The crux of Schmemann essay is that, despite some obvious similarities, there are important differences between the 1960s protest and counter culture of which he was part and today’s protests. Fair enough. However, his main focus is a ludicrous assertion about “the spirit of the times, the sense back then that change was possible, and today that doors are being closed.” You know this old saw: those Boomers accomplished so much; anyone else is wasting their time to try.
The flaws in Schmemann’s essay come screaming off the page from the jump. For starters, could it be that sixty or so years ago Schmemann was part of a movement that believed change could happen because he and his fellow rebels were young, and young people can be full of hope about the future? And could it also be sixty years later he doesn’t feel like change is possible because, well, he’s fucking old (80, to be exact), and what’s more, because his beloved 1960s movement eventually lost out, badly, to the Reagan Revolution and all consuming neolibralism that it initiated and which still dominates American society, so he’s spent the last four and a half decades feeling like part of his dream died, and has been left to grasp at nostalgia for the moment and inflated memories of his generation’s accomplishments?
Schmemann, by his own admission, has perhaps overly fond memories of the ’60s. He praises the “songs, love-ins . . . and even mind-bending drugs,” while dismissively sidestepping the “violence” that shadowed all that peace, love, and understanding. And he makes no mention of the hippies and their ilk being naive, self-indulgent navel gazers, possibly because they were mostly middle class kids like him. His privileging of that mid 1960s–early 1970s ‘counterculture is inaccurate, perhaps predictably so. He remembers the ‘60s as an “eruption of idealism, a youth-led rebellion against a misguided war and the racism and misogyny” of the 1950s. But that tired old narrative requires ignoring the very real fact counterculture protests against Vietnam and the shallowness of American mainstream culture were not an “eruption.” Rather, the mostly middle class white teens and 20-somethings who waged them were piggybacking off of and deeply influenced by the African American Civil Rights Movement and protests of the 1950s and early 1960s. I’m not sure why Schmemann forgot this, or if he did not, how he could in good faith choose to omit this crucial point. He does mention civil rights protests, but only briefly and to lump them in with the 1960s counterculture. But the truth is, ‘60s protests of the Flower Power generation were rarely about civil rights, being understandably more concerned with the issues that affected them directly, and more importantly, would not have occurred as such if they did not have the shining example of black protestors from the 1950s and early 1960s.
After botching history, Schmemann offers up head-slapping thoughts about the current moment. First, he thinks that 2024’s university protests pale in comparison to the ‘60s. But it is wildly unfair and misguided of him to claim that one season of Gaza protests at universities doesn’t measure up to a full decade of anti-Vietnam protests across the nation (two decades if you add civil rights). And while he is quick to point out accusations of antisemitism at the Gaza rallies, he completely ignore the rampant sexism and homophobia of the Civil Rights, Vietnam, and various Power (Black, Red, etc) movements. The sexism and homophobia of these movements was so pervasive and deeply rooted, that scholars have been studying it for years.
And then there’s this gem: “The student protests in the spring of 2024 against the carnage in Gaza, by contrast, never ignited a broader movement and petered out, mired in accusations of antisemitism and the humiliation of university leaders.”
First, Schmemann ’s noting that ‘60s college protests ignited other movements while ignoring that they were themselves ignited by prior black civil rights movements, which provided the model they initially followed. But second, his understanding of the present is shockingly narrow. Are you telling me that what’s happening right now in LA is nothing more than a coincidence? I’m sorry, but if Schmemann gets to connect the 1960s’ “rebellion against a misguided war and the racism and misogyny” with “civil rights, sexual tolerance, environmental protection, campus activism” during his era, then today’s activists get to connect the Gaza protests with immigration advocacy with climate change activism with trans rights with anti-Trumpism with whatever other progressive movements may emerge in the current moment, which is almost bound to continue for at least several years to come. The topical connection between Gaza protests and immigration protests may not be direct, but they are both, right now, clearly part of the same emerging era of protest. It takes a special brand of myopia to ignore that.
Schmemann has some self-awareness, but not enough. He admits that his recollections of the ‘60s might be “rosey,” but he then immediately defends that position by insisting nothing going on today could be more inspiring than Woodstock. Because I guess if you’re gonna lean on a cliché, it might as well be the biggest and most tired one available. At the end of his essay, Schmemann recognizes that his glorification of the ‘60s is perhaps “apt to idealize the good or expunge the bad.” Yet he still wrote and published it.
Despite his vast experiences and vaunted credentials and awards, Schmemann mostly comes off as just another Baby Boomer who thinks he and his changed the world in ways that no generation since can hope to match. He’s full of generational self-aggrandizement, which then leads him to pity and demean the generations that follow, and even go so far as to claim that the current generation has no hope of manifesting real change. It’s an old story from the Baby Boomers, or specifically the ones who were white, middle class liberals back when.
Yet as they launch their version of the hard work needed to improve society during these troubled times, I doubt the Gaza protestors of last year or the people demonstrating right now in LA, presumably almost none of whom were part of the 1960s counterculture, agree with Schmemann. Are they mere nihilists agitating for the sake of offending the establishment’s sensibilities? No, they are protesting because they do in fact believe that change is possible and even needed. Indeed, casting today’s activists as doomed to failure, especially to make your own history feel more productive, is at best appallingly naive, and at worst deeply cynical.
We live in troubled times. Almost everyone, regardless of their political leanings, agrees on that. Some of us see real danger in issues such as climate change and right wing extremism, which are not just U.S. issues but truly global in scope. And some of those who recognize those dangers have begun to confront them, not just intellectually and culturally, but also physically. Yes, the 1950s–early 1970s were in fact very important eras for Americans who sought to confront and overcome the troubles of their times. But if the old protestors of Vietnam, and much more importantly the civil rights movements (Black, Indian, Chicano, Women), are going to lend us their wisdom, it must come in the form of real lessons about what did and did not work for them and why, what they accomplished, how they failed, and what they learned. Not trite celebrations of their bygone era, self-satisfied pats on the back, pie-eyed nostalgia, or condescending assumptions and empty doubts about today’s people working to improve the world around them.