1950s= Divorce relatively rare and scorned. Single parent homes rare. Normal was nuclear family. Fornication frowned upon, etc.
And it was also considered normal and legal for a man to rape his wife, and god forbid a woman try to get -work- instead of being a house-slave. There was also the whole United Fruit fiasco, where we were out toppling democratically elected regimes in South America in order to help corporations, and did similar things with Project AJAX in the middle east. This isn't conspiracy nutjob shit, these are publicly available CIA declassified docs, that you may wish to go and read. It might change your mind regarding how fucked up things actually were in the 50's.
OH God, and don't even get me started on the Vietnam War. Fat load of good that did us. No sir, that wasn't a corporate venture at all.
No the 50's absolutely sucked socially. Sure the average white male was more economically buoyant, but everybody else was pretty much screwed. This is what i'm talking about here, the "ideal" is pretty far removed from the reality; the "morality" you're talking about is just a different kind of bad - it's just a shifting of who gets to dominate everyone else. Regressing to a point where we're out toppling democracies certainl...Wait, we never really stopped doing that.
But hey, on the plus side, Violent crime is now lower than it was in 1993
That's an objectively positive thing we can all agree on.
Also, Kaio's post. Sure people may have taken marriage more seriously before we were born, but looking at the culture of the time..I'm pretty sure i'll take not being able to buy five cars over not having to utterly conform socially, or get weird looks when I only date women with educations.
While I'm not saying that *all* social change is for the better, I don't really see that women no longer being viewed as property, or socially inferior to men as a bad thing.
tl;dr - the culture of the 50's was only beneficial to *some* people, People in general weren't really any better off if they were either female, nonchristian, or nonwhite. And our gubmint was doing things just as screwed up now as they have ever been, and looking at a few questionably ethical social mores with an idealized view won't rally change the fact that the 50's actually really sucked pretty hard.
Which, incidentally, ends up being *most* people.
However,I do agree on the point that, given the values dissonance the US is currently seeing, we can't logically continue to exist under the same set of laws, at least as our government is currently structured. People living in New York, think differently than people living in Alabama, who think differently than people living in California, so I'm of the mind that it's in most folks' best interest to divvy out the social power more regionally, rather than centrally, Give people more leeway to govern themselves and those who think like them rather than having everyone trying to tell everyone else how to live. I mean, It's pretty clear that you and I, politically, socially, morally don't have much in common, except maybe a belief that the fed can sit n' spin, and as such, I really don't see how we can be governed by the same set of laws.