The Aristocratic Populist Centrism of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (part II)

A Populist Movement Based on Noblesse Oblige

Part I

Source: @avrilbradley23 on X

RFK Jr. has made statements that sound quasi-aristocratic, such as taking pride in being a Kennedy, which some people find obnoxious. For instance, Leftist, Chris Hedges, especially hates this, besides RFK Jr.’s pro-Israel stance. RFK Jr. has told a story where his father pointed out poor people in the Mississippi Delta “and said, “These are Kennedy people.” While RFK Jr.’s point is that Kennedys look out for the little guy and not the oligarchy, Chris Hedges interpreted that as treating these poor people like royal subjects. While some find this patronizing, I appreciate how RFK Jr. is honest and upfront about his privilege rather than pretending to be a man of the people. Basically, he is an elitist who sees his role as looking out for the downtrodden, though not necessarily in a condescending way.  

Since Americans tend to hate hereditary privilege, there is this unhealthy fetish for the self-made striver. Since RFK Jr. didn’t have to strive, he was able to avoid the worst traits of the managerial and corporate strivers and career politicians. Thus he was able to focus on things like nature and intellectual pursuits. Being privileged grants one freedom to be a non-conformist and free thinker. The striver or self-made man has to conform to the values of elite institutions. However, obviously, plenty of old money types are rotten too.

Both JFK and RFK epitomized noblesse oblige, though they were relatively new money and certainly had their flaws. The Kennedys are the closest that America has to a hereditary aristocracy, with other political dynasties, like the Bushes and Clintons, not coming close. There is this cult of Kennedy worship among boomers, and I don’t think that JFK deserves to be deified or put on a pedestal. While the Kennedys represented a faction of the ruling class that was halfway decent, it is also that the bar is so low among America’s ruling class.

This sort of applies to Tucker Carlson, though he tries too hard to be folksy, with his man of the people schtick. Both Tucker and RFK Jr. represent better forces in politics, that is this elite noblesse oblige-based populism. There are even some comparisons to Donald Trump, as far as being a renegade from the elite. Kennedy, Trump, and Vivek Ramaswamy are similar in that they are mavericks who originated from the nouveau riche, outside the traditional WASP elite. Trump’s immigrant family arrived at roughly the same time and became wealthy at a similar time as the Kennedys.

However, Trump epitomizes much more of a mercantile or Vaishya archetype, though a 1980s version, while Vivek comes across as a new money Silicon Valley managerial striver. Though Vivek is literally a Brahmin, RFK Jr. is the most Brahmin political figure in American politics. Trump tends to respect people the most who are winners in the capitalist system. Just watch reruns of The Apprentice. However, Trump is aristocratic in how he treats his base as his subjects rather than acting as a public servant. It is just that Kennedy seems to genuinely care about people while Trump is too caught up in his own ego and uses people like pawns. While Trump has a Promethean element, he can also be a Philistine, such as eating fast food. RFK Jr. is the perfect candidate for those who are economically populist but culturally sophisticated while MAGA is more rightwing economically but culturally populist. For instance, RFK Jr. stands out in supporting the Arts.  

Source: @RobertKennedyJr on X

Practically all successful political movements need some elite support or dissident elite leadership. The idea of a pure bottom-up populist movement is a cope, and very rare historically. You need people with elite connections to challenge the elite, and it is naïve to think that a total outsider can make a huge impact. I would describe RFK Jr.’s movement as a hybrid of counter-elitism in cooperation with grassroots populism. Even then, it is an uphill battle with RFK’s chances of becoming president extremely slim.

I can see how one might make the case that RFK Jr. is not radically against the US establishment, as he’s American royalty and has endorsed Obama and Hillary Clinton. If he were to have run back in 2004, as a Democrat with similar views, he would have been tolerated as this eccentric maverick. It is just that America’s political elite have become extremely authoritarian and intolerant of any dissent.

The Social Democratic paradigm, which I consider JFK and RFK of, was not populism but rather a noblesse oblige arrangement between elites and the people to prevent the rise of Fascism and Communism. Social Democracy ended with the end of the Cold War and was replaced by the neoliberal paradigm, which treats the American people as serfs. RFK Jr. is still a strong believer in democracy and the American system, so it is not like I am making some Neo-reactionary case for him. RFK Jr. is for an inclusive left-right populist movement based on compassion because he warns that darker, more fascistic forces, will take advantage of the elite screwing over the people.