Assassination and Fame: A Dive into the Infamous and the Forgotten

The age-old question of whether an assassin would become famous if they killed a U.S. president like Donald Trump is a complex one. The answer depends largely on the outcome of the deed and the historical context in which it occurs. Let’s explore this in more depth.

Outcomes and Fame

Assuming the assassin manages to escape detection and prosecution, the path to fame is swift and eternal. However, if captured and convicted, the hunt for and eventual capture of the assassin would likely make them an immediate and intense subject of international news, much like the way the Khakos captured the manhunt for Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bombing suspect. In this case, the assassin would indeed become quite famous, albeit in a negative light, with their name and story discussed in classrooms, articles, and documentaries for years to come.

Historical Examples

There are numerous examples in history of individuals who became famous—or infamous—for their actions against leaders. Abraham Lincoln's assassin, John Wilkes Booth, is a prime example. Though he met a tragic end, his actions made him notorious. Ironically, the same could be said about Lee Harvey Oswald, who remains a subject of intense fascination and debate, despite being the lone gunman in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Similarly, Sirhan Sirhan, who shot and killed Robert F. Kennedy, holds a place in history that is both famous and tragic.

Logistical and Ethical Considerations

Even apart from the legal ramifications, the assassin's actions would likely lead to immediate capture and public attention. The world today is more interconnected, and the use of advanced communication technologies makes it nearly impossible to remain anonymous for long. The media, social networks, and law enforcement would ensure the pursuit and capture of the culprit.

Definition of Fame in the Age of Celebrities

Fame is not solely determined by public interest but also by longevity and permanence. In the context of presidential assassinations, the assassin may achieve a high level of fame in the short term. However, as time passes, they may slip from the collective memory, fading into obscurity. Even those who are remembered often become subjects of scrutiny and analysis, their names mentioned alongside other historical figures.

Conclusion

In summary, the path to fame after killing a U.S. president is fraught with uncertainty. Victory or capture, the assassin is likely to be remembered, if not revered, in the short term but may eventually be forgotten. This raises questions about the ethical and moral implications of such actions, which are rarely honored by society.

Final Thoughts: The Paradox of Fame

The paradox of fame in such a scenario is that, while the assassin may achieve immediate notoriety, their actions are ultimately counterproductive. As noted, it is unlikely that such actions would aid their cause or improve their public standing. Instead, they would likely cement their lasting infamy, rather than achieve any lasting fame.