'Tis not too late to seek a newer world' (Rowland Scherman/Getty Images)
![](https://unherd.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/guy-100x100.gif)
An insurgent Democrat with a famous last name announces a primary challenge against his party’s sitting president. He infuriates the establishment, who accuse him of running a vanity campaign and helping the other side to win. Amid widespread dissatisfaction with the direction of the country, however, this candidate draws support from a broad range of Americans. The candidate’s initials are RFK.
The individual who comes to mind today might be Robert F. Kennedy Jr., currently running to unseat Joe Biden. But the description is of his father, Bobby Kennedy, who was assassinated 55 years ago this week. Today, he is remembered as an icon of liberal idealism who seemed, for a fleeting moment, to reconcile the racial tensions of that tumultuous time. In the 82 days of his campaign, there were glimmers of a new way of doing politics, one that stood in opposition to the excesses of both Sixties radicalism on the Left and the reactionary impulses on the Right. These are the same fault lines that score American society today; it is here, as the Democrats attempt to sail gingerly between the extremes of wokism and Trumpism, that RFK Sr.’s campaign is instructive.
His quest for the White House took place at the end of what we now see as the New Deal era. The enactment of Civil Rights in 1964, followed by deep divisions over Vietnam and the ascendancy of the counterculture, carved fatal cleavages within the Democratic coalition. By 1968, the beleaguered president, Lyndon B. Johnson, seemed to personify the exhaustion of American liberalism, as he struggled to maintain support in the face of a failing war overseas and the dramatic splintering of his party between its working-class and liberal activist wings. The white-working class vote in the Northern cities, which formed a core part of the Democratic base, joined the Solid South in drifting toward Richard Nixon’s Republican Party. And that exodus reduced the Democrats to an uneven alliance of affluent liberals and working-class minorities. The GOP ended up with an analogous dynamic, with conservative “country club” business elites commanding the electoral support of downscale whites.
In subsequent decades, American politics would see Democratic and Republican elites converge on a post-New Deal programme of de-industrialisation and hyper-financialisaton that served to benefit themselves, while compensating their respective portions of the working-class electorate with gestures of rhetorical and symbolic affirmation (what Nancy Fraser has called “the politics of recognition”). And this realignment persists to this day. But the Kennedy campaign of 1968 rested on entirely different premises: that an alternative coalition could be forged from the support of working-class white and black voters alike. In part, this strategy was born of a genuine conviction that the races could be brought together on the basis of common material interest and patriotic sentiment — but it was also born of political expediency.
The constituency who could most readily be enlisted in a fight against LBJ — the largely white, and ultra-liberal college-educated youths who powered the anti-war movement — had already spoken for themselves. They had come out for Minnesota Senator Eugene McCarthy, who had beaten the indecisive Kennedy to the punch in announcing a primary challenge against Johnson in March 1968. Not only did Kennedy end up forfeiting the college crowd, his late entry had turned many of them against him: in their eyes, he was a power-hungry opportunist bent on stealing McCarthy’s thunder. In order to win, Kennedy would have to court a different set of voters, namely Americans on the lower end of the social-economic ladder from both races. The first test of Kennedy’s strategy would come in Indiana, where he was up against McCarthy and favourite son Governor Roger Brannigan, oldline Democrat and proxy for the party establishment.
In the flurry of speeches he gave to white and black voters in cities across the state, Kennedy would express liberal-sounding views on social justice, economic fairness, and ending the war, but combined them with conservative-sounding positions on patriotism and law and order, the last issue being particularly relevant in light of an epidemic of crime in American cities. As he saw it, rioting was never permissible no matter how morally compelling the underlying cause. This set Kennedy apart from McCarthy, who consistently avoided using the term “law and order”, which (then as now) was widely interpreted to carry racial connotations. Kennedy’s willingness to speak directly to the issue attested to the level of trust he placed in his audiences, refusing to change his message according to the perceived preferences of the crowd.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeMeh essay. The author says of the new RFK; “…his politics don’t appear to be anywhere near as grounded or level-headed.”
Although he provides a link, which I always appreciate, he needs to itemize at least a couple points illustrating RFK’s groundless policies. I’m not a huge fan of the new RFK – he doesn’t like fossil fuels or nuclear energy, and thinks it’s possible to power the US economy with solar panels out in the desert – but the author needs a little meat on the bone of his critique.
Something else is bugging me too – and it’s not limited to this author. I get frustrated by the use of terms like far right and Trumpism. What does this mean? Am I considered far right? I have no idea.
I’m pretty sure what progressive is, but opponents of this agenda have a wide range of political views. Calling someone far right could mean almost anything. I would consider myself a libertarian who supports some govt intervention in our lives, but in a limited way. I would have likely been a Democrat 15 years ago.
I wish people would be a little more specific when saying far right – it’s become a cudgel to attack anyone who opposes the progressive movement or the Democrat party.
This is a common observation by people on this site. ‘Far right’ is used too loosely – and too frequently. Always a lazy argument.
“Father, father, father, father, and Bobby stinks…”
Freddie – come on get some real writers. I want to hang in there, but Unherd has lost its Mojo.
I’m mystified as to why this author continues to appear on UnHerd. The quality of his analysis is 8th-Grade level at best.
I’m mystified as to why this author continues to appear on UnHerd. The quality of his analysis is 8th-Grade level at best.
Pointing out the ideals and vision of RFK’s father does nothing to tell us why this idiot son has fallen so far from the tree.
RFK junior has advocated some really whacky ideas in the past, but I was prepared to look past that, and I still am to a lesser degree, but I recently heard a podcast in which his solution to the energy crisis was building a bunch of solar panels in the desert. He totally opposed nuclear and his solution was some unserious idea that is unworkable.
Want to maker sure the author knows that I lived through the years he describes, and he has captured what it was about. Wonderful analysis of the decade we lived through, and a nostaligic, hopeful wish for a better tomorrow. RFK Jr right now may be all that we have.
Want to maker sure the author knows that I lived through the years he describes, and he has captured what it was about. Wonderful analysis of the decade we lived through, and a nostaligic, hopeful wish for a better tomorrow. RFK Jr right now may be all that we have.
RFK junior has advocated some really whacky ideas in the past, but I was prepared to look past that, and I still am to a lesser degree, but I recently heard a podcast in which his solution to the energy crisis was building a bunch of solar panels in the desert. He totally opposed nuclear and his solution was some unserious idea that is unworkable.
This is a common observation by people on this site. ‘Far right’ is used too loosely – and too frequently. Always a lazy argument.
“Father, father, father, father, and Bobby stinks…”
Freddie – come on get some real writers. I want to hang in there, but Unherd has lost its Mojo.
Pointing out the ideals and vision of RFK’s father does nothing to tell us why this idiot son has fallen so far from the tree.
Meh essay. The author says of the new RFK; “…his politics don’t appear to be anywhere near as grounded or level-headed.”
Although he provides a link, which I always appreciate, he needs to itemize at least a couple points illustrating RFK’s groundless policies. I’m not a huge fan of the new RFK – he doesn’t like fossil fuels or nuclear energy, and thinks it’s possible to power the US economy with solar panels out in the desert – but the author needs a little meat on the bone of his critique.
Something else is bugging me too – and it’s not limited to this author. I get frustrated by the use of terms like far right and Trumpism. What does this mean? Am I considered far right? I have no idea.
I’m pretty sure what progressive is, but opponents of this agenda have a wide range of political views. Calling someone far right could mean almost anything. I would consider myself a libertarian who supports some govt intervention in our lives, but in a limited way. I would have likely been a Democrat 15 years ago.
I wish people would be a little more specific when saying far right – it’s become a cudgel to attack anyone who opposes the progressive movement or the Democrat party.
The Democrats and their supporters have fallen in to the trap of believing that whatever they do is good – because they believe they are the good guys. The reality is that a lot of things Democrats do these days range from truly awful – (medically transitioning children – creating censorship regimes) – to highly debatable (free drug supplies – forcing energy transition in the name of climate change – wide open borders). I think RFK Jr is going to help the Democrats by blowing open the Overton window inside the party and creating space for moderate party members to seriously discuss these policies.
The Democrats and their supporters have fallen in to the trap of believing that whatever they do is good – because they believe they are the good guys. The reality is that a lot of things Democrats do these days range from truly awful – (medically transitioning children – creating censorship regimes) – to highly debatable (free drug supplies – forcing energy transition in the name of climate change – wide open borders). I think RFK Jr is going to help the Democrats by blowing open the Overton window inside the party and creating space for moderate party members to seriously discuss these policies.
Thank you for the reference to RFK Sr.’s speech. I had never heard it and it’s remarkable. A white presidential candidate announces the murder of the most prominent black leader at the time at the hands of a white man to a majority black, urban audience, and uses ancient Greek poetry and the Christian architecture of our common humanity to unify them for peace instead of vengeance.
Could it be done today though? Do we have enough of, as the author says, “values that command the respect of Americans of all races and cultural creeds”? I’d like to think so, but I suspect we don’t. Let’s face it, in 1968, in the midst of the sexual revolution, no one could have ever imagined that 55 years later, we would have major political debates over what a woman is.
Are there things we agree on? Absolutely! But we disagree about so many more fundamental things that this sort of American-unity is a illusion today.
I was struck by how no white person could ever give this speech today.
I was struck by how no white person could ever give this speech today.
Thank you for the reference to RFK Sr.’s speech. I had never heard it and it’s remarkable. A white presidential candidate announces the murder of the most prominent black leader at the time at the hands of a white man to a majority black, urban audience, and uses ancient Greek poetry and the Christian architecture of our common humanity to unify them for peace instead of vengeance.
Could it be done today though? Do we have enough of, as the author says, “values that command the respect of Americans of all races and cultural creeds”? I’d like to think so, but I suspect we don’t. Let’s face it, in 1968, in the midst of the sexual revolution, no one could have ever imagined that 55 years later, we would have major political debates over what a woman is.
Are there things we agree on? Absolutely! But we disagree about so many more fundamental things that this sort of American-unity is a illusion today.
“opportunity to break out of the trenches American politics has been trapped in since the Sixties”
Great insight. Sadly, I don’t believe American politics has quite reached that point yet. It looks like 2024 will be another faceoff between the two dinosaurs, Biden and Trump. My guess is Biden will win by a slim margin and limp along for another four years.
The current leadership is the last hoorah of an increasingly irrelevant generation of politicians incapable of delivering solutions to the problems that beset the modern world. It’s a painful prospect, but I suspect we’ll have to wait for 2028 before the current gerontocracy have died, or are incapacitated, and we might see a new generation of leaders arise who bring vision and pragmatism to the job. At least a decade of tumultuous times ahead, imo.
I find it hard to believe Biden will make to January 2029, and the end of a second term. He is another ruinous legacy of Obama’s squandered presidency…elected on the basis of hope, but governed entirely on the basis of division.
I find it hard to believe Biden will make to January 2029, and the end of a second term. He is another ruinous legacy of Obama’s squandered presidency…elected on the basis of hope, but governed entirely on the basis of division.
“opportunity to break out of the trenches American politics has been trapped in since the Sixties”
Great insight. Sadly, I don’t believe American politics has quite reached that point yet. It looks like 2024 will be another faceoff between the two dinosaurs, Biden and Trump. My guess is Biden will win by a slim margin and limp along for another four years.
The current leadership is the last hoorah of an increasingly irrelevant generation of politicians incapable of delivering solutions to the problems that beset the modern world. It’s a painful prospect, but I suspect we’ll have to wait for 2028 before the current gerontocracy have died, or are incapacitated, and we might see a new generation of leaders arise who bring vision and pragmatism to the job. At least a decade of tumultuous times ahead, imo.
“Instead, they ought, like RFK, to abandon radical activist positions and aim at diffusing culture war by appealing to values that command the respect of Americans of all races and cultural creeds. Rather than a heedless revolutionary attitude towards institutions, of the kind shared by woke and MAGA fanatics alike, they might consider adopting a more patient and thoughtful reformist disposition, as Kennedy did in his efforts to fight poverty.”
Oh I see, you’re referring to a time before all of America’s institutions failed it repeatedly and resisted even modest reforms. Wow it is almost like RFK’s time and now have some serious differences. Who knew?
“Instead, they ought, like RFK, to abandon radical activist positions and aim at diffusing culture war by appealing to values that command the respect of Americans of all races and cultural creeds. Rather than a heedless revolutionary attitude towards institutions, of the kind shared by woke and MAGA fanatics alike, they might consider adopting a more patient and thoughtful reformist disposition, as Kennedy did in his efforts to fight poverty.”
Oh I see, you’re referring to a time before all of America’s institutions failed it repeatedly and resisted even modest reforms. Wow it is almost like RFK’s time and now have some serious differences. Who knew?
I hope Americans come to their senses and have RFK Jr. runing against De Santis. I’m not wholly impressed by either but their ideas and politics have some positives and the alternative of Trump vs. Biden is frightening. If there are other better candidates then that would be good but no one with pondus and sufficient backing seems to have put themselves forward. The most negative aspect of RFK Jr. is his voice. I know it sounds trivial but it’s an effort to understand what he’s saying sometimes.
If you lived in Florida, you’d be impressed with DeSantis. This state is so well-managed towns actually complete with one another on whose can look the most beautiful. If I owned a landscaping company, I could afford an ocean-side villa in Palm Beach.
The ticket therefore: RFK @ Desantis, 2024. What else can be done.
The ticket therefore: RFK @ Desantis, 2024. What else can be done.
If you lived in Florida, you’d be impressed with DeSantis. This state is so well-managed towns actually complete with one another on whose can look the most beautiful. If I owned a landscaping company, I could afford an ocean-side villa in Palm Beach.
I hope Americans come to their senses and have RFK Jr. runing against De Santis. I’m not wholly impressed by either but their ideas and politics have some positives and the alternative of Trump vs. Biden is frightening. If there are other better candidates then that would be good but no one with pondus and sufficient backing seems to have put themselves forward. The most negative aspect of RFK Jr. is his voice. I know it sounds trivial but it’s an effort to understand what he’s saying sometimes.
Word. A symbiosis can develop between RFK Jr’s campaign and the Braver Angels initiative that seeks to bridge the divide between Red and Blue.
Word. A symbiosis can develop between RFK Jr’s campaign and the Braver Angels initiative that seeks to bridge the divide between Red and Blue.
RFK is a loose cannon. If you are not familiar with that coin of phrase, ask a military veteran to explain the danger.
I agree with your assessment. What I fear may happen, if the Democrats do not change course on their most absurdist positions, chief among which is gender identity ideology, is that RFK Jr. could, on failing to win in the D primary, run third party, a la Nader in 2000, and we all know how that turned out.
Would love to see RFK run on a third party of his own making. He would not win, but the power of his presence would set the stages for a viable third party that can oppose the duoploly. Dems and RS are both the enemies that we citizens face
Would love to see RFK run on a third party of his own making. He would not win, but the power of his presence would set the stages for a viable third party that can oppose the duoploly. Dems and RS are both the enemies that we citizens face
I agree with your assessment. What I fear may happen, if the Democrats do not change course on their most absurdist positions, chief among which is gender identity ideology, is that RFK Jr. could, on failing to win in the D primary, run third party, a la Nader in 2000, and we all know how that turned out.
RFK is a loose cannon. If you are not familiar with that coin of phrase, ask a military veteran to explain the danger.