Views of the ‘60s Differ Drastically

David Horowitz and Peter Collier, in their book “Destructive Generation,” do a 180-degree turn by trashing the ‘60s from their previous stance as New Left writers (“ ‘60s Reissued,” Aug. 10).

I too have drastically revised my view of the ‘60s. However, I then was in my 40s, so I was not “a child not wanting to grow up, longing for discipline.”

A supporter of the Vietnam War, I think the ‘60s, while they had their excesses, permanently changed the country for the good.

As a child during the Great Depression and son of a working man, I can remember one Christmas getting only one 97-cent toy--and it broke before breakfast. That Depression was brought about by Coolidge and Hoover, the soul mates at that time of Reagan and Bush.

As a ninth-grader, I can vividly remember saying to myself: “The most important thing above all else is social justice.”

My attitudes began to change during a year as a seaman during World War II and three years as a naval officer on an aircraft carrier, part of the time off Korea. After that, as Harvard Business School was very partial to former naval officers, I was accepted and got my MBA. For many years, I have served many of the Southland’s most powerful men in the field of Wall Street relations. So I sold out on my “social justice” promise to myself as a kid.

Then during the ‘80s, something within us died. The idealism of the ‘60s was replaced by Ivan Boesky’s “greed is good.” But, because of the ‘60s, a “kinder, gentler” attitude toward one’s fellow man has begun to re-emerge.

But the overwhelming imperative that made me return to my childhood “social justice” beacon was our foolish involvement in Nicaragua. If the Vietnam War protesters had not changed America, we would have sent our troops in, possibly leaving my son to be returned in a body bag.

God bless you, Vietnam War protesters, for opening my eyes that I might see.

FLOYD A. OLIVER

Los Angeles