JFK the Conservative?

With Ira Stoll's new book, "JFK Conservative," a new argument is being made that JFK isn't the true liberal icon that modern liberals herald him to be.  While I have yet to read Stoll's book, I think it is futile to argue that JFK had no conservative tendencies, though equally futile to claim he was completely conservative and a Republican in all but name.  The truth is that he was a moderate, and espoused tendencies that both sides could claim were in agreement with them.

Clouding our ability to objectively assess the veracity of the JFK conservative argument, and objectively consider the evidence, is our own political world that is not necessarily more charged than at times in the past, but is certainly filled with more venom, vitriol, polarization, and hate than is common.  More importantly, the Cold War is over--an event that defined the world in which JFK lived, and drove one of the primary platforms of his entire political career with his fervent and vocal anti-communism.  Indeed, he ran his presidential campaign on the idea that his predecessor, the Republican Dwight Eisenhower, had actually been too soft on the Soviet Union, and that a more aggressive, anti-communist foreign policy was needed, something that was just as alien an idea to liberals then as it is today.  Even former first lady and liberal icon Eleanor Roosevelt spoke out against JFK, recognizing he was not "one of them."

Prior to his presidency, JFK served in the Senate as a democrat after miraculously defeating the popular incumbent, and Republican from Massachusetts, Henry Cabot Lodge.  During his time in the Senate, the liberal Democratic establishment never considered JFK a member of their caucus.  Lyndon Johnson, the Senate Majority leader during this time and JFK's eventual vice-president, was the face of the liberal establishment and he scoffed at the "upstart" Kennedy and paid him little attention.  When liberal democrats joined together in the controversial censure vote of Republican Senator Joe McCarthy, Kennedy ducked the vote by being absent.  It was well known that the Kennedy family were supporters of the Republican Senator, with RFK having served as an aide to McCarthy and even naming McCarthy as the godfather of his child.  While JFK was never as close to McCarthy as RFK, he was an ardent anti-communist, as was McCarthy, though he likely would not have condoned the radical methods pursued by McCarthy.

As the 1960 presidential election neared, many liberal democrats considered JFK an "outsider" with only a long shot, at best, of capturing the nomination.  While Lyndon Johnson was the favorite, many also considered Hubert Humphrey the more likely choice for his more obvious liberal positions.  JFK had also distanced himself from the previous two time nominee, Adlai Stevenson, who was known for his more liberal policies.  JFK ran his campaign not on domestic issues, as liberals commonly do, but emphasized foreign policy, a typically conservative cause, and even did so on a platform of greater aggressiveness at rolling back communism, not merely containing it, a typically conservative approach to foreign policy.

Once elected, JFK began his presidency with a very powerful inaugural conveying American might and strength in the face of the Cold War.  Domestically, JFK spoke to Americans and issued perhaps his most famous challenge which cuts right to the heart of liberal domestic policy by urging Americans to "ask not what your country can do for you," but urged them to look inward and "ask what you can do for your country."  This led to the establishment of the bipartisan Peace Corps.  He further distanced himself from the liberal establishment by appointing a number of Republicans to his cabinet and other prominent positions, such as conservative businessman and Republican Douglas Dillon as Secretary of the Treasury and Republican Robert McMamara to Secretary of Defense (Kennedy initially offered McNamara the treasury post.  McNamara became one of Kennedy's most trusted cabinet members, whom Kennedy regarded as "one of the stars of his team" who became close to RFK as well, and even served as a pallbearer at his funeral in 1968).  Indeed, JFK's fiscal policies are nearly as conservative as was his foreign policy.  He supported across the board tax cuts and lowered the top income bracket by nearly 30%.  Of course he lowered the rate to 65%, still higher than the rates in our modern world, and as such open to the argument by modern liberals that JFK would support raising current rates, not lowering them.  It is on record, however, that JFK did believe that economic growth could be fueled by lowering taxes, and his policies proved correct.  He also, however, supported Keynesian economic policies favored by liberals.  As such, he considered deficit spending to foster economic growth but was extremely reluctant to pursue these policies, much to the displeasure of his more liberal advisers.  In the end, Kennedy believed that deficit spending should only be used to serve his ultimate foreign policy objectives in relation to the Cold War and ensuring our military capability in defending from a possible Russian attack.  Indeed, viewing Kennedy's decisions through the prism of the Cold War illuminate them with an understanding difficult for many in our modern world to grasp, again due to the end of the Cold War.  Kennedy believed the U.S. economy  needed to grow faster than the Russians, and viewed economic policy through this lens.  Spending on highways and schools was approved on the premise that improved our defense capability.

Regarding his foreign policy initiatives, Kennedy believed fervently in the very conservative policy of pushing back on communist expansion and established, with McNamara, that the primary mission of U.S. overseas forces, in cooperation with allies, would be "to prevent the steady erosion of the Free World through limited wars."  While we can never know how Vietnam would have unfolded with Kennedy at the helm, he did increase the number of U.S. advisers located in Vietnam from 900 to 16,000 during his short presidency.  When the Cuban Missile crisis occurred, Kennedy sought a moderate approach that ultimately preserved peace and defused the situation in perhaps the crowning diplomatic achievement of his presidency.

While assessing Kennedy's conservatism, it is appropriate and beneficial to compare him to what modern conservatives herald as their equivalent to Kennedy, their own principled hero, Ronald Reagan.  Both men were more pragmatic and principle oriented, who believed in compromise.  Both men were looked down upon by the entrenched politicians of their parties and were rejected by the establishment.  Both men focused their campaigns and presidencies on the people, not politicians, and they spoke directly to the people to drum up support for their policies.  Both men navigated a political middle ground.

In a 1962 commencement address at Yale, Kennedy spoke of his pragmatic commitment to principle over party when he declared "The central issues of our time are more subtle and less simple, they relate not to basic philosophy or ideology but to ways and means of reaching common goals...political labels and ideological approaches are irrelevant to the solution."  Kennedy admitted to reluctantly bearing the label "liberal" because of his awareness that he needed liberal support to win the nomination, stating he would call himself whatever was needed.

In another address, in 1960, JFK spoke most pointedly about this very matter when defining what he believed liberalism to be and proclaiming himself a proud liberal, and setting forth the terms by which he claimed to be a liberal.  He stated, "If, by 'liberal,' [our opponents] mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer’s dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrates that we are not that kind of 'liberal.' But if, by a 'liberal,' they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people….if that is what they mean by a 'liberal,' then I’m proud to say that I’m a 'liberal.'"  (To read the entire address, see http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/primary-resources/jfk-nyliberal/)

In the end, I do not believe JFK was by any means a conservative icon, but I do believe he is not a liberal icon, at least in today's understanding of the word in political usage.  JFK did have many very conservative tendencies which cannot be overlooked as easily as many liberals try to do, but he also had liberal policies by today's definition that conservatives must remember.  Regarding his policies that could be considered liberal by today's standards, during his presidency "Social Security benefits and food distribution to poor Americans was increased; including free school lunches. In 1961, Kennedy signed Executive Order 10925, which required affirmative action by government contractors as to both applicants and employees. It also established the "President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity". Kennedy also established the "Presidential Commission on the Status of Women" which was an advisory commission to investigate: education, income and workplace issues of women. Thereafter, in June 1963, Kennedy signed the "Equal Pay Act" which was to close the so-called wage gap based on sex."

Could it be possible that the tendency from all citizens on different political sides of the aisle engage in a futile effort to reach for the legacy of JFK and stake a larger claim to his legacy than the other?  Could it be possible that the reason for JFK's enduring legacy is exactly the opposite of what we try to do--label him?  Could it be possible that JFK's legacy endures because he avoided labels and believed one shouldn't be beholden to them?  Could it be possible that JFK's presidency was driven more by his own ideological principles than those forced upon him by any political party establishment?  And could it be possible that his own ideological principles were not only born of his own unique life experiences and views, but that they were more pragmatic and wide ranging than many ideologues care to admit?  I think so.