John Lennon: Closet Republican

[Orwellian]

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.

In new documentary Beatles Stories, Seaman tells filmmaker Seth Swirsky Lennon wasn't the peace-loving militant fans thought he was while he was his assistant.

He says, "John, basically, made it very clear that if he were an American he would vote for Reagan because he was really sour on (Democrat) Jimmy Carter.

"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.

"I also saw John embark in some really brutal arguments with my uncle, who's an old-time communist... He enjoyed really provoking my uncle... Maybe he was being provocative... but it was pretty obvious to me he had moved away from his earlier radicalism.

"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."

http://www.torontosun.com/2011/06/28/le ... -assistant

I'll be updating the Party news sources accordingly. John Lennon died a Republican. John Lennon was always a Republican.

[devogue]

Like his earlier "radicalism" a good business move, no doubt.

[Robert_S]

It should have been obvious when he turned down the knighthood.

[Rum]

John Lennon was a kid most of the time he was famous. Far too much credit is given to him just because he had the public's ear. I was a huge fan but he was a bit of a dick really.

[Atheist-Lite]

Money does that. He didn't want a revolution. Probably not very pleasant. Called everyone peasants.

[Animavore]

Is this some bullshit?

[Atheist-Lite]

Is this some bullshit?

Today we push another idol to the floor and smash it to pieces.

[MarkS]

I think it's been obvious for years that Lennon could be a right twat at times, despite making the best popular music of C20th. He was intelligent, gullible, nasty, generous etc. and was always taking the piss. He was especially vulnerable to father figures and was serially disappointed by and disillusioned with them. If this is in any way true, maybe Reagan was just one more. Didn't Neil Young get Republican at one point?

[PsychoSerenity]

I doubt it. Sounds like someone stirring shit to score points to me. But it doesn't matter if he was, it doesn't change how awesome and influential "Imagine" has been.

[Rum]

I doubt it. Sounds like someone stirring shit to score points to me. But it doesn't matter if he was, it doesn't change how awesome and influential "Imagine" has been.

..and everything he did with the Beatles which was in my view world changing. However being a hugely talented musician (he said he was a genius himself) does not free you from twatness!

[MarkS]

Ah but he also said that anyone could be a genius.

[mistermack]

Lennon was a good songwriter, well, great songwriter, but not the sort of person you would take advice from.
We all know that they were young when they started out, but how gullible do you have to be to get sucked in by that fuckin Maharishi Yogi?
He had a lot to be embarrassed about, but maybe he was just going along with his mates. I think Harrison was more into it than the others.
Anyway, it's not exactly a crime to be a republican. It doesn't make you an idiot. It's not for me, but I'm not a multi millionaire.

I always thought his lyrics and politics were incredibly naive. Anybody can say "give peace a chance", but it's real politicians who have to work out how to do it, and juggle the consequences.

Kennedy got the US into a disastrous war, Nixon got them out, cutting their losses.
Lennon never criticized Kennedy for starting it, never dared to say HOW they should "give peace a chance", any fool can lay in bed and say give peace a chance. It's childish stuff.
When it boils down to it, it was Nixon, not Lennon, who gave peace a chance.
.

[Tero]

He was a refular Andy Capp at home. If he weren't famous he would have been boring.

[Ian]

Lennon died a month after Reagan was elected, before his Presidency. Living in the US at that time, it wasn't a great stretch for anybody to feel sour about Jimmy Carter and the mood of the country in general. One of the things Carter was most famous for as President was a prime-time speech to describe a national "crisis of confidence" (incorrectly referred to now as his "malaise" speech), but had a hard time championing any particular way out of it . He was right.
(EDIT: I just read through the whole text of the speech. It's really a fantastic speech, and the public reception at the time was very positive. But Carter wrecked his own opportunity by soonafter firing several Cabinet officials - actually, he asked for the who cabinet to go, though he only intended a few to go. It backfired wildly; the public perception from this was that his administration was falling apart. Then a few months later Iran took their hostages, and that was pretty much that for President Carter.)

I can criticize Reagan's negative points as well as anybody, but without question I think his was a transformational Presidency. Emphasis on the transformational - in good ways and bad. In the broadest sense of American macroeconomic cycles (which generally last about two generations), he ushered in a new era and we're still in the middle of it. Reagan really had little choice in instituting his economic policies - by the time he assumed office, the US was facing a crisis of overconsumption and underinvestment, with a very large middle class, constrained business power and very high interest rates and inflation. Fielding a tax cut for the wealthy and overseeing the (relative) steady decline of government power and regulations, thus re-empowering the economy not through focusing on a perpetually expanding middle class but rather through top-down investment, was all but inevitable. Carter was merely the last President of the New Deal cycle initiated by Franklin Roosevelt, which had been refined and peaked through various administrations of both parties in the 50s and 60s and had finally run its course towards exhaustion in the 1970s. The Reaganomics cycle will also finally burn out and lead to an entirely new cycle - probably in the 2020s, IMO.
I could elaborate more on this, but I just realized I'm rambling off topic quite a bit...

[Tero]

I blame Reagan for everything.