Ben Woit on John Lennon
This was a really overwhelming film at times and I feel that there's so much more to be said about it than I can conceivably fit into one blog reflection, so I'm going to focus on Lennon's success (or lack thereof) as opposed to the actions of the Nixon administration and their image of him. I have to say that Lennon comes across good hearted guy, really devoted to his ideals of peace, even if he was somewhat naïve about his own ability to effect change in the system. That being said, at the time, the youth movement, the antiwar movement, and a host of other "movements" were vocal, visible, and really unprecedented. I don't think anyone, be they Nixon and his supporters, or the movement participants themselves, knew quite what they were facing and the extent of what they could achieve. It was a new and uncertain time for everybody involved, on both sides. That being said, I think that is why Nixon & Co. were so scared of this otherwise benign and stumbling hippie musician. They saw the crowds, the demonstrations, and the like, and were worried about this raw angst and dissatisfaction translating into electoral power.
The film mentions the 26th Amendment and the fact that millions of 18-21 year olds would be voting in 1972, and this scared the Nixon administration, and thus their efforts at silencing Lennon and other "agitators" of the left began. However, when all the noise died down, Nixon had won in a huge popular landslide and, in my opinion, all of the hippies, Panthers, and other leftists were left there looking stupid. For all of the noise and agitation of the late 60s and early 70s, what did Lennon, Bobby Seale, and other leftist radicals achieve? Perhaps they changed the minds and political leanings of some young people, but they by and large went on with their lives, got careers and a family, and participated in the same society they were so dissatisfied with in their youth. While I'm no Nixon fan, I believe he got it right in 1968 with his notion of the "silent majority." These protest movements, of which Lennon was for a time a figurehead, were loud, visible, and in-your-face, but just getting thousands of people out into the street to wave signs ultimately does not translate into political change or capital. In a way, it's too bad and tragic that even something as important as the 1960s-70s "movement period" was unable to bring out its goals and make whatever lasting policy changes they desired, but I guess that speaks to how our system works and, alternatively, to the fact that the "rest" of America, those who weren't out protesting, ultimately carried the day...the voice and attitude of the country as a whole was not out marching in the streets.
I think this films shows that, at the time, nobody really knew what these movements would achieve or the extent of their power, but once this had been discovered, first in 1968 but especially in 1972, the establishment really started to disregard them, the "silent majority" wrote them off, and many believers in these leftists causes became disenchanted and dropped out as well. For Lennon's part, I think he was a true believer but that even his faith was tested and dealt a blow as a result of the government actions against him and the failure of the peace movment. Sadly, I think that Lennon and by extension all he represented about popular culture, radical politics, and the like, and their ability to effect actual, meaningful change were overstated and that history has proven that they did not, in fact, change much of anything in actual political practice, policy, the war, and the like.