JFK Assassination's " Wider Reference" for History Students?

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

I study JFK related history, not so much for the "who dun it," but, to put it crudely, as a core sampling of how power really works.

For example, once we know of the CIA's track record of infiltrating investigations it can make us more sceptical about how the news presented re: more current events.

I was wondering if forum members might have any concisely expressed thoughts on how the JFK assassination might be presented to novices, in order to persuade them that this is "knowledge worth having".

We all know that there is much effort to trivialize some of the most contraversial aspects of history, and

turn it into a kind of exoticized trivial persuit that is outsed traditional history.

What point would you make --assuming you were trying to convince an open minded novice-- in favor of the

the following proposal:

There is much to be learned about U.S. history in general from studying the JFK assassination.

Of course there will be those who argue that all interest is self-generated, so why bother. I don't agree with this, and would prefer responses from those who have also meditated on this question--even though its not encouraged in many bourgois California Zendos.

[Pat Speer]

Nathaniel, I have come to think of the assassination in philosophical terms. Truth is a material object. We are all looking at this object from different points of view. A study of the Kennedy assassination reveals how people with different perspectives compete for respectability, quite often by deceiving themselves that they have the ONE view, the correct view. Once this deception takes hold, unfortunately, a view supposedly rooted in reason can not be altered by reason. At that point, one's perspective has become one's religion.

[John Dolva]

Possibly a good discussion point is pre post 11/22/63.

The 'shockumentary' 'The Killing of America', suggests this as a pivotal moment in history when freedom became shackled by the threat of murder. After this sniping and murder rates rose nation wide to a rate mirrored by nations at war.

This does not ignore the horrors of past decades, but there was a sense of the nation as a whole prospering and being able to put things right. After the assassination, all this went on a defensive. A sense of security was gone, trust and optimism as well.

To get back to a stage where the average person felt an individual sense of power begs an understanding and resolution of the events in Dallas. In a way I suspect that should this come to a successful solution, courage and optimism, and the promises one makes to those who didn't live in both times would mean a lot more.

_________

Truth of course exist without believers. Belief does not make a truth. The number of individuals that believed the earth was the centre of the universe at no time changed the fact that it was not. The fact that it is not the centre of the universe, at no time became more, true even when Galileo was the only one who dared suggest otherwise.

Real truths exist separate of promotion, individuals, campaigns, or individual credibility.

Arrival at truth realisation occurs through a search for it, not through campaigning. It is not measured by the number or fervor of adherents.