Kennedy’s Peace Speech, 60 years ago, highlights how Joe Biden’s approach to Russia and the Ukraine War needs a dramatic reorientation, writes Jeffrey D. Sachs.
President John F. Kennedy with Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev in Vienna in June 1961. (National Archives and Records Administration, Public domain)
By Jeffrey D. Sachs
Common Dreams
President John F. Kennedy was one of the world’s great peacemakers. He led a peaceful solution to the Cuban Missile Crisis and then successfully negotiated the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty with the Soviet Union at the very height of the Cold War. At the time of his assassination, he was taking steps to end U.S. involvement in Vietnam.
In his dazzling and unsurpassed Peace Speech, delivered 60 years ago on June 10, 1963, Kennedy laid out his formula for peace with the Soviet Union.
Kennedy’s Peace Speech highlights how Joe Biden’s approach to Russia and the Ukraine War needs a dramatic reorientation. Until now, Biden has not followed the precepts that Kennedy recommended to find peace. By heeding Kennedy’s advice, Biden too could become a peacemaker.
A mathematician would call JFK’s speech a “constructive proof” of how to make peace, since the speech itself contributed directly to the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty signed by the U.S. and Soviet Union in July 1963. Upon receipt of the speech, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev told Kennedy’s envoy to Russia, Averell Harriman, that the speech was the greatest by an American president since Franklin D. Roosevelt, and that he wanted to pursue peace with Kennedy.
‘No More Urgent Task’
In the speech, Kennedy describes peace “as the necessary rational end [goal] of rational men.” Yet he acknowledges that peacemaking is not easy: “I realize that the pursuit of peace is not as dramatic as the pursuit of war — and frequently the words of the pursuer fall on deaf ears. But we have no more urgent task.”
The deepest key to peace, in Kennedy’s view, is the fact that both sides want peace. It is easy to fall into the trap, warns Kennedy, of blaming a conflict only on the other side. It is easy to fall into the trap of insisting that only the adversary should change their attitudes and behavior. Kennedy is very clear: “We must reexamine our own attitude — as individuals and as a Nation — for our attitude is as essential as theirs.”
Kennedy attacked the prevailing pessimism at the height of the Cold War that peace with the Soviet Union was impossible, “that war is inevitable — that mankind is doomed — that we are gripped by forces we cannot control. We need not accept that view. Our problems are man-made—therefore, they can be solved by man.”
Crucially, said Kennedy, we must not “see only a distorted and desperate view of the other side.” We must not “see conflict as inevitable, accommodation as impossible, and communication as nothing more than an exchange of threats.” Indeed, said Kennedy, we should “hail the Russian people for their many achievements —in science and space, in economic and industrial growth, in culture and in acts of courage.”
Oct. 7, 1963: President John F. Kennedy signing the Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, surrounding by aides and advisers. (Robert Knudsen, White House, John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum, Wikimedia Commons, Public domain)
‘Collective Death Wish’ Warning
Kennedy warned against putting a nuclear adversary into a corner that could lead the adversary to desperate actions. “Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war. To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy — or of a collective death wish for the world.”
Kennedy knew that since peace was in the mutual interest of the U.S. and the Soviet Union, a peace treaty could be reached. To those who said that the Soviet Union would not abide by a peace treaty, Kennedy responded that
“both the United States and its allies, and the Soviet Union and its allies, have a mutually deep interest in a just and genuine peace and in halting the arms race. Agreements to this end are in the interests of the Soviet Union as well as ours—and even the most hostile nations can be relied upon to accept and keep those treaty obligations, and only those treaty obligations, which are in their own interest.”
Kennedy emphasized the importance of direct communication between the two adversaries. Peace, he said, “will require increased understanding between the Soviets and ourselves. And increased understanding will require increased contact and communication. One step in this direction is the proposed arrangement for a direct line between Moscow and Washington, to avoid on each side the dangerous delays, misunderstandings, and misreadings of the other’s actions which might occur at a time of crisis.”
In the context of the Ukraine War, Biden has behaved almost the opposite of JFK. He has personally and repeatedly denigrated Russian President Vladimir Putin. His administration has defined the U.S. war aim as the weakening of Russia. Biden has avoided all communications with Putin. They have apparently not spoken once since February 2022 and Biden rebuffed a bilateral meeting with Putin at last year’s G20 Summit in Bali, Indonesia.
March 26, 2022: U.S. President Joe Biden speaking at the Royal Castle in Warsaw, where he said Putin “cannot remain in power.” (White House, Adam Schultz)
Biden has refused to even acknowledge, much less to address, Russia’s deep security concerns. Putin repeatedly expressed Russia’s ardent opposition to NATO enlargement to Ukraine, a country with a 2,000-kilometer border with Russia. The U.S. would never tolerate a Mexican-Russian or Mexican-Chinese military alliance in view of the 2000-mile Mexico-U.S. border. It is time for Biden to negotiate with Russia on NATO enlargement, as part of broader negotiations to end the Ukraine war.
When Kennedy came into office in January 1961, he stated clearly his position on negotiations:
“Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate. Let both sides explore what problems unite us instead of belaboring those problems which divide us.”
In his Peace Speech, JFK reminded us that what unites the U.S. and Russia is that “we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s future. And we are all mortal.”
Jeffrey D. Sachs, author of To Move the World: JFK’s Quest for Peace, is a university professor and director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, where he directed The Earth Institute from 2002 until 2016. He is also president of the U.N. Sustainable Development Solutions Network and a commissioner of the U.N. Broadband Commission for Development. He has been adviser to three United Nations secretaries-general, and currently serves as an SDG Advocate under Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. Sachs is the author, most recently, of A New Foreign Policy: Beyond American Exceptionalism (2020). Other books include: Building the New American Economy: Smart, Fair, and Sustainable (2017) and The Age of Sustainable Development, (2015) with Ban Ki-moon.
This article is from Common Dreams.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
Support CN’s Spring
Fund Drive Today
“How JFK Would Pursue Peace in Ukraine”……Diplomatically, i.e., 1) “CANCEL” the $ANCTIONS aka Economic Warfare/$ocial Murder; 2) “CANCEL” the WAR on the Ground in Ukraine; and, the war in Pakistan, Somalia, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan, Haiti, Cuba, etc.; 3) “CANCEL” War effect Peace, what a concept!?!
BUT, imo, the Universe’s interest is in “HOW” JFK’S Daughter nka the Ambassador to Australia is gonna pursue the Release & Return of JULIAN ASSANGE to Australia. No doubt, TIMES UP!!!
As well, “It is time for Biden to negotiate with Russia on NATO enlargement, as part of broader negotiations to end the Ukraine war.” JEFFREY SACHS
Exactly!!! What a Peace Maker’s Plan, A-Z, looks like!!! However, you’re talkin’ about Biden-Harris, Warmongers NOT Peace Makers. They wanna restore the Nation’s “soul.” The problem is, Biden-Harris can’t find their own ass w/both hands!!! Like Bush-Cheney, Obama-Biden, Trump-Pence, Biden-Harris & their Generals lead the nation in war and hate of China, Russia & DJTrump!!!
Imo, IF, BIDEN-HARRIS were human, they’d serve up an apology, a Peace Treaty; and, mean it! BUT, some humans AIN’T human!!! Joey Robinette Biden & Comma La Harris were unmasked years, ago, as Frauds! Manipulative. Deceptive. Destructive. Perverted. Toxic. Basically, marinated in hypocrisy. Imo, it’s f/criminal to promote and/or $upport anything Biden-Harris. Fugg ‘Em!!!
Want Peace?!? STOP the hemorrhaging!!! CANCEL, A.S.A.P., BIDEN-HARRIS! Impeach, Comma La Harris, first! Second, REMOVE Joey Robinette Biden. IMO, the 25th Amendment’s got Biden’s name all over it! The most feeble, frail, perverted, incompetent, evil doing, mentally & physically unfit POTUS in American history!!!
“In an era in which distinctively new policy requirements (think technology regulation), foreign & domestic problems have taken centre stage, Biden-Harris, et al., are warped, old, outdated, octogenarians who haven’t had a new idea in decades.” Resolution: First, Impeach Harris. Second, REMOVE, Joey R. Biden. Give US peace.
“A body of men & women holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody!”
Sex. Lies. Scandalous ELECTIONS in The Divided $tates of Corporate America are outta f/control! At stake is The First Amendment, PRESS Freedom; and, Plant, Animal & Human LIFE!
“Might little force is needed to control a man (or woman) whose mind has been hoodwinked.” Robert A Heinlein
The comments on this piece are few but exceedingly insightful and pithy. My thanks to CN for republishing Sachs’ commentary and to the commenters here for their wisdom and intelligence.
Very good article.
What a good job that Biden was not president at the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis.
It is always important to maintain a dialogue. Khrushchev could, for example, have raised his concerns about the missiles in Turkey with Kennedy. I am not aware of any evidence that he actually did.
And it is also important to have a Plan B.
During the Cuban Missile Crisis, Kennedy apparently had a plan to use an intermediary to take the mutual withdrawal of missiles proposal to the UN Secretary General. It was hoped that he would then publicly announce the proposal and pass it off as his own idea. Kennedy and Khrushchev would then be under pressure to accept it.
The Limited Test Ban Treaty was another Plan B. Kennedy had wanted to ban all nuclear testing and told his negotiating team to seek such a ban. Only if that were to prove unattainable were they to go for the Limited Test Ban Treaty (an idea that was earlier proposed by the Eisenhower administration).
At least Kennedy tried, for all his flaws, to use the power of the office to do the right thing. That’s why he was killed. And thus no president since ever had the nerve to stand up to the “Deep State” again. And here we are.
When I think of JFK, the first Irish Catholic President of the USA, and Joe Biden, the second Irish Catholic President, I can’t keep out of my mind Marx’s remark that everything in history happens twice – first as tragedy, then as farce.
What JFK did not understand about Vietnam was that the point of the conflict was weapons and materiel inventory reduction. Missing that blaringly obvious point in Ukraine would certainly get him shot again today.
Biden, of course, has been owned and operated by the war machine longer than John McCain was, and to better effect.
How much culpability can or should be traced to JFK is a matter of serious reflection. Not mentioned here so far is all of the “counter revolutionary” actions the US was involved in in Central and South America at the time. Granted much blood had already been spilled there during Eisenhower’s administration, but it continued under JFK.
When I was in airborne school in ’71 the School Of The Americas was still in operation at Fort Benning, Ga.
The often-repeated JFK quote “Those who make peaceful change impossible guarantee that violent revolution will be inevitable.” was not part of a stump speech delivered to adoring supporters, but was a remark delivered to a cartel of wealthy Central and South American businessmen/oligarchs during a conference arranged by JFK’s administration. There were many “counter-revolutionary” operations going on there, involving US forces, arms, and aid as that remark was being made.
Who was that man?
Is there a clue in Eisenhower’s “confession” as he was leaving office? Maybe we should put MLK’s words into Ike’s mouth:
“Free at last, free at last, thank God almighty, free at last!”
Let the world not be blinded by moving words…let the world shed the blindness and see things for what they really are. JFK might have meant well but, overall, the US is a violent nation – inside/outside its borders.
The Dark Side of Camelot by Seymour M Hersh, alongwith many other investigations of the Cuban crisis, contradicts Sachs assessment.
When push comes to shove I’ll side with Sy Hersch.
The deification of JFK is symptom of the dire straits of US politics where an imagined past provides a convenient distraction from the subsequent coterie of gangsters that have forever occupied the Oval Office.
Another point, more a query.
In Shock Doctrine, by Naomi Klein, my recollection is that Jeffrey Sachs is far from one of the good guys; indeed he is the economist who pioneered shock therapy.
Back in 2007, Klein stated:
“A lot of people are under the impression that Jeffrey Sachs has renounced his past as a shock therapist and is doing penance now. But if you read The End of Poverty more closely he continues to defend these policies, but simply says there should be a greater cushion for the people at the bottom.”
hxxps://tsd.naomiklein.org/meet-naomi/interviews/red-pepper.html
Excellent points. Clinton’s rape and destruction of Russia with the drunken Yeltsin and oligarchs/ banksters including Sachs will never be forgotten in Russia. Gorbachev opened up Russia and other former Soviet countries and Clinton took advantage. Russia was prepared to forgive and trade their vast treasury of natural resources for a better way of life for their peoples, but the US is always intent on stealing rather than fair trade. This is why China is admired for their foreign affairs– economic interactions and diplomacy rather than military actions and war.
Hersh, despite his record as the premier investigative reporter, lost his standing with the Establishment with his exposure of the Kennedys. The hagiographies of the martyr JFK is the Official Narrative and about as believable as those of Kim Jong Il. I keep reading that JFK would have withdrawn all troops from Vietnam when re-elected in 1964. Not clear why he would keep that as a secret from the American people. The Kennedys were close Joe McCarthy (RFK worked with him) and they also had gangster connections. Kennedy was hated by most leaders of the US Intelligence and the Military, who no doubt were many of Hersh’s sources (but that doesn’t mean they were wrong). People can only speculate what JFK would have done if he had survived and been re-elected.
Yes, Kennedy was not a saint. He did have a hand in the approval of the use of Agent Orange in Vietnam from 1961.
We also know that the Vietnam escalation was also partly due to Robert Strange McNamara and some of his decisions during the Kennedy administration.
However, I do believe that the Cuban Missile Crisis change Kennedy views on Vietnam and the Soviet Union. He did want to pull out all the Vietnam advisors from Vietnam by 1965 as we saw in the NSAM 263 and he did start a detente policy towards the Soviets.
He made mistakes, for sure, but he did learn from them.
as to Sachs – thx for reminding of this.
Regardless of his important engagement now.
At first when he started to show up last year I was a bit puzzled since had remembered his name in totally different context.
But contrary to JFK, Sachs is among the living so he can still try do somthing positive.
I note that RFK Jnr often invokes his uncle JFK, and what a difference it would make if there were a US President who followed his example in the current war against Russia. But in an interview with Jordan Peterson a few days ago, RFK Jnr called President Putin a ‘homicidal tyrant’ and, from memory, he also called him a thug and a criminal. I may be wrong but I doubt JFK spoke publicly about Khruschev in that way.
I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Putin, but few illusions about his character. He is certainly a very smart, strategically oriented gangster, but that does not make him less of a gangster. Yes, the US provoked the current conflict with Ukraine; Kyiv is closer to Moscow than Atlanta is to DC. In this case, I think his ethnic bias goaded him too soon. He should have gritted his teeth and pointed wailing at the Nazis as they continues to shell the Donbas. It would have eventually gotten attention and sympathy: after all, these corpses are white.
> He should have gritted his teeth and pointed wailing at the Nazis as they continues to shell the Donbas. It would have eventually gotten attention and sympathy
That policy was followed in essence for a full eight years, with zero positive results…
Thanks for this clear contrast between JFK’s plan for peace and Biden’s reckless actions. I used to respect Biden, when I knew little about him. Then I saw videos of him brazenly lying about his academic record. I concluded he is a professional con artist. Then a lot of puzzling things suddenly made sense.
Biden is the current Dubya. Blinken is the operational manager of US foreign policy. His agenda is the Wolfowitz agenda of world domination. Hence he supports the ongoing conquest of Palestine and the current attempt to conquer Russia. Increasing censorship in America is necessary to keep the US vassal state subdued.
Sorry to disagree.
Albeit I very much share Sachs´ unrelenting demands for peace today there is an odd love affair and oblivion regarding JFK´s true colours.
Not that the “Camelot” nonsense were new. But in light of Biden and war:
You could as well argue that the Dems now have learned well from JFK in terms of telling half truths and omitting serious facts that would not let them look very good.
Thus “rigging” public opinion in the West at least.
Undisputed JFK oversaw one of the major military build-ups in US history. The next would be Reagan, btw again rekindled with even by today´s left. Very odd too…
1960: US nuclear warheads 18,638 USSR 3,127
1961: 22,229 USSR 3,153
1962: 27,100 USSR 3,451
1963: 29,800 USSR 4,050
(numbers from Marc Trachtenberg 1999, quoting “Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, November-
December 1994, p. 59”)
What is known is the secret missile deal with Jupiter missiles stationed in Turkey. Save face for JFK.
What is already less known is their limited capability and age. They were bound to be replaced anyway.
But what seems absolutely forgotten is the advent of the SSBN under JFK and the Polaris system which virtually rewrote the rule book of the nuclear “game”.
While the Russians were only building up their land-based ICBMs the US now placed those warheads basically untouchable on seaborne submarines, undetectable and invincible for Russian forces.
Upsetting the whole concept of MAD, which would only come up later in fact.
Ever since SSBNs are the backbone of nuclear forces, especially by the US. You could say, JFK gave them nothing.
And odd enough too, the “love affair” with peacenik JFK always starts 1962 after Cuba. What happened before?
(Sachs too speaks about 1963 here. Fair enough. But there is a story to that BEFORE that ought to be told by historians.)
Khrushchev had tried to argue with the POTUSes since the 1950s.
Moscow even asked for NATO-membership in 1954.
Khrushchev suggested scaling down the arms race.
The Rapacki plan from Poland was one among several suggestions for a nuclear-free zone in Europe, btw loathed by the FRG who would want unification but only on their, which mean US, terms.
But Rapacki was DOA.
So either it would be Washington´s way or it would be no way.
Since giving up (just like NOW) was understandably not an option for the USSR, they, after fruitless attempts to find a peaceful solution, gambled with Cuba.
I might find no friends with this, and I do not see it the proper way, naturally, but one could argue Khrushchev got his “parity” of arms after daring the Americans in 1962 pushing them and everyone else to the brink. (even if in his words, it was originally intended as security for Cuba.)
After all you could ask: why did dove JFK let it come this far? If he were such a lover of respect and peace?
We now know that in terms of chain of command the system had alreay failed.
We live today only for the sake of a couple of unorthodox decisions taken by marineers in 1962.
Or as National Security Adviser McGeorge Bundy put this double standard ““[t]he current threat to peace is not in Turkey, it is in Cuba”
(Chomsky 2012 hxxps://chomsky.info/20121015/).
Pentagon budget in 1962 had a post war high of 46bn $
increases:
“The figure appropriated was $6.4 billion over the fiscal 1961 defense appropriations and $5.9 billion over President Eisenhower’s January 1961 estimates for the fiscal 1962 defense budget.”
Or to quote JFK himself, here his press release from Oct. 11th 1961
“(…)
President Kennedy, speaking to an Oct. 11 press conference, said his Administration had increased the previous defense budget by more than 14 percent.
He added: “In strategic forces, which are the nuclear forces, we have ordered a 50 percent increase in the number of Polaris submarines to be on battle station by the end of 1964; a 50 percent increase in the number of strategic bombers on 15-minute ground alert at the end of runways, which is already in effect; a 100 percent increase in our capacity to produce Minuteman missiles against the day when that production capacity may be needed, and a similar increase in Skybolt, and other programs which affect our strategic arm. To strengthen our non-nuclear forces…we have called up two additional divisions, and many thousands more, particularly in the air. We have increased by 75 percent our modern long-range aircraft capacity. We have increased our anti-guerilla forces by 150 percent. We have stepped up the delivery of the M-14 rifle from a maximum of 9,000 a month to 44,000 a month. We have taken other steps to bring the Army and Navy and Marine units to full strength in terms of manpower and equipment.…”
(…)”
(source: article from CQ Almanac 1961 hxxps://library.cqpress.com/cqalmanac/document.php?id=cqal61-1372707)
Wow. Very peaceful indeed.
Sorry to disagree. With respect to JFK’s “true colours”, he had the capacity to learn and adapt. In particular, he escaped from the lies of the CIA and its war profiteering financial overlords. For example, he demanded Israel cease its development of nuclear weapons. And he was working to make the AIPAC of that day register as an agent of a foreign government, eliminating its money from US elections. Most significantly, he avoided the CIA trap leading to a war with Russia.
Ever since, his assassins’ gang has maintained a background campaign to smear him. They do everything possible to keep the public from learning the true story of JFK’s presidency.
The silver spoon was set aside after his confrontations with Allen Dulles, Curtis La May, Maxwell Taylor. He was tempered by expeirience swiming in the Pacific after his boat was cut in two, and the Power plays which took place within his Security Councel. The change from gung ho to peace keeper in both leaders took place befor the sun rose after the Ocotobor crisis. It took place for many of us.
When JFK came to office his administration was under the impression that the Soviets were on par with the nukes. It was only when McNamara found out around 1962 that the U.S. had a huge advantage over the Soviets that they’ve decided to stop with the huge increase in warheads. From 61 to 62 we have almost 5000 warheads built but between 62 and 63 we have 2700 warheads. That’s already a reduction by almost half.
The increase in Polaris submarine on battle station was understandable. That means readiness not deployment.
I.F. Stone (Weekly 1967-08-03): A certain moral imbecility marks all ethnocentric movements.
Kennedy would lie just like every other Yankee leader.
I.F. Stone (In a Time of Torment, 1961-1967): All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out.
Jeffrey, all I can say is, “If only…”. Among many such laments, “If only Biden were half the human being, with half the soul, of JFK.
Alas, he is not. In fact, he is effectively, ethically and otherwise, the antithesis. He probably would find JFK’s remarks abhorrent – to the extent he could even grasp their meaning (and we should have little optimism that would be the case- even before he began his descent into dementia). He represents the “anti-JFK”; and is the latest installment by the same establishment, of creatures who’ve been well conditioned to do what they’re told and above all, hold the line against any change. (Obama being the previous example, notwithstanding all his “Hope and Change” campaign rhetoric.
Washington is the very center- the HQ of War, Inc. No one granted access to the halls of power will dare do anything more than spout euphemisms at best. I can only hope that one day, those partisans so captured and distracted by the culture wars, on both sides of the firmly-enforced political aisle, will one day wake up to this fact.
Spot on. The problem, as I see it, is that Biden does not have brain one. It is not just creeping dementia. Rather he has spent his entire life as a self-serving, mediocre politician and Senate animal. Speaking out of both sides of his mouth is now ingrained. There is no core or center. It’s simply all up for sale. All his effort has gone into learning how to grin convincingly. I doubt that he could start thinking anew even if his head was clear. With what would he think with?
“[B]oth the United States and its allies, and the Soviet Union and its allies, have a mutually deep interest in a just and genuine peace and in halting the arms race.” Consider the irony that today, it is only Russia that has a deep interest in a just and genuine peace and in halting the arms race. Who has in recent years has walked away from all those hard fought arms treaties? And what was the reason for doing that? Only that they were a hindrance on neocon aspirations for world domination. Petty and self-serving to the core.
JFK had depth and character. He could think broadly and inclusively. And at heart he was courageous. Does any of this describe Joe Biden? Instead, Biden’s “thinking” is done by the ideologues that he has surrounded himself with. No doubt they spend their time flattering him while instructing him on what to think and what to say. They are barking mad and they would rather burn down the world than be shown up for the petty, vacuous fools that they are.
Even Reagan had regular communications with the USSR/Russia and wanted to end the nuclear standoff. I’m no fan of Reagan, but at least he made some effort to avert nuclear war and deescalate.
The US had put missiles in Turkey and then The Soviets put missiles in Cuba. Kennedy was not a saint, but compared to the whacko Dr. Strangeloves, he looks saintly in comparison.
No hotline to the Kremlin, no diplomatic relations, only provocations, lies and warmongering. No wonder the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists have the Doomsday Clock at 90 seconds to midnight.
I’d never seen that speech before. And doubt if i’ll ever hear one like it again. In just a short 60 years, look at what is happening today.
Just don’t forget that the people behind Biden put a bullet into JFK’s brain back when Joe was still receiving his training in college. Joe was thoroughly trained not to be another JFK. Everything about his long and public political career shouts this loudly. He is the Deep State’s President, there to be more obedient than Donald was.
After the fall, historians will look at the Deep State’s major assassinations that changed the course of America in the 1960’s as the point at which America became doomed to the course that led to its fall. At that point, America lost a democracy’s ability to change and adapt.
Democracy in America probably actually died with the formation of the Deep State and a powerful central government during World War 2 in order to defeat Hitler. The formal announcement of the death was on Nov 23, 1963 in Dallas, TX.
JFK had an average approval polling rating of 70% during his short time in office. A sign of a functioning democracy.
Biden had a disapproval rating of 74% in a poll I saw not long ago. Not a sign of a functioning democracy.
Thanks Jeffrey, this is an important time to remember what Kennedy was trying to accomplish before he was assassinated. For readers here who have not read it yet, I recommend James Douglass’ book: JFK and the Unspeakable”. It goes over the assassination in great detail, making it very, very clear that the CIA and business elites decided that Kennedy was a danger to their war objectives, and had to go. If everyone in the US understood this as the key turning point where America became the ultimate, perpetual War Nation, they might have a bit of a different opinion about the US military, CIA and federal government, who are still hiding the facts of the assassination from the US public.
I completely agree on the James Douglass book. He brings together well a lot of evidence that emerged after the Warren Commission report.
I also agree on the value of James Douglas’s book JFK and the Unspeakable. I had expected the latest on evidence of what had happened in the assassination and got that–but much more. To my surprise, I learned of an emerging alliance between Kennedy and Khruschev to thwart a nuclear war. Both were up against their own military industrial complex forces urging conflict instead of resolution. This moment helps understand that Kennedy was turning in a new direction from his previously militaristic tendencies. The portrait of Khruschev in this study entirely contradicts the western imagery of him at that time–as a cold, butcher and thug figure, much like the smearing of Putin today.