Major Project Progress

The readings from Gerard DeGroot have been very interesting, he seems to be the most unbiased historian I've found so far - in that he considers the ideas of the left and the right before making his own judgment. DeGroot acknowledges the counter-cultural aspirations of psychedelics, "By facilitating freedom of thought, the drug was supposed to inspire enlightenment." However, DeGroot also identifies the nativity of such a notion by revising the ideals expressed in earlier histories "Liberation could come entirely through the mind. All this tended to give indulgence the aura of noble purpose, encouraging the assumption that the individual tripper was engaged in self-improvement and contributing to social progress." DeGroot notes that early historians were correct in their assumption that LSD advocates such as Leary, Kesey and Ginsberg were sincere in their aspirations, however he notes the inconsistency of these ideals throughout the counterculture. "For Ginsberg, acid was never simply recreation, yet for the multitude that is all it ever was."

Continuing with his revisionist take on the counterculture, DeGroot addresses the idea of the "politicisation of a generation" through drug use. "they seemed the perfect elixir for a culture devoted to the abandonment of traditional values. It was easy, therefore, for the user to convince himself that he was engaged in meaningful rebellion. Due to their illegality, drugs were also a delightful way to defy authority - an enjoyable act of insubordination." This is followed by the opinions of Free Speech Movement activist Michael Rossman who "argued that drugs, by making the user a "youth criminal against the state," politicised a generation." This was extended further when DeGroot quoted a "favourite mantra" of the revolution "They have the atomic bomb and we have the acid." This was an explicitly political statement and highlights the views of some member of the counterculture.

DeGroot also touches on a different perspective, stating that drugs were purely an expression of the baby boomers' endless faith in science. This is a fascinating take on the issue and one which I have not heard often. I am interested in looking further into this insight as it is merely a passing statement made by DeGroot.

In concluding this chapter, DeGroot identifies the drawbacks of the political aspirations of the psychedelic revolution. "Political commitment had given way to karma and mantra. Some people took these ideas seriously, but most of the time they were bastardised, diluted, and bumperstickered." He states that one of the major flaws lay in the very personal nature of the drug experience, which did not exceed internal enlightenment. "For most people who sought rebellion through drugs, the crusade went no further than their own heads." DeGroot points out that drug taking is, in essence, a selfish act taken for one's own pleasure. In contrast, political action is a group activity which requires engagement with reality. This is emphasised by the observation that "devoted druggies, for all they might have fantasised about political change, found it difficult to contribute materially to change." Also, DeGroot highlights the misinterpretation of Leary's mantra "turn on, tune in, drop out" by counter cultural youths. "They did not understand that changing the world involved something more fundamental than simply turning on, and that dropping out actually required serious thought and effort."

Lastly, DeGroot discusses what he sees as the reasons for the lack of action by counter cultural advocates. "In the end, the drug rebellion was defeated by its own excess and by the contradictions inherent in the act of turning on... The foot soldiers of this fantasy revolution were usually too high to take directions and the commanders too distracted to give them."

I found this reading to be extremely beneficial. DeGroot highlights the aspirations of the counter cultural leaders (which are expressed in the early histories of the new left) whilst also identifying the inherent flaws in these ideals (emphasised by the revisionist histories of the extreme right) and chooses not to affiliate with either. Instead, DeGroot formulates a new, revisionist history by stating that although the aspirations of the left were political and aimed for self-improvement, the innately selfish nature of drug-use prevented any real action from occurring. The political aspirations of the counterculture appear a mere pipe-dream (haha) and, despite their good intentions, would never really eventuate in anything substantial.