Can you guys spot the secret message John Lennon was trying to send us?!
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (118)
sorted by:
So whats the story behind Yoko? Always felt like she was a communist handler. Any truth to that?
Not from what I’ve read. Keep in mind she was younger than John, born in early 1930s Japan. She got that traditional stereotype Japan businessman type upbringing it seemed like. She didn’t want anything to do with activists it was mostly John who was on a hippy trip of idealism, yoko anchored him to reality and brought some maturity and wisdom to him - changed him for his own personal better as any good woman will do to a man.
Her biggest thing was feminism - like, real feminism (women deserve fair treatment, orgasms, a voice, and equal opportunity - but still believes in the matriarchy centric community and nuclear family like all of us) keep in mind this is back when a woman being beat growing up or an uncle diddling your kid was kind of like taboo and it was like “we don’t talk about this stuff” so I think it’d make any woman a feminist. I mean, I can only imagine how Japan was considering horror stories I’ve heard from my mom just growing up in the rural Midwest during 40s/50s. Yoko is sensible from what I can tell - I mean, art wise yeah she is a nut and too much abstract for most (personally like her poems/song lyrics and art …. Not her singing tho, but I appreciate the idea behind it)
John was a womanizer and abusive to women growing up - yoko changed that part in him. They were both broken people in some ways (him, no mother growing up and when they started to reconnect she was killed - her with an ultra authoritative Japanese businessman upbringing and abuse).
Thanks for this really thoughtful and insightful post. As we start waking up and see things in the past with fresh eyes, it is a bit disorienting to recalibrate every aspect of what we believed. Your summation of Yoko seems to be on the spot. I always used to hate her because I thought she wedged herself in the Beatles and destroyed it. Now that I know Beatles was a fabrication of [DS] for their social destruction agenda, then Yoko has to be seen as a good thing. That fits with your reading that she pulled him out of the hippy scene and toxicity.
On a related note, its a little sad that when talking about real feminism, needs to be quantified and defended so carefully. One of the earliest things the Cabal did was to destroy the meaning of feminism and make it into the toxic mess it is. Can you imagine a society where everyone were feminists the way you describe Yoko? It would be such an awesome and strong society.
Its also kinda funny wot watch the liberals recently pushing for recognition of Yoko and credit her for songs like Imagine, etc. They clearly don't realise what she stood for is not the same.
Talking about Imagine - that song always felt like overly communist. Need to look back at it with new eyes.
She did play a huge role in breaking up the beatles but i don’t think it was intentional. Just like getting married kinda breaks us up from a lot of our friend groups or hobbies, not selfishly but just because what you find with that right person is more important than “you”. Paul and johns egos played a huge role in the break up tho, and personally think Paul always comes off a bit douchey/cocky and more about churning out (albeit good sounding) kinda generic songs just to make them or just to make money. There is something not ‘honest’ about a lot of them.
I don’t think beatles were a fabrication of DS - I think they were a huge influence and it took DS by surprise to see such a HUGE force (all based out of love basically) be able to sway people’s influence so greatly that the DS in turn studied and tried to make an algorithm if you will on what “makes” a pop star or boy band influential and tries to intentionally recreate that (and do to this day in my opinion).
The feminism thing is def interesting. I think around the 90s is when you start to see real pushback from more “deep state” or at least “communist/antifa” extremist type feminism that is progressive beyond a point of all sense. Leading up to that the majority of pushback was prob just from men in power who literally were the cliches and stereotypes (generic old rich white guy who uses women and feels above them) who were threatened by women for this and unable to keep their over inflated fragile male egos in check.
Something I know about the black community, and something I see being taken from it by force thanks to DS, and something I see being pushed HARD from progressivism to sorta destroy the “whites” is the whole nuclear family thing… and one thing that goes along with that is women being the focal point of family, community etc. in the black community is where i learned this most and it wasn’until a black friend pointed it out explicitly to me that I was like “yeah this makes sense and it explains all of the concepts I was raised on about mom/moms and women’s roles is legit”. Basically that friend said the black community and family is a matriarchy - where no matter how strong the male figures are the grandma or great grandma or wife or aunt are really the ones in charge and who have the most power over anyone”. This rang so true to me, and thinking back on history too,l. Behind everyone great man is a great woman for example. But yeah that really I see being targeted for destruction by work culture … because it destabilizes everything then. Fortunately I think most women, at least mothers, see through this.
Imagine - I don’t have time to roll through books and dig up exactly what he said but I’ll do my best to paraphrase… basically the whole point isn’t to be anti god or anti country or literally no possessions but rather just “imagine” what it would be like if we all just got along and didn’t worry about what nation you’re from or what religion I am or what race someone else is or how much stuff your neighbor has. Lennon is from from communist - he is all about capitalism btw. He has openly expressed how he has more than he could ever want or need but that he felt he earned to be rich and always wanted to be basically.
One last interesting thing because “imagine no possessions” comes up is something I’ve learned from Hindu/buddists I’ve worked with and books they’ve had me read (I was a chef for reference, so these are dish washers and cooks, not like professors or something) which is that the concept of materialism and giving up material things and giving up possessions isn’t in as much about physical possessions or wealth, but is mosty about possessions of the mind. It’s about the illusion and brevity of life and how not being able to let go of possessions of the mind is a bad thing when one dies because it will hold you back from finding peace in the afterlife and from a good rebirth (if u believe in that sort of thing). An example would be your loved ones, let’s say your dog and your wife - if you die, those days you leave spirit spends in limbo transitioning from this mortal plane to whatever is beyond, if you are too tied to possessions, will want to “hold on” to things in this material world. Like your wife, or dog, and love for them - it can hold you back from moving on to the greater love that is out there.
It’s a thing Christianity I think touches on a little bit but mostly gloss over and provide a cheat code to get you there by reassuring you “everything you want will be in heaven” just so it’s easier to move on from this life l.
Anyhow cheers god bless take care wwg1wga
As for Paul McCartney, later on in his life he has all the hallmarks of being a DS pawn or atleast an useful idiot. From his knighthood I am inclined to believe that he is higher up in the puppet hierarchy.
We see the conflicts between founders just like between Paul and John all the time and I now have a new theory about this. Once a talented team shows promise if they happen to attract the attention of a Cabal agent, they will get guided towards success and stardom. However at a certain point they will start asking them to be part of their secret society (like freemasons), but its still nothing nefarious. However, this initiation is meant as a filter to find out who would be suitable candidates for grooming further into Satanism.
Along this path certain founders just do not like this and either refuse to get into it, or pull back after getting into the initial stages. At this point the other founders can see the huge stardom right in front of them with only a few pesky steps in between, and the founder who is holding them back from that. This is what manifests itself in the outside world as some kind of ideological difference between the founders.
Your interpretation of "no possessions" from Hinduism/Buddhism perspective is very accurate. I would say it goes beyond the fact that you cant take things with you after death / spirits being held back in afterlife.
The Buddhists state that Desire of material possessions is the root cause of all misery. This is a very simplistic interpretation and when you go deeper into it, what it says is that the more deeper your attachments to the material world, the harder it is for you to find enlightenment. Its okay if you do own the material possessions, as long as you are not so attached that the thought of parting with it is painful.
You can see this all the time, even amongst billionnaires. No matter how much they have they are never happy and they want more. On the other hand you have people like Trump who have everything, yet dont care if they lose any of it. He would not have been able to take this job if he was deeply attached to his wealth. He proves the point that you can still enjoy everything this world has to offer and yet not be seduced by the possessions.
Well, after talking about this with you, I can go back to listening to "Imagine" without feeling guilty or angry!