• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A Bit On Racism In The Kennedy Whitehouse

rhinefire

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
10,399
Reaction score
3,021
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Watching a documentary on the life of Frank Sinatra his daughter Nancy stated because Sammy Davis Jr. married Britt Elkland (white) he was not allowed in the White House. Prior to the marriage there was no objection. This was told to Frank by Jack Kennedy and it took a heavy toll on Sinatra as he helped Jack win the election and he was also very close to Sammy Davis.
 
Our problem is going to get exponentially worse when going back through history and re-judging everyone exclusively through today's social contexts.

According to Frank Sinatra's daughter we have a potential problem here on JKF refusing to allow Sammy Davis Jr. to perform at an inauguration event, presumably because of an interracial marriage. Does that confuse the issue, or nullify him, when it was also JFK that sent National Guard troops to accompany the first black students admitted to the University of Mississippi and University of Alabama. Or how about his important 1963 speech on civil rights, in support of civil rights leadership.

As upsetting as it may be to discuss, it is very possible the JFK looked at the importance of civil rights but also personally had some issue with interracial marriages. The only thing to offer was a nation that socially speaking was going through (and about to go through much worse) various social revolutions changing how people thought about issues.

Bill Clinton way back in 1996 signed the damn near veto proof Republican sources Defense of Marriage Act, but now is an advocate of marriage equality. Does that make Bill Clinton an enemy to gay rights? Period and context means everything, and at the time the social climate of this nation on gay marriage was different in 1996 vs. today.

It makes sense that JFK may have had his own prejudices on certain subjects like interracial marriages, yet still ended up being quite a champion of civil rights (especially in comparison to his political opposition, a changing Southeast who in their own right eventually became social conservative Republicans.)

History is an interesting subject to learn from, what to do well and what not to repeat. Our problem becomes when looking at something from history but through the confines of today's social acceptance standards (arguably) to rejudge them on what they contributed. Does not mean instant forgiveness, just means understanding the period we are talking about here. In the 1960s interracial marriages was a social topic, and became quite political across the various States (the ones you would think.)
 
Watching a documentary on the life of Frank Sinatra his daughter Nancy stated because Sammy Davis Jr. married Britt Elkland (white) he was not allowed in the White House. Prior to the marriage there was no objection. This was told to Frank by Jack Kennedy and it took a heavy toll on Sinatra as he helped Jack win the election and he was also very close to Sammy Davis.

The Kennedys were not a very nice family, don't forget.
 
Back
Top Bottom