The 1960s revolts linked workplace exploitation to cultural and creative stifling

Evidence

Promising material stability and affluence in return for productivity, a clear division of labour defined the Keynesian moment of capitalism and the New Deal, which left very little opportunity for creative expression for most people. But, when the first generation of post-war youth and many workers of the late 1960s revolted against oppressive and exploitative working conditions, they also revolted against a stifling and conservative cultural idiom (Katsiaficas 1987; Vaneigem 2012). Not just about “good jobs” or the nature of state power, these movements demanded the liberation of creativity and the right to define life, subjectivity, culture and human potential. — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 438

Categorization

• XREF: Direct precursor to the book’s later argument about how capital appropriates the 1960s demand for creativity — connects to Boltanski and Chiapello’s ‘new spirit of capitalism’ thesis. — connects to: Lack of institutional support and illegality fueled taboo-breaking 1960s art — J. Hoberman, Everything Is Now: The 1960s New York…, 13; Public art absorbed taboo content in a successive widening of transgressions through the sixties — Fredric Jameson, Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic…, 642; Collaborationist conversions backfired by triggering renewed revolt

Broader Connections

• Lack of institutional support and illegality fueled taboo-breaking 1960s art #corroborates (0.82) — J. Hoberman, Everything Is Now, 13
• Public art absorbed taboo content in a successive widening of transgressions through the sixties #corroborates (0.78) — Fredric Jameson, Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic…, 642
• Collaborationist conversions backfired by triggering renewed revolt #complicates (0.72)