I still believe in the idea that the CIA or factions within the bourgeoisie assassinated JFK. It doesn’t matter that JFK was a war criminal who was just as bad as most other Presidents in the United States history. What matters is that his death to this day just comes off as incredibly suspicious and the fact that he wanted to get rid of the CIA just makes me… not really trust the official narrative. I mean, the narrative painting the man who did initially as a communist just seems too convenient…
I’m sorry, I know how I sound, but I used to grow up with 9/11 conspiracy theories as well. In many ways, it made me anti-imperialist, but it certainly did give rise in me to certain suspicious about the US government as well. I know that I shouldn’t be thinking like this, but honestly? I don’t know. And perhaps none of us will know for sure. But I can’t help but get the feeling that the bourgeoisie would easily cannibalize their own.
The US would never kill its own head of state? They’re easily replaceable, don’t have complete control of the federal government, and besides, kings were assassinated by nobles way back when for much less.
Honestly, I get how I sound, and maybe it’s my extreme case of OCD, but I just grew up with this as a fact. Maybe I need to rethink all this.
I’m sorry, comrades, but this is kinda hard for me.
(Also, this is a reply to the previous thread about this topic).
It’s all good, comrade. Just because someone said they don’t believe that JFK was assinated by the US on a thread doesn’t mean that the issue is solved. We aren’t a monolith here, we disagree on things.
Of course, yes.
I just didn’t want to come off as too much of an outlier. I know that “conspiracy theories” at best are a double-edged sword. I do not like conspiricism. But even so, I trust people that actually lived at that time to know that there was something fishy about it all. I mean, think about it, nobody was really taught to be a “conspiracy theorist” before that happened and yet somehow people sort of thought there was something up with it.
lol Maybe I’m insecure, but I know that many MLs don’t like conspiricism (with good reason), but to me, that shouldn’t deter us from looking at the official narrative with a critical eye, imho.
I feel you on being insecure, I am in a similar though I have a different experience when in comes to conspiracies. I definitely agree we should be critical of the narratives presented by any Imperialist nation, while still remaining materialist in our analysis. However I’m not sure if it’s something that will radicalize people to Marxism or even “the Left” generally. I could be wrong but I haven’t seen someone that was like “Well Maxism-Leninism agrees with my view point on JFK, so that’ll be my ideology”. I feel it’s the person’s material conditions that will lead them to the MLism. I think it’s more valuable to say “Hey, this is why you can barely make rent, while the CEO of your company earns extravagant amount of wealth” rather than “I believe X in conspiracy Y”. Though I could see those topics as a good jumping off point if you and another person agree on something, but their political development has to go further than just researching conspiracy-related topics. Hopefully I’m not being obtuse or unclear, but it’s more compelling to talk and learn about other prescient topics (such as SwCC) as someone new to MLism. Plus I’m not sure if I’ll be alive long enough to get satisfactory answers on various conspiracy topics – though having the truth revealed would be nice – so I tend to focus on what can help radicalize people now.
All that being said, as long you come to your conclusion in a scientific, materialist manner, then I say go for it! Solidarity comrade!
Thanks! Solidarity!
And thanks for the satisfactory answer. I get exactly what you mean. Too many conspiracy theorists focus on the, well, “conspiracies” and not the actual working conditions that many suffer in. The political is important but we need to connect it to the “bread and butter” issues that many around the country face.