Why didn't the hippies get into the jfk assassination ?

[R.K. Locke]

From article link above:

Most today assume that the CIA and the other intelligence-gathering organizations of the U.S. government are controlled by the democratic process. They therefore believe that MK-ULTRA's role in creating the psychedelic movement was accidental "blowback." Very few have even considered the possibility that the entire "counterculture" was social engineering planned to debase America's culture as the name implies. The authors believe, however, that there is compelling evidence that indicates that the psychedelic movement was deliberately created. The purpose of this plan was to establish a neo-feudalism by the debasing of the intellectual abilities of young people to make them as easy to control as the serfs of the Dark Ages. One accurate term used for the individuals who were victims of this debasing was "Deadhead," which is an equivocation for a "dead mind" or "a drugged, thoughtless person."

R K Locke wrote:

Whilst I don't necessarily subscribe to some of the more speculative assertions that the authors make, I do think that the general thrust of their argument is sound.

R K,I'd like to understand if you think these assertions above are generally sound.I'm just trying to get a read on what your position is.

My own feelings are that they are not sound.In fact,I would think they are the opposite of soundness.

1-Psychedelics to debase the intellectual abilities of young people?

It's been my view that psychedelic substances ENHANCE intellectual abilities.

2-to make them as easy to control as the serfs of the Dark Ages.

It's been my view that psychedelics lead away from control and towards free thought.

3-One accurate term used for the individuals who were victims of this debasing was "Deadhead," which is an equivocation for a "dead mind" or "a drugged, thoughtless person."

As a proud Deadhead,it's my view that this quote is totally insulting.

Thoughts R K???

Keith, thank you for the questions. Allow me to clarify.

Whilst some of the assertions in the segment that you quote unquestionably require further elaboration/justification, I think it's important to view the information provided in the aggregate.

In the essay, the authors show--quite convincingly and using primary documents--that there are clear, verifiable links between R. Gordon Wasson/Henry Luce and the popularisation of psychedelic culture in America.

Wasson's direct boss at J. P. Morgan was Henry P. Davison Jr. Davison was a senior partner and generally regarded as Morgan's personal emissary.[20] As it turns out, it was Henry P. Davison who essentially created (or at least funded) the Time-Life magazines for J.P. Morgan in 1923. After a row with Henry Luce for publishing an article against the war for Britain in Life, Davison "became the company's first investor in Time magazine and a company director."[21]

Another J.P. Morgan partner, Dwight Morrow, also helped to finance the Time-Life start-up.

Davison kept Henry Luce in charge of the company as president, as he and Luce were both members of Yale's Skull and Bones secret society, being initiated in 1920. In 1946 Davison and Luce then made C. D. Jackson, former head of U.S. Psychological Warfare, vice-president of Time-Life. It seems to me that the entire operation at Time-Life was purely for spreading propaganda to the American public for the purposes of the intelligence community, J.P. Morgan, and the elite.

And:

A New York investment banker, Wasson was well acquainted with the movers and shakers of the Establishment. Therefore, it was natural that he should turn to his friend Henry Luce, publisher of Life, when he needed a public forum in which to announce his discoveries.[25] ~ Graham Harvey

Is it possible that Wasson, the Vice President of J.P. Morgan and co., was no more than an enthusiastic amateur ethnomycologist with an interesting story to tell? It certainly is. But is it likely? I'm not so sure.

Is it likewise possible that the psychedelic movement and attendant counterculture was simply unforeseen "blowback" from MK-Ultra LSD experiments, or not in fact linked to it all? Again, it certainly is. But the alternative scenarios at the very least represent an intriguing and fertile avenue for further research.

There are many possibilities.

Perhaps the counterculture wasn't so much created as "seeded" by the establishment.

Perhaps it was promoted for reasons and purposes that are not covered in the essay.

Perhaps those reasons and purposes were never attained.

Perhaps they were.


One speculative hypothesis would be that the New Age movement that grew out of the "death" of the hippy dream was, on some level, an intended consequence thereof. If one sees the "grand narrative" that I referred to in my initial post (metaphysical connotations aside) in terms of individualism vs. collectivism, then it isn't much of a stretch to imagine how psychedelic drugs might be abused to promote that aim. Where I mostly take issue with the authors is in their depiction of psychedelics as being central to the "debasing of... intellectual abilities" rather than simply one aspect of weaponised culture. As you say yourself, they can often enhance intellectual abilities rather than debase them.

To be fair to the authors, however, they do clarify this point somewhat at the end:

The authors are in disagreement about the use of mind-altering drugs. One believes that we do should not dismiss the potential of these substances as biological tools to open doorways of the mind, and possibly spiritual dimensions; but those who consider these substances as only spiritual tools often ignore their dark side and never consider that they can be easily used as much for control. He recommends they not be used without a prior thorough study in something such as the trivium method, and suggests that, like a knife which may be used to cut your food, and also used to kill; psychedelics can be used to empower or control. It is important for people who use these substances to consider what others think of them who don't use them for spiritual purposes. The other believes that given their provenance, they should not be taken under any circumstances. We must consider: Does the predator think that these substances are tools for spiritual awakening, or for the control of others? What the reader may believe is not necessarily the whole truth.

My own beliefs would be along the lines of those expressed in the italicised section. It is becoming increasingly apparent that there are numerous potential health benefits to psilocybin mushrooms and other psychedelic drugs, above and beyond their abilities to positively alter consciousness when used responsibly. But that does not preclude them from being used as a tool of social control when combined with weaponised culture, psyops, manipulation of the education system and any number of other factors. It is not simply a case of the drugs being good or bad, and we must be wary of conflating explication with exculpation.


Of course, if you have any different theories regarding the genesis and evolution of this fascinating period of history then I would be very happy to hear them. I am always keen to learn more; enlightenment being a process rather than a destination.


Thank you again for the questions. If there's anything I haven't addressed please let me know.

Best to you.