Deepak Chopra and Intent

Deepak Chopra and Intent


Can Charisma Really Bring Change? (by Deepak Chopra)

posted by dchopra

It’s generally acknowledged that Hillary Clinton’s campaign has stalled on the wrong side of a charisma gap. The Democratic electorate has surged to follow Barack Obama, and yet this doesn’t signal that Hillary is unpopular — she still earns a high favorability rating. Nor does she suffer by comparison on issues of substance; if anything, she’s ahead. But Obama has done something very difficult for an inspirational campaigner. He’s kept building support. Enthusiasm isn’t waning as the first glow of infatuation fades. This is testimony to Obama’s integrity, a much used word in politics that rarely matches reality.


All observers agree that the secret to his inspiration is a hunger for change. But there’s a difference between “throw the bums out” change and “restore America” change. What one hopes for is the second kind. It’s much harder, but it’s also more practical, since it brings together problems and solutions. To deliver such change, charisma must cross over into realism. Some observers doubt that Obama is capable of that; they’ve taken a show-me attitude. Powerful politicians and entrenched interest groups lie in wait to bloody his idealism. I hope Obama doesn’t make the mistake of Jimmy Carter, who swept in on charisma but squandered his popular appeal by shrinking the expectations of the presidency, lecturing the public instead of leading it and offering little vision for solving difficult problems like stagflation, OPEC, and the Iranian hostage crisis. Obama will need to retool his charisma without losing it, because 80% of Americans believe the country is going in the wrong direction, which implies that restoring America has reached critical mass.
What should America be restored to? First, a pre-Iraq status as a friendly power without military and ideological agendas. Second, a global leader on climate change. Third, a secular republic in which preachers don’t have influence over government policy. In one way or another, both Democratic contenders, Clinton and Obama, would make huge strides on all three fronts, and in addition they would repair the social safety net by providing health care reform.
Yet there’s a further step that only Obama can make, because it will take every ounce of charisma and then some — the end of nuclear arsenals and a steady dismantling of the arms industry. On the first point, eradicating nukes from the planet, Henry Kissinger, George Schultz, and other elder statesmen have already given their support. The U.S. has no credibility left in keeping nuclear weapons from spreading to more and more countries. The only solution is for all stockpiles, large and small, to disappear. On the second point, dismantling the military-industrial complex, this country leads the world in arms dealing and manufacturing. We killed 150,000 Iraqis after terrorists killed 3,000 of our citizens on 9/11. This policy of massive retribution is horrifying, and so is the brute fact that the U.S. spends more on its military than the next 16 countries combined.
If Obama can use his integrity and charisma to break the stranglehold of military spending, if he can restore America to a semblance of being a non-threatening power to the rest of the world, he will have accomplished the greatest political feat since the New Deal, which gave a struggling country a new identity. We need a new identity even more today. Let’s hope that charisma extends that far.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(1)
post a comment
WALT

posted February 27, 2008 at 3:43 pm


RE: BARACH OBAMA – –
ALL WE HAVE HEARD THUS FAR CAN BE EQUATED TO “SNAKE OIL.” MORE SPECIFICALLY, IF A MOVIE TYPIFIES WHAT IS GOING ON TRY WATCHING “ELMER GANTRY” OR “NIGHTMARE ALLEY.” UNTIL WE BEGIN TO HEAR HOW ALL HIS “GLORIOUS” PRONOUNCEMENTS ARE TO COME ABOUT, HE’S JUST A SLICK PEDDLER TO ME. IT WOULD BE VERY INSTRUCTIVE FOR ANYONE INTERESTED TO CHECK OUT “ASIA TIMES” ARTICLES WRITTEN BY SPRENGLER. THIS IS VERY TELLING STUFF AND DESERVES RAPT ATTENTION.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

God Is the New Physics
When spirituality and physics started to be linked, many scientists called it the use of metaphor. It couldn't literally be true that there was a Tao of Physics that linked quantum mechanics to ancient Chinese philosophy. At best there might be a weak link--God and the new physics--the way one might

posted 10:54:59am Dec. 15, 2014 | read full post »

Will God 2.0 Be Indispensable in Ten Years?
The primary difficult with God isn't belief--more than 80% of US responders tell pollsters that they believe God exists. The problem is that God is irrelevant, providing few if any practical benefits in daily life. In an age of faith the circumstances were in God's favor. When people got sick or die

posted 1:58:33pm Dec. 08, 2014 | read full post »

Why Physics Needs God But God Doesn't Need Physics
Recently I created a brief storm on Twitter by throwing out questions that physicists can't answer. Twitter allows you to contact famous physicists directly, and it's predictable that a handful will become irritated and even riled up if you dare to challenge them. "What happens in physics stays in p

posted 10:19:20am Dec. 01, 2014 | read full post »

Why God Makes More Sense than Atheism
After two centuries of the tug-of-war between science and religion, it's clear science occupies the dominant position. It has passed the "So what?" test, meaning that science as applied to practical daily life has been immensely more important to modern people than God. This has given atheism, both

posted 10:39:29am Nov. 24, 2014 | read full post »

How Richard Dawkins Lost His Battle with God
When he wrote his 2006 best-seller, The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins expected to accomplish two aims that have proved to be remarkable failures. The first aim was social. He wanted to attract a horde of doubters, fence-sitters, and agnostics to gather their courage and join the atheist ranks. This

posted 11:50:49am Nov. 17, 2014 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.