The most common understanding about the sexual liberation, sometimes known as the "sexual revolution" is that it was a positive step towards a more understanding and beautiful culture. It was seen, in the eyes of the common man, to be a fruitful undertaking that would lead society into a more positive, more youthful, more sincere and more evolved culture. However, this opinion about one of the most subtle, yet most powerful transgressions of human understanding is thoroughly misunderstood and borderline whiggish. The opinion about what occured during the 1960's and 1970's has been most definitely tainted by a desire to say 'yes' to things that may or may not be thoroughly positive to our well being as a society. The reason why people have been saying 'yes' to the 'liberation' is because of the propaganda, the misrepresentation of reality and because of the fallen nature of man. The 'liberation' occurred approximately fifty years ago - this divide in time between the occurence and the contemporary understanding allows for historians to move away from the common bias that has perverted the understanding of history, so that one may come to a proper, fulfilling understanding about the nature of the situation that occured, ergo, through a justified and realistic undertaking of historiography with a leaning towards theology, it is possible to correctly contemplate and comprehend one of the most momentous moments of the 20th century - an occasion that still makes ripples of nostalgia, philosophy and general discontent with society in the great big lake of history in which we all eventually drown.

From my perspective, as a young man in the twenty-first century and an avid reader of literature from the 1940's, 50's and 60's years, I have found that the dream, the zeitgeist of the the 'sexual revoltuion' has failed. It has failed because it hasn't delivered the happiness, the fulfilment, soul rapturing nature that it so promised to deliver. I am not the first person to believe this, nor will I be the last, but I am a minority, that is for sure. There is no doubt in my mind that since the 1960's the sexuality of our society, Western society, has been manipulated, perverted and used for capitalistic gains. Everyday we see sexuality used to sell anything, from ear plugs to tickets to London - sexuality is the means to an end. But what is the end? I see the end being the making of more money, thoroughly capitalistic, thoroughly selfish. And how does this connect with the connotations of free-love of the hippie movement in the 1960's? It doesn't. Thus, this is the first of many areas where the great movement of the 1960's has failed to deliver in its promises.

I speak about the perversion, the manipulation of the zeitgeist of the 60's. I do not say this lightly. I thoroughly believe that the 60's were on the edge of something beautiful, a lifestyle, a community, a world a little less corrupted by the failing of man (brought on by the fall). It must be noted that the vietnam war cannot be disregarded. The vietnam war has immense value when considering the nature of the 'revolution' of the 60's. This is because the vietnam war taught many people, the old, the young, the rich, the poor, the weak, and especially the powerful, a lot about life, about society, about psychology and about humanity. It is commonly said that the Vietnam War was the first televised war - it is almost becoming a cliche. But, as Nick Cave says, there is a lot of truth in cliches, and his remark stands firm in this example. The Vietnam War was the first televised war, and as such, television made it possible for common people to witness the atrocities of war. Make no mistake, in our day and age we are swamped with the disgusting atrocities - this is no accident - this is manipulation, dumbing down, we are becoming insensitive to seeing acts of violence and satanic actions. The Vietnam War literally brought the war to the people at home, in every household that owned a television in America, war was there. All through the day, from break fast to lunch to dinner. When the breadwinner came home, when the children went to bed, when the children woke up, when the baby cried out during the day, when the wife was making lunch, war was being broadcast through the tubes. This had a huge effect on the Western world. It showed them just how ridiculous, how stupid, how barbaric and how weak war was. War is not the solution to anything that is good. War is man's way of saying 'we are too selfish, too stupid, to lazy, to figure out a proper way to solve this situation'. This message was broadcast to the entirity of America, to Australia, to Britain and to the world and as such this changed the social understanding about war in a massive way. This was, believe it or not, perhaps the first time that the television was used in such a way to massively change social opinion. And as such, the powers that be (and most of them are evil), learnt to use the power of the television to corrupt, to manipulate and to make money out out society. It was the Vietnam war that led to both an uprising in the current society of the time - but it also was the downfall of the nation, in the sense that a power, unseen before, had arisen in an ironic way - the TV that freed the world from the oppression of the Vietnam War, would, as history shows, come to enslave the coming generations.