Was John Lennon a communist?

[aociswundumho]

But we all get something from the government. It’s just that some of us don’t admit it.

Yes, but again, the real question is whether government services are worth what they cost, in both money and individual liberty. I doubt anyone would voluntarily pay for most of what the government does, outside of some public goods like national defense.

Claiming people support government programs just because they use them is like claiming someone enjoys a decision made at gunpoint. If you want to know whether it's truly valued, take away the coercion and see what happens.

 

[bomberfox]

No, I don't mind you made him fantastically wealthy by participating in the system he bitched about.

People are capable of seeing those the system impoverished and destroyed.

 

[vanceen]

I'm an enormous fan of Lennon's music, and admire the man as well.

That certainly doesn't mean I endorse every intellectual / emotional twist and turn he ever took.

And it makes no sense to try to argue John Lennon's position on anything based on what he may have said at one time or another. He was all over the place, and didn't worry too much about consistency. It's why he was a musician, not a philosopher.

My guess is that his comment to this thread would be something like "it's just a song, you know. I don't know anything you don't."

 

[Nickyjo]

Yes, but again, the real question is whether government services are worth what they cost, in both money and individual liberty. I doubt anyone would voluntarily pay for most of what the government does, outside of some public goods like national defense.

Claiming people support government programs just because they use them is like claiming someone enjoys a decision made at gunpoint. If you want to know whether it's truly valued, take away the coercion and see what happens.

How was I made less free by the labor laws that protected me when I worked at a steel plant? How did the 40-hour week make me less free? Were farm workers more free when they didn’t have workers compensation, a minimum wage, unemployment insurance, or when they were sprayed with pesticides from airplanes?

And national defense is the exception to the rule? No waste fraud and abuse there?

We and countries most like ours decided about a hundred years ago that we are not little atoms freely contracting with one another as Ayn Rand imagined, but interdependent as John Donne did. Would you rather work in a factory under the “liberty” of rules in effect in the 1890s, or those in the 1990s? I preferred the New Deal protections and rights and the safety rules that came with it and followed it.

 

[Mithrae]

Not faithless. It imagined a world without the things that have caused so much death and persecution, e.g., religion and countries (“nothing to kill or die for”).

It’s aspirational, like a religious hymn, not to be taken literally, reflecting spiritual longing that is almost universal.

A quick check on line of famous hymns produced something similar:

“And when at last the mists of time have vanished,
And I in truth my faith confirmed shall see,
Upon the shores where earthly ills are banished,
I’ll enter Lord to dwell in peace with thee.”
— from “How Great Thou Art”

The bold above is what Lennon was talking about in “Imagine.” Why else do you think it was chosen for the ending of “The Killing Fields”?

You don't really need modern-era hymns to get an Imagine-like feel:

Acts 2:44 All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. 46 Day by day, as they spent much time together in the temple, they broke bread at home and ate their food with glad and generous hearts, 47 praising God and having the goodwill of all the people. And day by day the Lord added to their number those who were being saved.​

Acts 4:32 Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common.​

****in' commies.

 

[Mithrae]

So the movie got it all wrong?

Collectivist ideals got me Social Security and Medicare, and provides me with mail delivery, police and fire departments, and the interstate highway system among other benefits. Jesus the Commie preached collectivist ideals.

You need to understand that Libertarians Propertarians struggle to understand that there are numbers between 1 and 0. Either there is perfect 'liberty' (as they misconceive it)... or supposedly you've got the Khmer Rouge as Dumho helpfully illustrated for us. Consequently, they choose not to acknowledge that by definition private property is a restriction on other people's liberty; in their binary world if they acknowledged that fact, they too would be the USSR or Maoist China or the Khmer Rouge.

Edit: Coincidence that both the posts I found most interesting in the thread were yours

 

[Michael Cole]

Yes, but again, the real question is whether government services are worth what they cost, in both money and individual liberty. I doubt anyone would voluntarily pay for most of what the government does, outside of some public goods like national defense.

The Commons need to be built and maintained by the government. No one is going to pay for a road if it leads to his competitor's storefront.

The Commons also need to be regulated, as without regulation, overuse occurs.

Government serves this purpose, among others.

Claiming people support government programs just because they use them is like claiming someone enjoys a decision made at gunpoint. If you want to know whether it's truly valued, take away the coercion and see what happens.

Have you seen Sovereign? It's not available in theaters in my state, as well as others. Strange.



I'll have to watch it on Vudu.

 

[aociswundumho]

The Commons need to be built and maintained by the government. No one is going to pay for a road if it leads to his competitor's storefront.

Actually infrastructure can be provided by the market, although governments tend to hate the idea.

The first transcontinental highway was built with private money. I also recently started a thread about government trains compared to a private train.

The Commons also need to be regulated, as without regulation, overuse occurs.

That's not the only solution:

Elinor Ostrom has made extensive studies of the management of common property by groups of common owners, contrasting that with management by state or private institutions. Perhaps surprisingly, she has found that those with a vested interest in the resources they manage are frequently better at regulating those resources than publicly-appointed management bodies would be. Her research reveals that in many, but not all, cases, allowing users to develop their own rules to regulate the use of common property results in the most efficient solution for managing those resources. For instance, her studies of the lobster fisheries off the coast of Maine in the United States show that self-imposed rules can often be better, and better-followed, than imposed ones. In short, self-governance can be successful.

Have you seen Sovereign? It's not available in theaters in my state, as well as others. Strange.



I'll have to watch it on Vudu.

While I agree with a lot of their ideas, I think the whole movement is dumb. They're fighting against government in exactly the way government wants.

 

[Michael Cole]

Actually infrastructure can be provided by the market, although governments tend to hate the idea.

The Commons have been provided by government since ancient Egypt. As has infrastructure.

The first transcontinental highway was built with private money. I also recently started a thread about government trains compared to a private train.


That's not the only solution:






While I agree with a lot of their ideas, I think the whole movement is dumb. They're fighting against government in exactly the way government wants.

Roads are public property.

 

[TobyOne]

Woodie Guthrie: Commie. This verse was later removed because........commie. Another borderline commie. Bruce Springsteen's version is probably the best:




There was a big high wall there that tried to stop me;
Sign was painted, it said private property;
But on the back side it didn't say nothing;
This land was made for you and me.

 

[CLAX1911]

Not faithless. It imagined a world without the things that have caused so much death and persecution, e.g., religion and countries (“nothing to kill or die for”).

If you have nothing to die for you have nothing to live for.

It’s aspirational, like a religious hymn, not to be taken literally, reflecting spiritual longing that is almost universal.

Sounds like a drug-induced stupor to me.

A quick check on line of famous hymns produced something similar:

“And when at last the mists of time have vanished,
And I in truth my faith confirmed shall see,
Upon the shores where earthly ills are banished,
I’ll enter Lord to dwell in peace with thee.”
— from “How Great Thou Art”

The bold above is what Lennon was talking about in “Imagine.” Why else do you think it was chosen for the ending of “The Killing Fields”?

No it wasn't.

 

[RF667799]

Woodie Guthrie: Commie. This verse was later removed because........commie. Another borderline commie. Bruce Springsteen's version is probably the best:




There was a big high wall there that tried to stop me;
Sign was painted, it said private property;
But on the back side it didn't say nothing;
This land was made for you and me.

Yeah, I think Woody was a communist or pretty close. Lots of advocates for labor have been that, or close.

 

[Nickyjo]

Yeah, I think Woody was a communist or pretty close. Lots of advocates for labor have been that, or close.

Another great Woody song was “If You Ain’t Got That Do Re Mi,” which was about California’s incredible attempt to keep people from coming to the state from Oklahoma and other depression weakened states. If I remember correctly, travelers had to show they had money to enter. I believe the “anti-Okie” checks were set up on the Oregon, Nevada and Arizona borders

 

[Nickyjo]

Yeah, I think Woody was a communist or pretty close. Lots of advocates for labor have been that, or close.

Sort of made sense. Commies supported labor and civil rights movements, both which were attacked for being communist influenced. Some of that lives on in Trump’s rhetoric, tho socialist is the scary go-to word from some on the right.

 

[uptower]

Someone’s still stuck in the McCarthy era. I mean a communist? What’s that?

 

[RF667799]

Sort of made sense. Commies supported labor and civil rights movements, both which were attacked for being communist influenced. Some of that lives on in Trump’s rhetoric, tho socialist is the scary go-to word from some on the right.

The communist influence was often looked on with disfavor by the laborers in the movements themselves.

 

[Nickyjo]

Sort of made sense. Commies supported labor and civil rights movements, both which were attacked for being communist influenced. Some of that lives on in Trump’s rhetoric, tho socialist is the scary go-to word from some on the right.

The communist influence was often looked on with disfavor by the laborers in the movements themselves.

Probably true, since for some communists, the labor struggles for higher wages or better conditions were only part of the class struggle they supported. Others managed to work on behalf of labor, setting aside their beliefs about classes.

 

[RF667799]

Probably true, since for some communists, the labor struggles for higher wages or better conditions were only part of the class struggle they supported. Others managed to work on behalf of labor, setting aside their beliefs about classes.

As I might have mentioned to you before, both my grandfather's were involved in the labor movement. Specifically, unionization. I'm not sure about my paternal grandfather, but my grandfather on my mother's side would have probably knocked on their ass anyone saying he was a communist.

 

[Nickyjo]

As I might have mentioned to you before, both my grandfather's were involved in the labor movement. Specifically, unionization. I'm not sure about my paternal grandfather, but my grandfather on my mother's side would have probably knocked on their ass anyone saying he was a communist.

I worked for the United Farm Workers Union for a couple of years in the 1970s. Commie types were attracted to the union, but put aside their beliefs in the inevitable revolution to help out. Naturally I was called a communist by some of the opposition, tho not by the growers.

 

[RF667799]

I worked for the United Farm Workers Union for a couple of years in the 1970s. Commie types were attracted to the union, but put aside their beliefs in the inevitable revolution to help out. Naturally I was called a communist by some of the opposition, tho not by the growers.

I assume you weren't a communist, and the people you worked closely with were aware of that. There's no doubt in my mind though, that communists could be a valuable asset to a fledgling labor movement. Mother Jones was pretty far left. Did you ever watch the movie "Matewan"? Damn good movie about a 1920 coal miner strike in West Virginia.

 

[aociswundumho]

Probably true, since for some communists, the labor struggles for higher wages or better conditions were only part of the class struggle they supported.

No, it’s because they understood that in a communist country, a strike is a subversive act - after all, if everyone works for the state (i.e., "the people"), then striking is seen as an attack on the people themselves. No communist country has ever allowed independent unions. Just ask the sailors at Kronstadt - when they demanded the right to organize independently, Lenin sent Trotsky to kill them. And he did.

 

[Nickyjo]

No, it’s because they understood that in a communist country, a strike is a subversive act - after all, if everyone works for the state (i.e., "the people"), then striking is seen as an attack on the people themselves. No communist country has ever allowed independent unions. Just ask the sailors at Kronstadt - when they demanded the right to organize independently, Lenin sent Trotsky to kill them. And he did.

All I know is that when I worked for a union, communists types supported us. They were able to hold two ideas at the same time: that unions were good and that class struggle would proceed as they believed.

 

[RF667799]

All I know is that when I worked for a union, communists types supported us. They were able to hold two ideas at the same time: that unions were good and that class struggle would proceed as they believed.

And they could have also figured that independent unions would become superfluous upon the realization of their glorious revolution.