12-06-2013, 04:29 AM
I'm a newcomer to Deep Politics Forum. Thank you for allowing me to post.
If I may be permitted to say just a few words about what I wrote in the Destiny Betrayed review. I did not mean to downplay the importance of the Missile Crisis. All I wished to state is that I didn't see JFK's behavior thereafter as an about-face from a previously hawkish Cold War agenda. I can agree with the formulation that it may have strengthened his resolve to seek peace with Russia and rapprochement with Cuba (and to accept the consequences thereof, even at the cost of his own life), but imagine, by way of contrast, what Richard Nixon or Barry Goldwater would have done in 1961 during the Bay of Pigs, let alone regarding Laos -- or even in Berlin. If suddenly someone like that decided, "No, this is not the way to go", I could see that as the "turning" of a Cold Warrior. Of course, I suppose that if you wanted to task me on my allusion to St. Augustine's Confessions, you could make the argument that the writer's conversion was merely the moment in which he found the will or grace to do something he had already in his intellect decided needed to be done; yet that "something" for Augustine was nonetheless indeed a turning away from a former lifestyle. This is the only element in Douglass's view of Kennedy which I find overstated; it otherwise seems to be congruent with Destiny Betrayed in that it actually builds a case for how resistant he always was to military intervention, both before and after the crisis (and Douglass even suggests that the PT 109 experience taught him to abhor war). Furthermore, as Jim DiEugenio argues, the White House tapes are quite revelatory concerning JFK's position throughout the thirteen-day crisis: his is the only voice consistently resisting proposals for bombing or invasion.
In any case, it is my personal view that the two Jims' books are, despite their divergence on this point, ultimately complementary. And they are both books that needed to be written (and are also both well-written). We have lived through 50 years of lies, suppression, distortion and disinformation on one side, and sometimes flimsy or occasionally ludicrous speculation on the other; these two books, however, are paragons of thoughtful and meticulous analysis (not to mention powerful indictments of our recent past which speak directly to our present) -- precisely what historical explanation should always strive to be even if historical certainty can never be attained in any objective sense.
As for what led to JFK's death, his own "three strikes, you're out" reaction to Seven Days in May impresses me as particularly apt in terms of the Cuban situation: 1. Bay of Pigs; 2. Missile Crisis; 3. Back-Channel. But we can factor in any number of subsequent "Bay of Pigs" in other areas during the course of his final year in office, like the finalization of the Vietnam withdrawal plans, the Test Ban Treaty, etc., as contributory; as Douglass himself states, there is an embarrassment of choices. Why JFK was elected could also be explained by the fact that he did not always reveal his deeper convictions publicly, and appeared to embrace the Cold War rhetoric of the era (from which, however, it would be hasty to generalize about his intentions), so to some extent, at least, I think those who may have thought they could control him (since he was young and inexperienced in their eyes) did not really grasp whom they were dealing with. But that's just my take on it.
Please, if you haven't already spent time with Destiny Betrayed, by all means do so. I promise you won't regret it.
If I may be permitted to say just a few words about what I wrote in the Destiny Betrayed review. I did not mean to downplay the importance of the Missile Crisis. All I wished to state is that I didn't see JFK's behavior thereafter as an about-face from a previously hawkish Cold War agenda. I can agree with the formulation that it may have strengthened his resolve to seek peace with Russia and rapprochement with Cuba (and to accept the consequences thereof, even at the cost of his own life), but imagine, by way of contrast, what Richard Nixon or Barry Goldwater would have done in 1961 during the Bay of Pigs, let alone regarding Laos -- or even in Berlin. If suddenly someone like that decided, "No, this is not the way to go", I could see that as the "turning" of a Cold Warrior. Of course, I suppose that if you wanted to task me on my allusion to St. Augustine's Confessions, you could make the argument that the writer's conversion was merely the moment in which he found the will or grace to do something he had already in his intellect decided needed to be done; yet that "something" for Augustine was nonetheless indeed a turning away from a former lifestyle. This is the only element in Douglass's view of Kennedy which I find overstated; it otherwise seems to be congruent with Destiny Betrayed in that it actually builds a case for how resistant he always was to military intervention, both before and after the crisis (and Douglass even suggests that the PT 109 experience taught him to abhor war). Furthermore, as Jim DiEugenio argues, the White House tapes are quite revelatory concerning JFK's position throughout the thirteen-day crisis: his is the only voice consistently resisting proposals for bombing or invasion.
In any case, it is my personal view that the two Jims' books are, despite their divergence on this point, ultimately complementary. And they are both books that needed to be written (and are also both well-written). We have lived through 50 years of lies, suppression, distortion and disinformation on one side, and sometimes flimsy or occasionally ludicrous speculation on the other; these two books, however, are paragons of thoughtful and meticulous analysis (not to mention powerful indictments of our recent past which speak directly to our present) -- precisely what historical explanation should always strive to be even if historical certainty can never be attained in any objective sense.
As for what led to JFK's death, his own "three strikes, you're out" reaction to Seven Days in May impresses me as particularly apt in terms of the Cuban situation: 1. Bay of Pigs; 2. Missile Crisis; 3. Back-Channel. But we can factor in any number of subsequent "Bay of Pigs" in other areas during the course of his final year in office, like the finalization of the Vietnam withdrawal plans, the Test Ban Treaty, etc., as contributory; as Douglass himself states, there is an embarrassment of choices. Why JFK was elected could also be explained by the fact that he did not always reveal his deeper convictions publicly, and appeared to embrace the Cold War rhetoric of the era (from which, however, it would be hasty to generalize about his intentions), so to some extent, at least, I think those who may have thought they could control him (since he was young and inexperienced in their eyes) did not really grasp whom they were dealing with. But that's just my take on it.
Please, if you haven't already spent time with Destiny Betrayed, by all means do so. I promise you won't regret it.