There's one really common fallacy you're engaging in here, largely because our media perpetuates it endlessly. The hippy movement itself was strongly apolitical. I think to many that would be surprising, so I'm going to link to a search [1] instead of any given article. Because this is not an opinion. Okay I can't resist linking to one especially interesting article though [2]. I recall The History Channel on TV turning into complete crap, but they have an oddly great selection of online articles!

Of course people in a movement about freedom, finding yourself, and spirituality would generally respond one way if asked, "Hey should we go get involved in a war on the other side of the world, to try to imperil the reach and influence of a geopolitical competitor?" but the core philosophy was not only apolitical, but largely anti-political: "Do what you want... man." Everything was largely based on a loose interpretation of Eastern philosophy which is similarly much more about the pursuit (and search) for the betterment of one's inner self.

The culture you're describing sounds much more like the Yippie [3] culture, which is something extremely different than hippy. As for authoritarianism - I'd argue that the lack of authoritarianism is precisely what enables counter-cultures. You're not going to see a counter-culture movement in places like Saudi Arabia. And I think something similar is happening in the US. Had the Occupy Movement been treated similarly to the hippies, I think there's a strong argument to be made that it would still exist.

[1] - https://search.brave.com/search?q=were+hippies+political&sou...

[2] - https://www.history.com/news/vietnam-war-hippies-counter-cul...

[3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youth_International_Party