>>> Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> 01/28/00 10:29AM >>>
>>> Roger Odisio <rodisio at igc.org> 01/27/00 12:15PM >>
>A conspiracy is an agreement between 2 or more people to commit a crime or
>illegal act. You can only deny the Kennedy killing was a conspiracy by
>embracing the single bullet theory. Good luck with that one.
What does it matter, really? That's my objection to this whole line. Embracing the conspiracy theory of JFK's murder leads you to some pretty surreal mythmaking about him - that he was a closet dove, or too much an anti-racist, neither of which is true. I find it perfectly plausible that the ruling class would have good reasons to want to kill Martin Luther King; once he started talking about imperialism and class exploitation, he wasn't safe for liberals anymore. But JFK? C'mon.
&&&&&&&&&&&&
CB:
It seems to me for leftists, it is more important to broadcast a dramatic example of the truly undemocratic aspects of America's vaunted "democracy" ( a coup d'etat) , than to avoid the indirect and weak inference from that that Kennedy might have done something slightly ok from a left standpoint. The main left goal is not to disabuse people of illusions about Kennedy the individual, but to disabuse people of illusions that the American system is so wonderfully democratic.
Futhermore, one does not have to conclude that Kennedy was progressive , only that the reactionary sector of capital was so rightwing and in crisis that it would kill even a bourgeois politician.
CB
Comment on Roger's post below:
>>> Roger Odisio <rodisio at igc.org> 01/27/00 12:15PM >>>
Charles Brown wrote:
> I just think the groupings you are talking about in the first part would not have been allowed by other elements in the ruling circles to off the pres for their own reasons alone, without being busted. Cuban exiles and Mafiosi did not have much weight. Mafia were not exactly in the ruling class, otherwise they wouldn' get such bad press. To kill the pres. and have it completely covered up had to come from sectors with more power, i.e. military-industrial complex and secret police. Also, Soviets were much more of a concern than Cuba. The Cuban missile crisis was important because it was the Soviets involved.
I've enjoyed much of your discussion of the Kennedy assassination, Charles. It's important event that begs for more light and thought. But I disagree with several aspects of this.
Do you really think (1) the ruling class had such a preference for Kennedy over Johnson (that was the choice), and
&&&&&&&&
CB:The ruling class was in crisis and sharply divided. It was like the New Confederates of 1963 just seceded , did their own thing, states rights or something. Only it is not just Southerners ,but the fanatically, nay manaically, anti-communist , most reactionary, most chauvinist sector of finance capital, specifically the military-industrial complex in accord with other elements of that sector of capital in that period. Yes, I really think they would fire a president on a slight preference and discipline to show all presidents who is boss. If Johnson did the wrong thing he could be removed too. In fact, he didn't run for reelection. The ruling class as a whole preferred Nixon at that time. Johnson's Great Society was not made up for by prosecuting the Viet Nam War.
Did the ruling class really have a preference for Johnson over Lincoln, when Lincoln was nothing but a petit bourgeois attorney, as Marx said.
The ruling class is quite capable of micro managing the presidency, in the way a corporate presidency is changed. Both presidents of a corporation are loyal to capitalism , but often one is preferred over another, particularly by different factions of major stockholders.
Similarly, a violent, reactionary sector of the major stockholders of the Corporation USA decided to remove the pres. in what they considered an emergency situation.
&&&&&&&&&
(2) that preference would outweigh their own interest in covering up the dirty deeds you, Max, and others have discussed, so that they would *not* have allowed rogue elements to wipe Kennedy without being busted?
&&&&&&&&
CB: As you point out below, once the rogue elements DID it, the remaining sectors of the ruling class had the choice of possibly busting the other sector of the ruling class, over just smothing it over and going along. The former might undermine the whole system too drastically. The Civil Rights movement was stirring things up. The ruling class could anticipate the reformist and radical reformist movements of the later 60's.
&&&&&&&&&&&
Kennedy with all those quasi-lefty Harvard intellectuals around him all the time. Who knows what dastardly, perhaps even anti-capital, scheme they might concoct, particularly if JFK got a second term and didn't have to run again. Johnson would clean house (and he did) and bring in all those go- along-to-get-along types he was comfortable with in Congress. And the press-the-war crowd (McNamara, Rusk, Bundy, etc.) weren't going to get much resistance from Lyndon.
&&&&&&&&
CB: Agree.
&&&&&&&&
No, for the most part the ruling class preferred Johnson to Kennedy. I say that not to introduce some argument that this was a coup to get Lyndon in there. But JFK, or anybody, was not protectable in Dallas-like public appearances. Any assorted rogue elements could have done it.
CB: Agree. I am not so big on "they wanted to get Johnson in". The main thing was to get Kennedy out, because he was too soft on the Soviet Union, and showed signs of acting like what a lot of that type of "kid" acted like in the later 60's. A proto-peacenik. Kennedy was starting to freakout culturally. Having Marilyn Monroe as paramour was rather outrageous in the symbolism of America at the time. Who knows what someone who would do something that wild might do next ? One of Kennedy's lovers was a Communist agent allegedly. Kennedy was becoming a risk to "NATIONAL SECURITY". Simple. " Kill his ass. And we move on from there. We'll deal with Johnson if we have to. But Johnson will get the message. None of that peace stuff. " , NIxon said on the tapes they didn't find. Or somebody who thought like Nixon but more to the right. Knowland of California.
&&&&&& Roger: But more than that, elites wouldn't see wiping Kennedy as an attack on them.
Once the deed was done, the ruling class had *only* two interests: (1) preventing information antagonistic to its interests from getting out, and (2) coming up with an explanation for those who thought their vote mattered very much. Even if Kennedy was wiped by three guys from the mob, there was *no* interest in looking into that, let alone busting them.
Btw, the mob is a distinct wing of the ruling class, particularly in their relationship with the Kennedys. The whole Kennedy family, from the old man to Jack, to Bobby, had extensive dealings with them, many of which had turned sour by the early 60s. Think, for example, of the visceral, personal hatred Hoffa had for Bobby.
&&&&&&&&
CB: Yes, I think you might be right on this. Especially, as far as the Mafia as a distinct part of the ruling class. They had a beaf with JFK.
But oddly, I think Oswald was in on the hit. He was just the fall guy, and , of course, didn't know it. And Oswald is not Mafia. He is a Marine sharpshooter with a Soviet wife. That is prma facie CIA. Then add that he was a fake commie handing out leaflets, a police agent undercover in the left movement. He seems like a government agent. Also, the Secret Service agents had to be in on it. A president is surrounded by Secret Service agents. The Sepruder film and even a recent book and many other studies show that the kill bullets come from on the ground right near the car, from the front. How does the Secret Service not notice who is shooting, go over and not go over and catch the person ? The Mafia cannot waltz in there and do all that without a very high up "clearance".
&&&&&&&&
Point is, the assassination happened and the trail is pretty cold as to why and by whom. I think you're looking for an explanation that is too pat, too uni-dimensional. The ruling class doesn't have near the day-to-day, detailed control over matters you imply. But in crisis they can unite and react. The Warren Commission was a massive display of such, gathering the executive committee (Warren, Richard Russell, Gerald Ford, etc.) in one place to pull their sleight of hand.
&&&&&&&&
CB: This would be true of other ruling classes in non-democracies, in dictatorships and kingdoms.
The main leaders of the U.S. ruling class have to be either consulted or accede to the removal of the president by violence.
The important part of this is that the U.S. is not the democracy it advertises itself to be. It has coup d'etats. It must be used to agitate children and others who are being taught the myth of American democracy, that their country is not as it seems in high school and elementary school textbooks. That sort of thing.
&&&&&&&& Roger: Well, how hard is it for the executive committee of the political branch of the ruling class to get away with things? Particularly when their message is don't worry, everything is all right, JFK was killed by a lunatic (which most people want to believe). And they have a pliant media to deliver the message at will and ridicule dissenters. None of the figurehead signers of the report were ever in the least damaged as far as I can tell. Gerald Ford, e.g., was picked by Nixon to become his VP in part to restore *credibility* to his administration after Watergate (besides the fact that he could depend on Ford to pardon him for his crimes when he left office).
&&&&&&&&&
CB: Roger really gets to the crux here. The ruling class wants anti-agitation or "everything is alright". We must try to disabuse of this . We agitate.
&&&&&&&& Roger: On this list, it took only a few gentle ripostes on the topic to produce claims it is either boring, irrelevant, or a sign of a lack of analytical rigor, since, everyone knows, resorting to discussion of a conspiracy is a substitute for clear thought about material conditions
&&&&&&&&&
CB: I agree. This is a general problem. Avoidance of rightwing conspiracy theorizing has gone a little to far so as to squash left realism about how the ruling class operates and valid left assessment of secret police operations.
CB