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: 2
18
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 06:13 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 06:50 AM
link   
John Lennon was murdered on 8th December 1980. Ronald Reagan didn't become President until 20th January 1981. So Lennon didn't live one single day of "the Reagan Years". I doubt he was "a fan".

Having said that, some people in Liverpool believe Lennon left England for tax avoidance purposes. The UK in the mid 1970's had a marginal tax rate of 98% for high earners so he could hardly be blamed if he abandoned the nation of his birth. And at the same time, Sean had been born, Lennon himself had withdrawn from the music scene & was concentrating on his family life.

So perhaps there might have been something which attracted Lennon to the causes which Ronald Reagan was espousing ? Family values, low taxation ?



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Niall197
So perhaps there might have been something which attracted Lennon to the causes which Ronald Reagan was espousing ? Family values, low taxation ?


This sounds about right. With Family and age usually comes a slight shift to the right, whereas youth and single-ness are typically less so.

Its actually natural for people to change their political positions throughout life...more than once. I find this whole idea of being one thing for life kind of spooky...



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Niall197
John Lennon was murdered on 8th December 1980. Ronald Reagan didn't become President until 20th January 1981. So Lennon didn't live one single day of "the Reagan Years". I doubt he was "a fan".


Hmmm.... Liberal blinders on? Ronald Reagan did exist before his inauguration as POTUS. If you had bothered to read the article, you would have known that Lennon met Reagan in the 1970's:



"He'd met Reagan back, I think, in the 70s at some sporting event... Reagan was the guy who had ordered the National Guard, I believe, to go after the young (peace) demonstrators in Berkeley, so I think that John maybe forgot about that... He did express support for Reagan, which shocked me.


www.torontosun.com...

Denial... Not just a river in the world of ATS...



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
I did read the article.

You'd have to be an incurable optimist to expect any kind of consensus to be drawn on ATS about two great icons such as Lennon and Reagan. So I'm not surprised opinions differ here.

But I don't know why you're so desperately keen to acquire an icon of the left for the right. Certainly, to do it through the unreliable medium of a thief's tittle tattle, whilst simultaneously disregarding and/or dismissing all other accounts of Lennon's politics & thinking, does an immense disservice to both men.

So if anyone's blinkered in this thread, I respectfully suggest it's yourself.

Still, you'd have us believe Lennon committed some astounding volte-face on meeting Reagan for the one and only time, making this quite improbable transition from peacenik to Reagan Democrat. Fair enough. That's what you think.

But I don't know of any interviews at the time where Lennon describes this change in his thinking, do you ? I can't recall a television interview where Lennon describes his joy on reading Reagan's plans for supply-side economics. Nor do I remember any articles in the music press where Lennon describes in undiluted admiration the exquisite diplomatic sure-footedness of Alexander Haig & Reagan's ambitious plans for US foreign policy.

I haven't seen this Reagan narrative in any biographies of Lennon, either. Nor have we heard accounts of it from people who knew John Lennon intimately, his family & friends.

Perhaps ... and more likely ... this political transformation of his just didn't happen at all ? And if Lennon did ever express any kind of affinity for Ronald Reagan, it'd be more along the lines of, "Yeah, I met him, he's a nice guy" ... as he said about so many others. And that your thief has so embellished a flippant one liner, he's made a mockery of John Lennon's testimony.

Had Lennon lived & been able to judge the man & his presidency, I'm confident that the John Lennon "we knew" would've condemned the Reagan administration in it's entirety. Conventional thinking on my part, I know. But that's my gut feeling on the subject.

Like others, I'm receptive to the idea that our own politics change due to life experiences and such like ... and that Lennon was probably no different than anyone else in that regard. So I extend to you the remote possibility that perhaps Lennon politics were changing, but not in way you claim.

Niall. Denial. It rhymes. How terribly original.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   
This doesn't surprise me that much. John got involved in some pretty shady characters during his NY political period. The people he hung with were claiming to be left radicals (maybe they thought they were) but in reality they just wanted a piece of John. John became disillusioned with them pretty quickly.

All the Beatles voted conservative in the 60's, they hated Harold Wilson (labour party). There is a clip somewhere of John saying they won't vote for Harry.

Just my theory, but I think John got into liberal politics because he felt guilty for the way he was, brutal, uncaring, parsimonious. He was trying to be a better person, but true to his character he went to the extreme. Yoko was the catalyst for this change. But he made a mistake and was still being selfish in his actions, he should have been closer to his family instead, which he did learn later on when he gave it all up. He used to neglect his kids and beat Cynthia (shotgun marriage, John didn't love her). Being a star from an early age he also missed the teenage rebellion period, and that came out during his political period. I also think it was a form of rebellion against his and the Beatles image as being nice 'mop tops' who had no opinions. He was trying to distance himself from all the hype that he hated. It's like all his frustrations came out and he grabbed what was considered radical and rebellious at the time.


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



new topics

top topics
 
18
<< 1   >>

log in

join