Deepak Chopra and Intent

Deepak Chopra and Intent


How About an “American Spring”?

posted by Admin

Anyone who has admired President Obama’s idealism all along should come away
inspired by the high-mindedness of his “Arab spring” speech. It served to
reassure his liberal base that he wasn’t solely continuing the Bush policy
in the Middle East (i.e., kill every terrorist, ignore human rights, let
Israel drift, keep the oil flowing). It put the conservative Israeli regime
on notice, along with some minor allies like Yemen and Bahrain. Those were
the points that might cause the powers that be to feel nervous for five
minutes. The rest of the speech, a lofty high five for reform in the Middle
East, was more problematic.

Obama referred to his 2009 Cairo speech that extended an olive branch to the
Muslim world, reversing Bush’s belligerent “clash of civilizations” stance.
Lofty as those declarations were two years ago, the intervening time has
been one of inertia. Guantanamo remains a thorn in our side; Iraq
continually totters; Afghanistan remains chaotic; Pakistan is a client state
bought off with bribes basically because they have the atom bomb. In the
face of such inertia, what can ideals do? If asked whether they would
support freedom movements in Saudi Arabia, for example, in exchange for
gasoline at $6 a gallon, the average American would jump ship on lofty
ideals.

As in so many areas, such as health care, immigration, and energy policy,
Obama combined visionary- in-chief with professor-in-chief. He’s good in
those roles, but a global President needs a global nation to follow him. I’m
not sure that we are really there yet. Reactionary politics held sway in the
2010 election; the economy teeters precariously; people feel like drawing in
their horns. Even in good times it would be hard for any visionary to
reverse the right-wing trends that have dominated American politics since
the Reagan era. In other word, without an American spring, the Arab spring
is still on its own. This country will keep supporting despots and royal
families in the Middle East; we will demand the free flow of oil, which is
the same as capitulating totally to the oil oligarchs that hold the world
ransom; and we won’t stop being the world’s largest arms dealers.

It’s not idealism that is at fault here; it’s self-contradiction. You can’t
be at peace and war simultaneously, reactionary and visionary, friendly to
reform and despots. Obama needs to thread his way through these
contradictions. Given his character, I believe that he’s trying. His
idealism rings true. But countless idealists have broken their heads against
hard realities. The best hope I can take away now is India, a place that is
thriving even though the government is corrupt, bribes are a way of life,
vast millions are illiterate, religious intolerance simmers beneath the
surface, elites jealously guard their privilege, and gender inequality is
shockingly rampant. Obama mentioned all those things in his speech, and it’s
heartening to realize that the dispossessed people of the world, starting
with so little, facing such heartbreaking obstacles, can still rise. The
silent power of idealism may be able to accomplish more than hardened
realists realize. Let’s hope so, especially at this uncertain moment.

Deepak Chopra on Intent.com
deepakchopra.com
Follow Deepak on Twitter



Advertisement
Comments read comments(1)
post a comment
Bruce Madeley

posted May 26, 2011 at 2:38 am


I believe we should withdraw all our troops from the middle east along with other countries where we maintain bases. If these countries wish for us to maintain our bases in their coutry, we will have to agree upon a fee for us to remain there.
Also, effective immediately, Pakistan and India will dismantle their nuclear armaments as they have not demonstrated the stability to have such destructive weaponry in their hands. Failure to do so will result in immediate action. North Korea will hand over to U.N. Authorities all materials on hand capable of assembling nuclear weaponry. Failure to do so will result in immediate action.Thank you for your 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.