Joe Ross - The US vs. John Lennon
There is undoubtedly a fine line separating dissent from disloyalty in American politics. Wednesday's film about John Lennon's post-Beatles years shows exactly how fine that line can be. Lennon was one of the most outspoken people regarding the Vietnam War, which obviously upset many pro-war politicians trying to justify the cause. In turn, he was also one of biggest celebrities of the day. This combination, and the fact that Lennon was from a foreign country, forced the Nixon administration to try censor Lennon's messge by any means possible. They believed Lennon and Oko's promotion of peace was disloyal and traitorous, even though they were trying to save the lives of "our boys" and the soldiers of all nations involved in the war. In my opinion, Lennon's actions constitute dissent, not disloyalty. He was not giving military secrets to the Viet Cong or planning a violent revolution to overthrow the US government,he was writing and singing songs about bringing peace to the world in order to make it a better place to live. He rallied support in opposition of Nixon for the election, especially among the youth and young adults because he saw a problem with the way Nixon and his comrades were running the country, which is very similar to the way America became a country. John Lennon's British free speaking mind was much more "American" than the Nixon adminstration's obsession with lies, deceit, and, as we learned in the film, murder. Ths is why Lennon is remembered as one of America's biggest heroes, while Nixon is usually remembered as cover-upping thief.