Looks like TAC‘s Jordan Michael Smith got it right — news today that John Lennon’s last assistant, Fred Seaman, says in a documentary, “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” backs up Smith’s take on ex-Beatle’s changing politics:
In fact, Lennon died as something of an individualist. “Produce your own dream,” he advised in lieu of getting involved in politics. “If you want to save Peru, go save Peru. It’s quite possible to do anything, but not if you put it on the leaders and the parking meters. Don’t expect Carter or Reagan or John Lennon or Yoko Ono or Bob Dylan or Jesus Christ to come and do it for you. You have to do it yourself.”
Scott Lahti 
tbraton 
Clown George 
A. G. Phillbin 
Mark 
freemansfarm 
Why this desperate attempt to prove that Lennon “converted.” Who cares? Was he ever viewed as some kind of deep thinker? He is admired for his creative abilities, not for the cognecy of his political arguments. And, anyway, Lennon himself (as opposed to his “last assistant”) said don’t look to Carter OR Reagan. How is that a “right turn?” And he was never an establishment, Democratic party guy anyway. He was ALWAYS an “individualist.” And anti conventional politics for years, including radical left wing politics…”cuz if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao, you ain’t gonna make it with anyone anyhow!” The whole point of “Revolution” is that you should “free your mind INSTEAD” of indulging in even ostensibly liberating radical politics. But, say the basic point here is correct, that Lennon did have a late conversion. I still don’t really see the signifcance. Who is to say that he was any more correct in his later views than he was in his earlier views? And how does it in any alter anything that he said or did or sung or wrote before that change?
It seems to me that some conservatives feel some kind of strange compulsion to “prove” that various Sixties counter cultural icons (Dylan, Lennon) were “really” conservatives. Or that they “became” conservatives. The “proofs” are usually pretty weak, and I’m not sure the candle is worth the game anyway. Do modern day conservatives somehow feel the need to have their current political views “validated” by aging or dead rock stars? Maybe they think their own status as political conservatives is somehow inconsistent with them liking the work of the Beattles or Dylan and so forth, and they need “role models” to have their stance as “Rock n Roll Republics” be consistent.
Frankly, I don’t care what Lennon’s political views. Nor Beethoven’s or Stockhousen’s, for that matter. I like their music, if they happened to agree with me politically, great, if not, so what?