Excerpt from:
Peter Isackson: Don’t Expect a Smoking Gun in the JFK Assassination Sagahttps://www.fairobserver.com/region/north_america/peter-isackson-daily-devils-dictionary-jfk-assassination-conspiracy-archives-news-15242/A theory of conspiracy is not a conspiracy theory. The failure to distinguish between them has become a major component of the political hyperreality routinely promoted by the media. This is not the fabrication of a recondite cabal focused on manipulation but rather the result of an easily identifiable convergence of interests, mainly economic.
Those interests are nevertheless guided by the desire to deflect questions, wield power and control the narrative. It means that a complex bundle of assumptions and beliefs has become so omnipresent in the ambient culture that its purveyors, especially in the media, confuse its hyperreality with the reality they are supposed to be reporting on.
The conspiracy theories most commonly cited as lunatic — be it QAnon or 9/11 as an insider job — are purely speculative stories, intended to account for noticeable anomalies but backed up by no hard evidence. They seek to persuade rather than investigate. On the other hand, a “theory of conspiracy” is precisely what good police detectives devise when investigating a crime in which complicity is suspected.
Thanks to the intentional and tendentious semantic confusion created between complicity and conspiracy, reality (suspicion of complicity) is replaced by hyperreality (conspiracy hypotheses). That may be the authentic “great replacement” — not the conspiratorial replacement of a dominant race, as white supremacists insist, but of the reality by hyperreality.
The White House, the federal government and the national media need to keep the status of the JFK assassination ambiguous. After six decades, their credibility depends on it. Most Americans believe there was complicity, but if the records revealed proof of a decades-long cover-up managed by the nation’s entire political-media culture, people might lose all faith in that culture.
For many other reasons — only too apparent in the workings of Congress today and in electoral processes — large swaths of the population have already stopped believing in the integrity of the nation’s institutions. But the particular dishonor associated with the JFK assassination cover-up, if officially confirmed today, might prove to be the veritable fatal bullet, the one that wasn’t fired by Lee Harvey Oswald or the sniper on the grassy knoll.
Thoughts?
While I agree with the author that confirmation that the government covered up and possibly played a role in the Kennedy assassination would further erode Americans' trust in their government, I'm not so sure it would destroy our political system.
But his broader truth is true. Some can't (or don't want to) believe that JFK's murder was an inside job or a coup because it would destroy the foundation of the idealistic view of our government and political system that many Americans still hold.
