Storming Camelot
RFK Jr's endorsement of Trump prompts reassessment of JFK
The rankings of American presidents have evolved over time, influenced by changing societal values, new historical insights, and shifting political priorities. But, among those rankings, John F. Kennedy, aka JFK, consistently occupies a high position, a fact that speaks to both his impact during his brief presidency and the powerful legacy he left behind. Or so we thought. Camelot was always a hyped Democrat fairy tale born of a tragedy in Dallas in November 1963, when Americans witnessed the murder of their young president and his grieving widow tried to craft a narrative to protect his legacy.
I started this newsletter because I want to raise awareness of the dangers of an overly politicized history, and even more risky than politicized history is a partisan one. Okay, and because I love writing about history, but you know that already. I have long known JFK’s presidency was overrated, and I planned to actually tackle his time in the White House for History Wars in a newsletter issue about Nixon, but his nephew’s endorsement of Donald Trump has made a surprising outlet change its tune.
Jeet Heer’s piece in The Nation entitled “By His Endorsement of Donald Trump, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Shows the Dark Side of Camelot” does not bury the lede.
I am not writing to endorse the article. Rather, it is to point out the partisan nature of the reinterpretation. The criticisms of the Kennedys are not new and have been known to researchers for decades. In fact, it is much worse than what Heer details, which I’ll write about later. The Camelot myth is being debunked not in the service of truth but to lessen the impact of RFK Jr.’s political clout, a man who was a young boy when his uncle was assassinated and a teenager when his father suffered the same fate. It is a real-time example of why I write History Wars. So I guess JFK is now a part of the history wars, and I’ll have to write about him separately from my planned piece on Tricky Dick. Writing American history is never dull.
JFK Pros - opened up economy for practically a decade long boom, managed to avoid nuclear war over Cuba, inspired a generation of volunteerism with Peace Corps, inspired the Space program, brought a cool style to the White House.
Cons - Bay of Pigs, gave up bases in Turkey, put Civil Rights on a back burner at the start of his Administration, didn't manage to get us out of Viet Nam entirely. Reduced the moral authority of the presidency with his infidelities and lied to the American people about his infirmities.
I'm not sure that he had a coherent foreign policy, but his altruistic, technology-oriented, forward-looking vision captivated a generation. I don't know where I'd rank him - maybe in the teens? What's your thought?