the emotional tracks. A lot of people won’t like this date, because it makes their political culture culpable for what has happened. The date is August 1968, when the Democratic National Convention found itself sharing Chicago with the street fighters of the anti-Vietnam War movement.
The real blame here does not lie with the mobs who fought bloody battles with the hysterical Chicago police. The larger responsibility falls on the intellectuals—university professors, politicians and journalistic commentators—who said then that the acts committed by the protesters were justified or explainable. That was the beginning. After Chicago, the justifications never really stopped. America had a new culture, for political action and personal living.
With great rhetorical firepower, books, magazines, opinion columns and editorials defended each succeeding act of defiance—against the war, against university presidents, against corporate practices, against behavior codes, against dress codes, against virtually all agents of established authority.
What in the past had been simply illegal became “civil disobedience.” If you could claim, and it was never too hard to claim, that your group was engaged in an act of civil disobedience—taking over a building, preventing a government official from speaking, bursting onto the grounds of a nuclear cooling station, destroying animal research, desecrating Communion hosts—the shapers of opinion would blow right past the broken rules to seek an understanding of the “dissidents” (in the ‘60s and ‘70s) and “activists” (in the ‘80s and now).
Concurrently, the personal virtue known as self-restraint was devalued. In the process, certain rules that for a long time had governed behavior also became devalued. Whatever else was going on here, we were repeatedly lowering the barriers of acceptable political and personal conduct.
You can argue, as many did and still do, that all this was necessary because the established order wouldn’t respond or change. But then you still need to account for the nation’s simultaneous dive into extensive social and personal dysfunction. You need to account for what is happening to those people within U.S. society who seem least able to navigate the political and personal torrents that they become part of, like Michael Griffin. Those torrents began with the antiwar movement in the 1960s.

Those endless demonstrations, though, were merely one part of a much deeper shift in American culture—away from community and family rules of conduct and toward more autonomy, more personal independence. As to limits, you set your own.
The people who provided the theoretical underpinnings for this shift—the intellectuals and political leaders who led the movement—did very well, or at least survived. They are born with large reservoirs of intelligence and psychological strength. The fame and celebrity help, too.
But for a lot of other people it hasn’t been such an easy life to sustain. Not exceedingly sophisticated, neither thinkers nor leaders, never interviewed for their views, they’re held together by faith, friends, fun and, at the margins, by fanaticism. The big political crackups make the news—a Michael Griffin or the woman on trial in Connecticut for the attempted bombing of the CEO of a surgical-device company or the ‘70s radicals who accidentally blew themselves up in a New York brownstone. But the personal crackups just float like flotsam through the country’s hospitals and streets. You can also see some of them on daytime TV, America’s medical museum of personal autonomy.

It may be true that most of the people in Hollywood who did cocaine survived it, but many of the weaker members of the community hit the wall. And most of the teenage girls in the Midwest who learn about the nuances of sex from magazines published by thirtysomething women in New York will more or less survive, but some continue to end up as prostitutes on Eighth Avenue. Everyone today seems to know someone who couldn’t handle the turns and went over the side of the mountain.
These weaker or more vulnerable people, who in different ways must try to live along life’s margins, are among the reasons that a society erects rules. They’re guardrails. It’s also true that we need to distinguish good rules from bad rules and periodically re-examine old rules. But the broad movement that gained force during the anti-war years consciously and systematically took down the guardrails. Incredibly, even judges pitched in. All of them did so to transform the country’s institutions and its codes of personal behavior (abortion, for instance).
In a sense, it has been a remarkable political and social achievement for them. But let’s get something straight about the consequences. If as a society we want to live under conditions of constant challenge to institutions and limits on personal life, if we are going to march and fight and litigate over every conceivable grievance, then we should stop crying over all the individual casualties, because there are going to be a lot of them.

Michael Griffin and Dr. David Gunn are merely two names on a long list of confrontations and personal catastrophe going back 25 years. That today is the status quo. The alternative is to start rethinking it.

[exit82]

Ironic how the media is still the same enemy to America that it was in 1968.

[redangus]

Bill Ayres and his friends were not Boomers, they are all in their mid to late seventies. The oldest Boomers are probably 71 at best.

[CommieCutter]

Its amazing that you can look at white people and with about 85% accuarcy pick out the Bernie Sanders voters. I think its a prerequisite to be unattractive.

[DJ Taylor]

In chaos theory, the butterfly effect is the sensitive dependence on initial conditions in which a small change in one state of a deterministic nonlinear system can result in large differences in a larger state. In other words, a butterfly flapping its wings in Texas can cause later a typhoon in the Japanese Sea.

But not for the Vietnam War and the 1968 Tet Offensive, Obama would still be a Community Organizer and hanging out in Chicago bath houses, but the “Butterfly Effect” of the 1968 Tet Offensive made it possible for Barack Hussein Obama, a homosexual Muslim Communist, to be elected to the highest office in the land.

During the Vietnam War, the 1968 Tet Offensive resulted in the annihilation of Viet Cong units throughout South Vietnam and was a disaster for the Communist insurgency; it never recovered from its loses. This Tet Offensive was a coordinated “Do or Die” attack by every Viet Cong unit in South Vietnam on the night of January 30 and the morning of January 31, 1968 that simultaneously struck every South Vietnamese City, village, and military installation in an attempt to win the war in one country wide attack; they failed and they paid the price for their failure; they died.
The war was carried on after Tet 1968 by invading North Vietnamese, and North Vietnam could never move sufficient troops down the Ho Chi Minh Trail to ever hope to defeat the United States effort in South Vietnam, so they resorted to another Communist tactic; they lied.

1968 was a Presidential Election year in the United States, and the Communist Party USA attempted to use the Tet Offensive to influence the election by claiming it was a Communist victory and the war was lost. This American Communist Party organized an anti-war movement and assembled enough strength through this movement to seize control of the Democrat Party that summer during the 1968 Democrat Convention in Chicago.

These Communists attempted to nominate a Presidential candidate who would end the war and they failed, but the Communist Party USA still retained control of the Democrat Party, and this Party managed to elect enough Leftists to Congress to cut funding for the Vietnam War and the war was then lost, so in this way the 1968 Tet Offensive was indeed a Communist victory.

After using the Tet Offensive to gain control of the Democrat Party, the Communist Party USA never lost control of the Democrat Party, and when a few decades later they managed to elect an avowed Marxist Communist, Barack Hussein Obama, to the Presidency of the United States, it made the 1968 Tet Offensive the greatest Communist victory of all times.

[kabar]

In 1968 89% of the population was non-Hispanic whites; today it is 63%. By 2019 half of the population 18 and under will be minorities as classified by the USG.

We have created a permanent underclass populated by mostly blacks and Hispanics. The wealth gap is growing along with a sense of frustration in our inner cities where the unemployment rate for blacks without a high school diploma is 95%. Some graphs to show why this is occurring:

The black unemployment rate has consistently been twice as high as the white unemployment rate for 50 years:

The gap in household income between blacks and whites hasn't narrowed in the last 50 years

the wealth disparity between whites and blacks grew even wider during the Great Recession

The black poverty rate is no longer declining:

Our schools are more segregated today than in 1980

The marriage gap has widened over the past 50 years:

Blacks are still far more likely to be uninsured than whites. That's true for both adults and children:

The racial disparity in incarceration rates is bigger than it was in the 1960s:

[kabar]

I spent my year in Vietnam 1967-68.

[Roccus]

The Obama Administration has set back race relations 50 years

Like I said 3 years ago...

Nonsense! Race relations are a two way street. Whites were just too damn stupid to see just how much they were and are hated by blacks. Whites were of a mind that with the fall of Jim Crow and the advancement of Nixon's Affirmative Action, blacks would then assimilate into mainstream American culture and we could all live as one. HAH! For decades the likes of Wright, Sharpton, Farrakhan, Muhammad and dozens of other preachers have been inculcating their flocks with one thought and one thought only. "The white man is responsible for ALL your ills. You will NEVER be free while the white man exists." Obama is just acting on what he has been taught for decades....and the feral vermin are starting to realize that.

It's not that relations have been set back. Rather the TRUE nature of those relations are now coming to light.

43 posted on ‎10‎/‎5‎/‎2013‎ ‎10‎:‎11‎:‎48‎ ‎PM by Roccus

[GuavaCheesePuff]

Oh yea, yea. They all look alike. Notice how they always have dirty, stinky hair? They look weak.

[JimRed]

The oldest Boomers are probably 71 at best.

Yep, I just beat the boom and will be 73 in the fall. Dad got home on leave during WWII. Army 33 years, retired CWO, passed at 73. If I got his genes, been nice knowin' you. If I got mom's genes, she made it to 95...

[abigkahuna]

I was 25 in 1968. It is not 1968 again.

Yeah, the music in ‘68 was great...today’s tune-age sucks beyond belief. Not even any good protest songs. Just guys and gals grabbing their crotches and screeching un-rythmatic nonsense.

[x]

Whites were just too damn stupid to see just how much they were and are hated by blacks.

Generalize much? Black and White communities and lives are separate and separated and there's ill will, but to say hatred is too much of a generalization.

[entropy12]

kabar is right. I lived through the worst riots in Chicago after MLK was assassinated. I do not recall shots with rifles. It was mostly throwing rocks and setting cars on fire.

[Hattie]

Yes, and in addition remember a couple of weeks ago the Dems sitting on the floor in Congress demanding votes for gun control. The Resident is furious he didn’t get that passed yet so now he send them out with rifles so he can scream some more about it.