Should the hippies have formed a religion?

I am trying to write a bunch of threads today on different forums that I've had in the back of my mind to start the new year off fresh...

Back in the 60's and 70's when this way of life was practiced by more people, should they have had the same tax breaks, religious protection, and the unity and structure that most religions have? The economic numbers still might not add up, but I think that they would have had a better shot, and been more respected and organized.

They live the teachings of the Bible more than most Christians probably. Living life without a pursuit of as much money and stuff they can buy, not fighting a bunch of wars, loving their neighbors, and if 'God' created the Earth shouldn't you take care of it... Do you need to have God, Prophets, and centuries old writings to have a religion?

About The Farm - Home Page
What it's like to live on a (former) commune | HLNtv.com

While it might not be the lifestyle everyone would like, it does seem to be more real than the never-ending rat race most of us live in isolated from others and not sharing very much.

 

I have to agree with Borla here. The "hippies" weren't an all-encompassing, monolithic group like most frat boys want to think. There were all sorts of brands, some in direct competition with one another. There were the Yippies, the Black Panthers, the Weather Underground (although they were very marginal at best), the Chicano Movement and a bunch of others that don't jump to the forefront of my mind.

Without a unifying belief, there can't be a religion or even a movement.

There are still a bunch of folks that live like this fairly quietly. I ate in one of their restaurants in Boulder, CO last year - the reuben sandwich was really good.

 

Being from that generation,,,, in order for hippies to be considered an organized religion, they would have had to organize, first. Something, I'm not entirely sure they were capable of doing. They certainly all didn't share the same ideals. Many were just dropouts. Some had political leanings driving their intentions and not all of those were consistent. There were definitely some that were religious fanatics, but not necessarily the same religion. Others were only along for the ride, it was a popular movement.

But it did leave us with some great music.

 

They didn't need to form one spiritual religion that has weekly masses, or to even prevent the members from belonging to other organized religions or no religion (except the hippie lifestyle).

But, in order to get the tax breaks and such, I'm sure they could agree on about 10 things and bring people together.

 

I think you have a very narrow and stereotypical idea of what 'the hippie lifestyle' was. My parents were hippies, but they also had a house and family and regular jobs. There were hippies that lived in communes and farmed. There were hippies that lived in cities and were into art and music. There were hippies that were activists and hippies that were just digging the scene. There were hippies that lived nomadic lives and hippies that settled down and started families. Hippies were no more a homogenous, like-minded group of people than, say, skateboarders or Bob Dylan fans.

 

But Buddhists get tax breaks and charitable donations are tax deductible.

It might not be perfect, but if you are trying to live a free lifestyle, having to pay more in taxes than big corporations isn't a good thing I would think.

 

They could be very organised, had to be. Local city. There was one dealer. He undercut London prices, and so controlled the area. Anyone selling anything to kids would be cut off, blacklisted, and no one would help that sort of a person in any way. Guy had morals. Lot more than you come across today.
They were politicaly aware. I remember when a report by Dr Simulian (think was name) came out on legalising it. They were not surprised at what was printed and released. Think they knew he had been hit with a gagging order, his report changed, and he was thrown to the press. As has been said, a mixed group, although they would sort of keep an eye on each other in case of someone having a problem and tended to turn out to help - same as lots of other groups - same as the 'animal lot' who I am a part of in a small way. Not a religious unity, I think it was more a time of pick what bits you like from here and there, and sew your own tie died patchwork quilt of what an individual thought it should be.

 

Lifestyle choice as a tax determinant? That is a slippery slope.

 

They were stoned and naked.... and they shaped the world.

I tried to be a hippie, but I couldn't get my hair to grow out long enough....

 

The simple answer to your question is “No.” But the story of the era has not really been remembered well, if known well at all as such, because the best paths didn’t lead to writing about it (or drawing a lot of attention to itself).

Agrarian communes were really a minor part of it all. I think that urban households were more prevalent (especially around university towns). A culture of extended-family making (alienated from the traditional suburban paradigm) was integral. Feminism and humanistic living was integral.

It all was a fluid part of a generation, essentially elusive to doctrine. So, “It” couldn’t have been articulated as a religion, just like political progressivism eludes doctrine because it’s ultimately (albeit implicitly) about the evolving of our humanity. The “making of a counterculture” was at heart about retrieving and advancing our humanity, in a most wholehearted sense.

I don’t know why, but I just now found Leonard Cohen’s “Famous Blue Raincoat” returning to me. Joni Mitchell’s “Blue”. Omygod, my first mescaline trip and The Moody Blues’ “In Search of the Lost Chord”.... “Mad Dogs and Englishmen.” I get chills remembering.

When psychedelic culture began, there was a sacred sensitivity to what I was getting into—not in terms of religion (which requires doctrinization of spirituality), but in terms of a sense of high mystery about a delicate venture. We (people in my communal house—an old mansion with 10 or so bedrooms, in my case) would insist on preparatory ritual: plenty of sleep and eating well before beginning the Trip, and we'd ensure a serene environment for the cruise and heights (and for frightening forests). “Crashing” was something that required experienced handholding. For me, all in all, it was at heart about sacred waymaking, wholly engaging in a holy flourishing .

I never took Carlos Castenada & company seriously. I read difficult things between journeys. Or we talked into the dawn. We burned out, then renewed ourselves.

Some didn’t make it back very well and made lives stuck in marginality, willfully not letting go of those times. (Across the Bay, People's Park in Berkeley is a sad remnant of ill marginality.) Others made great use of it, but they disappeared into their lives. Early online life through The Well became Electric Minds (of which I was a charter member), and all that faded away.

Decades have passed away, and stories remain to be told.

.

 

I don't remember exactly why I asked this question, but it wasn't to form a new religion to 'convert' people from the other religions or to give them a religion if they had none. It had a lot more to do with the organizational tax breaks, collective unity, and being able to teach the next generation about how you could live your life and be free. And you could write up a set of guidelines to prevent it from becoming 'the establishment'.

I don't know if the money ran out, the war on drugs started, or the war ended in the 70s...but something happened. And then once the 80s came around, success was defined by the size of your bank account and your job. And it seemed like a race was on and you had to win using any means necessary.

But, now we have millions of young adults living at home with no job, and they aren't doing much. Some of them did the Occupy protests, but why aren't they living a low-impact, inexpensive hippie lifestyle?

 

My take on the Occupy movement (from video news reports) was that there was a lot of hippie lifestyle involved (poverty does that "naturally"), though not the kind of intentional living you may have in mind. Actually, there was/is a Simple Living movement (that's not its name), but the entire "sustainability" ethos has its local versions of living light on the land, etc. The outback from urban S.F. Bay has a lot of that.

It might be a fascinating story to re-trace the Times from the mid-'70s through the last decade, but it seems that your capsule is about right.

The IRS basis for religious exemption from taxation is pretty stringent, because groups would love to avoid taxation on their donations/earnings. The upshot, I think, is that the organization has to show an instituted dependence on worship of a supernatural belief system, which certifies "religious purposes" that "must be organized and operated exclusively for religious...purposes" such that "net earnings may not inure to the benefit of any private individual or shareholder" (IRS pub. #p1828: "Tax Guide for Churches and Religious Organizations").

.

 

this is a religion I could get in to

 

I would have thought that the Occupy movement would have transformed into a rural anti-corporate cooperative society though. Now, it wouldn't be easy, especially with modern society today and the lack of free land. Plus, there is that whole 'dropping out' of society, even if they don't like Wall St. and the banks, how many of the Occupy members will take out a home loan in the next few years on an inefficient cheaply built house because we were raised being told to be normal and successful?

Worshiping the energy of the follow man/woman, animals, and the Earth along with writing a 'hippie bible' with good morals about how to treat others, lifestyle, and the environment might have been enough.

I wasn't alive back then, but this looks pretty organized to me. I'm not sure what they are or aren't worshiping here, but they are more deserving of a tax exemption than a political action committee.

 

Q: What's red and yellow and looks good on hippies?


A: Fire.