Why are the 1950's romanticised so much?

>low crime

Eh

The rest of the world was literally rebuilding from rubble so American had a huge advantage and highest quality of life as long you were part of the 80 percent that was white.

Brown people knew their place

Yeah, I meant America, sorry.

Interesting. I was under the impression that current American violent crime rates were comparable to the 70s and that the 60s and 70s were lower.

impressions from the media and reality don't always go together

Kek not at all, the 70's in particularly were infamously fucking violent and crime in the US at large is near the lowest it's ever been in recorded history. Media sensationalism coupled with modern outlets of reaching news are the reasons that it feels like things have gotten worse.

Last gasp of Christianity.

Smartphones mean EVERY little crime can be reported nowadays so we think that the country is crawling with rapists and killers behind every bush

The 70's were the heyday of post-WWII organized crime and common thuggery

Stranger danger wasn't a thing so serial killers and pedophiles could attack people with impunity

It is WAAAAY harder to get away with crime nowadays than it was in the past

Back in the day all you needed was a shovel and some wooded area

Recently in my old neighborhood they found the butchered remains of a little boy who disappeared in 73', tortured and killed by a sick fuck who lived not even 12 houses away. No amber alerts, no offender registry, none of that shit existed.

Nobody's stopping you from wearing a suit now faggot.

>b-b-b-but it's itchy and hot and uncomfortable

Well, now you know why we all stopped. Stop being a nu-male and deal with it.

Simpler times...

But seriously, only a retard (basically your average /pol/ poster) would really want to live in the 50's. It's stupid.

The '60s moral revolution caused the '70s crime boom. The '80s saw increased police presence as a reaction. The '50s are so comfy because the were still living in the depression/WWII era moral austerity.

>being this autistic

Hippies romanticize it because it was the dawn of the beatniks, drugs were freely available to everyone who wanted them (meth was over the counter until 1959 and opiate scripts were handed out like candy to any vet that wanted 'em which is how Elvis got hooked on pills. The CSA wouldn't be ratified until 1970).

In reality the 50's were degenerate as fuck, everyone was hooked on something, WW2 vets had shell shock out the wazoo and resorted to B52s and pills every day to keep the peace. Many children were abused in broken homes, these children would become the social activists of the next generation.

People see the fedoras and suits and think this means professionalism. They're wrong.

Was there a "moral revolution" in the 1920's too?

>Unified culture
>Christianity privileged
>Wealth influx from rebuilding Europe
>Rise of the comfy suburb
>Personal responsibility expected
>Manners were sensible and formalized
>Mental illness was treated as mental illness, not social capital
>Future looked bright

I guess I'm stupid, then.

Yes but it didn't get as far as the one in the 60's, and the strongest drug that was being traded around was alcohol (for the most part). 60's saw an increase in drug use and experimentation that resulted in stuff like that crack and heroine epidemics of the 70's.

>Suits are tool of capitalist-imperialist oppression,

soviets wore suits too

>beta autist too scurred about his muh public perception to wear whatever the fuck he likes calling anyone else an autist

Sure feels good being confident in myself and mentally stable, user. You'll never know this feel.

This was probably true for a slice of the population. But the "white picket fence" narrative was true for another slice. It depends mainly on how competent the individuals were. The 50s were heaven for competent people.

thank you i was gonna call him an autist but I see you've already done it. doing gods work

Autism is literally not caring about public perception. Everyone around you laughs about you behind your back and takes advantage of you. The nice ones just keep you around to feel superior.

According to my grandad domestic violence was through the roof. Wife beating was a private matter as long as you didn't leave marks or cripple her.

No it wasn't. It was a haven for mafiosos who pushed their racketeering and drug running to new heights during the 50's, in addition to Vegas.

Autism is a development disorder you mong.

>b-b-b-but muh meem Veeky Forums definition

Autists lack theory of mind, which you clearly do considering you can't take perspective for trash.

>Extrapolating ghetto culture to middle class culture
>Being this retarded
Learn to analyze class, user. Or do you also believe that everyone in Greece wore a toga?

>Can't fit in with local culture
>Being this autistic

>mafia
>ghetto culture

My sides, you stormfags look at the world and try to backapply it to eras long past. Your middle class was pill poppers and wife-beaters. I'm sorry, but it's true. Your glorious 50's generation produced the broken as fuck 60's generation because they couldn't stop beating their fucking children coming down from the bennies they got hooked on fighting Nazis.

>has no ToM
>calls anyone else autistic

Get a pet, user. You sound like you need one.

It's funny

Actual wiseguys they behaved much like modern nigger thugs back in the 50's. Then the Godfather comes out in the 70's and suddenly every made man wants to wear a suit, stop cursing, and philosophize.

Women were beginning to feel restless because 1) They had been active and engaged through the depression and the war and 2) Technology had developed to the point that housework took no time at all. Women who were used to overcoming challenges and engaging with stress were suddenly forced into a placed environment. They went crazy. Men didn't know how to deal with it, often felt that it was a personal attack on themselves, and went full ape. It was a sign of technological and cultural growing pains.

This are all US specific, and either really simplified or just wrong. If you're a retard who can't cope with living in a more open and varied times, that's your problem.

Also as I said that's just US. In Europe you have only starting to rebuild from ashes of WWII, where economy was still war-like, loads of stuff were scarce, you had to rely on government prescribed amount, even outside of socialist countries. Besides this being the height of cold war meant, that no matter where in Europe you lived you could face prison for espousing beliefs different from your governments. Or even worse, end up in a work-camp, or even killed.

Just because it was one of the best time to be a racist white male, it doesn't mean it was the best in general.

Italians and Irish ghettoized in the cities when they first came here. As most ghettoized populations do, they engaged in organized crime. Sure, it was cleaner and sexier than today's ghetto, but it was still a ghetto.
Aside from the fact that you can pick up a fucking book on the mob to find this out, you can trust my family experience.

See here for my explanation of wifebeating. It happened. No era is perfect. I'd still rather live in the age of opportunity than the age of social justice.

Eh, not particularly. Most women were happy with being housewives, it was a status symbol. Domestic violence was just a cultural thing, maybe aggravated by watching all your friends die horribly in some filthy hole in the Pacific Ocean.

I'd be open to the variation if it weren't causing societal collapse. The variation of the Industrial era seems really comfy by comparison. Today's "variation" is a race to see who can be the most degenerate or powerful. Innovation and creation of value have been lost as objectives. So no, fuck the modern day.

yeah I've heard this as well, during this period there was a sentiment that "a man's home is his castle" and you could do whatever you wanted to your wife

>I'd still rather live in the age of opportunity than the age of social justice.
why do you always think of social justice in zero sum terms? Women wanting equal treatment doesn't mean you as a man have to lose because of it.

Not anything, they weren't Muslims after all. Where I'm from the KKK would beat your ass or even kill you for beating your wife.

Feminism didn't liberate women, technological innovation did. The 50s were just growing pains. Feminism has always been a covert female supremacy organization trying to change the cultural character of the west. The only good feminist was Mary Wolstonecraft.
>inb4 virgin neet - I'm a sexually active gay man with no horse in the race

True.

Once upon a time being a housewife was a full time job. The invention of vacuum cleaners, washing machines, irons, grocery stores, etc made it a boring "job".

No deranged jungle savages everywhere in North America.

NO matter who you are, it's still wrong to a point. Sure technology gave women more job opportunity and ability to ear their own money.
But feminism was never about female supremacy, it was trying to assure that there's some equality, especially as the technology already gave some of the equality to the women, just not political.

Not to mention the state monopoly on education.

I was just anticipating the stock liberal character assassination. Apologies if you're the rare snowflake who isn't that petty.

Do me a favor. Define "equality".

sure there are some radical feminists that shouldn't be supported, but in my opinion feminism is about creating an even playing field between men and women, not supplanting the supremacy of one gender with another. And that's something that as a man I can certainly support. Everyone should have an equal chance to succeed and pursue their own aspirations in their own way. I don't see my own place in society disenfranchised by that.

Pretty much this: And equality is exactly what it means, equal treatment of everyone. There can still be some differences between people, but in general, there shouldn't be any difference different treatment based on sex.

You just couched it in other terms. "even playing field" "not supporting supremacy of one gender with another"
I need that to be defined. I can tell you're liberal (or at least modern) whereas I'm vaguely Right-wing. We're operating on different assumptions. I need you to spell yours out.

From my vantage point, women and men are already equal, and largely have been since the 70s. I don't believe in the wage gap - I think its explained by the biological difference in men and women's drives (achievement/dominance vs. nurturing/completion) and the IQ distribution (women tend to cluster at the middle, men spread out to both fringes).

Yes, it was called "Prohibition"

The same reason people care about the 90's or early 2000's

first guy you responded to, generally I agree with you that in the west institutional barriers between genders have pretty much all been knocked down. Through the hard work of many generations of activists women have the right to vote, are given (in theory) equal pay for equal work and often the difference in pay comes from women being less aggressive in demanding pay increases from their employer and women choosing less lucrative jobs. But if institutional barriers do ever reemerge I'll do what I can to knock them back down.

Like for instance it really bothers me to see people wanting to turn back the clock on abortion. That's something that in the future will need to be fought.

On the other hand things like women getting preferential treatment in custody battles upset me, it doesn't matter that it benefits women because a feminist should be against ANY institutional gender inequality. That's the type of issue that MRAs should really be focused on.

first post, best post

The hangover from mass prescription of stimulants probably made them snap once the long downer started.

If you want to understand something of the 20th century, study the popular drugs. And the legal ones as well.

You'll find a lot figures who have symptoms related to addiction problems that they felt as merely a bad feeling.

Unfortunately. The Depression put and end to it, except in the universities, whose structure protects bad ideas and nurtures them. They were the main cause of the hippie movement, which was exclusively upper class at first.

Abortion is a right that's pretty off to the side, though. Most women never have to think about it and it hardly affects their day to day.

People keep speaking about the need for "gender equality", including yourself, but I can never get a solid definition of what it actually means. What institutional barriers? What did the activists actually do? The most that the 70s feminists did was popularize "Ms." as far as I can see. And while I think that was a valuable addition to the English language, I don't see that as exactly revolutionary.

>racist

Just read through this thread. What 50's nostalgists have in common is that they all feel that whites and white men had it better back then, and that other races, namely blacks knew their place.

>I'm the main 50s nostalgist from this thread
>I'm Italian
>I wasn't considered white
>I would have been in the ghetto
>I still think it was better
>TFW

You think, because of the presence of high status blacks in media, that they're doing better?

It's a total atrocity what was done to them. Lynchings in the South took about 2000 black lives over an 80 year period.

This year, something like 5000 blacks will murder another black.

But why?

I'm a Slovenian with some mild socialist tendencies, and for me living in the 50's would mean living in great Yugoslavia under Tito and shit, yet I still don't want to go back to that time.

While police brutality and black on black violence is bad, blacks are at least de jure considered equal to others, and not treated as second class citizens.

I'm Italian-American who believes merit decides outcome in the best societies

20% of blacks entered the middle class in the 50s. That effect had been reversed by the end of the 70s. Try again.

>While police brutality and black on black violence is bad, blacks are at least de jure considered equal to others, and not treated as second class citizens.

De Jure is not the same as the Sui Generis of their problems.

Welfare destroyed what slavery could not (black families and values). I don't think you've ever been homeless. I have.

It'll be instructive to walk into the welfare equivalent (DPSS in Los Angeles. Go to 3rd or 4th street office) and see dysgenics embodied in shocking ways.

While it wasn't so comfy for minorities the fact remains that this country was still 90% white (so the context will be framed around this large majority), we were on top of the world, and business was booming everywhere

you could drop out of high school and still find a job that fed a family of 4 and bought you a house at 20

American culture was cohesive, and a lot of modern divisions hadn't cropped up yet

we could unite around a common enemy in the USSR

Ahem:

The problem is that our good and easy times came about as a result of the US having the only intact mass industrial complexes in the world.

When you're rich and selling to the (relative) poor, you have a haggling advantage.

Are you trying to say it wasn't as bad for minorities as advertised? I'd agree. I'm saying the "muh minority" point is kind of moot because they were a small portion of the 50's experience and shouldn't frame the narrative. Blacks were disrespected worldwide.

That's true but besides the point with regards to the thread topic, I was just pointing out why it's romanticized

I don't think we're ever going back to that kind of rapid build up

I might have painted myself into a corner a bit. I really don't know much about socio-economic position of the blacks in the 50's and 70's. I just know they were only stopped being treated as second class citizens in late 60's.

What I really don't get is this nostalgia. I mean I get it, here there's a lot of people who are "Yugo-nostalgic", thinking how back in socialism in Yugoslavia things were better. I mean sure everyone had a job (supposedly), and there were no homeless people (because it was illegal), but it was still technically worse than what ever we have now.

Ah. Unfortunately I think we need a new frontier.

The world is starting to look more like that mouse experiment than anything a sane human being would want to live through.

Space is the place. Don't miss out on the race. Either that or the ocean.

They still haven't stopped being second class citizens. Their noble efforts to enter the mainstream were cut off when welfare and the war on drugs destroyed the black family. Think what you will about moral values, all economists agree that a stable family is the most effective economic unit.

wait a bit and Antarctica should melt enough

>but it was still technically worse than what ever we have now.

Most humans are faggots. It's okay to admit this.

They remember when they had to share hard times with other faggots. They got to talk to each other and gripe about the same things. Harmony because of shared adversity.

This is one of the reasons the military is unbearable. It's literally filled with NPC-tier folk empowered by a system of regulations made by a few smart PCs. Dealing with NPC-tier is mentally horrific.

I would've preferred war over rotting under a bureaucracy that services war.

I'll say it until I die

a 70% fatherlessness rate is what is killing the black community

Wasn't that supposed to have happened by now?

Studies that control for fatherlessness find no disparity between black and white youths.

youtube.com/watch?v=iv7LvRhvgNI&t=2s

You don't even know. I've banged a bunch of black prostitutes who are/were single mothers.

I feel kinda bad because they'll have the kid just watch the TV while I'm facefucking his mom in the bedroom.

Well that killed my boner

A ww1 veteran who drove a truck would start a delivery business in the roaring 20s and perhaps smuggle some beer, he'd have maybe 5 years of (real) economic growth after ww1 and 5 years to enjoy it before it all comes crashing down in 1929.

Our ww1 veteran friend endured the trenches when he was 18-20, then for 10 years life was great, now he is in his 30s with kids and everything has turned to shit. He is not going to view the 20s as the time when the American middle class awakened, just an oddity before things went back to normal, drudgery and toil, just like his childhood.

Because they used to be demonized.

Bust a few rhymes so motherfuckers remember where the thought is
I brought all this
So you can survive when law is lawless (right here)
Feelings, sensations that you thought was dead
No squealing, remember that it's all in your head

The kid would be in the living room, obv. It's only on reflection when you consider what that kid has to see on a daily basis. A procession of male "friends" who his mom escorts to the bedroom and shuts the door. Then 15 minutes to an hour later, the strange dude walks out never to be seen again.

That's a negative matey as rates of violent crime took a nose dive after lead was removed from fuel, and they took another nose dive after the cold war (and the very real threat of death by nuclear fire) ended.

There's a difference between "homicide rate" and "violent crime rate", which understandably get conflated.

cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2012/06/img/violentcrime_fig1.jpg

There's also the argument that if it weren't for medical advancements, a lot of what are "assaults" today would be "murders" back in earlier days.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1124155/

wtf why aren't the hyperlinks active

bump

>"Violent Crime"
>Grown men settling disputes like grown men
This is why American society is dying. You're a faggot.

Based KKK

>Women wanting equal treatment
No one ever wants "equality" dipshit. They only want to turn the tables on the oppressors so that they can live the good life themselves

>What institutional barriers?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

and people who advocate that I'm against, people who like me are for equality I support

Men and women were not made to compete with eachother, on any kind of playing field, They are meant to complement eachother, occupying different tasks in society