Charles, usually find your aritcles insightful with spot-on analyses, but your focus here seems a bit myopic in more than one way. First, as to JFK Jr's notions of the origin of the pandemic, he hardly leaves the US with clean hands and, in fact, implicates the US in the research and funding of the Wuhan lab. Second, it would seem that the larger context for judging RFK is (1) his candidacy for President in the 2024 electiion, (2) his 40+ year history as environmental law attorney and advocate for peace, albeit not the kind of visionary that would come from Cuba or other countries whose philosophy and vision clearly and explicity run counter to that of the hegemon, in its dying state in late capitalism. RFK's books confirm this in detail. Here is his wiki entry which outlines his history as a successful lawyer defeating interests such as Exxon and monsanto and defending the interests of Native Americans and other oppressed minorities. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F._Kennedy_Jr.> One has only to hear him speak to hear his brilliance, determination and vision. While he may not be a socialist, he is an indisputable peace candidate, in the good company of his uncle, father, MLK and Malcolm X. Nope, not a socialist, but of the three candidates, Trump Biden (or Newsom or whomever they have step in for him at the last minute) or RFK, Jr, who would you vote for? In that context, the tone and spin of your article looks petty, myopic and, more importantly, seems to miss the point of what is at stake in the next US election. With all due respect, Charles, my two cents. Mary Rushfield (attendee at UH seminars with Cliff's groups for several years).
Thank you very much on your comment. It is true that my focus of RFK Jr.’s distrust of China did not address his virtues, but it is the sixth commentary that I have written on him. The first two were written in May 2023 (“Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.: RFK Jr hopes to heal the nation´s polarization with truth,” May 9, 2023; “RFK Jr. and the peaceful revolution: The road to sustained power to the people,” May 12, 2023). These first two commentaries are consistent with what you express in your comment. It stresses Kennedy’s defense of the legacy of the Kennedy family; his opposition to the merging of corporate and state power, for which he has a well-defined strategy; his opposition to the continuous wars; his lament of the polarization of the country, with he regularly seeks to heal with his discourses; and his views on other issues. In the May 12 commentary, I write that “RFK Jr. in his April 19 announcement of his presidential candidacy revealed a level of understanding that is exceptional in American politics.” However, in this commentary, I begin a critique of Kennedy for his lack of a consistent understanding of the logic of imperialism and anti-imperialist resistance. In this matter, U.S. public discourse has much to learn from the countries constructing socialism, which are leading the formation of an international anti-imperialist coalition of socialist and progressive states. I express the hope in the second commentary that the Kennedy campaign will evolve in a way that stresses the education of the people and well as Kennedy’s occasional references to a peaceful revolution.
Four commentaries this past January are based on my reading of Kennedy’s recent book (December 2023) on The Wuhan Cover-Up: “RFK Jr. and the bioweapons arms race: A new book by the independent presidential candidate does not persuade,” January 12, 2024; “WHO and the origins of COVID-19: Science and cooperation for the common good of humanity,” January 19, 2024, which focuses on the WHO-China report that RFK Jr. rejects; “The Wuhan Cover-Up: Ideological distortions and misinformation in the post-modern age,” January 26, 2024, which focuses on a report a report of the Republican minority staff of the House Foreign Affairs Committee that RFK Jr. cites; and “RFK Jr.’s distrust of China: Misreading China’s quest for preeminence in a peaceful world,” January 30, 2024.
I was profoundly disappointed, even disturbed, by The Wuhan Cover-Up, for reasons that I express in the January 12 commentary, where I write that “the book appeals to suspicious instincts and fear, rather than to empirical evidence and reason;” and where I cite instances in which the book selectively quotes scientific researchers in a form that distorts the meaning intended. His repeated comments on China in the book, reflecting a Cold War mentality, were also a problem, although less disturbing than his misrepresentation of the intended meaning of scientists as they described the purposes of their work. Such misrepresentations strike me as unethical.
I honestly am at a loss to explain the disjunction between Kennedy’s sensitive discussion of divisive issues, typically found in his online videos, and The Wuhan Cover-Up.
The links to the six commentaries can be found at “Explore Previous Posts” (https://charlesmckelvey.substack.com/p/thematic-index), It is a thematic index of all posts; scroll down to the final category, “United States.”
Charles, usually find your aritcles insightful with spot-on analyses, but your focus here seems a bit myopic in more than one way. First, as to JFK Jr's notions of the origin of the pandemic, he hardly leaves the US with clean hands and, in fact, implicates the US in the research and funding of the Wuhan lab. Second, it would seem that the larger context for judging RFK is (1) his candidacy for President in the 2024 electiion, (2) his 40+ year history as environmental law attorney and advocate for peace, albeit not the kind of visionary that would come from Cuba or other countries whose philosophy and vision clearly and explicity run counter to that of the hegemon, in its dying state in late capitalism. RFK's books confirm this in detail. Here is his wiki entry which outlines his history as a successful lawyer defeating interests such as Exxon and monsanto and defending the interests of Native Americans and other oppressed minorities. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F._Kennedy_Jr.> One has only to hear him speak to hear his brilliance, determination and vision. While he may not be a socialist, he is an indisputable peace candidate, in the good company of his uncle, father, MLK and Malcolm X. Nope, not a socialist, but of the three candidates, Trump Biden (or Newsom or whomever they have step in for him at the last minute) or RFK, Jr, who would you vote for? In that context, the tone and spin of your article looks petty, myopic and, more importantly, seems to miss the point of what is at stake in the next US election. With all due respect, Charles, my two cents. Mary Rushfield (attendee at UH seminars with Cliff's groups for several years).
Dear Mary,
Thank you very much on your comment. It is true that my focus of RFK Jr.’s distrust of China did not address his virtues, but it is the sixth commentary that I have written on him. The first two were written in May 2023 (“Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.: RFK Jr hopes to heal the nation´s polarization with truth,” May 9, 2023; “RFK Jr. and the peaceful revolution: The road to sustained power to the people,” May 12, 2023). These first two commentaries are consistent with what you express in your comment. It stresses Kennedy’s defense of the legacy of the Kennedy family; his opposition to the merging of corporate and state power, for which he has a well-defined strategy; his opposition to the continuous wars; his lament of the polarization of the country, with he regularly seeks to heal with his discourses; and his views on other issues. In the May 12 commentary, I write that “RFK Jr. in his April 19 announcement of his presidential candidacy revealed a level of understanding that is exceptional in American politics.” However, in this commentary, I begin a critique of Kennedy for his lack of a consistent understanding of the logic of imperialism and anti-imperialist resistance. In this matter, U.S. public discourse has much to learn from the countries constructing socialism, which are leading the formation of an international anti-imperialist coalition of socialist and progressive states. I express the hope in the second commentary that the Kennedy campaign will evolve in a way that stresses the education of the people and well as Kennedy’s occasional references to a peaceful revolution.
Four commentaries this past January are based on my reading of Kennedy’s recent book (December 2023) on The Wuhan Cover-Up: “RFK Jr. and the bioweapons arms race: A new book by the independent presidential candidate does not persuade,” January 12, 2024; “WHO and the origins of COVID-19: Science and cooperation for the common good of humanity,” January 19, 2024, which focuses on the WHO-China report that RFK Jr. rejects; “The Wuhan Cover-Up: Ideological distortions and misinformation in the post-modern age,” January 26, 2024, which focuses on a report a report of the Republican minority staff of the House Foreign Affairs Committee that RFK Jr. cites; and “RFK Jr.’s distrust of China: Misreading China’s quest for preeminence in a peaceful world,” January 30, 2024.
I was profoundly disappointed, even disturbed, by The Wuhan Cover-Up, for reasons that I express in the January 12 commentary, where I write that “the book appeals to suspicious instincts and fear, rather than to empirical evidence and reason;” and where I cite instances in which the book selectively quotes scientific researchers in a form that distorts the meaning intended. His repeated comments on China in the book, reflecting a Cold War mentality, were also a problem, although less disturbing than his misrepresentation of the intended meaning of scientists as they described the purposes of their work. Such misrepresentations strike me as unethical.
I honestly am at a loss to explain the disjunction between Kennedy’s sensitive discussion of divisive issues, typically found in his online videos, and The Wuhan Cover-Up.
The links to the six commentaries can be found at “Explore Previous Posts” (https://charlesmckelvey.substack.com/p/thematic-index), It is a thematic index of all posts; scroll down to the final category, “United States.”