President Obama: The Birth of a Moral Leader
A few years ago, in 2004, I wrote an article called “Is God a Pacifist?” It was a wide-ranging piece that covered many areas—peace, religious violence, nonviolent activism, etc. But it also was a philosophical analysis of the moral issues involved with the use of power and force. And one of the many interesting realizations that came out of my research for that article was the recognition that progressives and liberals are often quite uncomfortable around the use of power, in particular state power. Indeed, it sometimes seems as if the gritty business of politics, and all the inevitable compromises it involves, is below the idealistic impulses of the more progressive among us. It’s certainly true that many of the moral heroes of the twentieth century, as well as the movements they led, were primarily defined not by their heroic use of power and office, but by their inspired opposition to the powers that be—from Gandhi to Martin Luther King Jr. to Nelson 
Mandela. Obviously, there are many exceptions, but it’s a gross generalization that reveals a subtle truth. Moral courage, in the last century, has meant speaking truth to power more than it has wielding power and force—particularly the power and force of the State—with moral courage. It has often meant fighting against the corrupt structures of power rather than embracing those same structures as a means to achieve positive change. As political scholar Alan Wolfe noted in an essay a few years back, “liberals, in a word, are uncomfortable around power, and, because they are, they criticize politics more than they engage in it.”
This point was particularly brought in one of the interviews I conducted for the issue. I described it in the article itself.
In a conversation with Professor Abdul Aziz Said of American University, an inside-the-beltway peacemaking expert and a deeply spiritual man, I asked if he ever saw the need for the use of violence in politics. “No, I couldn’t use violence,” he said. “I try to only use nonviolence.” Moved by his conviction, I nevertheless had to ask: “Do you think that in government, there are times when we must use violence?” He paused for a moment and then chuckled, “I think that that is why I’ve never been in government.”
Of course, there can be good and high-minded reasons why progressives or idealists might be hesitant to engage in the gritty, contact-heavy sport of politics, and we can certainly respect legitimate reasons for choosing other paths. And yet the unfortunate truth about power is this—if we do not exercise power in the world, then we surrender influence over the world to those who may be much less able, but much more willing.
The same dynamic can be seen around issues of morality. In her recent book, Moral Clarity, philosopher Susan Neiman laments the way in which the political right has been able to lay claim to the territory of morality whereas the left has remained hesitant. In a recent interview she noted:
Those on the right are able to do one thing that progressives are seldom able to do: They can use words like moral and noble and hero without using air quotes and turning them into “moral” and “noble” and “hero.” Philosophers call them scare quotes. A number of things are being said with this: “Don’t take me too seriously.” “I mean it a little ironically.” “I’m worried about looking sentimental or sappy or kitschy.”
Neiman calls on us to embrace a “grown-up idealism” that is not afraid of the most progressive ideals, that is not hesitant to think in moral terms, and that is willing to embrace the kind of difficult realism needed to actually make change happen.
Enter president Obama. Watching him over the last week in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Buchenwald, 
and Normandy made me realize that we have crossed some kind of threshold. Talk about a grown-up idealist! Here is a president who directly engaged some of the most delicate moral minefields of geopolitics, and he seemed to barely break a sweat. Indeed, Obama is a progressive leader who is completely comfortable with power (but not enamored with it) and he is willing to wield moral ideals as if they were Japanese Katanas—elegantly, but with deadly effect. The Office of the President of the United States is many things, but it also a platform to speak to the world. Of course, that function has been underused recently, but don’t underestimate it. It can be much more than a bully pulpit for domestic politics; it can also be a platform that addresses who we are as a global society—not as a monolith, but as a collection of cultures struggling to come to terms with our differing systems of values, common aspirations, and increasing interdependence. And our shrinking world has only made this function more relevant.
So here’s to a President who is unafraid of moral clarity, who can unapologetically call on our highest, moral aspirations without a hint of irony. And here’s to a President who can turn the bully pulpit around and address the world, turning morality and idealism into diplomatic tools of the best kind—the ones that inspire the best—and shame the worst—in us all.
Filed Under: EnlightenNext Editors’ Blog • Idealism • News • Philosophy • Politics
Here, here!!!
Thanks Carter for great commentary. Appreciate your giving words to why Obama is just so darn compelling in every way!
I completely agree with your assessment of Obama. However, I don’t think that liberals generally hide from the use of violence and power to achieve an end. I think most of us are realist and, in being so, understand that power and violence are the arsenal of the good as well as the bad. It is its proper application that we advocate–turning to it only when all else fails and the situation is dire. In other words, the lives taken through such actions are no more than the lives that would have been lost should we not have acted.
To most conservatives, I would be considered a flaming liberal. However, I don’t understand why we have not moved in with miliary force more often and on a larger scale. For instance, when we went into Iraq, we should have gone in with a much larger force on the ground. Instead, we went in there as if we were on an exploration mission, not at war.
I also would have moved a larger force into Afghanistan and Pakistan at the same time we went into Iraq. If we are going to show folks we mean business and do something like this, then we need to actually act like we mean business. I also would have spent a few years building up support within those countries and had an army of their people ready to go to work with us in our effort. If they can send folks over here to train them to terrorize us, then we can do it to train them to fight for their rights as a people in their own land. Do I sound like a pacifist to you? I am, but a pragmatic one.
Barack Obama is SO inspiring, what a gift to the world! Thanks for reiterating this Carter!
I just finished reading your remarkable editorial and listening to Andrew Cohen’s brief clip pointing to the next big step forward, so awfully long delayed, toward ostensible progressives waking up to the need for all out moral awareness and firm new sense of right versus wrong. His point about our moral obligation to evolution, to evolve, is basic. Your point about the need for new recognition of moral power, which Obama at last embodies, as well as the morality of going up against power, is basic. What a heartening thing it is to see you both moving so firmly and surely in this vital direction!
This is an absolutely ridiculous article written by someone completely asleep and engrossed in “the game” now being played by multinational corporations who are almost in complete control, not only of Americans but the entire population of the world. Mr. Obama is an extremely slick PR frontman for the political machine that continues to systematically destroy the environment, the economy and the standard of living of most of the human race. His appointment and support of Geithner, Volcker, Paul Rubin, Larry Summers and the rest of the familiar list of crooks and cronies is not surprising. And in case you were distracted from what’s really happening: The House, on Tuesday, with almost no Republican support, approved a $106 billion emergency spending measure that includes $80 billion to sustain military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan through this budget year ending Sept. 30. So I guess change has come?
Thank you for this refreshing comment. There are too many people out there who refuse to look at the facts and insist on living in their fantasy worlds. We can’t sit back and live under the motto of “change”. Don’t believe that the change he’s talking about is the change that you picture in your head. This is how Hitler came into power. If you are offended by this comment then you need to do some research. (BTW, I’m not comparing Hitler to Obama. I’m comparing Americans to pre-WWII Germans.)
Very true, Damian, and unfortunately the case beneath the blind idealism that is still so pervasive – especially among the visionary community. We so want to believe that transformation is upon us. The real transformation will occur when we first choose to see reality as is. Knowledge is power!
[...] EnlightenNext wrote a blogpost last year, on the power of speeches at the occassion of the democratic acceptance of Obama as democratic candidate, calling it the “birth of a moral leader”. It is beautiful celebration and reflection of leadership, morality and the power of speeches. I particularly enjoy the introduction of the notion on “grown-up idealism”, referring to as a leader “not afraid of the most progressive ideals, that is not hesitant to think in moral terms, and that is willing to embrace the kind of difficult realism needed to actually make change happen.. [...]
President Obama is an ispiring orator, but so far it seems to be business as usual in the empire that is the USA. We are still engaged in 2 useless wars, and the tortureres of the prior adminsitration are getting a free pass for their crimes.
But even more disturbing is the presidents naivette as to the source of all our economic woes. The Federal Reserve is a cartel of PRIVATELY owned banks that controls our currency and our government, and is the source of virtually everything that ails us, as in actuality an extremely small group of people control the money, and the government, through issuance of currency and getting the government into debt. The primary instruments of this debt being wars and social programs.
Recently President Obama suggested a system whereby virtually all economic oversight is given to the Fed. In doing this he either reveals a terrible lack of understanding, or a terrifying complicity with the people that control this system of modern feudalism.
I coninue to hope that he is merely being very clever in not directly confronting the beast, but when I hear things like this, my hope dwindles.
For those interested in understanding the evils inherent in central banking systems, I recommend The Creature From Jekyll Island by Griffin.
Your view of world events will change forever if read this book.
Amen, and I wish Obama would read this book!
Your wish for a better tommorow has clouded your vision. Obama is an amoral snake oil salesman. Look – Listen – Think very carefuly!
I am astonished by the naivete of the author and most of the comments. Moral clarity? Obama? He represents the corporate elite and is way too comfortable with the power of the military/government/industrial complex that is sucking the rest of world dry. Think Af-Pak war. Think indefinite detention of prisoners with no charges. Think about a “health plan” that protects private insurance companies.
I’m not saying he’s a rotten person, just that he is doing his job as Pres. of the US, governing on behalf the capitalist party.
I am curious as to why any individual would be credited as a “moral leader” when he can only deliver vague platitudes in choreographed speeches and can not and has not demonstrated any ability to ACT with moral integrity as the leader of the free world? Hundreds, maybe thousands of Iranian citizens are being slaughtered as I write this comment and the best Obama can do is say, “well, uh, well, uh, we don’t want to intervene, uh”. Can he not even lend solidarity to those who are dying for their liberty? In all his magnificence, can he not fathom some innovative ways of supporting the freedom seekers in Iran? Liberty and freedom to persue one’s happiness is EVERY soul’s natural earning. This Obama is a manufactured saviour by the American media and socialistic elitists who have an overwhelming desire to inflict their restictive ideas of how we all should live . Obama is a Hugo Chavez redo with little understanding of world history and little care for human dignity and the soul’s natural desire for freedom and self expression. It’s okay to deal in the truth … your delusion over Obama will only lead you to despair. Before the life, people, the world can be the way you like it to be …. you must see it as it is. Then you can move forward toward positive, moral change.
Yes.
What should Obama have done differently? His administration – rightfully so – already condemned the shame elections and the violent aftermath against protesters. Take into consideration how tricky it is to counter the anti-American propaganda machine there. The hegemonic, unelected Mullahs and hardline politicians are very effective at building solidarity against reformers seen as too beholden to American interests, i.e. labeled a fifth column. Even VoA can be painted as part of an American imperial campaign. Threaten Iran and you only build support for thugs many Iranian citizens might not otherwise accept.
Iran is a very complex society, where even experts within it have difficulty divining how the political winds blow. Subtlety is required.
American interventions in Iran in the past haven’t worked for the welfare of either the US or Iran, whatever the intentions were. The best thing is to avoid invading and attacking Iran unless there’s no other way to stop it from making Iraq worse or we’re absolutely positive it is about to bomb/nuke Israel (hence the defense shield Obama’s worked on). As for the politically active (usually in the upper class) working for democracy, such that it is a singular movement at all, it has to evolve in its own way. Iran has to work towards democracy by itself. Our government can offer political asylum to dissidents and victims, and Americans can offer support and even make statements to pressure/embarrass its regime (e.g. Amnesty Intl., Human Rights Watch, Avaaz, etc.). But our military and elected officials should avoid direct confrontation if we want a stable Middle East. As it is, divestment campaigns (away from businesses that help the Rev Guards profit) probably work better than bombing threats or sanctions on their entire economy.
As much as I believe Obama was the best choice of candidates who ran, I think it is still too early to judge his moral character. Actions will speak louder than words. I, too, worry about the influence of big corporations on our elected officials – all of them. I hope they don’t own Mr. Obama, but I haven’t seen absolute proof of that, yet. The state of the climate bill in Congress right now doesn’t leave me feeling encouraged.
As someone with a Political Science degree and who is nonpartisan, I take issue with numerous points of your article (by Carter Phipps).
The United States was founded with a particular set of moral principles; to balance power equally between all three branches of the Federal government and between Federal, state and the population. The goal was to be different than Europe, which had a long history of government oppression over its people. This is what it means to be an American.
President Obama has opposed this basic American ideal of equality in several ways. First, he has shifted the relationship between government and private enterprise far more than any other president in peacetime. Much more power is in the Federal branch than ever before in this relationship. Second, the federal government is also taking power from individuals in numerous ways. There is thus a serious breech is occurring between the social contract of the moral founding of this country. The idea of promoting ‘inequality under the law’ by the redistribution of wealth instead of a flat tax or tax on consumption is immoral regardless of party affiliation. Third, Obama’s decision to be the first president in numerous decades who stopped supporting democracy movements abroad is utterly immoral as democracies provide more rights, freedoms and liberties than theocracies or totalitarian regimes. Fourth, the turning of the back of free trade – payback for labor unions for supporting him in the election – devastates many countries like Columbia along with the worldwide economy. Fifth, the ignoring or opposing of numerous campaign positions occurred. Sixth, the adoption of an economic approach (Keynesian Economics) that is and has been utterly discredited by economists across the political spectrum and which utterly failed in Europe in the 1980′s and 1990′s is the basis for his disasterous economic policies. Eighth, the demonstration that his pacifist and multilateral cooperation approach to China, Russia, North Korea and Iran has been an utter failure along with a worldwide failure in getting more cooperation for Afghan operations and taking prisoners from Guantanamo Bay.
All in all, for those of use educated and degreed in politics, economics, history and/or political science, President Obama’s so-called morality is a dismal failure as was clear when he was a laughingstock of a candidate. There were no terrific candidates in any party. It is only those people who turn their backs on MLK (judge by merit rather than by color in the I have a dream speech) and who are easily swayed by speeches and marketing slogans who cannot apply AQAL with discernment in regards to politics. Politics and morality needs to be looked at coldly and harshly in order to approximate truth. A president’s gender, color, and to some extent speeches are irrelevent. Actions speak far more than words and when actions clash with words – as they often do with President Obama – you choose the action to reflect the true intent and consequences.
One more comment, violence and pacifism are neither good nor bad within themselves. Each has a healthy and a pathological aspect. Pacifism to a rational leader is healthy. Pacifism towards a theocrat or dictator is highly destructive and leads to increased misery and death as has been seen numerous times in history. Think of WWII. Inappropriate militarism is pathological but using soldiers to stop a genocide, to protect a populace from invasion and to stop a war potentially leading to worldwide totalitarianism is moral. Thus, CONTEXT matters! When we apply context, the global generalizations of morality eventually evolve into an AQAL perspective and eventually discernment with depth and breadth. This means going through rules-based, means-based and ends-based moral analysis of words, thought and actions.
Bravo
I have also studied political science, and have taught sociology, so I have at least relevant knowledge here as well. However, I don’t claim to be an expert. I don’t doubt you are qualified to voice your opinions, but it sounds a little like “argument from authority” when you start off with a statement like that. In fact, all your points are quite debatable and reflect a particular ideology. My opinions are also debatable. In a healthy dialogue, parties make a distinction between facts and interpretations of fact.
I would say that both Mr. Phipps and commenter Damian Marshall are correct. Obama has been inspiring in his speeches on foreign affairs and speeches do mean something. Obama is rebuilding at least some of the respect we used to enjoy around the world. On the other hand I don’t see any actions to disengage from the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq.
Furthermore Obama was all wrong to make Laurence Summers his economic policy chief. Summers helped deregulate the banking industry under Clinton and so helped create the mess we are in now. Summers’ whole thrust is to defend his failed policies of the past rather than admit to past errors or fix the economy. Summers (and by extension, Obama) continues to keep failed bankers in business even though they depend on taxpayer funds. That’s wrong.
We did the right thing in 1989-93 when we preserved depositor funds in troubled S&Ls but fired the managements of failed institutions. Then we closed the weak institutions and sold off their assets. That’s how you stop the bleeding. Instead we have an open ended commitment to bad banks and we are not doing anything to force them to be prudent with our money. They should be allowed to take risk with the money of their own shareholders’ but not that of taxpayers.
If we continue to fund weak banks with trillions (yes, trillions!) of dollars, we will not have the money to fight wars, create jobs, fix healthcare, and clean up the environment too. Economics may not be Obama’s strongpoint but he is intelligent enough to study up and learn what he has to. Instead Obama appointed Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner along with Summers and these men just let the banks steal from the Treasury. If Obama doesn’t wake up soon the recession (if not a Depression) will be his problem. Good luck to him on getting re-elected at that point.
While I’ll take Obama over Bush any day I’m not about to beatify Obama either.
To the poster, I forget the name, who said he hasn’t changed anything with the wars, I believe all combat troops were removed in Iraq, as promised. It’s now down to 50,000 on reserve, mostly in an “advisary” position, more than halved from the previous year. Afghanistan is a different story, but some in the military criticized even proposed timetables – as in, if the enemy knows when you’re leaving, they’ll just wait it out and attack when/after that process begins. Hence, why it’s tentative. Hence, why the plan is to try to train as many in the Afghan National Army as well as possible, as quickly as possible. And to get the Taliban to a position of negotiation, from a position of strength. A huge gamble, to be sure, but I was never convinced that leaving right away, such that it can even be done, would be good for either side. Actually, it seems every solution is risky.
Further, many, though certainly not all, Americans who just want to pull out ASAP are arguing from a rather nationalistic perspective, not necessarily caring about the consequences to Afghans. Considering that our country invaded theirs, and has been directly intervening there in the past 30 years (marked by wars and devastation all around) we do owe to their people to try to clean it up and leave it better than before. The problem is figuring out how to do that!
Great post. Insightful and well written. I particularly like the criticism of political left behavior. It nailed, in words, the feeling I’ve had for so long about behavior that seems weak willed and afraid.
Obama is a power hungry, narcisstic, Socialist who is ruining this great country with his Marxist agenda !!!
As I read the author’s article I could only shake my head and wonder in which universe he is living. Thank goodness some members are awake to what Obama and his administration are doing to our country. And thank all those respondents who took the time to speak out about what is REALLY happening — not what wishful dreaming would LIKE to have happen.
I can’t decide whether this is just another Obama puff piece from another Obama fanboy, some mental masturbation posing as great moral insight,or just the decline of enlightennext into PCpap and verbal diarrhea. Since the start of the recantation of his campaign promises,starting on his inauguration, Obama has shown that he is one slick operator,in the most pejorative sense of the term. From his embrace of torture to his support of American Imperial Wars of occupation and exploitation,nothing about his foreign policy could remotely be construed as “moral’.On the domestic front, continuing the outright theft of the future of American working people,and for generations to come in the form of yet to be seen (and felt) taxes that will funnel the future wealth and welfare of the country to a cabal of elite,super rich,self-justifying oligarchs just defies being spun as”moral”or”ethical”. Continuing the failed policies of the Bush regime regarding so-called “terrorism” and “domestic security” vis-a-vis the secret spying on and detention of citizens without having commited criminal acts is both unethical, and more importantly UnConstitutional, which in itself is an unethical act for a sworn officer of the Government to allow. The environment is in an accelerating state of provoked destruction,and where are the “leaders” who take responsibility to turn the tide of blatant waste and the underlying exploitation of an economic “system” that makes it not only possible, but necessary, for the flawed and failed system to continue. Where is the great leader who will step up and make the systemic changes that will maximize the future choices and welfare of ALL people on the planet. That would be truly “moral”. Not just blowing smoke,as usual.
So called “moral leaders” always have a big shadow-side, which also seems to be true about Obama, try read Tarpley’s interesting unofficial biography if you want a more critical perspective about this “new messiah”: http://www.amazon.com/Barack-H-Obama-Unauthorized-Biography/dp/0930852818/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top
Obama is Nothing but ego ego ego! To say he is moral is s joke too. Obviously you choose to overlook all the dishonesty of his past and the dishonest implications of his past. Also the lies of his campaign. PLEASE! Time will show as nothing gets done except the acquisition of govt. power.
What is important to him is being on television.
I really appreciate your magazine and the countless interesting articles. Nevertheless I can’t share your enthusiasm here about Obama at all. It is really a very effective show, but nothing more than that. He is an advocater of the Orwellian New World Order in the purest sense. If you are really willing to let an alternative version into your perception of things, watch Alex Jones documentary “The Obama Deception”:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7886780711843120756
It’s really not about a conspiracy-theories. It’s all about facing facts that are totally there. Or do you still think 9/11 was caused by Osama Bin Laden and his Al-Kaida mates?
Name calling. How low. Enlightenment, Not.
Carter Phipps is a fool! Obama is totally enamored with power and does not tell the truth. Look at the changes from his pre election to the present.Note his complete flips on the issues. He is about as ego centric as you can be, entirely enamored with himself. All this is wrapped up in the fact that he is a marxist, and we know where that led the people. Carter, wake up!!! Please don’t make it true that the elightenext movement is an arm of socialism as the environmental movement became.
Obama is an inspiring speaker – a preacher, if you will. His attempt to bridge opposing sides is heartening, but I wonder if he has the strong leadership skill needed to break stalemates. He’s working hard on revising the nation’s healthcare system. I sincerely hope he succeeds.
The only true moral leader is the moral leader we find inside ourselves.
We must not let people write history before it has happened. Barrack Obama’s position as President only solidifies his involvement with the powerful elite who try to control man. Humans are free and autonomous beings, we do not need a President, especially a President that is a being lead by strings. These strings are pulled by the unseen hands of the New World Order, we know this now. The Universe will decide what order is needed in the world and I’m guessing that it is not the kind the NWO is talking about. They have clearly stated their intentions and Obama has not done a single thing that has gone against what the NWO has ordered. The position of President of the United States is to be respected only in that it is a position chosen by a man who is so arrogant and ignorant enough to think that he has a right to decide how someone else should live.
I would also like to add that morality is not choosing when war is necessary, even if it is a Political game. Morality is seeing the truth in war and choosing Peace, no matter what the circumstance.
Peace Profound
Om Eim Saraswatyei Swaha!
Mr. Obama appears to be an enlightened man. He seems to be doing ‘what Jesus would do’ (another enlightened man). He has one foot firmly rooted in clarity.
It is amazing to me how so many so called “Americans” can literally pull the veil of illusion over their eyes when it comes to Obama. These are the same people who hated Bush for protecting them against terrorist, yet at the same time are blind to the truth of Obama trying to take this nation into socialism. You follow like sheep to the slaughter.
I hope that the day never comes when you wake up (too late) and find that the government is controlling your lives and taking 75% of your hard earned money.
Obama is a former BANKER turned Politician.
His heart is NOT with the common people. It is with creating a stronger CENTRAL POWER STRUCTURE.
Simple and Plain.
Do NOT believe the hype.
This man is ALL TALK like every other politician.
Obama is a leader . You can see through him and he has moral authority.
This you don’t learn .It comes from within.
What a wonderful and encouraging commentary. Mindful listening, seeking common ground, understanding and honoring differences as “tools” of dialogue, this is the constructive force with the guidance of an “ultimate being”. WOW!!! May Pres. Obama, his Team and impact people across the world join in this effort.
We are hopeful–we believe in the moral core of this man. There are areas–such as Guantanamo–where his pragmatism is outweighing his philosophical belief in the process. I will continue to hope that he can govern with his brain and heart entrained for the good of those who are simply citizens and for those this country has wronged. It’s a big task, and no one else can claim it.
Hi Carter, wonderful article. I agree with you about Obama. He seems to have a moral clarity that is unusual, especially for a U.S. President. That’s not to say he or his administration has been perfect so far, but I am inspired almost every time I hear him speak. The unfolding events in Iran make me wonder if his campaign helped light a spark there.
It is important to understand the meaning of morality as ‘moral intelligence’ or ‘consciousness’ as opposed to the authoritarian interpretation of the word in the sense of ‘moralism’. In this context Barack Obama is not a ‘moralist’. He provides moral leadership for America and for the world because he is morally intelligent and therefore respects people’s humanity whatever their social or political status. He can be ‘cool’ because he does not have to represent a repressed minority or majority. Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela were equally intelligent and had to apply themselves to the need to overcome oppression by the powers that be. Obama’s rise to power (his campaign) also represents a revolution against the powers that be (moralistic religious conservative government) – a quiet revoluton but a evolution nonetheless. All these moral leaders are the most developed members of our species which is after all a social species which depends on morality for survival and which risks extinction as a result of the lack therof.
Obama is a politician. And as Paul Hein once said:
“The proper term for politicians is not “leaders,” but “rulers.” People who tell us what we must do, and what we must not do, and how they will punish us if we disobey, are not leading us, they are ruling us. They are not pointing the way, and suggesting we follow it, but ordering us where to go, how fast, how far, and what it will cost us if we dn’t.” – Paul Hein
A ruler is not a good person in my books. I’m a voluntaryist.
Living in NZ is a special experience. As yet we have avoided some of the worst side effects of moral decline, although it is alive and well here also. We are still small enough to know our neighbor and expect some co-operation from our communities in times of need. During the previous decades of American Imperialism, there has been an overwhelming sentiment here that summarized says “Not on our plot you don’t!” However, as we see our Maori lads impersonating Afro American street culture and out-rapping the best of them, we know that American culture has been exported/imported here also. It is something that the U.S. is extremely good at for good or bad. So it was with great relief when Obama got your vote, and we all looked and are receiving confirmation that America at last has someone at the helm with a sensitivity to the rest of us. He appears to be a man of integrity without ramming the American version of Christianity down all our throats. He seems to be a man who thinks before he acts and feels even before that. The world sat on tender hooks awaiting the outcome of your election. To know that we have no voting rights in a country that so hugely affects the daily life of so many non-Americans is scary and we didn’t want another decade of moralistic (as opposed to moral) rantings and corporate based foreign policy. I for one hold your president in high esteem. And I hold your people with greater esteem since they showed the moral courage to overcome deep-seated injustice and racial inequality by voting for a real man not a political puppet. I can only hope that he has the strength to stand against the opposing forces that place money and global market share above caring and decency. Well done America. You rose to your moral obligation to the world rather than staying glued to the fixation with owning us all that seems to have dominated. We all love you the better for it. May you and your leader live long and prosper. (See, even I have been indoctrinated) :)
I have been a lawyer for over 40 years and in those 40 years I have developed a sense about witnesses, clients and juries. I have studied psychological profiles, etc. and interviewed thousands of clients and witnesses. Obama is one of those gifted orators that can messmerize his audiences and make women faint. BUT, he is naive, into himself and has developed the characteristics typical of an abandoned and neglected child, namely, narcistic traits, deceit, and wanting power to control all of that around him, so that he will not be abandoned, neglected or without identity again. He comes within the definition of a messianic narcist. Read Eric Hoffer, the author of “A Nation of Sheep”.
My word for Obama is BALANCE. I have been following his story since 2000 and have always taken notice of his ability to take all sides of an issue and bring out truth. Even when the truth is not necessarily in line with what he wants, he recognizes that the truth is the truth. This is the stuff of real leaders. Unwavering strength in the worst of all situations and the ability to function under those circumstances with honor, morality and fairness. What more could we ask for?
Hi, Cheryl,
Just a thumbs up your characterizing President Obama as Balanced. If he’s naive, it’s how idealists tend to sound to those not charmed by his charisma and really sharp articulated speech and views of trying to restore to America and Americans some of our principles that may seem to have become rather neglected and to cynics as “naive”. I believe we’re lucky to have such a stalwart kind of leader coming after a period of decadence and excess and wish him and his administration all the luck and support we Americans can send his way.
Some of the narrow, hateful comments here really surprise me and make me wonder just what sort of individuals actually subscribe to this publication.
EnlightenNext is neither a left-wing nor right-wing political rag. God knows we have more than enough of those out there. This has always been a publication that has looked for alternative answers to individual and world problems based on spiritual solutions, rather than those that remain purely in the weary, narrow-minded political realm.
People who complain that Obama is merely a “politician” have little useful to add to any political debate. *Of course* he’s a politician, you ninnies! If you want a saint, cast your vote for Jesus or Buddah. But I doubt they’d have any sort of clue about how to run a nation in this world. With all the morons on both ends of the political spectrum spewing venom at the man, he will be lucky to live through his first term in office, let alone successfully negotiate the political tightrope he must walk.
This is the world as it is, not some unattainable version of Utopia. Fortunately we have a leader who seems to realize that, not one of you crackpots. (Okay, maybe that’s *my* narrow-minded comment, but there you have it.)
President Obama reminds me of the leadership phenomenon, in terms of “responsible leadership.” When doing his job, he´s so clear about freedom, about the giving of reflexive capacity in all means.
Here is an outsider’s view from Australia: Obama does present as a highly competant, moral person who is not held hostage by any lobby group and who has that unusual mix of sensitivity and pragmatism needed when dealing with world issues. The criticism that he is all words and no action is partly true in that unfortunately his is constrained by your economic system which, in a word is in a mess. The best that he can achieve in the short time is to change attitudes which he is slowly achieving. There is no doubt that he is yet another early (but most important) flowering of the new consciousness.
Just wanted to respond to the comment above in response to the article . Art said ‘your wish for a better tomorrow has clouded your vision’. I’m wondring what else we’re doing here in the world then, wishing for a worse tomorrow? What leader is going to be perfect then? It seems that Barack Obama is a passionate idealist, and also a realist as much as he is humanly capable of at this very early stage of his presidency. Obviously not a single person comes already fully equipped with all the answers to be president, how can they? They learn and are tested, sometimes severly , along the way, as I’m sure Obama will be. He’s bound to make mistakes, as all human beings without exception do. But I say give him a fair chance. It seems to me that Obama’s intentions are very sincere. He does not seem like some ungrounded utopian idealist, but that he is realistic from real life experience and that he’s fundatmentally a good human being with an exceptionally challenging job ahead of him. I think he really does want a better future based on his considerable real life experience as a truly ‘global’ citizen, with a positive forward thinking vision, not just for America, but for the world.
I totally endorse the last comment by Michael Friedman. The anger expressed by both ends of the political spectrum here is disturbing.
I trust Obama’s idealism and recognize that he has to tread diplomatically if he is to stay long anough in office or indeed in the world ( assassination by extremists is very much on the cards) to make any significant difference to current pressing global woes. Furthermore, the point that Carter is making re the engagement of power is surely sound regardless of whether or not it will be seen to be applicable to Obama.
Tell me which country has done the most to advance the world ?
That one should be easy, You THink?
Does anyone speak with logic?
Do you think that freedom is free?
Simple questions, No?
Wake up world.
Does anyone remember Hitler?
Who stopped him? Socialists, I don’t think so.
Who helped Saudia Arabia get black gold out of the ground?
Do you know how life would be with out American ideas or inventions?
Right now oil keeps the world going and will for a long time.
Are you ready to give up flying?
Is any one getting this?
Thank God I was not elected president with the job of untangling the Gordian mess that now involves us all.
Politics is the art of the possible. I don’t know anyone in America, who could have been elected, who may be able to untie that knot. I think Obama may be the man most suited to that task.
Here’s to President Obama. But, I don’t envy him.
You don’t have a clue!
If Obama is so moral than I am Jesus Christ!
As usual Carter, you offer astute, insightful and eloquent commentary. Thank you!
See this article for what it truly is….. the level of consciousness of Carter and the Company who pays him.
Beautiful and perfect for where they are at. Then look at your response and there you are. Perfect as well. This one as well. We will all be held accountable for what we put out. Live and Write like a prayer. Thank you, Your efforts are greatly appreciated.
Mr. Obama appears to be different from the usual brand of the US Presidents. His intentions as the President of a nation that projects itself as the world leader in economic, political, corporate and military power are ideal and a welcome change. But intentions have to be translated into action. Rhetoric is OK. Action is the test of intensions. He has a chance to be a global ‘ideal’ leader if he is able to bring about a paradigm shift among his egotistic, self-centred countrymen and at the same time convert the existing collective hate of the citizens of the world towards the USA. US style democracy is not the only form of governance. There are alternatives also. Forms of governance are culture specific. The intelligent business people with global vision have learnt this basic mantra. Let us hope that Mr. Obama understnds and respects the religious and cultural diversity. There is no “one best way” of doing things. Best wishes to Mr. Obama, the US President, to bring about a positive change in the world order, but not as perceived by the Americans.
I would simply say that it is too early to tell what sort of preseident or leader Obama will make. I like many people are very very comfortable with his rhetoric but surely the real determination will be what he actually does, what changes will he support that makes our world more just. We can easily be taken in by anyone’s attractive qualities, their family friendliness, us hearing what we want to hera. Let us be cautious and not develop a cult of personality. We have to keep in mind who he has succeeded in office and look beyond the now.
Dear Mr. Ovasdi,
You make some good points, but you are clearly stuck in green postmodern cultural relativism. Read some KW and maybe then you’ll get what makes Obama a new kind of leader.
That President Obama has the full support of people who strive for peace and co-operation between nations,using non-violent methods, is self-evident from tributes already paid worldwide. What I am waiting to see – and to learn from – is how he is going to deal with the enemies from within his own country.
While I realise that every individual human being must take responsibility for his/her own actions, I feel that he also represents what we all aspire to. As John Donne put it, “No man is an island entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main….” Our prayers and hopes go with him as he carries a very heavy burden.
yes i have confidence in President Obama but regret that he has an environment minister or whatever you call them who is pro Genetically modified food stuffs. A pity we in Europe are against it nearly 100 percent.
It is exactly the awareness that change is possible, and first, from within, then leading from there, that will BE the Change we wish to see.
Energize this Awareness. Evolve your Consciousness. Create Joy.
Namaste
I find it naive to glorify Obama as a good one at this stage. How do I know he is not enamored with power? I do like him, he is good looking, sympathetic, surely the format of a statesman – yet, who is he? What do I know of him? If there is any truth in the movie “The Manchurian Candidate”, and I guess there is, how probable is it for a good one to become and stay president? How free is any president to change things these days? What about the rumors that he is Brezinzki’s (sorry for the misspelling) puppet? These rumors may be true or not. What about Guantanamo? What has really changed so far, except that he has generated a lot of hope, a lot of sympathy – which in itself is already much compared to before … but not yet the change he promised, and much less than the change we need collectively.
Vincent – you actually are, if you look at it non-dually.
I would hate to polemicize but I think that the credentials any country’s President has to speak to the world, the moral backup so to speak, can only come from the people he leads. Americans have a lot of moral fortitude for sure, and they like to share their idealistic visions, i find that good in many ways, but that also is perceived by a great part of the world as an intimidating imperialistic use of power. Even Hollywood can be seen as a propaganda tool… And it is prtetty good one in that sense.
I am no expert, but i do not yet see how anything has really changed, sometimes what i feel is that there is a lot of expectation to jump back in the saddle of the good ol times. When America could show the world the way of goodness… I dont think, politically we are quite there yet, and in my understanding there is not really a need to anyone telling anyone else what is right, but looking inside and changing within.
That to say, any effort would be better spent in changing America itself, from within, and seeing the world as a colaborative venture, instead of as a market of ideals… I fear for the come back of status quo.
And to finish, to lead one has to know where he is going, and we will only find this out collectively, in colaboration. Naturally we have to choose between many issues and name apples and oranges without fear, we have to discriminate with lucidity. Still i am still to find hope in any one man (a Leader), without every other man. Or hope in America as a leading country, we dont need this anymore, i’d rather see America as a fraternal country in this world, resolving together the problems of survival for our humanity as a whole, and dreaming of a bright future for all of us…
I personally believe that you don’t need to imprison yourself to liberate others. To institutionalize yourself in any way is to compromise – to serve the institution – to become a servant and not a master. Now you can strive very hard and manfully to integrate some spirituality into politics – this is what the Mahatma did – and he left a lasting legacy. So I think will Obama even though I really feel the contradictions – like sending more troops into Afghanistan and not really taking a tough stance on Guantanamo are equally damning.
Effectiveness and success in worldly terms is what the world is impressed with. But being absolutely honest is very much a personal endeavor that goes beyond worldly praise and blame. The politics is not half as serious as the issue of personal honesty. Its just a game of win and lose in which the world revels ….
I feel that Obama is moving between these two poles – sometimes he is honest and sometimes he is playing a game – he has to being the President of the United States …. he wanted power – so he must play the game.
At the end of the day the organization and institution is the perfect vehicles for human greed and hatred – precisely because they preach the opposite. Only the individual can be truly, truly free ….
I believe that President Obama is far from a moral leader. I voted for him and now I feel betrayed. ” Change we can believe in” has become more of the same. His refusal to investigate the human rights abuses of the previous administration makes him an accessory after the fact. The President has first hand knowledge of acts of torture, rape and murder and refuses by U.S. and Iraqi forces and refuses to hold anyone accountable. This makes him an accessory to these acts. How could anyone call him a moral leader. He uses the excuse that full disclosure would further inflame anti-American sentiment and endanger our troops. I believe that continuing the war in Iraq and further escalating the war in Afghanistan and now Pakistan is what is endangering our soldiers, not to mention thousands of civilians.
Here at home, He is continuing to violate our civil liberties by continuing the warrantless wire tapping and electronic surveillence of Americans. Some say it has increased. He continues to hold people in jail without charge or a trial. All of this in the name of keeping us “safe”. The same excuse as the Bush administration. I propose that they have made us less safe. Now he is proposing to give unprcidented powers over the economy to the Federal Reserve, a private banking cartel. The same cartel that created the present economic collapse. President Obama has proved himself to be a puppet of the banks and the multinational corporations that financed his campaign. I had the sincere hope that real change was possible, but the Obama administration has proved to be as morally bankrupt as the last administration. Like the famous song by The Who says; “Meet the new boss. Same as the old Boss.”
Thank God we’re rid of Bush, a disaster on all fronts, but I disagree with your assessment of Obama’s “progressivism.” He never claimed he was, and those who expected that of him nonetheless have been justifiably disappointed. Intelligent, interesting, charismatic guy, but he made some real bonehead appointments (Vilsack in Agriculture, Salazar in Interior, etc.)
I heard the Sec. of Agriculture putting forth his agenda and wonder why you are negative re: him?
We voted for Obama and change and though brickbats and accusations about him naturally have abounded, I and most Americans welcome this shift in America’s steps toward recovering our moral stance and respect from the family of nations. Is it possible to be in politics and emerge from office unsullied and escape all the advantage-giving opportunities offered? I pray Obama will be an exception to the general rule that tarnishes politicians.
We in Hawaii are rooting for President Obama, our native son, along with the rest of his myriad supporters. Those who are trying to bring him down for being black forget or ignore that he’s half white and brought up by his Caucasian grandfolks. May he persevere and succeed in his efforts to enable America to prosper and shine!
Aloha,
Hi Sooty, re: Prsident Obama
What he is is seemingly a skillful politician who’s been given a really tough job. We may disagree with some of the decisions he’s made but I hope they were made with the best info he had at the time. I feel America is lucky to have gotten him at this time in our history and wonder if anyone else could have offered anyone “better”?
For just the turnaround he and Michelle have given the US’s image, I think that’s a great step in rehabilitating our rep abroad, don’t you?
In the recently discussed book “The Power of Collective Wisdom I present below, he’s characterized as the leading spokesman for Collective Wisdom thinking. I recommend checking out the book. The discussion was on New Dimensions’ radio program (online: New Dimensions) or (online: The Power of Collective Thinking)
re: The Power of Collective Wisdom book
This seems to be a really useful book!
Access to ND online: (New Dimensions radio show)
_________________________________________
WISDOM FOR A GLOBAL TRIBE with Alan Briskin
New Dimensions radio Program #3342 – 1 Hour – Listen Now!
Alan Briskin is a pioneer in the field of organizational learning and cofounder of the Collective Wisdom Initiative. He is co-author of The Power of Collective Wisdom and the Trap of Collective Folly (Berrett-Koehler 2009), winner of the 2010 Nautilus Book Award in Conscious Business and Leadership.
Topics explored in this dialogue:
How you can use both science and mystery in the service of wisdom
What practices your group can use to create the conditions for wisdom to arise
Why disagreement within a group can be the catalyst for deeper wisdom
How you can discern the impact of your decisions on generations to come
Why community is important in these ti
Cont. (The Power of Collective Thinking)
*Why community is important in these times.
I encourage you and all others to check out the book. I hope it gets a lot of attn and circulation. I wish that word of the book gets to the leaders of the world and the UN (who are difficult to communicate with in any way, it seems). The take away from the book could be a manifesto for a universal Constitution, IMO.
Aloha, all!
Hi Sooty:
In defense of President Obama, characterized in the book “The Power of Collective Wisdom”, he’s spoken of as being the most articulate proponent of collective wisdom. Of course that doesn’t guarantee he doesn’t make mistakes but with his challenging agenda dealing with entirely unprecedented issues, can anybody be expected to come up with fail-safe solutions? We wouldn’t want to have the administration sitting on their hands and not acting forthrightly, would we? His legacy will be determined by how the measures the administration has come up with prove, helpful or not. It’s too soon to make definitive judgments, IMO.
Must say I found John T. Bruere comment pretty funny. John says he’s been a lawyer for 40 years, after which he proceeds to deliver a psychological evaluation of Barack Obama that includes the following bit of “pithy” analysis:
“Obama is one of those gifted orators that can messmerize (sic) ( his audiences and make women faint. BUT, he is naive, into himself and has developed the characteristics typical of an abandoned and neglected child, namely, narcistic (sic) traits, deceit, and wanting power to control all of that (sic) around him”
I’m well aware that attorneys must also be psychologists, Mr. Bruere; but typos aside, if that is not the perfect description of many lawyers I have known, I don’t know what is. Perhaps your rant is based on some measure of self-knowledge you prefer to project onto others rather than face by looking in the mirror.
No offense. dude. Just wonderin’ :-)
A year ago I was on Omaha beach where president Obama gave a talk a few weeks ago.
When I saw that man, I was on my knees facing what he had the courage to express : morality, dignity, freedom, attention, strengh, openness…
This man is definitely in touch with a much bigger context than most of other political leaders…
I am happy to see that this blog is starting out as a study in diversity. I am very happy with President Obama’s efforts so far, even though he has done some things I don’t like. What I see most of all in the responses of this blog are the same arguments I hear daily on the 24/7 news channels – that this is one impatient country, still immature on many levels. We want what we want and we want it NOW, by God (even though we don’t agree of much of what it is that we want)! This country is going to take time to morph into a country that recognizes and respects that, while we are currently powerful and prosperous and immensely lucky in every sense of the word, we are not the end-all and be-all of the entire world.
Obama is establishing a new way of speaking and acting which comes closer than any president in my memory has done on describing an attitude and the values which I admire in people and nations. It will take some time for the structures themselves to change. He is, after all, only one man and he is taking immense heat from the far reaches of both sides of the political continuum; he needs to have a fair share of ego and spine to stand up to the barrage of commentary aimed squarely at him.
Anyone who thought they were electing a pacifist needs to go back and see what he said from the get-go – that Afghanistan should not have been left to languish. Mostly though, guys, its 6 months for crying out loud; there has been plenty of change so far.
We in Hawaii are so proud that President Obama spent a great part of his life in Hawaii and was educated here. The Hawaiian culture has a technique of settling contentionish issues called hooponopono (HOH-oh-poh-noh-POH-noh) where all parties meet with a mediator who agree to resolve the situation in a satisfactory way to all parties, allowing all to speak about their perspectives. I believe Obama has taken this approach to the White House, speaking about being agreeable to discuss with even our adversaries in world politics. I believe this will prove productive and hope for the changes in world affairs that will bring about more understnding and peace. Aloha,
All these comments are quite interesting. The truth of the matter is that the world is one of opposites, black/white, yin/yang, good/bad, etc. You can’t have one without the other. Peace/not peace. The nature of man is survival and freedom. When push comes to shove survival and being right will always win. The history of the world proves this. At this point in time we are a little more civil and sophisticated about playing the game but ultimately it is the same game. O’Bama, I don’t trust him or the people he has surrounded himself with. He obviously has his own ideas of how to go about things. It looks like to me that his message isn’t about personal responsibility, freedom, and peace. It’s that we are incapable of thinking for ourselves and managing our own lives. Anyone who wants to take from those who have accomplished success in their lives and give it to those who haven’t isn’t my guy. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is the goal for all, not socialism. Peace in our time and all time? I’m for it. The only way I see it happening is for all governments to operate on the same principle, freedom. Good luck to humanity.
Hi Cinder, your opinion re: President Obama’s assuming “that we are incapable of thinking for ourselves and managing our own lives.”
Maybe you being such an informed person are offended by anyone insinuating you’re so incapable. I submit that many Americans are not as informed as you are and that as a collective entity as a nation, there is a need not only for being brought up to speed but also in getting everyone on the same page as the elected President is attempting to have happen. Without leadership and respect for the Administration’s attempts to govern, America would not be the United States that has made us the leading nation we have become. Not only I believe that President Obama is the leading and strongest champion of collective wisdom and of human rights currently and . I’m disappointed you don’t recognize this and IMO we are fortunate to have him and Mrs Obama at this point in our history.
Obama is velvet glove which has been put on to cover Uncle Sam’s old gnarly hand , involved for many years in senseless slaughter, environmental degradation, political and financial corruption. Wonderful, the voters, to their credit, picked a really lovely glove! It proves that the people have good taste.
But my question is “What is the hand doing?” Who controls the hand? We have had a shadow government for many years– people who manipulated Uncle Sam’s puppet strings, privatized the Federal Reserve, made the regulations that the banks followed to pull us down into an underworld of shoddy financial dealings. Now that we have been brought down, who do we go to for help? We have to go to the same international players who corrupted our political system and brought the monetary system down in the first place! What do they want? The New World Order – and ultimate control of the world financial system? Will they get it? Tune in next time.
The very idea of BO as a “moral leader” is a farce.
The man is a politician, a con artist of the first water.
This dreamy eyed love affair has no place in a study of true enlightenment.
Another 20,000 troops into Afghanistan. Sure, a real Messiah of Peace.
Obama not enamored with power, well then perhaps the Pope is not enamored with Christianity. I think that the record is clear on this point. In my lifetime at least I have seen only one President, Lyndon Johnson, who had as strong an ambition to be the one who wields power in the political system. He has spent most of his adult life running for President, although he had to settle for a time for a mere seat in the Senate. Now he is presiding over one of the greatest expansions of governmental power in peacetime in our history, second perhaps only to FDR. Straddling moral fences, saying something to please as many as possible, and engaging in high flow rhetoric is hardly a substitute for making hard moral choices. At least one good thing can be said about the President and the use of power-that he is not a pacifist. At times, e.g. in regard to Iran, he hasa Carter like moments, but that is not the real Obama. For that we should be thankful.
I have reread the comments on this site three times and, while at first I thought it was good that both sides of the political narrative were represented, ultimately I am left with a sense of great discouragement. If these are the articulate opinions of a burgeoning enlightened world society, I’ll drop out. Ego, anger, paranoia all well represented; the more positive and thoughtful comments appear to come from non-Americans. The same ugly attitudes on display that don’t invite dialogue, just rancor. Ugh!
Drone bombing innocent people? Giving away trillions of working peoples tax dollars to gambling bank institutions? Protecting the Bush administration from investigation and prosecution? Maintaining the same secretive executive branch secrecy of the Bush administration? Protecting those who ordered and carried out illegal wiretapping of US citizens? You call this a courageous and progressive President?
For a self-proclaimed “enlightened” publication, you do an excellent job of parroting the propaganda of politicians. I read a compendium of re-constituted campaign descriptions of Obama by his adulating supporters, vague commentary without direct connection to the man, and rote assertions that the utterance of general virtues apply to him without a shred of evidence, logic, or supporting argument.
I am very sincere in my exasperation with self-appointed “intellectuals” who actually do not know how to think. If the human race survives, it will not be as a result of, but rather in spite of, the benighted self-appointed, mutually congratulating group of pseudo-intellectual thinking that appears to typify your publication.
Out in the middle of the ocean where its surface is a few miles above its floor, there float algae subject to the oscillating motions of the surface waves. When carried down a few inches or feet into the troughs of these waves, they undoubtedly see themselves as creatures of the deep, much as your writers apparently see themselves as deep thinkers. If you attempt to rebut this analogy, please rely on some other argument than the fact that algae can’t think, since that characteristic is obviously just as true for your writers. You preposterously offer Obama as a moral leader without feeling any need to define what is meant by morality. Of course this has its own internal logic, since what you do write is strong evidence you don’t have a clue as to the definition of “moral code,” which — by definition — means you have no idea what you are actually talking about.
I have seen examples of far more enlightened thinking from reasonably intelligent high school students, so my first experiences with your publication will be my last, since I don’t have time for such less-than-sophomoric drivel. In fairness, I do owe you thanks for the almost hilarious amusement you provided me when — after being tempted by your self-described “enlightened” thinking — I actually sampled your wares.
What a load of absolute drivel! How can you call yourselves enlightened if you don’t realise that Obama is just another in the line of puppet leaders who is following the dictates of the global elite who are running this planet and taking us to the brink of destruction. Obama has no more say in things than you or I and he is merely following orders. If he did not follow the specific orders of the elite’s very clear agenda he would just get wasted like all the other pioneers, including presidents, who have stood in the way of the very obvious new world order the elite rulers tell us we are heading towards. In fact he has been specifically prepared and programmed to take us to the final stages of the new world police state that is unfolding before our eyes with clarity each new day.
Surely your main purpose at enlightennext is to enlighten people about the great global conspiracy we find ourselves caught up in which is the sad but true reality of what we are experiencing in the world. For goodness sake please do your homework, please do the research about what’s really going on here before you publish anything else that could deceive people in to thinking that this illusion, this grand hoax, is real.
To be enlightened we have to know the truth so please start publishing the truth. I look forward to reading and hearing the truth on your website from now on. I don’t want to read any more drivel. Thank you.
The vitriol and hatred of the last two comments is astonishing – while outrightly attacking the opinion expressed in the article, there is no solution offered for a better future – only cynicism, and a tearing down of others’ ideas. This to me is an expression of using one’s voice as a vehicle for hatred without actually offering the readers here a better solution, if as you’ve expressed, you seem to know much better. Let’s hear it! I read only anger, nastiness and it’s very dark and sad. Please do enlighten us if you have all the answers.
Here’s your enlightenment.
Barack Obama offered solutions: End the war,Open and transparent biPartisan government, no lobbyists in cabinet, a full reading and complete debate before signing any bill, reduction of national debt, reduction of deficit, etc.
He has failed WHEN GIVEN THE CHANCE to employ these solutions.
He has only just done what he had to do to get the moderate, centrist independent vote, then fed them to the lions.
Anger and vitriol often result from such deception.
JA, the earlier couple of comments were critiquing the article, not providing a solution to world’s problems. Don’t expect so much from those who are merely expressing an opinion on an article, not writing a book.
Government does not create wealth. Obama has promised to steal more and more money from wealth generating people and hand it over to those who love sloth. Never in the history of earth has Darwinian theory so badly turned upside down. Obama will be a one time president and a couple of years from now, those people who said that Bush was the worst American president ever will say that they were wrong that nothing could be worse than Bush. Obama has never held a wealth creating job. He was a so-called community leader, which these days pass for a job, which depends on by right seizing from Paul to give to Peter.
In the end, Obama and Bush are nothing but signs of the start of the end of the Western civilisation. So sad, Americans cannot see what their worldviews have got them into. Historically, Americans believed in hard work. Now, they believe that wealth can be created by the Fed. They want something for nothing. This leads to social bankrupcy and degenerated morality. Yes, the author of this articles indeed fails to see this. His analysis is very shallow.
It has suddenly occured to me what it is that has made true moral heroes out of Mathatma Ghandi, Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandella. In spite of the overwhelming reasons for wanting to lash out with anger and hatred and rage (and rightly so) at the perpetrators of the violence and the savaging of their people with sickening results, people bashed senseless, little children bombed and blown to peices, murder and torture – none of them retaliated. I can only imagine the bearing and containment of outrage that must have had to have happened in order for Ghandi, King and Mandella to succeed in not succumbing to all out warfare and bloodshed and enter the frey of neverending violence with violence.
Enter Barack Obama, who is in a unique position of being elected not as a nonviolent community leader, but as president of the United States. This is a new kind of leader, because of Obama’s very big global perspective, and also because we are living in a new era where new means are needed to work with the world – the idea of using non violence say by sending troops to parts of the world for a non violent sit in, would not work I don’t think anymore – stronger newer and perhasp firmer approaches are needed. This is the challenge for Barack Obama – to have a care for the whole (world) by engaging with it as president of the US, but to balance that with the challenging position of also having to be very strong and decisive when needed, which may or may not include armed force.
Jayant, thanks for your response. What I hear in your comment though is a lack of faith in Barack Obama. Basically what I see is a decent human being, who does have some backbone and is not just a 60′s idealist, who sincerely wants to give his very best shot at being president of the US, with all its inherent constraints – how challenging that would be. I think we should allow him trial and error to some degree, to work with the systems that are in place and try different ones (as much as he is able to within the boundaries of the presidency) if those systems don’t work. The difference is faith and positivity about the future. Whereas I hear (or read) nothing but cynicism and ‘the end of the world is nigh’ from the other two comments, and even (with all due respect) somewhat in yours. If there is nothing hopeful to look forward to, then why don’t we all lie down and die now…that is the point. What ideas would work…., not just predicting the downfall of America, which offers nothing but a depressing outlook! Sincerely…….
Moral leaders can come from the side of power as well as the side of resistance (or should I say non resistance). Obama will never be a Gandhi or a Mandela. Lets face it – as the President of the US he must KILL when this is perceived as necessary for the US to stay on top. But in killing other human beings he will be more sensitive and less self-deceiving than Bush. We need to appreciate that he has a huge balancing exercise to perform – to integrate different points of view and manage them without going to extremes. Bush was an extremist in some ways. Obama we hope will be much less so. Personally I like the guy – he inspires us and offers some hope. This does not mean he has to be perfect.
Above all politicians the world over, and in fact anyone who enters the violent and corrupt thicket of exercising power over others can learn from him. He is faithful to his wife and family and he appears genuine. These basic facets make him a man we can trust – not always perhaps but most of the time.
He is a lamp I will use when I need to. In these times we need light from many lamps. It would be foolish with all due respect to throw stones at it.
Hi JA:
“Faith” is a superstitious world. In the so-called progressive culture of today, not having this is seen as being cynical. No, I am not cynical, just realistic. I moved to North America to realise an American dream—and I have, for which I am grateful for this great country.
But look at what is happening in today’s America. You are stripped off at the airports, your women and children are felt by the hooligans at TSA. And Obama is only worsening this, now bringing in new regulations against Canadians.
There is no history of avoidance of contract in American judiciary. Obama abrogated on the contract that Chrysler had towards its bondholders, by calling them speculators. What Obamam did is daylight robbery. He is a man of no principles. The result American dollar fell overnight, quite rightly. Obama installed a female Hispanic at a judge to the Supreme Court. American was a meritocracy. I don’t care if a person is black or female or white. I want competencies. A judge is supposed to judge based on the Constitution, not on “empathy”. Obama is supposed to be a lawyer. Did he ever pass his exams?
Obama can indeed say all the nice things. Why shouldn’t he? He does not have to work to create wealth. The best he can do is re-distribute wealth from wealth generators to losers. As I write, hundreds of American are moving their money out of the country, for they are sensible to understand that unlike what millions of Jews did by staying put in Hitler’s Germany, they must move out in time.
American President has a virtual God-like (but mostly destructive) strength. There is no place for trial and error here, JA. Any one with integrity would avoid this position unless he knew how to hold it. Obama is naive (and power-hungry) and so are those people who cannot see this. The world is smitten by Obama as a teenage, stupid girl get smitten by a bully.
What you don’t get is JA that government can only at best provide law and order (even at which it mostly does a horrible job). It cannot provide for economic development. Founding Fathers understood this. But no one now looks at the American Constitution these days.
I write these words not because I hate America, but because I deeply care of it and would hate to see this only bastion of liberty fall into pieces. But this is now unavoidable, given Obama, who has now created almost a 10 trillion dollar debt for the US in merely few months. This cannot be paid and American must economically and then spiritually go bankrupt.
When the soul of America is Business, what can another President do? In business, a person acts first in his self interest, and his share holders, and worry about his employees, the vendors and finally the society at large if the profit margin allows it; any social service is done, if it helps in enhancing the business image.
Barack Obama is the President of a large corporation called America who wants to be the one and only power in the globe and he will do whatever it takes to protect American interests. May be he does it more sophisticatedly and smoothly.
The fact that America still spends more money on warfare than any country, and produces more than 50% of all world’s war machinary, it is imperative that America is not inclined towards the overall wellnes of the globe and the humanity.
In this global village, we need a global moral leader who will create a paradigm shift in thinking, and move away from wars, and show transpareancy in the governments expenditure, and set a new trend by reducing the expenditure on defence. If Obama can convince the American public to contribute more towards the global well being, than spend more money on protecting themselves, he will set a new direction for the world to follow.
Imagine asking Americans to vote for 10 Billion towards African education instead of Afghan war!! Would he ever do that?
All I can say right now is what an overwhelming job Barack Obama has ahead of him. With all that was inherited by previous governments and all that stretches ahead , including the many things that have to be attended to, some of which have been mentioned already such as the dire state of the economy. I guess time will tell in the long run (it’s been less than 6 months into the presidency) what Obama’s imprint will be. Obama did say in his acceptance speech that the job ahead was going to be very difficult (being an absolute realist), and for people not to get swept up by the miracle (in my opinion) of the first black man to be elected as President of the US. There’s much more to it than that. My sense is that he’s going to need a lot of spiritual fortitude and development and accessing high states of consciousness in order to really make a big difference, and that then his impact on the world could be absolutely phenomenal. What a challenge ahead, I’m in awe of anyone willing to take that on if there motives are good (which I do think Obama’s are) especially with millions of people critiquing every move.
When the ether wears off, let me know. Where was the President when Iranians were being killed in their streets for trying to peacefully protest their elections? He was waiting for the polls to come in and tell him what his reaction should be…about 5 days too late. May I suggest that true “world” leaders not run for political office? Obama ran for President of the US, and the oath to which he swore was to serve and protect the US as well as to uphold its constitution. He did not run for president of the world. By his own oath he is to first and foremost serve the interests of the US and its citizens, not use the position to serve the rest of the world. If he truly wanted to serve the rest of the world, he easily could have assumed another leadership role and/or created one for himself. So, by the very fact that he wanted to serve the rest of the world but ran for political office that is to serve one country first, I suggest he is not the moral champion you purport. MLK, Ghandi, Mother Teresa, etc etc; they were not politicians, right? And please, I love your website and writings, etc, and every contributor seems extremely well-read, educated and intelligent. So, when you overlook the gross inconsistencies Obama has shown between what he promised and has done, what he said before being elected and his “restatements”, his corrupt Chicago political ties, the bills he is now trying to pass, his unwillingness to follow his own set of guidelines for “transparency”, etc etc it is clear to most everyone that anyone supposing Obama is a moral leader is simply and willfully overlooking what is right in front of their eyes: Obama is the preeminent politician that is taking you for a ride. I feel terribly sorry for all of the so called intellectuals; but don’t worry, America is bigger and better than all of them combined, and I feel certain that we will, as usual, come to your rescue some time soon.
If President Obama does not accomplish anything else as president, he has already left a powerful legacy.
As a psychologist I have for some time studied what I call personal myth – which is things that you believe about yourself that either empower or impose limits on who you are and what you can do. It is the negative personal myths that fascinate me the most – limitations we impose on ourselves, often with no rational justification.
I have seen the personal myths in action of a wide range of people, and have spoken with people about their personal myths. Often, people are not aware that they have imposed such limitations on themselves, and talking with them about those myths takes away some of their power. A convicted felon, for example, believed a college education would not benefit him because of his conviction. I suggested he could just as easily be in business for himself as work at the minimum wage job he had relegated himself to.
I have also studied race and race relations here in east Tennessee. Part of that study, especially interviews with many people over the years, have led me to understand that a lot of black people in this area – and outside this area – have personal myths that they cannot get ahead because they are black.
Obama’s contribution lies here: All of these personal myths that use race to self-impose limitations are now seriously questionable.
Hi Kent,
You’ve made a very good point about Barack Obama already leaving a powerful legacy, because it is absolutely inspiring to see that Obama shot out of nowhere, on a determined trajectory, without letting anything get in his way, self doubt, racism etc. He transcended all limitations and didn’t allow anything to stop him going for the presidency. That, if people thought about the strength and determination of what that takes, is quite something and good it’s been acknowledged and recognized – what he has already overcome and proved about his character to the world.
**** Oooobama is an Angel showing Us Evolution on Earth in Practical-Action !!!! :We Lucky to have Him !!!!!!
Carter nails it. But I think he could go one step further in using Spiral Dynamics or the evolution of personal consciousness to explain how moral certainly and moral decisions change based on where one’s center of gravity resides within the spiral.
The old debate about pacifism vs. moral use of power is actually not an either/or dictate to be made, both in fact are correct based on context.
Without all the numerous levels of moral development in this world we would have a another set of problems, other than the arguments we currently have over who’s morals are best. Without someone willing to stand up and fight against tyranny, we’d be ruled by sociopaths like Stalin, Pol Pot and Hitler. Pacifism in the face of such people, or movements, just makes the job of eliminating the opposition that much easier for the tyrant. However, pacifism in the face of many other types of social problems or against unjust Govts can be much more effective than the use of force.
So as always, context, context, context. History tells us this.
I often use the invasion of Tibet as an example of how different actions are correct for different people based on their own evolutionary level. For the monks who simply refused to fight and died for it, they did what was most important for their level. They valued their spiritual principles above their physical mortality. For those who fought the communist invasion, they did what they thought was right in standing up against tyranny. Neither one can claim ultimate truth in the path they chose in my opinion. But one thing is clear, without the people willing to fight for freedom, those who choose pacifism would probably never know what freedom was or is. People at both levels of development need to understand where the other is coming from and acknowledge its validity (which unfortunately is not going to happen unless you’re already second tier).
The integral perspective aims to maintain the health of the spiral, and it seems like Integral Politics would ask the question, “What kind of leader is most appropriate for the current center of gravity of this nation?” These questions are the ones that lead Steve McIntosh to assert (in EnlightenNext) that Singapore needed a heavy does of blue to unite the 5 disparate ethnic reds before they could move to a more US styled orange democracy. Imposing a democracy which values individual freedoms and rights with the assumptions of our constitution is only capable in an environment where the cultural values align; in other settings it leads to pure power domination by the largest and most powerful group. I’d like to evaluate our President from this question, trying to ask from the Integral Perspective what does our country need? How can we allow all the values to develop into healthy manifestations?
Reading Obama’s book and speeches, he seems to be a very SDi green (postmodern, egalitarian valued) president. This could well be my own projection, but he constantly asserts that we are all one people with the same values, the same needs, the same etc. etc. etc. There should be great wealth redistribution, equality in health care, free higher education, and so forth. His morality seems to be informed by the common good and does not seem to recognize that we have vastly different approaches to seeing and making decisions in the world and that some of these are more appropriate or valid in certain situations than others. Ask Obama to comment on the idea that “all excellence is elitist” and see if he agrees. Ask him if he won the election because he has excelled, because he has a clearer moral vision – or ask him if it because the common man has spoken, because so many individuals have supported him in grassroots efforts, because his policies give the greater distribution of power and government action to the people.
A postmodern president may be exactly what the US needs to pull our center of gravity up towards second tier, because you have to go through each stage to get there. But it may not. That’s the question I’d like to see discussed, and the framework I’d like to view a President in when judging their actions.
I believe most overlook, or fail to understand what power is, & how to use it most effectively.
I believe power for the flesh, or physical world maxes out, & is limited to the five senses, but the power of creation is limited only by belief. Personally, I believe in the power of love, or God, over the power of any physical creation of destruction.
My words may not have meaning to those who don't understand the differance between liberal, & conservative in the way I'm thinking (my liberal side is the side that is from spirit, & my conservative side is the side that experiances from 5 senses).
I believe Obama understands the higher power aspects & how to effect change that way.
With great sadness I see that B. Obama has again gone back on another basic promise upon which he was elected. The tours of duty in Afghanistan and Iraq have been extended.
His appointment of violent criminals and committed “social engineers”, the like unseen in high government since Maoist China, makes the article appear a facade or illusion by a promoter or at best, another mistaken assessment.
9-11 truthers have no place in a government which regularly derides citizens who protest as “conspiracy theorists” (Van Jones), nor are economic advisors to be selected from avowed Communist revolutionaries, unless the candidate for President makes clear his intentions prior to elections . Obama did not, but rather lied in order to lull moderate centralists, and pacifists, into his camp.
Dear Carter:
I was drawn to this blog from the enticement quote in Issue 45 of EnlightenNext, which stated your premise herein as “Does Obama’s willingness to take a strong moral stand represent a new kind of leadership among progressives?”
I was compelled to inquire, since I was confused by your premise. Are you inferring that Obama is a new kind of president who takes a strong moral stand as compared to past presidents? If so, I respectfully disagree with you.
Morality is based on a code of ethics, and Obama’s code seems to dismiss the core integrity in each person: the innate potential with which we are all born. Growing government implies that people are incapable of helping themselves, and makes people dependent on the government. This does not develop peoples’ potential; it squashes it. This creates meaninglessness and fosters unrest, which, according to Obama’s path of solutions, would be met with government control. This is sounding like a dictatorship, not a democracy.
On that same note, I find Obama extremely A-moral in his haste to execute policies of extreme irresponsibility, notably the outrageous level of national debt and the medical reform bill that is too contorted to even implement. What kind of moral basis promotes insolvency and ignorant decision-making? That is not the basis of growth but of demise.
Obama and his administration is stripping the potential of people and pocketing it into the seats of government. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with your comment in the article above when you say that “Liberals are often quite uncomfortable around the use of power.” As I witness this administration, it seems that they are seized with the need to accumulate power and wield force… which is also in disagreement with your comment that “Moral courage…has meant speaking truth to power more than it has wielding power and force…with moral courage.”
Obama’s charisma feigns the sound of inspiration, but his practices are saying that people cannot take care of themselves and that the government must take over. Who thrives in that scenario? Not the people who are suppose to be represented, but the people who have been voted into power. If the power that has been democratically imparted to representatives morphs into force, then a dictatorship is born; if the power remains with the people, then democracy is sustained.
When government can responsibly represent people, and people can be encouraged and supported to step into their responsibilities for personal development and collective contribution, then there is a unity in community design. In this scenario, one finds the pulse of human potential rising and the role of government officials as supportive, not dictatorial.
I do not believe, as you laud, that Obama “inspires the best…in us all”. His words can sound delicious as they are spoken, but the outcomes of his practices are bitter. Change for the sake of change does not necessarily produce improvement. National and global improvement will occur when the power in peoples’ potential can be realized and government yields to its supportive role in that realization!
Respectfully submitted,
Mary Beth
Sadly, throughout history, many — including those with strong spiritual inclinations — have confused secular leaders that exude powerful charisma with archetypal bearers of light, with deeply negative consequences. Certainly, breaking the barrier that had limited the presidency to white males is to be cheered. But Obama will be judged on his policies, many of which wrongly replace individual conscience and initiative with government mandate, and personal responsibility with state-directed social engineering. Many of us do not all believe he is The One, but see a politician disposed toward hubris, and we are wary of what so much unearned adulation by his admirers will bring.
The Acorn scandal, the NEA conference call scandal, trillion dollar deficit, Government owned Banks, Government owned car companies, failed foreign policy opology tour, cash for clunkers boondoggle, bullying in health care bill, appointed unvetted csar’s of questionable character, ignoring the contitution of the United States. Yes what a gift we have here. Obama not only wanted to be the first Black president, he wants to be the first third term president. They are singing Obama songs in grade school for the love of God. Obama is a fraud…definately a socialist and bordering on marxist. America is a great country and it will not submit, it will fight to perserve our democracy at any cost.
We voted for Obama and change and though brickbats and accusations about him naturally have abounded, I and most Americans welcome this shift in America’s steps toward recovering our moral stance and respect from the family of nations. Is it possible to be in politics and emerge from office unsullied and escape all the advantage-giving opportunities offered? I pray Obama will be an exception to the general rule that tarnishes politicians.
We in Hawaii are rooting for President Obama, our native son, along with the rest of his myriad supporters. Those who are trying to bring him down for being black forget or ignore that he’s half white and brought up by his Caucasian grandfolks. May he persevere and succeed in his efforts to enable America to prosper and shine!
Aloha,
What a great choice in conferring the Nobel Peace Prize on our President Obama! Unexpected and for some much too premature, his work only just getting started after just 9 months in office. But I believe just on the basis of his
1) Restoring the projection our true values to the world after the lamentable performance of the previous administration
2) Putting us back on the track of representing peace and human rights and justice for all
3) Respresenting a credible image of America as honorable once more
4) Giving hope and promise of more dialogue with even adversaries in the interest of furthering beter understanding instead of American hegemony in world affairs
In Hawaii there’s the technique called Hooponopono (HO-oh-poh-noh-POH-noh) where the interested parties meet with a mediator with the understanding to come to a point of conciliation. After a prayer, all express their points, speaking of agreed common interests and hopefully coming to a resolution. I wonder if Obama is influenced this way? His Peace Prize is a confirmation of the Family of Nation’s hope of his fulfilling his promise to further world peace and human rights. Let’s wish him well in fulfulling his promise and doing his work!
Aloha, all!
Sorry, Frank L., but I see very little evidence that Obama is “Putting us back on the track of representing peace and human rights and justice for all.” His support for Hugo Chavez and compatriots is a sad betrayal of those who are struggling for human rights against leftwing dictators. And his unwillingness to meet with the Dalai Lama was rather shameful.
Hi, Stephen:
Are you thinking he can accomplish his agenda in his 9 months of office? Given the complexity and range of challenges, we’ll be lucky if he gets to resolve half successfully. Security is top priority, resusitating the economy, those I see at the top of the list. You can add to list as everyone does. Did you hear his UN speech? I heartened me to hear that mission statement. I hope he’ll get the support of the family of nations instead of the way the previous administration took , the US hegemony enforced. Give the man time. The biggest change he’s wrought already is the feeling of hope rather than the gloom the Bush people inflicted on the US and the world. For that alone, I feel his prize was warranted. Aloha,
Internationally, who has President Obama given ‘hope’ to? Contrary to media and cultural propaganda, The United States of America is NOT the World.
Americans are yet to confront their narrow-minded insularity. Until this is done and the average American truly starts to understand that America IS NOT the World, rather IT IS a part, and a small part of at that, then and only then can there be any HOPE of real dialogue that could put us on the road to longtetm peace.
Hitler also made some speeches and gave Germans the HOPE of bringing them to world domination. Words without condign action only bring FALSE HOPE and has the potential of lulling the listener/’believers’ into a state of blind, unquestioning acceptance of any action that follows.
Personally, I am deeply saddened that the Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to an individual who is so new on the World stage and whose policies are yet to stand the test of time. Has this award been reduced to the level of the Oscars? One performance in a 12-month period or even less, is all that it takes?
Try as I might, the notion of equating President Obama to the Dalai Lama, Nelson Mandela or Mother Theresa all of whom have lived LIFETIMES following paths of peace, love and compassion is little short of nauseating to me.
Furthermore, the fact that he has accepted the Award does little to raise or solidify his level of integrity or convince me of him having a true understanding of or commitment to what it will take to bring some semblance of peace or real hope to this greed driven and fear-filled planet.
Please do not be blinded by false hope and thereby abdicate your responsibility to think, rationalize and see things for what they are rather than what makes you feel good in the moment. In so doing you run the risk of becoming a passive and willing victim of ‘star-quality’, charisma, rhetoric and propaganda, none of which will ever bring World Peace into fruition.
PS. I am not Jewish, anti- American, anti-Black or anti-establishment.
Hi Amber, re: Who Barack has given hope to?
Okay, a lot of the huge enthusiasm has died down and folks (including you?)are very impatient with getting results. I still feel most Americans are willing to go along and still support the president with reservations about how things are being handled. I believe most Americans still feel the great sense of relief that our country is now in the hands of an administration that’s trying to enact measures that will prove beneficial for most. What seems to be true is that worldwide, the majority of the people express a renewed respect for the present president as opposed to the former one and that seems to translate to a renewed more positive regard for the US in general. I think that’s a big deal, don’t you? I think we are lucky to have had President and Mrs. Obama come to the aid of our country at this time when they seem to be just what we needed.
Let’s see how things go and wish them well.
Frank, it’s not a question of whether he’s had time to accomplish his agenda; it’s a question of just how misguided so much of his agenda is.
Focusing on human rights, my point is that his inclination is to appease leftwing dicatators — how does that advance human rights?
A good column: “Does Obama Believe in Human Rights,” by Brett Stephens, at:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB30001424052748704500604574481341183751038.html
This is a fascinating forum. How is it that the author and so many of the commentors have missed the fact that Obama represents the moneyed corporate interests who have no morality? For example, the whole point of health care as structured in the US is to make a profit. Obama has made a deal with Big Pharma and with the insurance companies to protect their profits at the expense of our health and well being. And what about the billions that went to the financial institutions whose reckless behavior triggered the financial meltdown? Just 2 examples of Obama’s betrayal of the values he purports to uphold. That said, I think he’s probably a decent person who thinks he’s doing the right thing, sad to say.
Isn’t it a tad early in the game to raise President Obama to such a high pedestal? History will no doubt be the judge. In the mean time, overweening labelling may simply be yet another form of ‘burying one’s head in the sand’ not to mention propaganda! What has this man truly done to foster World Peace, OR to be so deserving of a Nobel Peace Prize? And does he really believe that he deserves it?
No doubt is a very talented orator, along other famous figures in history. Does the author of a book believe or base their life on the story that they are telling. Let history be the judge OR at the very least, let’s wait until he has completed his term of office before we start applying labels particularly moral ones.
Amber: Are you dismissing that President Obama has absolutely revised the low opinion the rest of the world held prior to his being elected by a huge majority of Americans and with strong endorsement from the rest of the world? I don’t think this is trivial and hope you don’t think so as well. For this alone, I’m grateful to him, to Mrs Obama and his charming family now in the White House. Nay-sayers have a tendency to denigrate anything the Dems have accomplished. If you check, you might find they have accomplished quite a bit and against all the opposition of nay-sayers.
Yes, his legacy will only be seen with time. I hope he will be able to bring about his attempts to improve the dismal situation brought about by his predecessors.
Hello Kate, re: “How is it that the author and so many of the commentors have missed the fact that Obama represents the moneyed corporate interests who have no morality?”
I hope I’m not being the first to point out to you that politics is a game of compromise. You must know that money makes the world go round, even (surprise!) with politics! It’s not that money is intrinsically evil but depends on the objectives of the utilizaton of it. If corporation leaders have humanistic values (which also include providing employment for their employees and maintaining their families) the corporation will exhibit humanistic responsibilites and values. I understand there are those exemplary ones, the ones who paid out salaries and bonuses to workers, who have re-deployed employees rather than firing them. I don’t want to bash corporations carte blanche and after all, would you rather we be a less prosperous ambitious nation? This doesn’t mean irresposible greed and malpractices but only that we instill reponsibility and make CEOs
accountable, starting with their insatiable need for their incomprensibly high salaries and bonuses.
Hi Stephen, re: “Focusing on human rights, my point is that his inclination is to appease leftwing dicatators — how does that advance human rights?”
Obama tells us he’s ready to listen to opposition and he’s doing that re: undemocratic leaders and those who differ with our democratic ways or the administration’s direction. Have you noticed that those kinds of leaders hate to appear to be swayed and will appear to be intransigent when I seem to note that China has given ground as inconspicuously as possible. This is a ploy of these people. As we see the family of nations is not giving ground to N. Korea or Iran at America’s strong instigation.
In the book “The Power of Collective Thinking”, it’s maintained that President Obama is the most articulate spokesman for this way of thinking that keeps doors open to more democratic and collective thinking. In Hawaii, where Obama was brought up, the ancients and even we today have the technique of Hooponopono which convenes all interested parties who meet with a mediator to come to a better way to proceed in a dispute than in acrimony. I would like to believe this concept has influenced our president.
Let’s wait and see how things spin out and not predict negative objections too soon.
Aloha,
It’s fascinating to read such strong criticism of the President at this point in time, when he’s been awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace (which he also admits is not about accomplishment, but anticipation and possibility). He continues to inspire the world even when his actions seem to reflect an old approach. There’s the rub. Stay tuned, folks.
Of course President Obama’s legacy will be the proof of the pudding and all those overly lauding his election and those seeing him negatively will then be sorted out as to who’s right or wrong in their assessment. Coming after Bush and that Administration, anybody would have been an improvement but if democracy gains a ground in the Mid East as a result of our changing Iraq’s regime, I think history will not be so harsh in assessing Bush’s Iraq war.
What I wonder is if any politian who leaves off being so, if that’s really possible, can not become really enriched by his being in office? With all the opportunities to become so, he’d need to be so squeakily stalwartly moral or like me a total doofus at making money. It would be interesting to make a list of those rare creatures who didn’t enrich themselves unduly, a short list I’d bet. I think there are many who start off intending to stay clean and free from temptation but wind up co-opted. I hope Obama will be able to be on that short list but he’s human and it’s way too early in the game. I think ego and often the women who goad the men to cave and give in to temptation.
The authors of the book “The Power of Collective Thinking” asserts that President Obama is the most articulate spokesman for the concept of the book and by extension for human rights and democratic universal values. OK, his speeches are wonderfully composed and delivered but rhetoric and then performance are two different things. I support him and hope he’s not just whistling “Aloha Oe”.
It seems that Science and it’s proponents have exerted a hegemony on intellectuality, regarding others as less intellectually valid and even dismissing them as unqualified in discussing truth. We now see those dissed others pushing back and putting some scientific beliefs into question. Is it a matter of a monopolistic intellectual dynamic fostering a reaction/overreaction and that what’s occurring is a putting matters of regarding truth in balance, where the spiritual is a necessary part of our humaness and must be respected as such?
First of all I second the notion of others who have spoken before that this article was extremely premature.
It is also disappointing to see such an inspirational outlet of information as EnlightenNext resort to stoking the flames partisanship (even if inadvertently) by putting politicians on pedestals and seeking to make near-gurus out of them. Barack Obama may be a welcome change from the previous administration’s obvious missteps, but that is only possible by a contextual comparison. Intelligent and thoughtful as he may be, President Obama is hardly the enlightened leader we have been waiting for. He may well prove to be just another politician, and by his record in office so far I would counter that it cannot be “claimed” that he agrees with or supports the visions of this group. In fact some of his decisions have already proved a significant disappointment. We are seeing the effects of this in the Gulf of Mexico right now as he cedes to the pressure of corporations to protect themselves rather than take the reigns of the problem himself and find ways to protect the environment first.
The ease with which we are willing to lift anyone to such messianic status highlights that we are still as a society plagued by our own inner self-doubts, holding to false beliefs we are unable to carry out great acts of change ourselves such that we must instead put all our hopes and dreams on invented heroes. But heroes quickly become scapegoats when they dont meet our impossible standards, imposed by internal archetypal patterns as old as time. When we stop worshiping gurus, we will be able to step ourselves.
I’m with you Allen! The inflation & then demonization of Obama makes it nearly impossible to rationally assess the merits/faults of his administration. It says more about those making the statements than it does about Obama. Going by the rhetoric, he’s both a greedy capitalist and a communist dictator! He’s a continuation of the capitalist system and yet is destroying the capitalist system (which apparently has never really been tried anyway). It’d be better if the citizenry could just honestly debate among themselves overhow to fix our country’s problems, assuming we can even agree on what the problems are, and all have an equal desire to solve them, compromise, or make any necessary sacrifices.
Let’s take the Gulf oil spill. The rules were already there, but weren’t properly enforced. Both BP and members of the US government were at fault, that much is clear.
Offshore drilling is too costly (Obama, wisely, later decided to put a moratorium on it) and we ultimately need to get off oil, period. But something had to be done to fix the immediate problem. Reforming the regulatory process is good, but isn’t an immediate solution. We had to find out what BP did wrong and get them to pay for clean up (while trying not to cause a row with Britain). If the fed gov just took over – though it would create temporary jobs and help the local environment & economy of the affected areas – after the stimulus, bank bailouts, and controversial healthcare legislation, it wouldn’t get enough support from congress or taxpayers. Ideologues would paint him as a tyrant. But giving BP all the responsibility made the clean up take too long, and the longterm damage was too costly. He should have directly intervened, even if it was unpopular, assuming of course the gov could even do better job.
A limerick I submit re: President Obama:
__________
“Could you cut me some slack, I beg—please?
It’s a tough job as anyone sees.
I inherited this,
All I get is more dis—
Since elected, I hardly get z’s!”
Though overwhelmingly popularly elected, President Barack Obama is being denigrated for not accomplishing the miracles all those then-supporters were hoping he’d effect.