No possessions, “nothing to kill or die for,” etc. are envisioned as as a result, not a means to an end, as is the abandonment of religious superstition. It’s a dream about a basic change in human nature, and the things imagined not to exist in the song are envisioned as things which would drop away naturally if human nature were different. he isn’t saying “become a commie atheist and we’ll all have peace and brotherhood,” he’s saying that war, material greed, nationalism, religon etc. would all disappear on their own if humans weren’t assholes.
In point of fact, though, Lennon did not actually believe these things could happen. The song is intended as a fantasy, not a political treatise.
I’d really like to see Curtis’ response to the point that the song fits exactly with what Jesus supposedly taught. Of course, I have a feeling Curtis will abandon this thread like his others.
I can’t believe that people are presumptuous enough to think that a world without their religion would drive people to mass depression and suicide.
Now if you actually looked at the writings of Paul you’ll see most of it was not the case except for certain heretical sects such as the Gnostics.
No but we could prepare for it by keeping up military technological progress, encouraging interstellar exploration, and preparing for such a possibility.
Messianic Judaism actually.
No just a more civic-minded society.
He says the word nothing-not even other people or concepts such as “freedom”.
I mean in general to be willing to die for something-be it humanity or democracy or freedom.
No the point of life is to improve the human condition.
Pop quiz, you can travel through space with apparent ease. Do you get in a bloody fight with the nearly bald juvenile looking apes on the third planet for their sparse resources?
Or do you set back from a safe distance and use your technology to redirect an asteroid to their planet?
Or do you just say fuck risking who knows what nasty biological contagions they may have, and use the plentiful energy and resources in space?
If you look at the quotations attributed to Jesus, you’ll see it’s ALL true, and nothing in the Pauline corpus contradicts it (trust me, kid, I know more about this stuff than you do), plus the Acts of the Apostles explicitly describes the first Chritian communities as being literally communistic, with no private ownership of property and everything owned in common (Acts 4:32-35). A couple of people are even killed for withholding money from the commune (Acts 5:1-11)
None of which would do us a damn bit of good.
No, that’s Christianity. Jesus just believed in plain old Judaism with a human (non-divine) Messiah.
it is simply a song about conflict and imagining a world without the reasons for it. Of course I think John was taking the piss and it was a wonderful ironic English joke.
So what? I fail to see how the behavior of anyone other than Jesus and the Apostles is supposed to be meant as an example for Christians to follow. Jesus was clearly very suspicious of profit and materialism, and none of the Apostles (by which I mean the Eleven & Paul) had much good to say about the rich. Of all the willfully obtuse perversions of Christian doctrine, the Prosperity Gospel of whited sepulchurs such as TD Jakes & Joel Osteen rank among the worse.
Jesus tells them they have to leave their professions (and I would not call slavery a “normal job”) their money and even their families behind if they want to follow him.
I too am thoroughly weary of it - that slow dreary tune.
But it’s an anarchist anthem. It always amazes me that no one else sees it. It got to number one with everyone thinking it was just a nice tune with dreamy lyrics but it’s actually a hardcore anarchist manifesto.
I bought the single - the B-side was Working Class Hero just to emphasise the point.
This passage is a complete non-sequitur. For one thing, Jesus didn’t say it, and for another thing, it doesn’t contradict Jesus’ communistic worldview anyway. Communism doesn’t preclude work.
That’s interesting considering Working Class Hero was released on a different album (John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band; 1970) than Imagine; and, shortly after Imagine (the album) was released in 1971, *Imagine *(the song) was released as a single with It’s So Hard on the B-side. *Imagine *was also released as a single combined with Happy Christmas (War is Over) and Give Peace a Chance. Are those songs anarchistic as well?
I’d be interested in a cite that Lennon intended to two songs to be combined on a single as an anarchist manifesto.