Comment on A monolithic and ruthless conspiracy: What was John F. Kennedy referring to?
ehpolitical@lemmy.ca 1 week agoThanks, 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.
CurlyWurlies4All@slrpnk.net 1 week ago
Nah man sorry. You’re just wrong in this case. You’re missing the forest for the trees.
ehpolitical@lemmy.ca 1 week ago
You could be right, maybe I’m wrong… but maybe not. About religion, do you not find it odd that every American Pres since Kennedy has been found consulting with the pope concerning how to govern his own country, including those who’ve not been Catholics? Much of the world bows down to the pope and few seem to question it. I’d think atheists and people of other religions, even Protestants really, would kick up a fuss to see their leaders bowing down to this guy, but nope. There’s also the relationship and history between the RCC and Russia (something else I need to read up on).
CurlyWurlies4All@slrpnk.net 1 week ago
I don’t find it odd. Even with Vatican II in 1962-65 transforming the role of the pope to a more ecumenical approach, the role is still one of a world leader. It’s similar to how those same politicians consult with the Dalai Lama. There’s realpolitik reasons for political world leaders to be seen consulting them as ‘world leaders’ that have nothing to do with the actual religions.
ehpolitical@lemmy.ca 1 week ago
Ya, like I said, few people seem to question it. Anyhow, thanks for taking the time to chat. I’ll be checking out that link you left me!