On Marianne Williamson

Rose Cross of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn

Marianne Williamson intrigues me in many ways, but I'm not sure why. On one hand, I think she has a huge ego (self--small 's'), but on the other hand, I think there's a real sense of integrity that might override the ego. She's mindful of it, which is another way of saying that she has the various random "wills" figured out. To be mindful of mindfulness means it has to have some effect in reality. The intentions have to be clear--as they do in any activity. Do we want to practice mindfulness just because it's trendy?

Bruce Lipton talks about this in his book Biology of Belief. Most of us are under the control of the black box of unfree will, and we work off of this pattern of beliefs throughout our lives. Being mindful of this is the first step to establishing new thought patterns, ultimately played out at the cellular level. If this is true, this works positively for her. But she was raised in an upper-middle-class family and already had good programming. She has a “white box” which she would have had even without practicing A Course in Miracles (a psycho-spiritual practice as a means of transforming the inner spiritual life). If you ever watch her ACIM lectures, you'll recognize your own life challenges addressed, and see logical ways of moving forward.

What may look like the result of spiritual practice was already predetermined. What was predetermined is the proclivity to be open to that set of possibilities, so it's more of having a broad view of life--which is not uncommon for someone with an intellectual bent. When you read widely (she studied comparative religions), it is easier to see similarities in areas of knowledge. So she's decidedly NOT political (polemical) but suffuses politics with activism through her inspiration from Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi, and even Gnostic philosophies (the Hermeticists).

The book I'm currently reading Decoding Reality has a good explanation of how "willing" works:

(On randomness versus determination): "This is a hugely controversial area, with various proponents of religion, science, and philosophy all having a quite contrasting set of views....Could it be that some events just don’t have first causes?...The answer to this impacts on whether there is any room for genuinely free action in and ordered and structured universe like ours. If the laws of reality govern everything, and even our actions would be subjugated and determined by them. This of course leaves no room for the human element of free will." (p. 153)

Daniel Kahnemann's System 1/System 2 theory also applies:  She simply might be too System 2--as was Obama. She couldn't be System 1 because she'd lose all her integrity. It is more than clear that integrity is no longer a requirement for the presidency unless the behavior is consistent with the true ego self. It's the 'S's that can get confused. Marianne once commented that Eckhart Tolle has achieved enlightenment (capital S). Alas, a president no longer needs to know the Self and can be more effective appealing to the reptilian part. We all have a System 1 running in the background, but it's hard to see what's in it, unlike System 2 which is wide open.

Running for president even if you know you won't win is actually smart in some ways because it buys you an audience on mainstream channels. But even if the ideas are compelling and interesting, it won't necessarily impact policy and governance in office. One would hope that the nominee will be inspired by her ideas, and if elected, appoint her to a cabinet position. (She'd make an excellent SOS because of her cross-cultural empathy--she has a huge following across the world). She has done well as a lecturer for quite a long time. But I wonder how she manages the compartmentalization of spiritual practice and politics when politics is now all about corruption--a game she could never play--even if it had some other higher goals (a gray area). She was doing the obligatory "dog and pony show" with "hats and flags" which ultimately infects spirituality. Can you imagine creating a jingoistic hat and flag for spirituality, all made by low-wage slaves in a third-world country? Her followers wouldn't be making the hats and flags by the thousands as volunteers--although they might--until they realize that hats and flags represent nothing about the serious issues that form the realpolitik.