Many spiritually advanced people I know (not coweringly religious, mind you, but deeply spiritual) identify Obama as a Lightworker, that rare kind of attuned being who has the ability to lead us not merely to new foreign policies or health care plans or whatnot, but who can actually help usher in a new way of being on the planet, of relating and connecting and engaging with this bizarre earthly experiment. These kinds of people actually help us evolve. They are philosophers and peacemakers of a very high order, and they speak not just to reason or emotion, but to the soul.
Mark Morford, San Francisco Chronicle, “Is Obama an enlightened being? Spiritual wise ones say: This sure ain’t no ordinary politician. You buying it?
There is something important about the ongoing deification of Barack Obama. But it’s not easy to identify. Yes, if viewed in light of other, relatively recent self-proclaimed leftist Godheads like Hitler, Lenin, and Mao, it is disturbing. But then, these men ushered in their leftist ideologies. Their promises of a secular utopia were fresh and exciting. Their followers had just been through wars and revolutions. They were psyched, as the saying goes, ripe for the appearance of a larger-than-life leader. They were convinced that their God had failed them and were ready to follow a secular one who promised heaven on earth in the here and now.
By contrast, Barack has come late to the party. His flock is not expecting him to start a secular religion, but to save one that is drowning in failure, marked by debt, moral decay, and nihilism. Woodrow Wilson shredded the Constitution in order to create a more perfect union than the one established by the nation’s founders. Franklin Roosevelt advanced Wilson’s cause by expanding the role of federal government into the daily lives of Americans far beyond the Constitutional mandate. Jack Kennedy “proved” that utopia was possible by building a model called “Camelot” right in the middle of Washington, D.C. And Bill Clinton freed Americans from the chains of conventional Christian morality by publicly flaunting his barnyard appetites.
Indeed, in the last half century, the Democratic leaders have succeeded in all but banning the transcendent God from the party’s ranks. They have rid themselves of the foolishness of faith; of the burden of conventional morals, customs, and values; of the folly of the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman; of society’s obligation to love and to protect the unborn; and of the hypocrisy of patriotism. And yet, their Marxian vision of a heaven on earth goes unrealized. Their dreams are unfulfilled. Their thoughts are uneasy, dominated by class hatred, fear, and greed. They know no joy. Clearly, they are in need of a Messiah to lead them out of this wilderness.
And then, miracle of miracles, yonder comes a visionary, a man with an exotic name, exotic heritage, and an exotic past, who promises that his presidency will be remembered as the moment when “the rise of the oceans began slow and our planet began to heal;” who publicly mocks the enemies of his deistic vision, accusing them of “clinging” to their guns and religion. Raise high the roof beam carpenters “The One” has arrived to fill the void. A man has appeared on the scene whose charisma is so great that it sends “a thrill up the leg” of the popular liberal political commentator Chris Matthews.
Rabi Alan L. Mittleman explained the need that created the Barack phenomenon as follows in August/September 1992 issue of First Things.
The constitutive human hunger for ultimacy of purpose, transcendent confirmation of values, solace in the face of death, remains. If the human experience is essentially a religious one, then secular modernity is less a religion-free zone than a religion of its own, a religion of radical this-worldliness. Secular modernity, with its careful effort to bracket ultimate issues of life’s meaning and goal out of civil life, acquires the status of a surrogate religion and becomes a source of profound disquietude for those thinkers who have pierced its banal surface and discovered its mythic core.
Now the question that begs an answer is whether any of this matters. And the answer is yes, it matters a great deal. Americans should fear a president who promotes the notion that he is on a mission from God, or fails to refute this claim when others make it. Edmund Burke, the father of modern day conservatism described the danger as follows:
The cause of civil liberty and civil government gains as little as that of religion by this confusion of duties. Those who quit their proper character, to assume what does not belong to them, are, for the greater part, ignorant both of the character they leave, and of the character they assume. Wholly unacquainted with the world in which they are so fond of meddling and inexperienced in all its affairs, on which they pronounce with so much confidence, they have nothing of politics but the passions they excite.
On a broader front, Americans should fear any political party that promotes the growth of a religion that recognizes no guidance other than the immediate hatreds and appetites of its followers. Such a party is the carrier of disease that will eventually destroy the nation.
In her classic 1996 book, Holding Up A Mirror, How Civilizations Decline, British scholar Anne Glyn-Jones discusses and describes the process by which a society turns away from its ideological beliefs to what she describes as a “sensate” or materialistic formulation, which is the predecessor to outright decay. The dust jacket of her books describes this transformation as follows:
History shows that Empires rise as they turn away from religion to science, but then decline because without an underpinning of religious belief, the morality that holds society together inevitably falls away. In the West today the triumph of materialist philosophies has transformed living standards, but declining moral standards are destroying what has been achieved, as crime escalates and personal relationships (especially between the sexes) turn sour, encompassing the inevitable spread of sexually transmitted diseases and the breakdown of families. In a secular society the arts turn increasingly to sensationalism, until violence and explicit sex coalesce in the amalgam of pornography. Despair and disgust ride rampant, and in a final gesture of evolutionary futility, communities cease even to reproduce themselves.
She describes such a society as follows:
In a society in which materialism is the only reality recognized, the purpose of life is fulfillment in the here and now, the pursuit of happiness, which is increasingly interpreted in material terms . . . Europe and America since the eighteenth century clearly exemplify this trend, as did Greece of the third and subsequent centuries BC. Roman writers themselves identified the second century BC as the period when values of their own society began to shift towards what we would now call consumerism. The pursuit of happiness is worthless unless each individual can pursue his own definition of what for him constitutes happiness; thus individualism is a marked characteristic of hedonistic societies. In the early phases of the evolution from a society based on otherworldly tenets, a vestigial absolute moral order may remain, but absolutes give way to relatives. Law is brought into conformity with the demand for maximum choice in the pursuit of personal fulfillment, subject only to constraints where conduct might lead to unhappiness for others.
When contemplating this circumstance, it is tempting for conservatives to withdraw into their own communities and seek to ignore the corruption, greed, and licentiousness that is characteristic of societies governed under the auspices of a secular religion. But it is important for them to understand that they will not be allowed this luxury. The principal characteristic of the secular Godhead is to demand that everyone participate in his foolhardy dream. And this brings us back to Hitler, Mao, and Lenin, who together killed quite literally hundreds of millions of innocent people because they either refused to buy into their utopian scams or were deemed unfit to participate.
The answer then is to fight back. Cling to your religion, for it will protect you from fear in the battles that lie ahead. And cling to your guns, not simply because they may protect you from physical harm, but because they are a potent symbol of your right and duty as an American to take personal responsibility for the protection of yourself, for your family, and for those who need your protection. When you give up this right, you have surrendered your freedom and you will never get it back.
Barack Hussein Obama knows the symbolism of the gun, and he hates it, just as he hates all of the private associations and institutions that rival the power and reach of the great all-seeing government in Washington.
God bless and Godspeed.