this post was submitted on 30 May 2024
133 points (100.0% liked)
the_dunk_tank
15910 readers
15 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Like father like son. Talentless hack with bad politics.
i just now realized i know nothing of Lennon's politics but just from a couple of songs I thought he was left-leaning if not socialist friendly
The way I see it, he was an archetypal radlib of the hippy era. He was very outspoken against the Vietnam war which is undeniably good, but it also served his popularity and image as a hippy counter-culture icon. Considering how much that ended up being the source of his wealth, it makes it hard to gauge how authentic it really was. No matter how anti-war he may have been, he was also vocally anti-communist and critical, even hostile and dismissive, of anything genuinely revolutionary. And I say "vocally" because he made it apparent not just in interviews and such but also in some of his most well known songs. He was one of those staunch "non-violent" "leftists" of the same type that today would be as loud about criticizing Hamas as he would be Israel for the former's use of violence instead of just doing peaceful marches and sit-ins in he face of the latter's genocide. Maybe that last part's unfair, as I'd like to think such an obvious genocide would have shaken him of the stereotypical hippy-dippy "make love not war! like just be peaceful, man!" dogmatism, but consider that "Just Give Peace a Chance" is now a catchphrase because it's a song he wrote. Also, his big anti-war action with respect to Vietnam was literally to hang out in bed in a hotel for his honeymoon while actual working people tended to his needs.
Genuinely curious - Could you point to a song of his that was vocally anti-communist/revolution? It's not something I've personally noticed.
there's that line from the beatles song revolution where he says "but if you go carrying pictures of chairman mao, you ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow". honestly don't know if it's a great example but it's the first thing that comes to mind for me
He was kind of just a hippy shitlib that abused his wife and other son.
"Imagine" is the most perfect distillation of liberal philosophical idealism, i.e. the notion that the world's problems are caused by people just having wrong ideas and if everyone could simply 'imagine' a peaceful world it would happen, rather than problems being the inevitable outcomes of current material conditions as determined by the dominant economic system.
This seems a wild take to me. Since when does liberal philosophy promote the idea that people should all think about current material conditions and imagine having no private ownership or nationstates? Whatever about the guy, but I genuinely think the song has a very good message that very few people have seriously thought about.
I suppose I should say "radlib", but as this post shows he's clearly against an actual organized revolution.
Pointing out the problems of the system is still well within the bounds of the leftward edge of liberalism, as long as the solution given shepherds people back into the fold of nonresistance. Electoralists who insist that Bernie or AOC or whoever could fix the problems of the US, if only they could get some kind of New Deal through that danged Congress, are playing the same game. As are environmentalists who cry about climate change but but don't connect it to the fundamental mechanics of capitalism and never go beyond individual acts of defiance. And they don't even have to be doing it cynically, they just have to be unable or unwilling to see beyond the limits of their current understanding, as imposed on them by the material conditions of their life. Such as, the life of a millionaire rockstar.
Charitably, one could go so far as to call him a utopian socialist, but that still doesn't mean anything if he doesn't investigate any further into the real conditions of the world. All he can do is idly daydream and "imagine" a better world without suggesting any kind of next step or concrete plan to create a better world - indeed, the people who are actually trying to do something are the subject of ridicule. And more than that, someone can listen to Imagine, daydream about a better world, be satisfied with how good they are for wishing the world was a better place, and then go straight back out into capitalist society with an untroubled conscience. Like, Imagine came out 53 year ago, the official youtube upload from 2016 alone has 306 million views - how many of those people did it set off on the path of communist revolution?
I don't want this to feel like I'm bashing you for liking the song, if it's meaningful to you then cool, it has a good sound and the lyrics do conjure an objectively good world, plus by being here you're already reached a far more radical level than the vast majority of westerners. But it actually has no content beyond what can be recuperated into the system that created it, especially in the context of the rest of his work and his cultivated hippie persona.
Bad politics sure but I don't think calling him talentless is of any help. People can have a lot of artistic creativity and be absolutely clueless in the realm of complicated matters. Now, I totally agree that people calling The Beatles the best band ever are extremely shortsighted, but in their sphere of influence which is western popular contemporary music they were pioneers and did a lot of wild and interesting stuff.
I'm not saying this because I'm some massive fan or anything, I just think it's important to acknowledge that people who have bad politics aren't wholly decrepit human beings incapable of doing anything good, because not only it's factually wrong but also alienating for a lot of people and we don't want to alienate people.
I don’t separate the art from the artist. John was a garbage human being and I don’t think he was that good. In my opinion he made mediocre music that happened to take the industry by storm during a major turning point.
I respect this opinion. I don't really like the "separating" either, but I think there is something dialectical between the art and artist especially when multiple people are involved
I try to take that into account depending on the situation. However, there are times we’re the other people in the band enable and ignore the shitty behavior in which case all bets are off usually.