It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lennon was a closet Republican: Assistant

page: 1
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 11:40 AM
link   
Lennon was a closet Republican: Assistant



John Lennon was a closet Republican, who felt a little embarrassed by his former radicalism, at the time of his death - according to the tragic Beatles star's last personal assistant.

Fred Seaman worked alongside the music legend from 1979 to Lennon's death at the end of 1980 and he reveals the star was a Ronald Reagan fan who enjoyed arguing with left-wing radicals who reminded him of his former self.


An interesting insight into what many consider a leader of the liberal masses.



"He was a very different person back in 1979 and 80 than he'd been when he wrote Imagine. By 1979 he looked back on that guy and was embarrassed by that guy's naivete."


Embarrassed indeed. This demonstrates the reality of the failed liberal philosophy. Lennon had no reason to make such a radical change in viewpoints other that the overwhelming preponderance of evidence that a liberal/socialist/communist approach to society is fatally flawed. It ignores every aspect of true human nature and rests it's arguments on a plan that wile implemented and failed many times through history, "just hasn't been done right."

Welcome to conservatism John... We missed you...




posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 12:24 PM
link   
And perhaps he grew up...older and wiser is an adage that rings truth. Many of the hippies / liberals of yesterday are now the radical republicans of today. Of course there are many who never grow up and remain stuck in a time of our youth where we are vunerable to the teachings that if we just give everbody what they want they will be happy and the world is a wonderful place.

Facts are that greed is as much a part of the human genome as the DNA which determines our size color and the other aspects. A greedy liberal is much the same as a greedy conserative with the differencies being the conservatives do not want anyone to have anything without working harder and liberals want everyone to have everything as long as sopmeone else gives it to them and they themselves keep what they have.

Liberals views are not a bad thing and neither are conservative views as long as we grow up and perhaps combine both views into a more realistic middle ground...help those that help themselves...Mr lennon was someone whose youth was radically different from the rest of us...traveling the world in both countries democratic and those with more repressive regiemes.

When he visited both he was only exposed to those that kept what they have and often he failed to see those who had nothing even from hard work which in many communist and socialist countries resulted in someone else getting all of the benifits just as hardwork in a democratic country results in a few very rich and many somewhere in the middle but happy.

Imagineing world peace is something we should all imagine but looking at humanities greed we should relize it will never come..at least not before it is too late and we all have nothing



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 12:28 PM
link   
Wouldn't any wealthy Democrat be a 'closet' Republican? Otherwise, by their party's wealth redistribution philosophy, they wouldn't be wealthy, right?



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 12:32 PM
link   
His crazy liberal wife probably drove him to conservative views. Poor bastard.

People have to keep in mind that MANY people were fans of Reagan back in 1980, even liberals. Kind of like how it was with Obama in 2008.

By the time the Reagan era was over (after Bush) they all flipped back over to liberalism (Clinton). Lennon most likely would have been no exception, it's just that he never had that opportunity.
edit on 29-6-2011 by Cryptonomicon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cryptonomicon
By the time the Reagan era was over (after Bush) they all flipped back over to liberalism (Clinton). Lennon most likely would have been no exception, it's just that he never had that opportunity.


Nice try at revisionist history... There was some guy named George H. Bush that easily won the office of President after Reagan's two terms, and would have been re-elected and served a second term if it hadn't been for H. Ross Perot running as a third party candidate and splitting the conservative vote... Clinton ran as a centrist, and as demonstrated by the current socialist/neo-fascist (yes, fascism is typically a left wing ideology like Hitler and Mussolini) that occupies the White House, Bill and Hillary are far more reasonable, centrist and reasonable. I'm not saying I like them, but I do like them better than our current fraud.

Revisionism is just one small part of the liberal mindset failure that John Lennon distanced himself from.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Mirthful Me
 


A very interesting article. Reading the comments felt like being here at ATS. Most were respectful, while disagreeing with one another.

There are a couple of conspiracyists there as well. One thinks Yoko had Lennon wacked. That’s a conspiracy I had never heard of.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 01:59 AM
link   
John Lennon was just a bloke from Liverpool that was just lucky enough to become famous in a pop band.
Plenty of Scousers have changed their political outlook without anyone giving a flying fudge..

He never started a revolution, he never preached an original ideology and he claimed at one point to be, and I quote, "The Walrus".

With a claim like that, he and Regan would have made cosy bedfellows, he was as daft as a brush too.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
Lennon was a closet Republican: Assistant



John Lennon was a closet Republican, who felt a little embarrassed by his former radicalism, at the time of his death - according to the tragic Beatles star's last personal assistant.

Fred Seaman worked alongside the music legend from 1979 to Lennon's death at the end of 1980 and he reveals the star was a Ronald Reagan fan who enjoyed arguing with left-wing radicals who reminded him of his former self.


An interesting insight into what many consider a leader of the liberal masses.


Who happens to conveniently be dead. But just as an aside... who really thinks Lennon was a "Leader of the Liberal Masses"? Apparently conservatives do, but they generally can't tell their asses from their mouths anyway.


Embarrassed indeed. This demonstrates the reality of the failed liberal philosophy. Lennon had no reason to make such a radical change in viewpoints other that the overwhelming preponderance of evidence that a liberal/socialist/communist approach to society is fatally flawed. It ignores every aspect of true human nature and rests it's arguments on a plan that wile implemented and failed many times through history, "just hasn't been done right."

Welcome to conservatism John... We missed you...


You inferred all that, from a guy who knew John Lennon for less than a year claiming that he was, apparently, a Reagan Democrat.

Think maybe that's just you wishing really, really hard?



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 02:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJMSN
Many of the hippies / liberals of yesterday are now the radical republicans of today.


Many of the hippies / liberals of yesterday were middle-upper class kids who honestly thought the world revolved around them, that if they "dropped out," the world would screech to a halt and listen to what they had to say. When this narcissism failed to pan out like they hoped, a great many of them decided to turn to drugs, or communal living in the woods where hte women were kept barefoot and pregnant.

Then they voted for Reagan.

Makes sense, really.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 02:19 AM
link   
Now all the Socialists need to know is that Karl Marx was a sympathetic supporter of Abraham Lincoln and the Republican Party and their heads might explode.

Link


We print below Karl Marx’s letter to Abraham Lincoln written between 22 and 29 November 1864 on behalf of the International Working Men’s Association.

Sir

We congratulate the American People upon your Re-election by a large Majority.

If resistance to the Slave Power was the reserved Watchword of your first election, the triumphant Warcry of your Re-election is, Death to Slavery.

From the commencement of the Titanic American Strife, the Working men of Europe felt instinctively that the Star spangled Banner carried the Destiny of their class. The Contest for the territories which opened the dire epopee, Was it not to decide whether the virgin soil of immense tracts should be wedded to the Labour of the Emigrant, or prostituted by the Tramp of the Slave Driver?

When an Oligarchy of 300,000 Slave-holders dared to inscribe, for the first time in the annals of the World, Slavery on the Banner of Armed Revolt; when on the very spots where hardly a century ago the idea of one great democratic Republic had first sprung up. Whence the first Declaration of The Rights of Man was issued, and the first impulse given to the European Revolution of the 18th Century; When on those very spots counter revolution, with systematic thoroughness, gloried in rescinding “The ideas entertained at the time of the formation of the old Constitution” and maintained “Slavery to be a beneficent Institution, indeed the only solution of the great problem of the relation of Labour to Capital,” and cynically proclaimed property in Man “The corner stone of the New Edifice”; Then the Working Classes of Europe understood at once, Even before the fanatic partisanship of the Upper Classes for the confederate gentry had given its dismal warning, That the Slaveholder’s Rebellion was to sound the tocsin for a general holy Crusade of Property against Labour, and that for the Men of Labour, with their hopes for the future, even their past conquests were at stake in that tremendous Conflict on the other side of the Atlantic. Everywhere they bore therefore patiently the hardships imposed upon them by the Cotton crisis, opposed enthusiastically the Pro Slavery Intervention, importunities of their “betters,” and from most parts of Europe contributed their quota of blood to the good cause.

While the Working Men, the true political power of the North, allowed Slavery to defile their own Republic, while before the Negro, mastered and sold without his concurrence, they boasted it the highest prerogative of the white skinned Laborer to sell himself and choose his own Master, they were unable to attain the true Freedom of Labour or to support their European Brethren in their struggle for Emancipation, but this barrier to progress has been swept off by the red sea of Civil War.

The Working Men of Europe feel sure that as the American War of Independence initiated a new era of ascendancy for the Middle Class, so the American Anti-Slavery War will do for the Working Classes. They consider it an earnest of the epoch to come, that it fell to the lot of Abraham Lincoln, the single-minded Son of the Working Class, to lead his Country through the matchless struggle for the rescue of an enchained Race and the Reconstruction of a Social World.

—Karl Marx, “To Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States of America” (November 1864)


Haha oops.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 02:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Not if one understands US political history, of course. Which, I'll grant, you probably don't. That Marx was congratulating Lincoln and the Republican party SHOULD tell you something about the Republican Party back in those days; it was socialist before "socialist" was coined.

Do you think Lincoln could carry a Republican primary these days?

edit on 30/6/2011 by TheWalkingFox because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 02:29 AM
link   
Hmm, well, people do change politically as they grow older.... I think John was the kind of guy who liked to stir up drama or fun in many different ways.

I can see him pretending to be right wing, almost like Steven Colbert or something, just for a kick....

I just cant see him as a republican though.... I mean, I just find it hard to believe that a man who could be that much of a radical left winger, to change his view points so drastically....

Well, regardless, the man was a Musical Genius and he is up there with the most important people of all time, Davinci, Einstein, Lennon.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 02:33 AM
link   
So this guy was his assistant all the way from 79 to 80 huh?
Well that sure is a long time to get to really know the person you work for.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 02:36 AM
link   
*sighs* You guys shold look into subjects before going into them.. I guess i shouldnt expect that from political propaganda but it looks bad on this whole board.

Lets look at Fred Seaman

news.bbc.co.uk...

He was an assistant for a little over a year, not much more.

He was sued by Ono for stealing personal items from Lennon after his death and plead guilty to it in a court of law.

He was sued by Capital Records for copywright infringment regarding Lennon.

He has come out with several trash biographys and resorted to selling the personal photos he stole..

In short, this guy didnt even know Lennon, was employed with them for under a year and has been trying to make a living off of John Lennon for 20 years after the fact.. Every time he gets low on cash he comes out with more trash..

And this is the guy you are going to listen to? Explains why there are so many birthers here.
edit on 30-6-2011 by ShogunAssassins because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 02:37 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


You are always freaking obnoxious about everything, I cannot name one post where you do not intentionally try to insult someone else's intelligence. That is not exactly the best character trait.

Back to the subject. I was saying that rather superficially as I know the Republican Party used to be the home of the most radical leftists in America. It represented the more culturally progressive people of the country. The abolitionists are definitely not an exception to that and neither are the Radical Republicans such as John C. Fremont who found much of their support from left-wing theorists at the time.

And you are right Abraham Lincoln would be kicked out of the Republican Party of today but it's not like he would find comfort among the Democrats either. Both parties have changed drastically and neither for the good. GOP taken over by the National Review and Christian Right Republicans, Democrats taken over by the New Deal academia and relativists.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 02:38 AM
link   
reply to post by ShogunAssassins
 


So long as someone tells them what they wanted to hear anyway, most ATS posters will buy it. Sad but true.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 02:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Misoir
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


You are always freaking obnoxious about everything, I cannot name one post where you do not intentionally try to insult someone else's intelligence. That is not exactly the best character trait.


Yet, isn't that exactly what you just did, by asserting that socialists' heads will explode if they found out about Marx' admiration for the republican party of the 1860's?


Back to the subject. I was saying that rather superficially as I know the Republican Party used to be the home of the most radical leftists in America. It represented the more culturally progressive people of the country. The abolitionists are definitely not an exception to that and neither are the Radical Republicans such as John C. Fremont who found much of their support from left-wing theorists at the time.


Good. Now for your next step, don't assume that others don't know this stuff, too. It's... what was the word you used? Obnoxious.


And you are right Abraham Lincoln would be kicked out of the Republican Party of today but it's not like he would find comfort among the Democrats either. Both parties have changed drastically and neither for the good. GOP taken over by the National Review and Christian Right Republicans, Democrats taken over by the New Deal academia and relativists.


New deal academia and relativists?
Man, I wish the democrats had a New Deal anything. And relativists? What?

Both parties are owned by moneyed interests. Plain and simple; all they are now is a new variety of corporate logo.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 04:53 AM
link   
I loved the music but always wondered why he is singing about "imagine no posesssions" while playing it on his beloved multi-million dollar grand piano...



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 05:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Mirthful Me
 



An interesting insight into what many consider a leader of the liberal masses.


These people are bought and paid for, they are no leaders just like their followers are not followers.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 06:11 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




top topics



 
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join