this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
102 points (99.0% liked)
Asklemmy
43945 readers
1028 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'd save RFK and give him a full two-term presidency. Just because I've always wondered how much a difference it would have made in the course of American history. It definitely seems like things took a severe turn for the worse in the late 60s and the American political system has never recovered.
I personally believe there were conspiracies to assassinate both him and JFK because they were not susceptible to being controlled by their donors or political mentors, as is the case with the vast majority of politicians. They were rogue elements with a strong potential to disrupt the status quo (i.e. gravy train) for the rest of the oligarchy, so they got taken out.
Reagan is where things got fucked. Give Carter two mandates instead.
Por que no los dos
Carter?
I wasn't alive for these events and I am possibly missing context. But I just see an inflection point in the 60s and I don't know if another term from Carter in 1980 would have been enough to turn things around. I also feel like he was a less impactful character than RFK
The main turning point was 1971, as referenced by the website (https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/).
Nixon was the president then, and the main force was that the economy was decoupled from the gold standard
Edit: president
Nah that was Nixon. If RFK had been elected, withdrawn from Vietnam earlier and not been corrupt, things may have gone differently
My brain goofed, I knew that. Thanks for the correction!
It makes me sad the site seems to be pushing crypto. Or maybe it's that crypto bros keep referencing the event? Chicken and egg? I dunno