Agreed, "Java" was an oversimplification. It's actually JVM bytecode. It's still strange in my book to use an object soup runtime for something (Lisp/Scheme) that feels closer to functional languages to me.

Clojure is a different case, because when you already are on the JVM anyway, then Clojure is still infinitely better than no Lisp at all. It's not the same as putting the JVM somewhere where it wasn't before and where it's not actually needed.