English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

3 answers

The convulsions and radical and abrupt changes of the 1960s left an indelible mark on young people throughout the world, especially those who participated in cultural and political movements. The generational concept of Jose' Ortega y Gasset in which young people are swayed by a sense of commitment to achieve a particular set of goals seems especially applicable to the period.1 Openness of expression, tolerance and sensibility to humanitarian issues may be considered values upheld by the generation of the 1960s. On the political front, the "New Left" spoke to the concerns of a large number of young people, especially in its rejection of established ideological isms, its search for new utopian models, and its Weberian preoccupation with bureaucratic structures.

Youth behavior in the 1960s led social scientists to analyze generational concepts in depth. Theorists pointed to a wide range of changes on socio­economic, political and cultural fronts to explain youth rebelliousness in modern times. One explanation viewed young people as "rebels without a cause" whose predicament stemmed from the fact that existing modes of thinking and action such as fascism, anti-Semitism, orthodox Marxism and aggressive nationalism, which might have captivated the young and channeled their energies, had lost credibility.2 Other theorists were influenced by a seminal essay first published in 1928 by Karl Mannheim which saw generational consciousness and "style" (or "entelechy") as the product of social transformations in the society as a whole.3 Alain Touraine and Barbara and John Ehrenreich, among others, used this concept to show that student rebelliousness was either the result of the transformation of intellectual workers into a sector of the working class (the "new working class") or an expression of a newly consolidated middle class.4

The psychological theories of Lewis Feuer and others maintained that the youth rebels were passing through a prolonged adolescent stage with its inevitable rejection of, and protest against, the older generation. According to them, student protests in the 1960s represented a means of escape from the competitive pressures of society. Feuer argued that rebellious youth combined ethical concerns with a sense of self-destruction, as demonstrated by the fact that crisis periods (unlike the situation in normal times) produce a higher incidence of suicides among young people than those of older age groups. These writers implied that the political issues raised by youth leaders were themselves irrelevant, not to say artificially contrived, whose function was to allow students to act out, sublimate or evade their problems. New Left leaders such as Daniel Cohn Bendit naturally resented these views as disparging the seriousness of the goals of their movement and the messages which they were trying to convey.5

These explanations of generational conflict have in common a "macro" approach which assumes that societal changes and events have a uniform impact on the thinking of all young people, and which thus tends to minimize the differences among them. This assumption was held by Ortega y Gasset who emphasized the natural bonds between members of the same generation. According to the Spanish philosopher, even where formal contact between members of the same generation is lacking there is -- in the words of one of his biographers -- "still the common experience of the consciousness process and the link between older contemporaries and the future generations."6

The members of an entire generation are never so uniformly influenced by events and common experiences that they end up holding an identical ideology.7 Nevertheless, in spite of differences, they sometimes formulate a similar set of questions, embrace similar goals and are collectivel'i moved by similar problems. Examples of this combination of diversity and convergence abound. The "generation of 1898", which so profoundly influenced Ortega y Gasset, was devastated by Spain's defeat in the Spanish-American War and searched for a Spanish identity which would serve as a vehicle to lead the nation out of its backward state. Both monarchists and republicans figured among the generation's prominent intellectuals. In Venezuela, the "generation of 1928" consisted of participants in the protests against long-standing dictator Juan Vicente Gomez. By 1931, however, they divided into the Communists and non­Communists and grouped in two distinct political organizations. Prominent representatives of the generation would retain membership in these two groups and their offshoot parties and would go on to play a leading role in the nation's political life for the next half a century. Finally, members of the "generation of the 1960s" in the United States and Europe reacted to the War in Vietnam and other events of international concern while championing many of the same values and political ideals. Nevertheless, they participated in disparate political cultural movements, ranging from the "traditional" and New Left to the "hippie" subcultures

2007-02-02 21:44:02 · answer #1 · answered by ♥!BabyDoLL!♥ 5 · 0 0

i might say no for "Latin united statesa." and Mexico. i might insist it is Brazil. For the middle East you're able to argue many countries... Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran or maybe Syria to a pair quantity. Turkey additionally has extreme prestigue, yet little power. purely my ideas...

2016-12-13 07:30:29 · answer #2 · answered by kleckner 4 · 0 0

Lack of freedom, lack of individual rights, and no rule of law.

2007-02-06 06:12:04 · answer #3 · answered by JimTO 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers