Ping list for the discussion of the politics and social aspects that directly effects Generation Reagan / Generation-X (Those born from 1965-1981) including all the spending previous generations (i.e. The Baby Boomers) are doing that Gen-X and Y will end up paying for.
Freep mail me to be added or dropped. See my home page for details and previous articles.
So many nuances, so little time.
Let me know what Mr. Hershberg the "Russia Expert" predicted in the 1980s about the future of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact. Then I'll decide whether to take him seriously.
The thing is, if Reagan were alive, his own sense of humility would allow him to give some of the credit to pop culture. He was that big a man. There was no smallness in him.
But the political left will never give him the credit he is due. They are that small.
The difficulty with his thesis is that it was not a cultural victory, and that those that he proposes overwhelmed the ossified nomenklatura in fact were largely in sympathy with them or at the very least made great efforts to promote the idea of moral equivalence between a parent society that indulged and defended them and a Soviet Union that, were it victorious, would have crushed them. It wasn't the Beatles, it wasn't peace, love, and dope, and it certainly wasn't "we are the world."
What it was defies efforts to overintellectualize or to see in multitudinous shades of gray. It was this: "My idea of American policy toward the Soviet Union is simple, and some would say simplistic. It is this: 'We win and they lose.' What do you think of that?" -- Ronald Reagan, to future National Security Adviser Richard V. Allen, 1977.
Hershberg and his will go to their graves denying this simple proposition because of its simplicity. Pity them.
Don't take the brown acid...
The Beatles' "counter-culture" revolution in America ushered in Communism, Marxism, and Socialism. It may possible that rock and roll helped generate a youthful rebellion against the Soviet Union but those "rebelling" in America EMBRACED the USSR.
It is an intricate and fascinating story, but the conclusion is relatively simple: the "left" as we know it today is little more than an advertising gimmick run amok. This, according to Frank, is the real reason for the prevalence of left-wing ideology in popular culture and its associated media and advertising industries.
The scales fell from my eyes when I read Conquest of Cool. I think it is the most important book of the last 10 years.
Oh sure, Gorbachev would have ended Communism without Reagan pushing him -right, and the Hippies and Beatles helped end it? Puuhhhleeze...... The author needs to roll another one and smoke it. What a fantasy.
It wasn't the Beatles that did ended the Russian Empire, it was Louis "Sachmo" Armstrong who made many trips to Russia playing that American Music called Jazz.
(Sorry if it's already been said - I'm too anxious to read all replies!)
Back when, liberals did the all-hail Mikhail. This is no different.
The funny thing about this statement by this genius is that Mikhail Gorbachev was STILL a communist. He basically wanted to SAVE the USSR, not destroy it!
So how can Gorbachev possibly be the #1 man responsible for the downfall of something he wanted to preserve?
Ah, I get it - his INCOMPETENCY?
"It's a lot more complicated than that. If you were to pick one person who ended Soviet communism, it would be Mikhail Gorbachev."
Actually, I agree that ANYTHING is more complex than just 1 factor in changing anything. That's just the way life is.
However, he equivicates by naming a "1 person" - i.e., a primary reason.
Just that he should put "Ronald Reagan" as a primary reason, as well as being the nail in the coffin.