tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6832901.post463140271968893331..comments2024-03-25T19:48:24.624+11:00Comments on Oz Conservative: Review: The Year of our Lord 1943Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6832901.post-66810125076981915562020-06-23T01:37:21.558+10:002020-06-23T01:37:21.558+10:00Modern technology had also unÂleashed awesome new ...Modern technology had also unÂleashed awesome new powers, but these were all instances of physical force. If there are eternal realities, they must be, in their peaceful stasis, beyond the push and pull of mere power. And so each of the figures Jacobs describes sought either to subordinate the regime of force to the intellect and spirit or, in the case of Weil, to reject force outright and to bring about a Christianity of pure self-sacrifice. Andre Surkishttp://www.confiduss.com/en/jurisdictions/united-kingdom/culture/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6832901.post-17594886006421063092020-04-10T11:51:08.347+10:002020-04-10T11:51:08.347+10:00Yes, a lot of the big names in Australian intellec...Yes, a lot of the big names in Australian intellectual life were born around that time. Germaine Greer, Robert Hughes, Clive James, Frank Moorhouse, Bob Ellis, John Bell, Paddy McGuinness, Richard Neville - the list goes on. They shaped the cultural landscape by the time I was a young adult in the 1980s. Some of them (e.g. Greer & Neville) played a role in kick starting the international counterculture.<br /><br />It would be interesting for someone to come up with an explanation of why such a small cohort should have had so much influence.Mark Richardsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15961688379656119701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6832901.post-89170268541076295802020-04-10T00:33:53.254+10:002020-04-10T00:33:53.254+10:00I went and looked up some of the leading figures o...<em>I went and looked up some of the leading figures of the Australian counter-culture - and you're exactly right. In fact, their birth year tends to cluster around the years 1939-1941.</em><br /><br />People who write about generations mostly overlook the War Babies (born 1939-45) but it's a big mistake. They're a fascinating group. They're a totally distinctive generational sub-group all their own. And for such a small birth cohort they were incredibly influential. Nobody really knows why they were so distinctive and so influential. And nobody seems to want to study them.dfordoomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02306293859869179118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6832901.post-19269720116109659952020-04-09T22:39:22.479+10:002020-04-09T22:39:22.479+10:00The counter-culture was created by a sector of the...<i>The counter-culture was created by a sector of the previous generation, and especially the 1935-45 birth cohort.</i><br /><br />I went and looked up some of the leading figures of the Australian counter-culture - and you're exactly right. In fact, their birth year tends to cluster around the years 1939-1941. So not boomers after all.Mark Richardsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15961688379656119701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6832901.post-88741870432028905902020-04-07T02:49:26.010+10:002020-04-07T02:49:26.010+10:00A thought of my own: perhaps the student revolt of...<em>A thought of my own: perhaps the student revolt of the 1960s can be thought of, in part, as a kind of "revolt against the machine" - against the technocratic view of life favoured by the older elite (I'm thinking particularly of the hippy side of it, the drop out/commune with nature/alternative lifestyle side).</em><br /><br />Yes. To some extent the counter-culture was understandable. It's crucial to remember that the counter-culture had nothing to do with the Baby Boomers. The counter-culture was created by a sector of the previous generation, and especially the 1935-45 birth cohort. And it was a reaction against consumerism which had become a replacement for meaning in life. The early exponents of the counter-culture, in the late 50s and early 60s (when the Baby Boomers were still playing with dolls and toy fire engines) were repelled by the cult of consumerism which blossomed after the war. Consumerism was very much a side-effect of the technocratic worldview and its obsession with economic growth.<br /><br />To an extent even the counter-culture's revolt against marriage and traditional sexual morality was understandable (if misguided). They felt that marriage in the 50s was mostly about filling a house with consumer goods - married bliss meant having new wall-to-wall carpets and a new lounge suite and a radiogram and a TV set.<br /><br />It was all largely a reaction against the idea that economic growth could give people a reason to live.dfordoomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02306293859869179118noreply@blogger.com