My Least Favorite Song...Ever...Period

Along with many of my fellow Tarheels, fellow UNC '08 grad Anoop Desai's success on season 8 of American Idol has led me to finally start watching the show. Billy, a friend from undergrad and long-time fan of the show, started a blog about it where he and many of our mutual AI first-timer friends can discuss the show's weekly happenings. Recently, he posted a poll to gauge "the best AI performance of all time", one of the options being David Archuleta's rendition of "Imagine." After casting my vote, I proceeded to comment about how much I hate the song "Imagine" (not necessarily David A's performance of it, but the song itself). Not only did my position receive not one supporter, but I garnered a lot of passionate defenses of the song. Thus, I felt the need to support my position with this post.

The first time I heard John Lennon's "Imagine" was during 2006 Winter Olympics opening ceremony. My gut reaction was to puke. A bit harsh, maybe, for a song which sounds so hopeful and optimistic. Yet, I think the reasoning behind the reaction is sound, so I stick by it. To begin, I think it's important to consider the song's actual lyrics:

Lyrics to "Imagine" by John Lennon:
Verse 1
Imagine there's no Heaven, It's easy if you try
No hell below us, Above us only sky
Imagine all the people, Living for today

Verse 2
Imagine there's no countries, It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for, And no religion too
Imagine all the people, Living life in peace

Chorus
You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

Verse 3
Imagine no possessions, I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger, A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people, Sharing all the world

Now to my reasons for hating this song. Each point will start with what I think is a major implication of the song (in bold), followed by my response to that implication.

1. Moral relativism will fix the world's problems (Verse 2): Calling for "no religion" is extremely problematic. In one sense, if "no religion" means there is no supernatural world (God, heaven, hell, etc.), then Lennon is arguing for a secular religion in which humanity is the ultimate good (god) and human rights, peace, and communalism, are the means to that good (religion). In the other sense, if "no religion" means there is no morally authoritative set of beliefs and right/wrong, whether supernatural or man-made, then Lennon's utopia is but a personal one and thus non-applicable, non-transferable, and non-obligatory upon anyone else. Either way, the song's diagnosis and prescription for the world's ills have no authoritative basis. If there is no religion (read: no moral authority) or if religion is secular, there is no basis for an objective statement about what is good or bad (i.e. without religion, Lennon can't argue that countries are bad and sharing is good). Any judgment regarding such is based upon the contextualized and limited scope of human observation. Morality becomes simply an ever-evolving product of society with no possible claim of absolutivity now or in the future (this is moral relativism).

This becomes even more problematic because "no religion" undermines any argument for humanity's inherent value or purpose. If human life was not created (by God) but rather came to be (evolution), there is no concrete reason why it should be valued or protected.

**Point 1 is important to understand because its implications are fundamental to the following points.**

2. There are no ultimate consequences for our actions (Verse 1). If there is no heaven, there is no incentive for living the "right" way, regardless of how you define "heaven" or "right." If there is no hell, there is no punishment for living the "wrong" way, regardless of how you define "hell" or "wrong." In essence, "living for today" thinks not of today's consequences for tomorrow. This philosophy undermines two of humanity's most basic emotions and motivators: hope and fear. Whether there is heaven or hell (given that we can't empirically prove it) or under what philosophy/theology/worldview humanity chooses to live, death remains an ultimate inevitability for all humanity. If there is nothing after death, then this life is the only chance to pursue enjoyment and hedonism becomes the only sensible philosophy. Would secular hedonism lead to world peace?

Of course, if there is no right or wrong (Point 1), there is no basis on which to send people to heaven or hell anyway.

3. Religion and authority are to blame for the problems of the world. To me, this seems one of the the song's most straight forward concepts. Elements of the song are broken into two categories. The first category pertains to things to get rid of: heaven, hell, religion, countries, reason to kill, reason to die. The second category is the things that result from getting rid of category 1: living for today, peace, no greed or hunger, sharing, brotherhood of man.

One of the greatest arguments of moral relativists and atheists against theistic religion (belief in God) are the crimes that have been committed in name of God. I'm not one to pretend that theistic religion has a blameless past and has no fault in some of history's greatest injustices such as this, this, and this. However, intellectual honesty demands, that we also must consider instances such as this, this, this, or this. Not only were many of the latter instances instituted by atheistic forces, but the purpose for doing so was often the elimination of theist religion.

Further, what about all of the good that is done in the name of God? If you get rid of organized religion, you get rid of this, this, this, this, this, and this - just to name a few. To eliminate God is to eliminate the greatest motivator for good and compassion the world has/will ever know(n).

4. There is no truth and therefore nothing worth dying for. Verse 2 specifically mentions "nothing to...die for." Well naturally (back to point 1), if truth is relative, there is no fact, idea, logic, theology, reason, philosophy, belief, or conviction worthy to be consequential to the way we live, try to improve ourselves or treat others. See the problem? The entire concept of justice is dependent on a moral code that is true regardless of societal, cultural or chronological context. If there is no reason to die, what happens to the importance of justice. Would a world without justice lead to peace, nonviolence, brotherhood, elimination of scarcity, etc.?

Conclusion
This song is symbolic of the ideals of the era in which it was written. The generation and ideology that bred this song rebelled not against a poor moral code, but against morality; not against a corrupt authority, but against the concept of authority; not against disorder, but against order. These ideals were not new or unique to their time, they were just as characteristic of Israel in pre-Davidian times and they thrive today on college campuses. It is inherent to our sinful nature.

When I ask friends why they like this song, they often respond with something to the effect of: "Well I appreciate Lennon's passion for peace and harmony, even though I disagree with the 'no religion' stuff." The problem with this song, is that you can't divorce these two elements. The song is lyrically composed to argue that if we want peace on earth, we must get rid of religion and anything else (read: truth) that may cause division among people. The song is musically composed for minimal instrumentation in order to place emphasis on the lyrics. The message is clear and coincides with the rising and widespread influence that amoral, secular humanism has in modern, American society. A society in which New Atheism (long but informative article) is taking root and arguing not for the toleration of religion and faith, but for the aggressive extermination of it.

I appreciate Lennon's passion for peace. I think his instinctive yearning for the "brotherhood of man" is simply evidence of the fact that humanity was not created for violence or discord. We were created for peace and harmonious fellowship with Christ and each other. The problem of the world is not religion or truth or governments, rather it is sin. Christ is not the Prohibitor of hope and peace, but rather the Creator, Bearer, and Giver of it. To suggest otherwise, as "Imagine" does, is to lead seekers astray and promote their own destruction.

To preempt some complaints:
- I'm not saying that music has to be about Jesus to be good.
- I'm definitely not hating on the Beatles or the profound influence they have on the music I love.