May 1968 paradoxically advanced the narcissistic individualism its actors opposed

Evidence

The 1960s are generally treated as the turning-point in this cultural shift: thus Gilles Lipovetsky argues that the main consequence of the events of May 1968 was, quite contrary to the intentions of the actors, to promote the narcissistic individualism which he, like other commentators, regards as the dominant feature of the 1970s and 1980s. — Alex Callinicos, Against Postmodernism, 534

Categorization

• XREF: This inversion — revolutionary act backfiring into its opposite — speaks directly against Jameson’s claim that the 1960s marked a decisive break into postmodernity, which is the core counterargument of the book. — connects to: May 1968 actually began the implosion of the social — Jean Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation, 251; Postmodernism’s acceptance stems from 1968ers’ class position and disillusionment — Alex Callinicos, Against Postmodernism: A Marxist…, 617; The 1968 generation’s disillusionment followed the events’ modernizing logic — Alex Callinicos, Against Postmodernism: A Marxist…, 610 (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• The 1968 generation’s disillusionment followed the events’ modernizing logic #expands (0.78) — Alex Callinicos, Against Postmodernism, 610
• May 1968 actually began the implosion of the social #complicates (0.75) — Jean Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation, 251
• Postmodernism’s acceptance stems from 1968ers’ class position and disillusionment #complicates (0.75) — Alex Callinicos, Against Postmodernism, 617
• The events of 1968 actually launched anti-communism and a new consumer capitalism #contradicts (0.72) — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 96
• Postmodernism emerged as a response to the revolutionary failure of 1968-76. #contradicts (0.72) — Alex Callinicos, Against Postmodernism, 627