As is usually the case, things may have been 'crazy' then but it didn't seem that way the same way it might be viewed now - just as things are crazy now and many don't know it.
What was going on in part was that one paradigm about democracy and authority was being tested - the idea of 'the people' ruling and being free ran into 'law and order'.
It's a little like when the country slid into McCarthyism - and then, watching innocent good people caught up in the paranoia, had a backlash against it.
Or a little like in the 80's when the threat of nuclear created a backlash against unlimited arsenals and the permanent danger of their use.
JFK being assassinated was a 'loss of innocence' in a way too - the first president assassinated since McKinley and in the modern age - but not only that, our youngest who seemed so much to represent the development of the US in the post-WWII era as the world's leader pursuing liberty and democracy and the economic benefit and social justice for the world's masses much less our own, it seemed - followed by the dark days of Vietnam and the exposure of things like US-backed dictatorships and terrorism.
The CIA less James Bond and more 'our KGB'. The era of J. Edgar Hoover, the symbol of law enforcement integrity for decades, compromised by the Mafia and going after the life of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Cointelpro and the Pentagon Papers and the revelation of the President lying and criminal with Nixon.
Students cared and prootested and could become radical in the face of powerful government forces who seemed ot be doing all kinds of wrongs, and the had the spirit of democracy that what the government did was their responsibility and they would fight against wrongs - at its best, while some was more just a 'popular' or 'social' movement, a cause with great music.
It had bizarre moments, like Nixon secretly leaving the White House in the early morning hours to try to talk with hippie protestors at the park he just didn't understand.
Didn't they understand he was for the good of the country? Didn't he understand the immoral violence he was committing against innocent farmers in the name of big military?
Kent State was unimportant in that it was some nameless local national guardsmen who, young and tense, seem to have had a bad leader who made a bad call, and it had nothing directly to do with the larger national issues - and it was important in showing the country the craziness where it had its youg protesting people at odds with the national guard where they could be killed not by some USSR agents or 'lone nuts' but in the cultural conflicts going on.
It was a little like the race riots just before as well, that awoke the nation to the injustices further - didn't we just pass the civil rights bill for them, what's the problem?
IMO, our nation still has nt come to grips with things like what it did in Vietnam - oh, *we* killed millions in a war that cost our nation in honor and lives and wealth - let's ignore it.
It's little wonder the nation preferred the escapist entertainment of families of monsters and witches and genies.
But the period was a turning point of sorts - not entirely a good one - in which the people seemed to lose some blind trust, but instead of replacing it with improvements, somewhat turned to cynicism, to excusing the wrongs rather than preventing them - but a mix, so that some of what the US did seems to have become politically horrible for the time being.
We may have backed a coup against Chavez, but we did not send in the US military and invade and install the next Pinochet/Shah/Batista/Somoza/Marcos in power.
People who have grown up later would have a hard time appreciating the evolution for the public, and are on to their new errors (hello, tea party and libertarians, for one).
Kent State was a shock, violating the idea of the US as the world's utopia safe from the unstable problems the rest of the world had. Our forces killing our civilians.
The Vietnam war led to both the harm to the nation of it being split apart by passionately opposed sides - and to its benefit by the idea of democracy challenging militarism.
Unfortunately, democracy was not a clear winner in that battle. As usual for all nations, national amnesia was the choice, not improving the system. 'It's over' was the main thing.
Teddy Roosevelt once said what our nation needs is a war, good for building spirit. That's a problem that has not yet been solved.
Vietnam was a coolant to our use of our massive, massive military power until, like a recovering alchohollic who forgets the harm, the 'we should not be a prisoner to Vietnam preventing us from using our force' became stronger than the warning, in our desire to 'get back on track' with the war to invade Iraq, violating our long-held principles against aggressive wars, corrupting our institutions to do it (Colin Powell to his later shame laying out a false case for the war pushed by the hawks).
Some in this thread indicated, 'what's the big deal about a few people out of our millions'.
They don't realize it, but they are a warning. It's always the case when things go wrong.
That's why our nation has at its political core the notion of indiviual rights, that one person punished for political views, jailed or killed, is a problem for the nation, because if it's no big deal for a few, it'll be no big deal for many soon. We always have the battle between those who understand that and those who don't care as long as it's people they disagree with being harmed.
This is why you really see any such wrong have apologists - because the apologists need some excuse to say 'it's no big deal' rather than admit they have a national issue.
Unwittingly, their burying the issue helps more wrongs happen for them to again excuse.
Just as the Joe McCarthy type movement was brought under better control when Edward Murrow exposed his errors somewhat, perhaps Kent State helped slow the use of force for addressing the national unrest, the democracy - right or wrong - of people protesting and seeming a 'threat to the man'. Some went further - left-wing underground movements appeared, some of which were violent. The conflict could have gotten more and more violent.
As one side kills the other, 'revenge' is needed and more violence justified. A cop killing could happen as 'revenge' for Kent State, and a cop could take revenge for that.
Luckily today we don't see this sort of conflict - but our democracy doesn't seem all that strong either, as the people rarely seem to lead the policies. To that extent the tea party is 'healthy', but they are just misguided on the issues. Where are the movements for world social and economic justice? Not strong enough.
Democracy is dishonored by our not having the good of the human race leading it enough, filled instead with petty corruption as the nation declines, in ways.
But again, there was good to the change, things are much better in ways too.
Unfortunately, while democracy served to stop some wrongs, an unlearned lesson is that it's not strong enough, it seems, to stop many.
Our democracy has been chipped away, as the media who were its voice have been consolidated and compromised, corrupt interests entrenched with tens of thousands of lobbyists, many former politicians and staff who are seduced by the big money now for the first time in our history unleashed on the elections.
We should have a constitutional amendment to say corporations are not persons, but the people do not unite for passing it.
Kent State was the people doing a bit more. You don't need to shoot the people who are not taking action.