roots of post modernist counter culture + morality

Post Reply New Topic

I started reading a book the other day on the history of the infamous "Hellfire club", a secret club that operated during the in parts of Britain and Ireland mostly during the 18th century, and is considered as one of the early anti-morality movements more modern history.

I was reading in the first few pages however, that the author of the preference also referenced other more modern counter culture movements that he also felt were anti-morality in nature.
Including in the movements were the hippies of the 60s/70s.

Which, was I found interesting, as personally I actually thought that the Hippy movement wasn't necessarily an anti-morality movement but more a movement that promoted spiritual, creative and sexual freedom from the traditional constraints imposed on people during the post modernist period.

Sure, I know there were some who hijacked the hippy movement, in order to exploit what they could in the name of fashion or even spiritual enlightenment and revolution.

And I also understand from a puritanical religious perspective, some of the behaviours that the hippy movement promoted would be considered unacceptable in puritanical terms.

In modern terms however, in today's world, a great deal of what the Hippy movement promoted would be considered acceptable.

This made me wonder, why the Hippy movement is considered by others as anti-moral, and if they do, is it a fair judgement.

Personally, I don't see creative, spiritual and sexual freedom* (within the constraints of modern law)
as being anti-moral, and being counter consumerism doesn't necessarily make a person bad, nor does it
necessarily make it a person a communist.

I do understand that the Hippy movement did upset a lot of people and sure, there are some examples where
people really were irresponsible and did commit crime. But from what I know of the Hippy Movement, that followed the
Beat Author movement, following such a movement did not necessarily make you a bad person or a criminal.

I was just wondering if someone who does not come from a puritanical religious background, as to why
the Hippy Movement has received such a reputation. I ask as i find it funny that the Hippy movement has this reputation, as to me, a lot of the philosophy and creative endeavours that people from the movement promoted
weren't what i would refer to as being anti-moral, but more anti-consumerist, anti-authoritarian, while promoting peace, love, sexual freedom, creativity, and spiritual development and fulfilment.

Anti-extreme consumerism yes, anti-establishment, perhaps, anti-materialism, sure.
But anti-moral, well, not if its taken the right way. No need for it to be incompatible with the modern world.

Any thoughts?

If you define "morality" as a simple codification of fair play and justice, then "anti-morality" is not a good thing; but if you define "morality" with a convoluted mess of do-or-die "Thou Shalts" and "Thou Shalt Nots", including strict regulations on copulatory activity between two (or more) consenting adults, then "anti-morality" becomes synonymous with anti-brainwashing, anti-conscription, anti-oppression, and anti-slavery -- a very good thing, but also something which threaten the very existence of a hard-core evangelical-nationalist government.

From the Wiki:

"Dashwood's Club meetings often included mock rituals, items of a pornographic nature, much drinking, wenching and banqueting."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellfire_ ... activities

So, basically equivalent to a visit to a reasonably civilised - yet slightly bland and boring - local bar...

Could you please tell us the exact title and author of the book?


It was a movement that advocated changes in then-current ideas about morality. To people strongly attached to the old ways, this seems "anti-moral."


People who regard the hippie movement as "anti-moral" are, in most cases, stating their opinion of the hippie movement itself, not just hypocritical exploitations thereof.


Indeed it would -- in today's Western world. But the Western world before the hippie movement was very different.


Indeed it does not.


Of course it didn't. But that's not the point. The point is that, back in the 1960's, there was a huge cultural "generation gap." To many people of the older generation, it seemed that the world was falling apart, and that the emerging youth culture was intrinsically evil.


Back in the 1950's and 1960's, the majority of adults, even among nonreligious people, still accepted lots of ideas that would now be considered "puritanical."


My guess is that the author of the book is an extreme right winger of some kind. The only question is whether he's a Christian religious right winger or an ethno-nationalist right winger. Both kinds hate the hippie movement.

I don't think you have to be a rightwinger to think of the hippies as anti-moral.
The German hippies even used the phrase "moraline-sour", as if morals were an acidic chemical.

Morals are always specific to time and social group, as has been said. But true, philosophical "anti-moralism" is rather rare - the Marquis de Sade comes to mind. But one could also just assume the author means anti-moralbin the sense of "against the prevailing moral sentiments of the time/social group".


That said, Alan Ginsberg, I recently found out, was a supporter of NAMBLA, the national men-boy-love association, and I do know that the German Green party had initially advocated for sexual liberation including pedophilia - they didn't think of pedophilia being outlawed as anything other than part of those traditional morals they were rejecting, similar to the legal state of homosexuality at the time.
They have since very much changed their opinion on pedophilia, in accordance with what developmental psychologists think of it.
But the various international versions of the hippie movement had some rebellious streaks that are still not accepted (and rightly so I might add).
The Marquis de Sade however, a philosophical anti-moralist, enjoyed at least writing about it, not because he thought it should be legal or morally accepted. He enjoyed writing about it precisely because it was immoral.

We had a Hellfire Club in NYC, too. I went to it twice.

What's missing in this discussion is moral relativity.

The Moral norms of Germany in the 18th century are light years apart relative to modern "enlightened" society where much has changed.

This discussion is also through the prism of judeo-christian ethics and western morality which has been imposed on much of the world.