!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
it seems like you didn't quite get the responses you were hoping for.
i appreciate your questioning and attempt to reframe the JFK speech in a modern context. it makes sense to me that he might have been speaking about some underground conspiracy which is still in operation today.
👍
I was looking for something that would click in my mind, like when you just know puzzle pieces fit together... and, no, I haven't heard anything like that yet.
He's talking about the Soviet Union. This would have been clear to anyone at the time. Conspiracy just means more than one person working together.
It was mostly before my time, so I don't have that kind of insight. When I read it, it sounds to me a lot like what we see happening in the U.S. today.
Well, back then it was the Soviets, and now quite a lot of what we see in the west is being guided by the hand of Putin, so it basically is the same thing happening all over again.
What I'm trying to get at is 1) Exactly what this thing is that JFK was talking about; and 2) Whether this precise thing has continued to exist since JFK's time up to today. With the very elaborate way JFK was speaking, it sounds to me like it had to involve more than just the Soviets, and not like something that would have easily and suddenly died off. But I suspect you must be right, that the Soviets were and obviously are significantly involved still. Maybe I'm just asking an impossible question.
He was talking about the Soviet Union. Don't they teach this very basic history in school?
Who do you think was conducting the 'Cold War' in the last sentence?
If he was talking about nothing more than the Soviet Union, why didn't he simply say 'we are opposed around the world by the Soviet Union'? Seems like a very complicated way of saying Soviet Union. And no, the schools I went to didn't teach about covert global conspiracies, the likes of which John F. Kennedy was clearly warning us against.
You're not going to like this answer but he didn't say Soviet Union because he didn't need to. Everybody understood that 'communism' was 'THE Global Conspiracy' ever since McCarthyism took of.
Check out A conspiracy so immense : the world of Joe McCarthy by David Oshinsky to learn a little of what the attitude of the time was like.
Also sorry for the previously snippy response.
Thanks, apology accepted. Thanks also for the link, saved it.
In his entire speech, he never mentions Russia in any form. Meanwhile, he does refer to some enemy in plural form, that is advancing from around the globe, i.e. "those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe", and "this nation's foes", etc. He also warned against religious involvement in politics in a different speech, which I think has gone mostly ignored at our own peril. People scoff at religion if they themselves aren't religious, ignoring the fact that the leaders of the world are mostly very religious people (whether sincere in their religion or not). I mention this because I suspect these two were somehow connected in JFK's mind.
For the sake of objectivity and truth, I'm trying to take into account my lack of any firsthand perspective. I just honestly cannot see how he was talking about the Soviet Union alone when I read what he said and how he said it. It honestly seems to me he had to be talking about something far greater.
Russian and Chinese communism
This could be as easily applied to the people who killed JFK
From his wording, I'd think it probably did/does.
Who are "they"?
Russian and Chinese communism
Yes, both have been forms of authorities rules.
And in light of OP's question. To me "they" are all the authoritarians; both the extreme left and right winged.
How do you know that? Seriously asking.
In the quote he says he's talking about the Cold War.
He makes reference to it, but also speaks of some kind of opposition from "around the world" that was working on "expanding its sphere of influence". He also described this thing as operating in secret, not out in the open. Was Russia operating secretly? (I don't know much about the Cold War.)
For those of us who lived through it, what he said was blatantly obvious at the time.
There were people that assumed he meant Jews, but they were always going to think he meant that.
Makes sense, I was too young to remember most of it. Still, does his description not strike you as resembling what we see happening in the U.S. today?
I disagreed with it at the time and do again now… there’s no grand conspiracy; people are just depressingly predictable in how they respond to economic and cultural pressures. Some people recognize the trends and attempt to ride them or even control them (or stop them), but with a few notable exceptions, history tends to just roll on regardless — which can look to some as if there must be some cabal of puppet masters calling the shots.
Sorry, do you mean you disagreed with what JFK was saying, that you didn't believe him?
I believe his observations were mostly correct, but wouldn’t tie it as closely to a “group” as he did.
That's amazing to me, that you were there to hear him and remember it. He's one politician I would have loved to listen to firsthand. He seemed to say a lot of very controversial things, like when he spoke out against religious involvement in politics and named the religious groups very specifically... he was either really dumb or very brave... I imagine the latter. So do you think in this case he was maybe a bit too paranoid, or just mistaken?
I think he, personally, had made a lot of enemies because of how he spoke, and then conflated that with more general and organized resistance to his ideas instead of it being reactionary responses so his delivery.
People are generally nowhere near as organized as we give them credit for.
I can see that... it would be an easy mistake for anyone to make. Still, there are an awful lot of coincidences between what he said, what we see in fact taking place today, and that he was ultimately assassinated. Because of all that, I can't help but believe a lot of what he said.
That’s logical fallacy though. More likely, there were general principles at play that resulted in his probability of being assassinated increasing. Secret organized groups plotting his downfall aren’t necessary and would be much more complicated to pull off than just letting social response take its course.
But human minds like to turn everything into a narrative where all the parts are directly connected, when in truth, it’s usually a combination of natural selection and social dynamics.
Logical fallacy, how so?
So you don't even believe his assassination was planned/plotted (by some group that felt threatened by him)?
Yes they were operating in secret. There are many examples of their infiltration, such as the Cambridge Five.
Ok, I didn't know that. I was too young still to remember most of it.
Probably the oligarchs. They have been trying to install fascist dictatorships for a very long time.
He was talking about worldwide communism. This was during the Cold War and no one would even think America was an oligarchy at the time. The audience knew it was the Soviets he was talking about primarily.
Bookmark worthy, thanks!
It’s pretty funny to see this thread filled with wrong answers by lemmy.world users and those same smuglibs downvoting anyone that suggests otherwise when it’s pretty universally accepted that he was killed by the CIA.
The CIA even did a distinctive CIA-style cleanup job , eliminating all parties with knowledge of the hit afterward.
What for many years seemed unthinkable has turned out to be true after all.
There was a CIA cover-up. The CIA did suppress information. The CIA did stonewall both of the official government investigations of the JFK assassination. And as a consequence of this Agency misconduct, both investigations were compromised in important respects-particularly in regard to the fundamental issues of whether the assassination resulted from a conspiracy and whether Lee Harvey Oswald (alleged to be the sole assassin in the Warren Report and alleged to be one of multiple assassins in the Report of the House Assassinations Committee) was affiliated with the CIA.
So you're saying JFK was referring to the CIA when he talked about a "monolithic and ruthless conspiracy" from around the world?
Yes. They did, after all, assassinate him.
I was thinking almost the same but in addition I'd add the whole Cold War, because from the URSS, the KGB used to do analog things but IMO with less effectiveness and judged more harshly, maybe because the International agreement were naive and powerless against the USA.