He Hated the Hippies...Didn't He?

[Bubbles McGee]

First, as was previously noted, "Gene" had nothing to do with the episode.

By the time this was filmed, in the fall of 1968, the "Hippie Movment", whatever that was, had NOT waned. In fact, it was in full flower, if you'll pardon the expression.

Freddie Frieberger was desperately throwing his crappy ideas at the screen in a misguided attempt at broadening the audience. Take a look at the "Get Smart" hippie episode, or the "Batman hippie episode, or the "I Dream of Jeannie" hipisode.

Freddie was a hack, and he wrote and stole like one.

In fairness though, the idea of capitalizing on what's current and trendy and slipping into your TV show is not original to FF and it continues to go on to the present day.

 

[Greg Cox]

The other problem with the ep, of course, is that how do you do hippies without the sex and drugs or even the anti-war protests? So the show had to make it all about the music and eccentric clothing and lingo and some vaguely defined opposition to the Federation's high-tech society, which inevitably came off as kind of superficial.

They're rebels because, er, they dress funny and talk funny and play that crazy music grown-ups don't get . . ..

 

[Bubbles McGee]

They're rebels because, er, they dress funny and talk funny and play that crazy music grown-ups don't get . . ..

But, isn't that essentially what real hippies were? I mean, they didn't really change the world...at least not as much or in the way they professed to.

 

[Nerys Myk]

They're rebels because, er, they dress funny and talk funny and play that crazy music grown-ups don't get . . ..

But, isn't that essentially what real hippies were? I mean, they didn't really change the world...at least not as much or in the way they professed to.

They cut their hair, got jobs and then changed the world.

 

[BoredShipCapt'n]

And the world has been crap ever since.

 

[The Castellan]

And the world has been crap ever since.

Was crap before that, also.

 

[BoredShipCapt'n]

And the world has been crap ever since.

Was crap before that, also.

Yeah, but at least Star Trek was good.

 

[MANT!]

As I've stated before, it could have been much worse..

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaGG8Oh3Qas[/yt]

 

[Maurice]

There are some pretty naive and ill-informed opinions above. It's conveniently easy to make fun of the "movement" when viewed with hindsight and through the blinders of pop culture, which tends to exaggerate the silly at the cost of the serious. Like many movements, in some ways the hippie/yippie/counterculture was underminded by its own popularity. The cultural pendulum had swung so far in one direction so that people rebelled against it and pushed it the other way. That some swung it perhaps too far in the other direction is pretty natural. Think about the Roaring 20s compared to the decades that preceded and followed it and you'll see a similar swing of the pendulum to the extremes.

 

[Bubbles McGee]

There are some pretty naive and ill-informed opinions above. It's conveniently easy to make fun of the "movement" when viewed with hindsight and through the blinders of pop culture, which tends to exaggerate the silly at the cost of the serious. Like many movements, in some ways the hippie/yippie/counterculture was underminded by its own popularity. The cultural pendulum had swung so far in one direction so that people rebelled against it and pushed it the other way. That some swung it perhaps too far in the other direction is pretty natural. Think about the Roaring 20s compared to the decades that preceded and followed it and you'll see a similar swing of the pendulum to the extremes.

What gives you the right to deem the opinions of others "pretty naive and ill-informed?" Why are they so? Because they don't conform to your own? The hippie movement did contribute to creating the current climate of intolerance (aka political correctness aka if you don't agree with us you are an inherently evil person) that pervades the media, academia, the workplace, and possibly (but hopefully not) government.

 

[Nerys Myk]

There are some pretty naive and ill-informed opinions above. It's conveniently easy to make fun of the "movement" when viewed with hindsight and through the blinders of pop culture, which tends to exaggerate the silly at the cost of the serious. Like many movements, in some ways the hippie/yippie/counterculture was underminded by its own popularity. The cultural pendulum had swung so far in one direction so that people rebelled against it and pushed it the other way. That some swung it perhaps too far in the other direction is pretty natural. Think about the Roaring 20s compared to the decades that preceded and followed it and you'll see a similar swing of the pendulum to the extremes.

What gives you the right to deem the opinions of others "pretty naive and ill-informed?" Why are they so? Because they don't conform to your own? The hippie movement did contribute to creating the current climate of intolerance (aka political correctness aka if you don't agree with us you are an inherently evil person) that pervades the media, academia, the workplace, and possibly (but hopefully not) government.

You lost me at "political correctness"

Seriously, intolerance is the result of "political correctness"? Yes, lets tolerate bigotry and discrimination.

 

[Bubbles McGee]

There are some pretty naive and ill-informed opinions above. It's conveniently easy to make fun of the "movement" when viewed with hindsight and through the blinders of pop culture, which tends to exaggerate the silly at the cost of the serious. Like many movements, in some ways the hippie/yippie/counterculture was underminded by its own popularity. The cultural pendulum had swung so far in one direction so that people rebelled against it and pushed it the other way. That some swung it perhaps too far in the other direction is pretty natural. Think about the Roaring 20s compared to the decades that preceded and followed it and you'll see a similar swing of the pendulum to the extremes.

What gives you the right to deem the opinions of others "pretty naive and ill-informed?" Why are they so? Because they don't conform to your own? The hippie movement did contribute to creating the current climate of intolerance (aka political correctness aka if you don't agree with us you are an inherently evil person) that pervades the media, academia, the workplace, and possibly (but hopefully not) government.

You lost me at "political correctness"

Seriously, intolerance is the result of "political correctness"? Yes, lets tolerate bigotry and discrimination.

You've made my point for me. No one is suggesting that bigotry nor discrimanation should be tolerated (although you might find that not everyone agrees on what constitutes those things...even within your own camp). But, how about not just assuming that the hippies (and others who adhere to the left both past and present) have all the right answers all of the time? Let's call it freedom to dissent...you know, that thing that happens in open and democratic countries? How about freedom to discuss opposing views, rather than dismiss them as inherently unenlightened? It's the kind of stuff that people have fought and died to protect (well maybe not most of the hippies although they did make good use of the freedoms accorded them by the sacrifices of others). Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them a racist and a bigot. Jumping to false conclusions with little or no evidence rather than hearing others out with an open mind is a characteristic of fascism and I am sure you would not sympathize with them, right?

And maybe that is part of the commentary in that episode. These Space Hippies, despite professing peace, harmony and oneness, engage in violent activity at the bidding of one man who has cast all who disagree with him as msiguided and evil (and therefore worthy of being harmed).

 

[Maurice]

Uninformed opinions are by definition ill-informed, i.e. Gene having anything to do with the episode in question.

And I wasn't defending the hippies, I was saying that it's easy to exaggerate and reduce them to stereotypes that are easy to ridicule, dismiss, or heap blame on.

As to the final sentence of your post: rubbish. That's my opinion, and if you consider it naive and/or ill-informed you may "deem" it so, whether I or anyone else likes it or not.

 

[Nerys Myk]

What gives you the right to deem the opinions of others "pretty naive and ill-informed?" Why are they so? Because they don't conform to your own? The hippie movement did contribute to creating the current climate of intolerance (aka political correctness aka if you don't agree with us you are an inherently evil person) that pervades the media, academia, the workplace, and possibly (but hopefully not) government.

You lost me at "political correctness"

Seriously, intolerance is the result of "political correctness"? Yes, lets tolerate bigotry and discrimination.

You've made my point for me. No one is suggesting that bigotry nor discrimanation should be tolerated (although you might find that not everyone agrees on what constitutes those things...even within your own camp). But, how about not just assuming that the hippies (and others who adhere to the left both past and present) have all the right answers all of the time? Let's call it freedom to dissent...you know, that thing that happens in open and democratic countries? How about freedom to discuss opposing views, rather than dismiss them as inherently unenlightened? It's the kind of stuff that people have fought and died to protect (well maybe not most of the hippies although they did make good use of the freedoms accorded them by the sacrifices of others). Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them a racist and a bigot. Jumping to false conclusions with little or no evidence rather than hearing others out with an open mind is a characteristic of fascism and I am sure you would not sympathize with them, right?

Who's jumping to false conclusions? Who's suppressing anyone right to discuss issues? Who's assuming the hippies had the right answers?

Making racist and bigoted comments is what makes people racists and bigots. Wanting to deny people rights based on things like skin color, national origin or sexuality makes them bigots. Mocking people based on those things makes them bigots. Calling people on it is part of those freedoms you mention. Yeah sometimes people can see offense where none exists. They should be called on that too.

If you want a discussion of how the hippie movement contributed to the intolerance (aka political correctness) in the media, academia, the workplace, and possibly the government, then back it up. Don't just toss it out there and think people will let it slide without comment.

Oh and more than a few hippies were veterans, the guys who have fought for our freedoms. Some marched for civil rights and faced threats of and actual violence. They sacrificed for our freedoms, too. So lets not paint them all with a broad brush.

As Nick Lowe wrote, "What so funny about peace, love and understanding?"

Fascism? Really? You went there?

 

[Bubbles McGee]

As to the final sentence of your post: rubbish. That's my opinion, and if you consider it naive and/or ill-informed you may "deem" it so, whether I or anyone else likes it or not.

I would not presume to do so sir as I believe in and uphold your right to disagree with me; nor do I claim to hold a monopoly on truth (or on rubbish for that matter). No need to thank me, you are welcome.

 

[Bubbles McGee]

You lost me at "political correctness"

Seriously, intolerance is the result of "political correctness"? Yes, lets tolerate bigotry and discrimination.

You've made my point for me. No one is suggesting that bigotry nor discrimanation should be tolerated (although you might find that not everyone agrees on what constitutes those things...even within your own camp). But, how about not just assuming that the hippies (and others who adhere to the left both past and present) have all the right answers all of the time? Let's call it freedom to dissent...you know, that thing that happens in open and democratic countries? How about freedom to discuss opposing views, rather than dismiss them as inherently unenlightened? It's the kind of stuff that people have fought and died to protect (well maybe not most of the hippies although they did make good use of the freedoms accorded them by the sacrifices of others). Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them a racist and a bigot. Jumping to false conclusions with little or no evidence rather than hearing others out with an open mind is a characteristic of fascism and I am sure you would not sympathize with them, right?

Who's jumping to false conclusions? Who's suppressing anyone right to discuss issues? Who's assuming the hippies had the right answers?

You dismissed my posting with a series of laughing emoticons and suggested that I was suggesting that we should tolerate bigotry and discrimination.

Making racist and bigoted comments is what makes people racists and bigots. Wanting to deny people rights based on things like skin color, national origin or sexuality makes them bigots. Mocking people based on those things makes them bigots. Calling people on it is part of those freedoms you mention. Yeah sometimes people can see offense where none exists. They should be called on that too.

I totally agree. Does a series of laughing emoticons qualify as “calling people on it” or as “mocking people?”

If you want a discussion of how the hippie movement contributed to the intolerance (aka political correctness) in the media, academia, the workplace, and possibly the government, then back it up. Don't just toss it out there and think people will let it slide without comment.

Just enroll in a course at any North American college or university, read the news, try to teach Huck Finn in the classroom, or just wish someone a Merry Christmas rather than a Season’s Greetings.

Oh and more than a few hippies were veterans, the guys who have fought for our freedoms. Some marched for civil rights and faced threats of and actual violence. They sacrificed for our freedoms, too. So lets not paint them all with a broad brush.

I know that is why I said “most hippies” and not “all hippies.”

Fascism? Really? You went there?

I sometimes worry that we are headed in that direction.

 

[T'Bonz]

Don't get personal, guys.

 

[Nerys Myk]

You lost me at "political correctness"

Seriously, intolerance is the result of "political correctness"? Yes, lets tolerate bigotry and discrimination.

You've made my point for me. No one is suggesting that bigotry nor discrimanation should be tolerated (although you might find that not everyone agrees on what constitutes those things...even within your own camp). But, how about not just assuming that the hippies (and others who adhere to the left both past and present) have all the right answers all of the time? Let's call it freedom to dissent...you know, that thing that happens in open and democratic countries? How about freedom to discuss opposing views, rather than dismiss them as inherently unenlightened? It's the kind of stuff that people have fought and died to protect (well maybe not most of the hippies although they did make good use of the freedoms accorded them by the sacrifices of others). Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them a racist and a bigot. Jumping to false conclusions with little or no evidence rather than hearing others out with an open mind is a characteristic of fascism and I am sure you would not sympathize with them, right?

You dismissed my posting with a series of laughing emoticons and suggested that I was suggesting that we should tolerate bigotry and discrimination.

I totally agree. Does a series of laughing emoticons qualify as “calling people on it” or as “mocking people

It means I found your unsupported statement that hippies led to intolerance and that intolerance is the same as "political correctness" humorous and laughable.

Just enroll in a course at any North American college or university, read the news, try to teach Huck Finn in the classroom, or just wish someone a Merry Christmas rather than a Season’s Greetings.

I finished college over thirty years ago. Made some good marks in history. Even thought of getting my degree in History. I read the news every day. As an avid reader, former bookseller and amateur author I'm against banning books. Huck Finn is usually a local matter. If my local library or school wanted to ban it, I would be against it. I say Merry Christmas all through the Season, no one has stopped me yet. If a business or organization prefers "Seasons Greetings" that's their right. Seasons Greeting has been with us a long time anyway, so what's the big deal?

Oh and more than a few hippies were veterans, the guys who have fought for our freedoms. Some marched for civil rights and faced threats of and actual violence. They sacrificed for our freedoms, too. So lets not paint them all with a broad brush.

I know that is why I said “most hippies” and not “all hippies.”

You seem to seperate hippies from those that sacrificed for freedom here:

well maybe not most of the hippies although they did make good use of the freedoms accorded them by the sacrifices of others

Fascism? Really? You went there?

I sometimes worry that we are headed in that direction.

If we are, it isn't going to be from hippies or PC run amuck.

 

[Bubbles McGee]

I have been a part of academia for the last 20 years and I can tell you that it has changed a lot just during that time. Neo-Marxism and enthusiastic leftism is not viewed as ONE point of view in the curriculum, it has become the ONLY point of view and it is the curriculum.

Pet topics like: gender constructivism, feminism, class warfare, anti-capitalism, white privilege, and others are now central to all areas of study in most modern N. American colleges (even for subjects where these topics are ill-placed such as the pure sciences). Anyone pursuing post-doctoral studies is practically required to touch upon one or more of these if they wish to have any hope of succeeding. If these topics are not dominant in the curriculum, or if opposing viewpoints are permitted, untenured faculty runs the risk of losing their postings. Students wishing to engage in dissenting views are smacked down and their grades suffer for it. This is happening right now. I have witnessed it personally in a prestigious university. Check out the film Indoctrinate U.

The hippies who championed the right to dissent have become the establishment and have unfortunately adopted the same parochial practices as their one-time opponents. They are going to make this world a kinder and better place according to their own standards no matter what anyone else thinks. For now, this seems not to have become as pervasive in government as it has in academia.

I am not saying that their positions should be silenced, I am simply saying that theirs is not the only valid position. As soon as people en masse start believing that they have any moral authority, bad things happen. As a student of history, you have surely come across many examples of this.

Why should a store be permitted to dictate to people how they should express their holiday sentiments. Do Jews, Muslims, and other non-Christians really get offended if someone wishes them a Merry Christmas? Perhaps atheists do, but then why should they care?

I am sure that there are many hippies that were veterans, but let's be frank here, the vast majority of them burnt their cards and skipped out. I probably would have done the same thing, but you see, I would have been more honest about it. I would have dodged the draft to save my own ass from being shot up and would not have claimed to be taking some moral high ground.

Tolerating dissent is key and it is well represented in The Way to Eden. Even though Kirk questions the Space Hippies' morality, sanity, and politics, he still allows Spock to help them try to chart Eden.

 

[Amaris]

I have been a part of academia for the last 20 years and I can tell you that it has changed a lot just during that time. Neo-Marxism and enthusiastic leftism is not viewed as ONE point of view in the curriculum, it has become the ONLY point of view and it is the curriculum.

Pet topics like: gender constructivism, feminism, class warfare, anti-capitalism, white privilege, and others are now central to all areas of study in most modern N. American colleges (even for subjects where these topics are ill-placed such as the pure sciences). Anyone pursuing post-doctoral studies is practically required to touch upon one or more of these if they wish to have any hope of succeeding. If these topics are not dominant in the curriculum, or if opposing viewpoints are permitted, untenured faculty runs the risk of losing their postings. Students wishing to engage in dissenting views are smacked down and their grades suffer for it. This is happening right now. I have witnessed it personally in a prestigious university. Check out the film Indoctrinate U.

The hippies who championed the right to dissent have become the establishment and have unfortunately adopted the same parochial practices as their one-time opponents. They are going to make this world a kinder and better place according to their own standards no matter what anyone else thinks. For now, this seems not to have become as pervasive in government as it has in academia.

I am not saying that their positions should be silenced, I am simply saying that theirs is not the only valid position. As soon as people en masse start believing that they have any moral authority, bad things happen. As a student of history, you have surely come across many examples of this.

Why should a store be permitted to dictate to people how they should express their holiday sentiments. Do Jews, Muslims, and other non-Christians really get offended if someone wishes them a Merry Christmas? Perhaps atheists do, but then why should they care?

I am sure that there are many hippies that were veterans, but let's be frank here, the vast majority of them burnt their cards and skipped out. I probably would have done the same thing, but you see, I would have been more honest about it. I would have dodged the draft to save my own ass from being shot up and would not have claimed to be taking some moral high ground.

Tolerating dissent is key and it is well represented in The Way to Eden. Even though Kirk questions the Space Hippies' morality, sanity, and politics, he still allows Spock to help them try to chart Eden.

As an atheist and a liberal, it is my goal in life to make you cry. I want to oppress you because I am truly evil and want to take away your rights.