"Oprah: Prophet, Priestess … Queen?"
Seriously?
Haven't we had enough of celebrities yes?
This woman is a shameless hustler simply striving to increase her wealth! I always want to ask people like Oprah and the Koch boys: How much money do you really need and to what levels will you stoop to satisfy your obsession with money!
3
Oprah has deep, sincere moral compass. Something we haven't seen much of before or since President Obama. I wouldn't mind calling Oprah POTUS!
3
The politics is considered as a Master of All Arts . Oprah Winfrey has , as is publicly known at this time , chosen not to run for any public office . The State Craft is not as simple as a for Business person , Anchor person and others based on populist movements , trends , short term agenda items and
opportunities to fill the political void if any . Rather requires opportunities
Statesmanship , knowledge of World and regional history, and a strategic vision deliberated and developed as a proven leader , it is complicated . There have been several proven experiences in scores of countries across the world since the Second World War , particularly in former Colonies after their independence , ruled by authoritarian and in name only democratic rulers with all kinds of training and disciplines . A few grand stories emerged in last several decades , mostly only of outstanding politicians , who were able to lead their countries both during the tough challenges of economy , the War and peace . What do you think ?
Appreciate the attempt to deal with these issues, but you need to more fully develop this notion of "American religion," which I think in your formulation is more like civil or civic religion; you want this to be about faith, but it is really about a politics of profound respect for the original American idea of perfecting themselves and their Union / community. And that brings us all together in the grandest human idea yet created.
1
"[I]n between secularism and traditionalism lies the most American approach to matters of faith: a religious individualism that blurs the line between the God out there and the God Within, a gnostic spirituality that constantly promises access to a secret and personalized wisdom, a gospel of health and wealth that insists that the true spiritual adept will find both happiness and money, a do-it-yourself form of faith that encourages syncretism and relativism and the pursuit of 'your truth' ..."
There's a strange kind of Follow Your Bliss-ism -- or a distortion thereof -- that has arisen as conventional religion has imploded. The Gospel of Wealth has a large following among, and may or may not be helpful to, the haven't-quite-made-its, that is, certain middle-class types who aspire to the success they see the wealthy have attained. Periods of mass value- or belief-transition often look like ours.
You once said that if people hated the Religious Right, wait until they see the Post-Religious Right. I know precisely what you meant. The Left, for its part, with its Heaven on Earth-ism, is marvelously entangled in this confusion over what justice is, what fairness is, what equality is, what freedom and democracy are. They haven't concrete goals so much as hazy but ecstatic reveries: feelings over facts, intentions over outcomes.
Oprah, besides being absurd, would likely be a disaster as president. But little the People do surprises me now. Down with hierarchy! Up with ... Oprah?
1
Like so many in the increasingly tired commentariat, Father Doubt That has taken one speech at an awards show and created the foundation for a presidential candidacy only 34 months from now. Will the Times now assign Amy Chozick to dutifully trudge around after Oprah like they did Hillary well over two years before Clinton declared a candidacy?
The idea of an Oprah candidacy is purely reactionary to Trump. As Colbert put it, she really is a billionaire and really is a TV star.
Despite Stephen Miller’s sputtering outrage, Oprah really is self made, unlike Trump, who got a start with a million of daddy’s dollars, then got bailed out by daddy illegally buying several million in chips from one of Trump’s struggling casinos. Unlike habitual word salad tosser Trump, Oprah can deliver an articulate, inspiring speech. Perhaps the biggest contrast is that Oprah popularized the book club, and Donald Trump has never even read the books he is alleged to have written.
It is understandable to pine for an articulate person with respect for the written word over the current occupant of the White House. That is far from saying that she is the anointed one, or that she will even be a candidate.
5
I admire Oprah's charisma and intelligence, but she is not qualified to run for president. I wish Shirley Chisholm could return from the dead to seize this moment.
Run, Anita Hill, run. That would be karmic "justice."
3
Perhaps Oprah will skip the mere presidency altogether (now that Trump has debased it) and opt for apotheosis. With $3B on hand she should be able to manage deification.
The problem with theology in general is that it does not submit itself to rational scrutiny. It cannot be updated to address new learning.
Ad hoc theology exacerbates this problem by not having any central doctrinal guidance. Thus we experience Branch Davidians and Jim Jones and the like.
But even doctrinal theology has sins to account for: the crusades, the inquisition, etc. And the accounting we need is not in the flavor of 'those were not good Christians' but rather 'this is how our doctrine might have led to or condoned those atrocities, and this is what we've done about it.'
But that runs dangerously close to a reliance on human reason, and we wouldn't want to go there.
2
America needs something other than "sheer unpredictable weirdness" in order to redeem itself at the altar of global trust...
I'd like to see a race in 2020 between Donald and Oprah. Sort of a choice between the person who presented Trump University to the world and the person who presented Suzanne Somers' hormone injections and vitamin regimen routine to the world.
1
Douthat, distrust a woman.
The Republican bought media, in all forms, that dominate the airwaves, the radio, TV, internet, lobbying, tweeting-- 10X the amount over Liberal voices of all kinds. Oprah is a star.
Be suspiiocus and denigrate anybody who is not a front runner in your party, the party of the monied interests. America is no longer a Republic, thanks to you and/or partisan blinders.
1
The GOP hasn't been serious about carrying out the Nation's business for the benefit of the People for a long time.
It has been interested in these things: advancing a Plutocracy and maintaining power by playing to Right Wing Authoritarian/Fundamentalist passions, fostering militarism, creating cynicism, gas-lighting issues and solutions, lies, breeding fear of difference and challenges to passe' norms, and last but not least outright voter suppression.
They no more care about the REAL message of JC than Putin cares about fair politics.
Conservatives like you Ross should intellectually join forces with Progressive scientific non-ideological nonreligious secular Christian Citizens like me to shape some good policies. That is if you could give up your inner insistence that religious traditionalism trumps all other considerations.
Pope Francis's statement that "Blessed are those who look into the eyes of the abandoned and marginalized and show them their closeness" should drive you to support the Dems over GOP in my mind.
Oprah - a left leaning version of DJT - should stay out of it - and the Dems should ensure she does and offer us a splendid real political candidate with real qualifications, real objectives and goals, and potential wide appeal and real charisma.
I would not vote for a DJT or the current GOP. I doubt a real Jesus would. Believe we both would vote D! Only moral choice really. Join us Ross - not just on DJT but on your reps too.
1
Do people not realize the desperation that this prospect represents? That the once and proud Democratic Party, home to statesmen like FDR and Kennedy would turn to the cult of celebrity to save them from irrelevancy is just so pathetic, and sad. Who will be her running mate? Dr. Phil?
5
Ross is exactly right about Oprah. A false prophet of a prosperity Gospel (the Osteen comparison is apt). As Newsweek once published in ‘09: “In real life, she has almost nothing in common with most of her viewers. She is an unapproachable billionaire with a private jet and homes around the country who hangs out with movie stars. She is not married and has no children.” To me, she’s a dangerous charlatan who tries to convince people she cares about them — something Trump never really makes an effort to do. Despite her speech at the Golden Globes, which was adequate for the occasion, she’s intellectually incurious and a master self-promoter. If all we can do is succeed Trump with her, I weep for the Republic.
2
Couching Oprah's importance in religous terms is only really pertinent if you view the world primarily through a religious lens. Fundamentally, what Oprah was doing with her text selection (and has always done to one degree or another) was to allow people, primarily women, to feel intellectually competent, relevant and even smart- some for the very first time in their lives. I don't know what Oprah really believes... what I do know is that unlike Osteen, and other "not-for-profit/prohets" Oprah wasn't really hawking her own books or ideology. She met her audience where it was and urged them to reach a little more. I simply can't really find much wrong with that.
4
I can't believe people seriously think Oprah should try to go for the presidency. Another total amateur from the world of television? Should US politics remain a joke forever?
4
Sorry, while Oprah may have been successful as a talk show host, I'm not ever going to see her celebrity status on the par of Pope Francis...
I respected and admired Oprah Winfrey until 2007 when she gave Jenny McCarthy an opportunity to spew misinformation on Oprah that caused the deaths of 9000 children. Until then, I trusted her as a journalist. She should have done more research before supporting McCarthy's allegations. Oprah viewers trusted her and believed in her. If Oprah says so, then it must be true, right? No, it was all lies fabricated by Andrew Wakefield. The last thing America needs is another celebrity billionaire without any experience in government.
2
Oprah has been the de facto queen of the US for decades. Remember, it was Oprah who was called on to comfort the country after 9/11. It's Oprah (when she had her show) who public figures turned to for public affirmation and absolution. Her custom is celebrated by merchants as proudly as that of Britain's Elizabeth ("purveyors to the crown" & "Oprah's favorite things". And it's Oprah presence that provides gravitas to cultural events.
A queen performs a very different function than a president/prime minister, one that transcends political weather. And although I'm sure Oprah could excel at anything she set her mind to, her true value to the world is as our queen. We can't afford to lose that.
Oprah is not "our queen." She is a strong and intelligent woman, a self-made billionaire, a non-liar, a non-braggart, a non-bully. Today she is helping her neighbors who were caught in the mud slide in Montecito.
Where is Trump? In Puerto Rico helping his fellow Americans who still don't have electricity?
3
Thank you Mr. Douthat. Oprah has inflicted a who's who of fake and fraudulent on the American public. Added to those pseudo-mystics and pseudo-philosophers you mentioned one could add Dr. Phil, Doctor Oz, Jenny McCarthy, Suzanne Summers and too many others. Imagine the cabinet president Oprah might assemble. I suspect it would rival the band of bothers Trump has foisted on us. Gwyneth Paltrow as Surgeon General? Chopra as Secretary of Cosmic Energy? Is there no charlatan she won't anoint with the mantle of Oprah sainthood?
I admit that making a lot of money requires a certain kind of intelligence, an intelligence boosted by the steroids of ambition and invincible self-confidence. But making a lot of money has little to do with governing. Jefferson was essentially bankrupt when he died as was Grant. Lincoln was what we would call middle class today. Truman was barely staying afloat before his career in politics and lived modestly after the presidency. Americans, much like the "stable genius" in the White House, seem to think that there is a direct correlation between bank balance and IQ. Einstein makes more money in death than he ever did in life.
2
Being a TV star, having a gossipy magazine, and giving a good speech, does not make one presidential material. We have been down this road a couple of time already, one Trump, is turning out to be a disaster. The other, Obama, had one success and was mediocre for the rest of his term.
Our experience with Trump, I would hope should teach us that there is more to government than making promises and being able to read a room. We need to stop buying the sizzle and start buying the steak.
2
Ross's litany of insults to religions and religious teachers he dislikes, includes "Rob Bell, an erstwhile evangelical megachurch pastor who has reinvented himself as an itinerant preacher of the vaguest sort of Christianity."
(Can a megachurch pastor be an itinerant preacher at the same time?)
And what's wrong with "the vaguest sort of Christianity?" Isn't that less arrogant than imagining a Creator who cares about the order in which the candles on the altar are lit?
http://dominican-liturgy.blogspot.com/2011/05/dominican-candle-lighting....
So many middle-aged white men finding every reason in the book why our nation's most financially successful, inspiring, communicative, and popular Black Woman in history, filled with phenomenal leadership gifts, should not run for President. So very many middle-aged white men.
4
Phil Donahue lost to Oprah who led the dumbing down of daytime TV, took it from journalism and drama to gossip and celebrity non-news.
I can see her Cabinet starting with Jerry Springer at State, Vanna White as Secretary of Education, Dr. Oz as secretary of Health and Human services, Montel Williams as Secretary of Defense, Judge Joe Brown as Secretary of Justice, Ricky Lake as Press Secretary, Sally Jessey Raphael as Special Counsel, Steve Wilkos a Secretary of Homeland Security, Maury Povich at the CIA, Jenny Jones as UN Ambassador and the casts of The View and The Chew as the Supreme Court, and on and on and on.
What could be worse, the current presidential entourage?
5
The only thing constant about religion is its inevitability. If you let people believe what they want, they will believe anything. If organized religion is good for anything, it's to keep a lid on the worst excesses of zealotry - and it doesn't always succeed!
Ross, you hold yourself out to be a Catholic conservative. So when Trump shows up, it obviously offends you, I get that. Because he pretends to be you.
Your heart and mind are both offended by that just as Roy Moore offends you.
People who pretend to be you offend you, They hold themselves up as religious conservatives like you albeit obviously psychologically ill or deficient.
However, where your personal rubber really leaves the road is when you try and define the other two of your own categories in this piece: secular (science) and religiosity individually. Let me help you--the formers are the fake yous (Trump and Moore.) Oprah is the real thing.
Perhaps you might look to your own historical Catholic mystics and perhaps investigate their claims which were systematically eradicated by your own et al churches, Perhaps you might look at Buddhism. You might find some answers about the false dichotomy you construct between scientific-(ethical) secularism, and a religious individuality.
To paraphrase the Dali Lama: if something is true spiritually, it will be proved
scientifically.
3
Buddhism is another religion in which women are incapable of achieving enlightenment.
https://berkleycenter.georgetown.edu/forum/can-women-become-leaders-in-t...
Good grief, people (Ross included)! Are your memories so short and your souls so traumatized by Donald Trump that you've forgotten about the rapturous praise heaped on this bunch of white male Actor/Entertainer Politician: Ronald Reagan, Sonny Bono, Clint Eastwood, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Al Franken, Jesse Ventura, Fred Grandy, and Fred Thompson, and for THEIR move into politics??? Why in the world would it be more ridiculous for Oprah be President? I would posit that Oprah is more intellectual and better read, better attuned to the average person (look at her hard-scrabble childhood) and with more ability to think with business-like strategy (now she's a billionaire) than all of those aforementioned men put together. She would make a fine politician and would at least express interest in finding out what she doesn't know (which always helps any person in office). As well, she would put the ability to negotiate diplomacy above declarations of war instead of the testosterone-fueled Reagan and Trump approach to governing. I would welcome her common sense and sense of purpose.
5
It's very worrisome that anyone would think Oprah should run for president. It's already difficult for serious people with political experience to run for office and get their ideas heard - they are drowned out by big money, simplistic sound bites, and people with more charisma than sense. Unlike Trump, Oprah seems like a decent person, and her wealth was not handed to her - she actually earned it. But her lack of relevant experience should disqualify her. Her touting of snake oil salesmen and New-Age garbage ("The Secret" etc.) makes her clearly unsuitable for president. It is so obvious, and it worries me that people don't realize this. If our obsession with celebrity has gone this far, we're in even deeper trouble than I'd thought.
5
On Sunday night & the Golden Globes, The recipient of this year's Cecil B. Demille Award, Oprah Winfrey; gave an inspiring speech about integrity, the struggle for acceptance based on merit, self-worth & the belief that our best efforts should be enough to gain us recognition & the path out from being controlled by a powerful force intent on using us for their own benefits. While the speech was filled of what it is to be a girl or woman (with special emphasis on African Americans) under the dominance of white men, it was also about the power of truth & the power of speaking out against those abuses & the abusers; putting the heat on them; their corruption & their utter inability to change without being confronted by the havoc they create.
Many commentators have opined Oprah's powerful speech as an opening salvo of a bid for the most powerful elected position in the land.
Yet others have compared her to another side show huckster pushing her own brand of snake oil onto an unsuspecting audience, desperate for a miracle cure for life's woes.
To me, Oprah's speech was reminiscent & an echo of another speech from another time, especially when she alluded to the future saying, "So I want all the girls watching here & now to know a new day is on the horizon..." It was rousing & invigorating. In those words I heard an echo of Dr. Martin Luther King's Mountaintop speech.
Oprah's strength is in the power of speech which can motivate us to be better than we are, just as Dr. King did.
4
Perhaps we first need a preparatory figure. For some reason your column brought to my mind the idea of John or Jane the Jester, reworking the old Monty Python “I Didn’t Expect The Spanish Inquisition” sketch for our hyper-partisan, social media, supposed war-on-Christmas, force-out-Franken-without-a-hearing time and place.
Don't blame Oprah for being an opportunist. Oprah abhors a vacuum, and the Democrats have provided a yawning chasm of one. The only faces we routinely see on the public stage are the two tsk-tsking schoolmarms Schumer and Pelosi. Anyone of real passion, like Bernie Sanders, who proposes a truly progressive vision, that would invariably discomfit wealthy donors, is quickly packed off to Siberia.
5
Old Bernie and "Doctor" Jane went to Moscow on their honeymoon. They would love a free trip to Siberia.
Given the moribund, anemic state of the Democrat Party, Oprah is the perfect candidate. But the reality is that she, like so much of Hollywood and media froth, is a huge distraction from dealing with the hard political and economic policy concerns facing the middle and working class families and relating to our small businesses, our need for military and infrastructure modernization, our avoidance of future military adventurism, and universal healthcare.
3
What we really don't need in our next president is another TV celebrity with no experience in governing. Add in the evangelical aura, and the idea becomes truly offensive. What ever happened to statesmanship?
6
Please, no more actors or celebrities or pastors as politicians. PLEASE. I cannot wait for America to grow up and realize that professionalism in politicians is a good thing. You can argue for term limits, but let's stop arguing for people who are on TV, successful or not. (Oprah at least IS a successful businessperson, unlike our current Prez) Being able to communicate is not the same thing as having any ideas in the first place, or any aptitude for the job, as we are now seeing. Enough already.
4
Oprah is truly a self-made success, unlike Trump. the things she has overcome are staggering. And, she isn't that impressed with herself. Rather, she seems to be quite appreciative of her success, good fortune or blessedness, and delivers the goods on her unique ability to help others. I love that about her. I'm certainly not alone.
A bucket full of empathy, Oprah wants to share her wealth of wisdom, hard-earned and won. She wants to be her best and she wants that for us too. Genuinely. None of us will ever be Oprah, but I'm all in any and every day if it means we have a leader who cares about people and is able to demonstrate humility and, most importantly, gratitude. Oprah as President would really show that men's time is indeed up. You think ol' Mitch and Jeff are struggling with the Orange Man, wait till they have to deal with a woman in the Oval Office.
3
Thank you. Please add a rich and ripened intellectual curiosity bearing beautiful fruits to the list of the gifts she brings.
Many, many, many here give her the magic communicator wand only to quickly follow up with the great condescension, wrapping it up with a shudder and a plea not to run. Oh, will the voters flock to her, while the pundits look down on her and pummel her!
We need experienced leaders - not celebrities. Oprah is light years ahead of Trump in every way but she is still primarily a celebrity. For all of her charm and intelligence, the fact that she is seriously considered as a political candidate for President of the United States tells just how weak our two-party electoral system and our government has become.
3
Lest we cash Oprah too quickly to the side, what alternatives do we have? Could you possibly imagine Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders in a general election? We might as well just hand it to Trump in 2020.
1
Agree. The anti-Oprah commenters offer no suggestions for alternatives.
And no, I cannot imagine Elizabeth or Old Bernie in a general election.
They will both be there, but as supporting characters.
HEY! Oprah has definitely paid everyone who ever worked for her. Never grabbed anyone by the whatever. Not run a fraudulent university. Didn't inherit the hundreds of millions that our current POTUS used to punch his way to the White House. She runs a creative organization, mentors hundreds of people, and, for cryeye, she gives away cars! Am guessing she is current on most important issues. And when out of her depth, would bring in top talent. Ross, PFFTTTTT
Hope she won't run, though. Because this non-television household would regret seeing a bright entrepreneur with a big heart demolished by the lowest common denominators out there. You know who they are, Ross. Those smug, sanctified, self-absorbed, twits trying to turn the USA into a banana republic or theocracy. Take your pick. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
4
The problem with this analysis is that it presumes that Oprah's place in society is identical to her role in TV culture. It isn't. I don't watch Oprah, but I like and respect her. Oprah's fame and likability transcend her viewership; her political base, should she choose to run, would care less about her New Age beliefs than Douthat does. The country at large would regard her spirituality in the same way it regards that of other candidates -- as peripheral to the question of whether she'd be effective in office. Of course, there would be partisans on both sides to whom her metaphysical beliefs would be critically important. But for the rest of us, the rise of Oprah would represent a welcome acknowledgement that our country is actually more diverse than might be surmised by a look at government forms that ask people to check a box labeled Christian, Jewish, Muslim or Other. Perhaps, after an administration that flirts with white supremacists, a celebration of "Otherness" is just what America needs.
4
In a strange way, losing weight is today’s equivalent of being saved and Oprah made her journey there as important as its destination.
1
Oprah could win in a landslide - and Winning is all that matters. Experience can be delegated to a professional bureaucracy.
Note that the President runs the country and the world, not the government. The government is run by systems and the bureaucracy.
Only a landslide will wash the Trumpsters down the drain, swamp the Republican's anti-democratic vote rigging, and redeem America from our nightmare.
We Need a Landslide.
David Axelrod's theory that Presidents are followed by their opposites is well considered. And you can't get more opposite than Oprah!
Plus she has a good heart and good instincts, and she knows how to sell. Oprah has character and compassion and integrity - that's all you need to be a Good President.
Most important: Celebrities know how to win over audiences (that's the definition of celebrity). Celebrity is why Trump, the world's least qualified candidate, won in spite of the odds.
Every single non-white would vote for her, as well as most whites, to stick it back to the Trumpsters. People would rise off their death-beds to vote.
Revenge is what marched the Trumpsters to the polls, not competence or qualifications, because emotion motivates turnout, not reason. Reason rationalizes emotion, never the other way around.
It's simple: no charisma > no turnout > no landslide = more Trump.
Do you want to Win, or would you rather field another qualified Loser??
3
It's my banal observation that in general the most charismatic candidates win election, especially at the Presidential level, and that many faults fatal for another competitor are forgiven because people just plain like the candidate. Oprah can make people feel good about themselves, possibly bring back Ronald Reagan's sense of "morning in America". I think she could win no matter what dirt gets thrown at her, and she is smart enough to know what she doesn't know and bring in advisers (Obama? Hillary?) to help her fill in the gaps. Hope she decides to run.
2
While Oprah and Trump are both extremely wealthy and both entertainers, that's pretty much where their similarities end. There are some very important points about Oprah that you are glossing over: her devotion to improvement; her inclusive style of leadership; her acknowledgement and acceptance of constructive criticism; her ability to apologize; and, most importantly, her interest in the health and well-being of the American public.
For all that I have had personal qualms about some of her stances on issues of health, I have no doubts that she is invested in making the US a better place to live, with healthier people, vibrant institutions, and an interest in the wider world. Compare this this with the man currently running the White House--his divisive and drastic hits to the working class to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy; his undercutting of the press, academia, scientific inquiry and a fair justice system; and his disinterest in how the rest of the world works. When I see the contrast, I cringe--and am willing to entertain President Oprah Winfrey.
Heart counts for a lot.
8
Ms. Winfrey may be a step up from Mr. Trump, but that's still far from acceptable. We don't need another inexperienced celebrity as POTUS. Her accomplishments include mentoring Dr. Phil (her VP?), another self-promoting celebrity (and not licensed as a psychologist, BTW). Enough with big egos, we need a statesperson: " ... a politician, diplomat or other notable public figure who has had a long and respected career at the national or international level." (Wikipedia) Example: Colin Powell: During his military career, Powell, a four star general, also served as National Security Advisor (1987–1989), as Commander of the U.S. Army Forces Command (1989) and as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (1989–1993), holding the latter position during the Persian Gulf War. Powell was the first, and so far the only, African American to serve on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He was the 65th United States Secretary of State. Unfortunately for us, Gen. Powell has been too intelligent to get involved in a presidential run. Not many like him around for the next election.
3
More than a spiritual leader, I see Oprah as a motivational figure. And what she says resonates. Whether it is taking control of our health, finding things to celebrate in our every day life, or facing painful parts of the past head-on, Ms. Winfrey shows us the way and uses herself as the model.
May she use her gifts to motivate everyone to reshape our country by voting, this year and in 2020. That would be her best gift to the political world.
6
This is a perfect column:
A writer who believes in the truth of the virgin birth, the trinity and the infallibility of his No. 1 priest takes a thousand words to patronizingly explain that Oprah Winfrey's spirituality is suspect.
Ross Douthat just gets funnier & funnier.
17
And don't forget that he also believes in the talking snake story, the one where a talking snake told Eve to eat a forbidden fruit and Eve listened to the snake, ate the fruit, thereby bringing evil and suffering into the world. Not only does Mr. Douthat believe that snakes talk, something that I knew was not true by age 4, he also buys the story that woman is responsible for all the ills of the world.
Presumably he also believe the Bible fairy tale about Eve being made from a rib taken from Adam. Apparently Douthat and the other believers never bothered to count ribs, or they would have learned that men and women have an equal number of ribs.
This elevation of the neophyte ms winfrey to some sort of political godhead will simply harden the dis-education of America. in the 19th century, women like ms Eddy got away with Christian Science,(a dying "religion" now), because there basically was no understanding of science or medicine in American society. it took decades of hard work by MDs as well as the Carnegie-Rockefeller commissions to turn the awful US hospital and medical education vacuum into a working, modern system, pushing "Christian Science" medicine to the edges of mystical hucksterism where it belonged and died a slow death. I hope she stays on TV and is given no platform by legit media, or we might be ruled by a Democratic Nancy Reagan clone, and her Amazons.
Best she doesn't get any ideas she is seriously able. Please-the Times can keep her in the E section to ensure a lack of coverage.
4
Ross, calling a prophet a prophetess is a put-down. The "ess" means little, less. Less than a real prophet, who would be a man, presumably. You do that in your 5th paragraph. And in the headline, Oprah is called a priestess. Little, less. Less than a real priest, a man, according to your "sort of Christianity."
(Oprah was meant to be named Orpha, after the character in the Book of Ruth, the only character in the bible who chooses to return to the land and gods of her people and goes unpunished. But the name was misspelled.)
Why attempt to belittle Oprah with the offensive language? A prophet is a prophet. A priest is a priest. Will you call her Presidentess?
8
Perhaps a less combative approach might be better. After all, Ross is using the existing definition of -ess (a suffix forming distinctively feminine nouns), and you are the one that is trying to evolve our language away from it's sexist underpinning - a cause that Ross would likely understand and support.
Men who can't bear the thought of women in responsible positions invent "distinctively feminine nouns" to remind women of their lowliness. Remember doctoresses? Actresses?
I still see the demeaning term suffragettes used for suffragists.
As to what Ross "would likely understand and support"? Agree that he likes suffixes added to nouns to diminish women.
(Its, not it's.)
When voting for President, ask oneself the following question---Is this the person I want to see sitting across the table from ________ (fill in the blank)? Suggestions for filling in the blank:
Vladimir Putin
Li Kequing
Benjamin Netanyahu
Crown Prince Mohammed of Saudi Arabia
the Speaker of the House of Representatives
the Majority Leader of the Senate
the victims of the latest hurricane , earthquake, or wildfire
etc. etc. etc.
2
Definitely not Trump, Pence or Ryan!
Please get thee to a Seminary. NOW.
6
I think the effort to paint Oprah as a revival priestess, a Joel Osteen type without Jesus, disregards -- or purposely excludes -- her creative work in motion pictures and television. Before she a spiritual guru, one should dedicate space to her day job -- producer, director, actor, business owner.
The picture attached to this article is unflattering, aims to characterize Oprah as some prayer revival type. Her hands are in the air, eyes closed in prayer. I think it almost attempts to belittle Oprah in a subtle way. So many pictures of accomplishment to choose from and and this one is selected. Why? Because it fits Douthat's limited thesis: Oprah as new-age religious leader of America. Please. Look at most of her real work, what she has built, created, don't focus on some "revival" with Deepak Chopra in 2014.
5
Enjoyable column, Mr. Douthat. I especially enjoyed your invocation of Gnosticism. As a recovering Catholic I do find it amazing that you actually believe in the bible.
But I'm not here to be snarky. Science can't provide meaning to our lives. But to find meaning in something which science demonstrates to be false strikes me as highly dubious.
We are a social sort of animal. The insane over emphasis on competition that capitalism nurtures has placed our very survival in question. Esalen-style spirituality may be a dead end or it may be our way forward.
You prefer creeds. Why? Folks have been killing other folks over creedal differences for many hundreds of years.
3
The idea of one TV star bringing down another TV star seems about right these days. Oprah is probably a better tweeter too, so what's not to like?
3
As a clergyperson, I've seen many faith communities make disastrous choices when filling an available position. If the previous incumbent was well loved, there's a rush to find someone who is a reproduction of the previous person, then deep disappointment when he/she inevitably fails to be the clone everyone expected. If the previous incumbent was disliked or incompetent, the impulse is to find someone who is the exact opposite of the unloved predecessor, only to be disillusioned when the new person turns out not to be able to walk on water after all. Many of us are starved for someone who can inspire our country, who exhibits decency and human kindness, who values human dignity and equality. In our hunger for change we may latch onto the first person who seems to embody what we think will satisfy us. Oprah is an inspiring human being, but that doesn't necessarily mean she would be able to guide this nation to where it needs to go. Let her be one of the voices that serves to remind us that such people still live among us, and when we've done our preparatory homework, then we can go out and find the one who has the experience and skills, along with these other human qualities, to take us where we want to go.
4
I'd be careful how you classify people, though I understand you can only start from yourself.
I've never actually understood Oprah Winfrey's spirituality even though I subscribed to her magazine for many years. She is always her own "cover girl" and is open about her beliefs. But they defy easy categorization.
I hope Oprah doesn't decide to run for president because I believe it would be a demeaning experience for her. And she's a strong, dominant woman.
I'm an independent who believes in both faith and science. It doesn't have to be a choice between one or the other. Morality isn't the sole domain of either a conservative or a progressive, just as immorality isn't either.
3
Oprah is, above all else, a fine actress as much as Donald is a reality show star. What distinguishes them as qualified presidential candidates? NOTHING! My God, to what leadership depths gave we sunk! Color me hopeless for our future.
Even the actual Pope isn't Catholic enough for Douthat.
His reaction is apoplectic to what he sees as, "to the extent that there is a specifically American religion, a faith tradition all our own, Oprah has made herself its pope."
Even Catholic Popes have killed to suppress "gnostic spirituality." Now Douthat sees in in Oprah. Heretic !!!
That may be one of the best things about her, that she outrages the guy more Catholic than the Pope.
11
She would have to go to school, starting now. Call her friend Hillary over for a few glasses of Chardonnay. Quite a few. Or she'll end up where Trump landed. (Well, maybe not quite that bad).
Forget Oprah. Forget Mars. Impeach the Puzzle. Save the environment. Save the Oceans.
4
After a rambling column, you finally reach the conclusion that Oprah is our most important religious leader and we should beware of her seizing power. Oprah is a talented woman that has used the power of television to enrich herself using spirituality. She has parlayed a television show into an entire network bearing her name, and is just as fake as Donald Trump.
The current batch of religious leaders whether it is Oprah, Joel Osteen, TD Jakes, and others use spirituality and religion to enrich themselves and convince the public that if there is something missing in their lives it is their own fault. It is a shame that the gullible among us buy their nonsense. Then again, Donald Trump is in the Oval Office.
1
Prophet, Priestess ... Queen? Maybe.
But not President.
Oprah is a wonderful citizen, but her qualifications for the presidency linger around 5 [at best] on a scale of 10. Maybe Vice President, but not President.
The sudden desire of many to propel Oprah Winfrey to a presidential candidacy (and ultimate nomination) is just another typical knee-jerk reaction in a celebrity-/fame-obsessed nation full of knee jerks.
3
Oprah will make a great democratic president. Oprah will Make America Great Again and undo a lot of damages that Trump has inflicted on our great country.
3
She has the number one qualification to run for president, and win. She's rich.
5
The addition of The Oprah to Donald Trump's campaign ticket in 2016 was discussed away from video sources, so today's progressives who hate reading are blissfully aware of it, but Oprah was loudly reported as WAY too inexperienced about politics by moderates and the Left to even seriously discuss as a political candidate.
How do you elect someone who cries at the drop of a kitten to high office? Her loud support of Barack the Secretive Ideologue cost her millions because half her audience dropped her show in 2008.
Will he have a similarly tin ear as a leader? As progressive lose to ask politicians, can she find Vietnam on a map?
Oprah is already our number one cultural leader. Could that translate into a presidency? Impossible not to embrace the thought given our present dilemma. What wonderful justice! Trump paving the way for the first woman president. It could right a wrong and bring us even further than we imagined.
Unfortunately I have some concerns... do we really want to put a cultural icon through a presidential campaign? She could handle it, but could we? Also... I am not sure about the transition from entertainment to public service. Work experience is a requirement for job success (dah.) Haven’t we learned this lesson?! On the other hand, Oprah has remarkable skills and is the role model we desperately need.
The media need to recognize how much their steady fascination with Donald Trump enabled his rise to power, and quickly and steadily point out that Oprah Winfrey is not qualified to be president. It would be Oprah Winfrey, not Oprah the Pope who would be president; a skilled orator with a gift of being able to connect with people, who studied communications for several years at Tennessee State University, and who has never held political office. That isn't enough.
Very thought provoking article.
2
An elegant and amusing read. Amusing Ourselves to Death? (apologies to Neil Postman).
1
I really like Oprah, but I've been absolutely stunned by the talk in recent days - by a lot of generally sensible people - of her potential as president, and that she is now seriously considering a 2020 run.
She's all about personal growth, self- awareness, exploring new possibilities and "living your best life", which all sounds somewhat at odds with the arrogance of thinking that without any prior political experience you are a viable candidate for the most difficult job in the world.
This shouldn't be a case of "if Trump can do it, so can I". Reagan is the model she should be looking to. He gained political experience and proved himself as Governor before setting his sights at the White House.
I can just see the 2020 primaries if Oprah runs. Again, all the media attention will be on the new glittering celebrity outsider while career public servants and politicians won't get heard. We're seeing right now how that turned out.
1
Oprah has many fine qualities – intelligence and compassion being among the most prominent. But, President Winfrey? I don’t think so.
I think Winfrey is smart enough to know that politics today is very dirty. I’m not sure she would want to sully herself with it. A Democratic candidate would have to play tough or the play-dirty Republicans would eat her alive. Furthermore, her inspirational guru energy could not offset the Republican money machine and the elections it can buy with the help of weapons like Cambridge Analytics.
For all of her excellent qualities, Winfrey has always struck me more than anything as a champion of consumerism in America. Witness “Oprah’s favorite things” and “O” magazine’s feel-good consumerism. I don’t think nihilistic Trump supporters really care about “9 Staples Stylish Women Pack for a Trip.”
And therein is the biggest rub against her candidacy: the Trump base. All of her, frankly New-Age, priestess qualities and exhortations to pursue “your truth” will not neutralize the economically fomented tribal hostilities – racism, misogyny, anti-elitism – of the Trump barbarians. She will be viewed as another elite. Oprah would have an appeal not unlike that which Hillary had for many – and Hillary was one of the costliest mistakes the Democrats ever made.
Democratic elections are not about the appeal of intelligent policy platforms; they are about tribal affiliation. The Republicans know this, and exploit it. What tribe would Oprah represent?
1
Everyone please, cut Oprah some slack. She has already given us Dr. Phil. If we expect any more from her, we're being unreasonable.
3
No, she's none of the above, she's a talk show host and halfway decent actress, nothing more.
There is nothing in her history that would point to her being a successful politician, much less president, she will be taken apart on the world stage.
2
No matter how much Douthat slices, dices and, as usual, over-the-top intellectualizes Ms. Winfrey and her place in America's religious firmament, people are simply so attracted to her because of a genuine, basic altruism, compassion, decency, and great capacity to actually listen to people from all walks of life, absorbing their concerns. To my knowledge, she has never been attached to scandal nor any notable moral lapses. In other words, Oprah is a much needed antidote in this immoral and amoral, disgusting Age of Trump. While she consoles, he cons. While she gives, he grabs(in numerous ways). While she exudes an honesty and frankness, he systematically spews falsehoods.
The country could certainly do a lot, lot worse than to have this truly classy lady as either its prophetess, pope, or president. You go girl!!
1
I reject Douthat's view of Oprah and contemporary religious expression. Oprah is a media phenomenon because she connects with people. The people she reaches with her positive, lite spirituality do not care if it is often thin gruel. it would not seduce people into rejecting Catholicism or stop attending their local Presbyterian church. She reflects what many Americans seek. What she offers is certainly not harmful. In contrast, conservative evangelicals embrace of Trump, by accepting his immortality in exchange for political power, is definitely malicious. They seek to create an American theocracy, which limits true religion freedom through real force of law.
I think Douthat just wants everybody to become the kind of Catholic common in 1950s America--unquestioning, devout to extremes, secure by virtue of their own limited vision. Those days are long gone.
1
Oprah is a fantastic person but not a president. She would be better than what we have because she's first a good person and he simply is anything but. There are a number of talented and politically savvy Democratic women who would eat Trump's lunch in 2020 and, after this disaster is over, we're going to need a pro to administer a Marshall Plan like effort to rebuild our country. Should definately be a woman, but not Oprah.
1
Sure, let's elect a television host w/o government, regulatory, legislative, or policy experience. Oh, yeah, we already did that. How is that working out for everybody? Oprah is a new-agey spiritualist, one whose 'base' is the mostly low brow female audience who consumes daytime television, dreaming of a charm filled existence while chanting "The Secret" by Rhonda Byrne. Is this where we have landed as a country- one in which we have so little confidence or intellectual integrity we are grasping at wealthy snake oil salesmen promising us a life affirming utopia to save us? This isn't the Wizard of Oz and clicking our heels together while chanting "There is no place like home" just won't cut it. I'm looking for a man/woman with a briefcase, a tattered suit, and tired wonkish eyes that never glitter, but reflect the world as it truly is.
I have no idea if Oprah would make a good President or not. But the fact that we are even talking about Oprah possibly running for President shows our completely unrealistic view that somehow an outsider, with no real political experience, can come to Washington D.C. and succeed.
We need to recognize that if we are going to bridge the gap that exists between the parties we need at least two things to happen. One is greater moderation of the political activists of both parties and, then, professional politicians - with deep roots in Washington politics - to carry out this moderation and forge reasonable compromise on contentious issues.
Politics is very much about personal relationships among the lawmakers. Bringing in outsiders (Oprah, Trump etc.) without long-standing personal relationships with other lawmakers will cause uncertainty without yielding any appreciable results.
I've always felt ambivalent towards Oprah for this very reason. I find most of the middle-way spirituality she highlights to be lightweight (like "The Secret') and prone to being co-opted by egos, especially individualistic Americans.
One thing you miss here is that amongst the therapies and spiritual studies that emerged from the consciousness movement centered at Esalen are some that have true gravitas; and the explosion in Buddhist practice in America carries its own weight. I'm lucky enough to know many people who are very serious about their spiritual practice and walk amongst us with grace and compassion that is rare to see in humans (I even see evidence of this in the NYTimes comments once in a while). Oprah has also come in close contact with some people in this realm.
Even though Oprah is not my cup of tea, I can't discount that she has brought a world of awareness to a huge number of people, and I see her as a powerful force for good in this world. It's hard to say how her papal tiara would be worn as president, but the one thing I would take comfort in is that we would probably have one of the most consicously self-aware presidents of all time, and that just might be kind of special.
1
Yes, Oprah is not stuck in the past (like Clinton) and is open to the future. That's what makes a good leader.
Here's an idea who's time - alas - may have come: only people who have starred in hit TV shows are eligible for the Presidency. There would have to be criteria around requiring sufficient ratings, longevity, etc.: not every guest on Wayne's World can aspire to the highest office in the land. That would be absurd.
2
The discussion about an Oprah candidacy brings to mind the loss of what used to be a professional class of politicians, and I say that in a positive way.
People like Sam Nunn and Scoop Jackson were experts in their fields as politicians.
Talk show hosts (and celebrity billionaires) simply don't bring the same expertise to the table.
I may be the only person in America yearning for a professional political class but I am afraid we have lost something important over the last 50 years or so.
7
You're not the only person in America. The problem we have is television, and the confounding shortcoming humans have of not being able to tell the difference between a reality TV show and reality.
The number of commenters who think Oprah is a perfectly fine candidate is disheartening. Could she at least be like Michael Bloomberg and run a big city for a few years? Didn't she grow up in Chicago? She ought to start there.
2
Scoop Jackson was a very serious person, connected to everything, and he knew exactly how they system works.
He was the start of the neocon wars. He was the mover and inspiration for what Eisenhower feared, the undue influence of the military industrial complex, and in his case it was sought.
Eisenhower's Farewell Address: "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."
That was Scoop Jackson, in person.
How do we "guard against" that? Not by finding more of Scoop Jackson, professional face of the "complex."
1
I agree, G. I've been thinking a lot about how we really should have a professional class of politicians with the skills and ideology to move government forward, find the best compromise, support and enhance democracy, you know, governance of the people, by the people, for the people. Knowing their ideology, we would have an idea of what their cabinets would look like because being an effective president will take a team of experts with very specific expertise, skills and understanding.
After this current presidency, though, Oprah as president does not look too far-fetched. At least, we would know what her cabinet would look like (a little worrisome).
This is an enjoyable thought experiment, thank you, Mr. Douthat. Depending on who she would select as her running mate, I would probably vote for her.
I don't think America needs another tv personality as president. Oprah could make a great ambassador and if a future president were to offer that, she could shine in that role. My dream ticket would be Biden/Sanders or Sanders/Biden, they have experience and could do a lot of good for this country. In 3 years, there will be even more issues to tackle, considering the current administration's primary interest in tax cuts, deregulation and little else.
4
If OW runs for president, she'll win for the same reasons that BO won. And the results will be just as unfortunate. Give her the Peace Prize now, and she won't have to run. BTW how many black citizens have been killed by policemen of any color in the past year? Killings that have provoked outcries. See a message in such a statistic?
4
"BO" is a Constitutional law scholar, educated at Harvard, community activist, U.S. Senator. I read his books and understood his vision for this country and agreed with it. That's why I voted for him, and that's why the overwhelming majority of people who voted for him did so. There's no comparison between these two people except the color of their skin, which is what I think you're saying is the reason "BO" won. You are absolutely wrong.
6
wait, what? did you not see the golden globes. it was like being in middle school and the girls got the mic and started chanting, "girls rule, boys drool". then the celebrity guest/fanstasy president kicks in: they want Oprah. How do the boys respond? We know the girls are winning:Oprah against dr. phil and jerry springer. Who would be my fantasy celebrity guest at a barbacue in my neighborhood. I guess, "beastmode". He would boost my cred in my neighorhood coming by for some barbacue. Post those pictures to social media, morph into half steve bannon, half pope francis type campaign manager and i got "beastmode 2020". oh, back to reality, my plan for the day, 10-6pm. priority will be going to the gym.
7
Please remember that Oprah is a promoter of "alternative" (fake) medicines and their practitioners like Dr. Oz.
16
Have you any experience with Big Medicine? A 2017 study continues to find what previous studies also found, that American healthcare is ranked at the very bottom of all the industrial nations. Worse, it does so while being, by far, the most expensive.
MDs (Malpractice Doctors) are the marketing arm of Big Pharma. Not one of them has ever cured anyone - what they do is "treat" (put you on drugs for the rest of your life).
Any idea how effective pharmaceuticals are? Google: Dr. Light, Safra Institute, Harvard. 90% of drugs are ineffective, but all have side effects.
The only good doctor is an ER doc or a surgeon, the rest are highly paid quacks promoting fake medicines.
Oprah knows this as do the majority of Americans.
2
Oprah, having already taken the "traveling roadshow' and if deciding to launch a run for president, certainly has a jump on Kirsten Gillibrand, who seems to be readying her stretch limo, ornamental shrunken head on the rear view mirror, road maps leading to the corn belt in the glove box, for a run herself.
Certainly the evangelicals, along withe ''frozen chosen" crowd, have reason to fear Oprah's appeal. The laundry list of demonic influence held in trembling hands by the revivalist flim- flamers & clerical bureaucrats must be aghast at the thought of Oprah raiding their tents & cathedrals.
Politics as theater is still in it's infancy.
5
Let the thought experiment begin.
First off, I have met Oprah in an informal setting, several times. She is genuine.
Second, she is truly self-made and someone who possesses empathy cultivated by experience. She has put herself before every single tier of American society. She's interviewed the poor, the wealthy, the weak, the powerful, the influenced and the influential. She is an actual billionaire, which was accumulated through a successful and disciplined media empire that she built herself.
I look at our current reality as a profound turning point in human history. Donald Trump represents the worst of the Patriarchy. He is vile, twisted by pride, envy, wrath, lust, greed, gluttony and sloth.
For the Matriarchy to rise, it must be brought to the fore by an icon who is trusted across the entire breadth of the American culture. Oprah is that person. Not sure if she ever shrank away from confronting bigots and scoundrels. She put them on her sofa and looked them in the eye.
And I can promise you this: There is nothing white, bigoted Republican men fear more than an intelligent, moral, strong, determined and successful black woman who does not need their money nor their validation.
What Oprah needs to ask herself, however, is if she is willing to take on the burden of being responsible for the deaths of other human beings. She's gotten this far in life without killing anyone. Even the most ethical Commander in Chief takes on this burden. Will she?
14
There are many solid Republicans that are female and black, Latino, Asan, etc. Do you get out of the basement often?
"Donald Trump represents the worst of the Patriarchy. He is vile, twisted by pride, envy, wrath, lust, greed, gluttony and sloth."
True, and a good summary. However, there is something even worse -- the Establishment that has failed us, willfully failed, failed by calculation and design, in service of its financial backers.
Vast numbers of Americans wanted a choice that was not either a vile man nor the Establishment yet again. Then they were forced to choose. They did.
2
Actually, we're all responsible for the deaths of other human beings.
Our tax dollars and silence kills people every day, both inside and outside the country. We just ignore it.
2
Oprah and Trump have branded their own name. Trump slapped his name on everything from steaks onward, Oprah has slapped her name on everything from tv networks onward. I was volunteering in MS when a non-profit with a sterling reputation was approached by Oprah's people. After several rounds of vetting they won the grant! First stipulation of several - rename themselves to "Oprah's [....]". They would have done it too if they believed that the other stipulations attached would have left their organization intact. (In the end she generously donated $10M to "Oprah's Angel Lane".) As an aside, her popular clip of "and YOU get a car! and YOU get a car!" is in line with an attack on Dems that rings true with moderates.
8
The real core of the opposition to the idea of Oprah is in this, "her popular clip of "and YOU get a car! and YOU get a car!"
She really would try to take care of people. We'd get health care, finally, not excuses, and not half measures.
3
I have no doubt that Oprah would do everything she could to reverse income inequality, which is the only empirically sound way to stimulate the economy; quantitative easing from the bottom up.
2
Don't forget Oprah's Angel Lane! "And you get a HOUSE, and YOU get a HOUSE!" The problem with this is that helping 65 families costs $10M.
When oh when will America stop looking for the silver bullet or the quick fix. The expense in blood and treasure has been immense and the results usually disastrous. America needs every citizen to roll up their sleeves and contribute to a lasting peace and prosperity; every citizen to be responsible for their street, their community, their state, and finally their country. Snake oil will not cure America's woes only hard work and personal responsibility.
4
Hopefully the legal separation of church and state will prevent Pope O from ever running for office. The US does not need a billionaire TV star with dubious qualifications, a huge ego, legions of brainwashed fans and zero political experience leading it. Again.
11
Leaders ain't born (like Donald Trump), they are made (like Oprah).
If you really believe the mindless realtor makes a good leader...pay attention.
But then again, America is so mediocre that a mindless president is what America wants. Meh.
4
Axelrod and Obama were great campaigners but lousy at draining the sewers that flow through every state in the country, red or blue. Oprah is their chance to get it right. How many black women built businesses worth billions?
Oprah's spiritual leanings or beliefs aren't as logically compelling as they are fundamentally at odds with everything the current administration believes in: unregulated corporate power, rigid, racist fundamentalism and the Republican brand of ardent, public stupidity, as seen in the Republican Congress and the administration.
Too many voters bought the argument that Trump would drain the swamp. He has deepened and widened it while floating pedal boats (for rent) so the scene doesn't look so sewer-like.
Winfrey is a true drainer. She doesn't kneel, bow or bob to anyone's altar. She doesn't need any religion or minister or priest or imam or rabbi to confer legitimacy on her ideas or success. For centuries they have been the perfect system upon which to build models of perfect corruption, institutional lying and today's version of larcenous, hateful American government. Mr. Douthat has long hoped that his Church would change and lead but not even Francis is speaking truth to power.
Oprah wins 50 states. She is the most trusted person in the US, towering above men like Obama. Her narrative of who she is and what she'll do will destroy Trump's populist, phony swamp draining. She will not be a fake president.
4
Don't you get it? Oprah is LIVING IN THAT SWAMP of billionaires whose $$$$ make policies that benefit people of privilege and wealth, not the hard-working people or the disabled and sick. She is most definitely not the most trusted person in the US.
2
Ross, Oprah Winfrey is not "America's Pope". She could be America's Cleopatra redux, or our Cassandra from Kosciusko, Mississippi 63 years ago, or the high priestess of the spirituality movement in America, or presidential fodder for 2020. And spare us your witty phrases like "she would lose her papal tiara" by donning a "partisan mantle". Oy, too purple, though we know Oprah was born to the purple. To" The Colour Purple". An Empress? Our "most important religious leader....[laying} claim to temporal power". Knock it off, Ross, Cut us a break from your proselytizing for the G.O.P. It's too early for pundits to predict the 2020 election. They didn't do so hot with the 2016 catastrophe.
I hope she doesn't run, but I hope she teaches the Democrats how to fashion a message for whoever does.
8
Oprah for president? Of course, especially after Bush #1, Bush #2, and the current idiotic genius. There is no limit to the money and power she's after so why shouldn't she qualify? Greed is good! (ain't it?)
3
As Douthat points out, Oprah has been selling a big, stinking pile of New Age woo hoo for most of her career.
In that time she’s created her compelling persona as a benevolent, all-knowing Earth Mother - unfailingly sincere, compassionate, and empathetic
She may well have many of these qualities and may genuinely believe much of the nonsense she’s peddling, but her power to do so is essentially a likeable media construct.
So only two possibilities remain: if she truly believes in the absurdities she promotes, we have to seriously question her judgement and knowledge.
If she doesn’t, we can only conclude that, like Trump, she is merely a shameless huckster.
17
Ross, I'm not am Oprah fan. But in my humble opinion, you make a bad faith leap to Oprah as pope and then a bigger, more demeaning and even sexist one, to Oprah as queen. Better to discuss a president's required skill set and evaluate Oprah against that.
8
Oprah is famous for her personality and for interviewing other famous people. Her fame is based on other's fame. That might be the best part of an Oprah presidency: the ability to recognize greatness in others. Great presidents inspire and help. That is a skill that our current egomaniac-in-chief lacks.
2
Like Osteen and Chopra, Oprah is a bit of a religions charlatan. She is pretty 'christian' in her talk but not in her walk-among-the-uber-wealthy. She gives away a pittance but not enough to make a dent in her lifestyle of luxury.
5
Wow! Ross takes the art form known as "concoction" to a new level.
1
No more celebrities in our politics please God...
Amen
11
Congratulations, Douthat! Your nimble mind has come to the conclusion about Oprah Winfrey that many thinking people realized long ago: She is a bit of a snake oil salesperson.
But she seems a remarkably level-headed person despite her predilection for oil of the snake and, despite this flaw in her character, she hasn't (yet, at least) opened to great personal fanfare an Oprah University where YOU can learn the secrets of television stardom, or sold Oprah Steaks or Oprah Wines.
Religious? The American Pope? Please, sir. You give her way too much credit.
2
Got you scared doesn’t she Ross.
She scares me a lot less than the current charlatan in the White House though. She also scares me less than Pence and the remainder of the religious right champions of Christian-sharia law sitting in positions of power in Washington today. Yes, “my truth” and some of the other self-empowerment new age fluff is hokey and silly at times. But at least nobody is trying to force it down my throat.
5
Yes, I think there is "a truth" that is an ideal like in Plato's Cave, casting shadows that are all we see.
However, each of us has a life, different from everyone else's life. Bits and pieces of The Truth apply to each of our own lives. Those bits and pieces are "my truth" for each of us.
Furthermore, many seem to contradict. Walt Whitman explained that over a century ago in his masterful "Song of Myself."
"Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes."
For each of us in the multitude, there is a somewhat contradictory piece of The Truth that is our truth. That is not Oprah "woo woo" it is the genius of Walt Whitman from long before her, with illustrations by Plato in his Republic.
2
The mass neurosis that gripped white America in the wake of the election of the first black president and gave us a debilitated game show host as our next president must be avoided at all costs.
If that means old white men must carry the Democratic Party banner for several decades, then, believe me, diverse America will be the better for it.
2
I've zero patience with Oprah, less still with the notion of her being President, and even less with Ross Douthat once again declaring that he is not in any way a fellow snake-charmer.
Given the nuttinessess Republicans cling to like a clngy thing, where exactly does he get off complaining about this?
4
"When I look into the future, it's so bright it burns my eyes." -- Oprah Winfrey
Unfortunately Oprah is not that different from The Donald. Granted, she's obviously not an infantile idiot, but she is a self-absorbed narcissist just like our odious Oval Office occupant. Please do not encourage her to run for president in 2020. Trump has already done enough damage to our country. No more celebrity billionaires in the White House.
8
Ross,
Best, most insightful you’ve ever written.
www.InquiryAbraham.com
2
In my view, Opera is as skillful and as willing as Trump is to take advantage of others’ ignorance, stupidity, emotional vulnerability, and inability to think.
2
At first when this whole Oprah brouhaha started, I was thinking "whatever, but anyone is better than Trump," but the more I think about this woman being in charge of our country the more I am disturbed by it.
Her nutty spiritualism disturbs me. The thought of who she would surround herself with disturbs me. Trump is an incompetent fool, but he is the incompetent fool we know.
This is the true danger of Trump, not particularly himself, but who comes after him. It's like he was the first horse of the Apocalypse, with more to come.
1
This country is enamoured with high profile celebrities. They ignore intelligence and education as well as experienced world views. They also ignore those with government experience. This is not going to happen in this century as the US is misogynistic, racist, and puritanical. Folks need to travel abroad for a few years to see how the rest of the world lives and makes choices. It makes us absolutely ignorant. Look what happened when Obama was president. An extremely presidential human being and the repulsives spent the whole 8 years berating him and now reversing all the good that Obama accomplished. Oprah would be exactly the same thing. Don't run Oprah and please folks, don't even thing of voting for her.
2
Oprah is not and never has been accused of being a con, grifter, fraud, or money launderer. So that is a pretty good start.
11
She also supported Obama for '08, when those opposing her here were supporting Hillary for '08. So who was right?
2
False prophets in the Christian church are nothing new. Jesus warned His followers about them in ( Matthew 7:15-16 ) " Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them."...........False prophets are people who have not been sent by God but claim that they have been. "Fruit" here refers to more than their deeds; it includes their doctrine.
She is another snakeoil shill, preying on the emotional gullibility of her audience.
As for sounding like a friend or someone you know....she is just telling people what they want to hear.all the best cons do.
5
Oprah is not a prophet, princess or Queen.
She is simply an immensely inspiring human being who works hard everyday to live TRUTHFULLY.
In other words, the perfect antidote to the lazy Liar-In-Chief we have leading this nation now.
5
Yes, she has integrity. If she campaigns her character will shine against the darkness of Trump. The blind nay-sayers on this page may suddenly see the light. She has the potential to win some Trumpsters, unlike Clinton.
That means she could bring the country together, which is another reason she could create a landslide.
The secularization of religion posited by the likes of Oprah, Osteen, Williams and others is a central element in the argument that faith, in oneself and one's ability to overcome any obstacles and challenges thrown in one's way, is the true path to happiness and, of course, wealth. It is the same preachiness, not so much of virtue but of possibilities, that propelled Donald Trump to the pinnacle of power. God, per se, may be involved, but appears to be less of an element in the mix than in established religions.
It is one thing to admire those who have been successful in such endeavors, particularly so when they have risen above humble beginnings and achieved greatness through perseverance, intellect and other sometimes admirable qualities. It is altogether another to presume that those abilities, coupled with what might best be called messianic leadership skills, translate into the capability to govern in a fractured and precarious world. While Trump still has his core enthusiasts, he has not convincingly demonstrated, at least thus far, that his earlier successes translate into an ability to govern and solve complex problems, or convert non-believers to join his cult-like following.
Oprah certainly appears to be more appealing than Trump for a host of reasons, and, to many, more capable than Trump. But boomlets have a way of coming and going, sometimes quickly, and cults of personality have a habit of giving way to reality, which isn't always as compelling.
3
Oprah began her career exploiting dysfunctional people on her stage. She evolved into higher entertainment and issues, and worked her way up to A-listers. She has a history of promoting non-scientific products that make serious but untested claims about health and well-being. That is paralleled by her connection to spirituality that includes an organization that charges a lot of money for spiritual enlightenment and also makes certain untested and un-testable health claims. Her promotion of wish fulfillment through "The Secret" is also questionable. At a time when we are having difficulty getting people to understand science, Oprah would be a huge setback. Her "new age" leanings would create plentiful fodder for any opponent willing to address these questionable elements of her resume. Oprah may believe in the Power of Attraction, but that will not bring her what she needs to be credible to a wide and and ever critical audience.
9
The vast majority of people are in between hard science and hard religion. That's a lot of people with a lot of votes.
I think that you will find that her positive thinking and Power of Attraction work quite well. Certainly better than Clinton's data-driven polls.
Let me convey a metaphysical secret that always works, in spite of its non-scientific basis. (But it doesn't work for Nay-Sayers): The Universe loves Courage.
If this were about courage, I am sure Ms. Winfrey would have explained her relationship with Harvey Weinstein. Don't confuse posturing and PR with courage.
1
It takes courage to go for it, especially the Presidency.
Posturing and PR is running in place, hoping others will think you are going somewhere.
Ross,
Your words Prophet, Priestess...Queen betray you.
Can't swallow "President?" Why relegate her to
mythical times and mindsets?
3
That mass empathy you cited is exactly the reason I could see myself voting for Oprah. God knows we could use empathy expressed in tangible form through public policies that help the poor and vulnerable. If you want to use the Christian word for it, call it charitable compassion. Whatever you call it, it's not only missing from the current presidential administration and GOP, it's actively under attack from them -- with continuing support from a heavy majority of white Americans who claim to follow Jesus. Go figure.
I'll take, and I think Jesus would take, Oprah-style mass empathy any day over the death of charity and compassion in the public square that evangelicals have brought upon us.
5
This is just plain a great, well-written article. Let us occasionally pause to praise them that can write.
2
At last a sober look at this icon. Think of a day in the life of priestess Oprah in the white house. How much of the day could she spare from the beauty rituals, the massages, the sessions with gurus concerning her weight, her hair, her gowns, her spirituality, her self worth, not to mention those with her business advisors, to devote to running the country? It is indeed a sick nation that would replace one egomaniac with another. As for the great speech at the Golden Globe, she's an actress for God's sake. She was simply doing what all the others there were doing, delivering a commissioned speech, perfect for the moment, and full of the homilies Hollywood loves, self adornment, self assurance, self truth, self GOD--the God within.
4
"Think of a day in the life of priestess Oprah in the white house. How much of the day could she spare from the beauty rituals"
A woman would primp instead of clearing brush in a manly way like Dubya?
I have been living in Mexico for the past three years. Just a change, not a permanent relocation, I thought. However, this persistent idea that celebrities have an answer to our bewildering political landscape has caused me to consider my current home in a new light. Mexico has corrupt politicians throughout the system. There are cartel problems that demand an accommodation or a full blown military intervention. The infrastructure and general support services are either nonexistent or severely compromised. Most Mexicans accept they cannot challenge the system, notwithstanding lip service from progressives. Below this public level, life goes on untroubled. And so I ask myself what is the difference between the two countries? Not a lot, except our cartel is the CIA. America is trying to maintain its glory days and now believes a drama queen is the answer. Perfect, and pathetic.
2
We need a president who honors all parts of our Constitution, including its Establishment Clause, ensuring all are free to believe as they wish but not free to impose their faith on others. A president who remembers we're ruled by secular law. Beyond that, a president remains a public servant — not a billionaire CEO, entertainer, prophet, priestess/priest, queen/king or authoritarian. More focus on policy, on experience crafting and passing legislation, on applicable public service — less focus on celebrity and 'persona.'
43
The democrats need to put Oprah as a possible presidential candidate in deep six! This country doesn't not need another actor, media personality, and a novice in the political game running for president!
6
Oprah is all you claim her to be, and more. She is a sane person and has no compunction in calling things as they are; hence, calling Trump a fraudster. Although she could become president, she does not deserve the certain to come low blows as a candidate. She better remain our representative as a public force for good, and help us defeat so many un-representatives who are out there in a shameful self-serving capacity...instead of being servants to the common good (which they swore to uphold as candidates). Go Oprah, go, stay with us, and be the voice of reason, and justice, and freedom.
Have we not learned from the current tv president? Sorry. I'm not voting for oprah..
5
I don't know, Ross, for you to sneer at the "soothing faux profundities" of 'new-agey' religions is rather rich coming from one who, from what I've read of you, believes in virgin birth, walkable waterways and physical resurrection.
But for Paul, Christ would have been forgotten. And I dare say that if Paul were living now, you'd have some snarky things to say about him too.
8
Right now Oprah is as close as we've got to a unifying figure. Her religious and ...err... medical views are pretty sketchy but she's very smart and able to bring people together. Pure American dream, rags to riches, including the mushy, silly stuff Douthat identifies. That's America, folks.
Oprah and Michelle in 2012!
Ross - What Pope has ever encouraged fellow citizens to read and reflect on life and society by reading Dickens, Steinbeck, Wiesel and Garcia Marquez, to name a few of the many such great author's on Oprah Book Club lists?
"Prophet, Priestess ... Queen"?
How about: "Practical and Prodigious Promoter of the Population's Potential ... President"?
Let's see. Oprah Winfrey has a heart. A big one. She has a brain. Her intelligence is not in question. On her show of many years, she had all kinds of guests--including those she would not normally choose to break bread with in her home. She recognizes that we are all one human family. She has reached countless people with her strength and vulnerabilities (which show great bravery and strength). Whether or not she is a politician is less important than whether or not she would serve the presidency well.
I would serve as president better than what we have. Many people would. Yet I could not touch Ms. Winfrey's capabilities. There are many elected congress people and senators who are ridiculous human beings. They are only in office because they sway people. Some of them sound as idiotic and inarticulate as the president.
Hillary Clinton sought to be a uniter. Trump is a divider. That is what snarky, white middle-America went for. I would hate to see Oprah's energies spent trying to unite people who are wedded to their racism, xenophobia, misogyny and homophobia. Yet I would vote for her in a minute and I would drop whatever I am doing to campaign for her.
5
One of my friends commented that Democrats form their firing lines in a circle. And so it begins.
For Pete's sake, Ross. Someone probably jokingly said that Oprah gave an inspiring speech and therefore she should run for President. And it got you so nervous that you had to jump right in with tearing her down? With the current horror show in Washington furthered along by the broadcast of Trump's
meeting with various congresspeople from both sides on the subject of DACA where he agreed with everyone but contradicted himself constantly, said nothing profound or important, and ended up looking more out of it than ever, I should think you would be thrilled with the idea of getting a President Pence sooner rather than later. And yet, you are so scared of any discussion of who the Democrats might look to as a leader you spend all this time and silly words denigrating a successful black woman who most likely has far too much sense to run for President. And in your group of conservatives, you have Ann Coulter, Mike Huckabee and his daughter, Paul Ryan, Rick Santorum and others who wear their religion on their sleeves (or as a cross on her low cut dress like Coulter) but wouldn't actually recognize the true Christ if they fell over him.
They are way to busy promoting the Anti-Christ in hopes of hastening the "final days."
Ross's mocking tone and breezy dismissal of Oprah's quest for individual spirituality despite his belonging to the first religion that made the divine human to enhance its personal, individual appeal is pretty rich.
And, his fervent wish to hold onto a craven, oppressive, divisive, intolerant, exclusive, hateful, fantasy of an idealized father religion created to compensate for the imperfection of all human fathers and to justify male hegemony in the world would qualify him for a leading role in the Roman Curia.
1
Several ceos have been mentioned recently as having thought about running for president. But, they are men. No one questioned their credentials. But, they are men. Jimmy Carter was a peanut farmer. But, he's a man.
Get the picture?
1
Jimmy Carter was both a nuclear engineer graduated from Hyman Rickover's demanding program, and a successful state governor.
We've done worse than Carter, and lately.
2
Carter also has integrity.
1
Oh Ross, you are so confused.
Trump has demonstrated beyond question that being president requires NO qualifications. You don't need to be a statesman, well-educated, well-spoken, handsome(or pretty.) No need for a grasp of the issues. No need for even an INTEREST in the issues. You don't need to be successful or innovative.
Perhaps the only thing that is required is to be famous. Which Trump, courtesy of a TV show and many bankruptcies, is.
So worrying about Oprah as president seems a bit disingenuous. She is clearly smart and centered. She appears reasonable. She is therefore already way more qualified than our current White House resident.
The pipsqueaks and poseurs, party hacks and egomaniacs who fill the halls of Congress offer what, exactly, beyond what Oprah brings as qualifications for the job?
We could do far worse.
2
I am not an Oprah fan. But thank goodness she isn't Gwyneth Paltrow. And at least Oprah wouldn't be boasting about how big her nuclear button is or firing nukes at N. Korea.
Oprah: Television Celebrity, Businesswoman. Sound familiar? One big difference is that she's a decent human being who knows how to read.
4
Let's set our sights a little higher than this.
3
How high, Nick? To being a man?
3
Dr. Phil and Dr. Oz are her creations. She gets popular culture, but her judgment is suspect.
2
She was running a TV show, and she sought people who could do that well. She evidently found them. That does not mean she's seek the same people with the same skills for very different jobs. Horses for courses. She picked well for the course.
2
She's just so boring. The whole spiritual worldview is just so boring. And smells to heaven of serious denial.
And with millennials embracing socialism, they must be asking "who?" Not to mention "why?"
2
Talk show host, mogul, philanthropist, role model. Not president.
3
I think Oprah is a strong positive force & I’m sure she is an effective leader at her company
But...I don’t see her wanting to be in the role of someone who would have to balance all the conflicting needs of the country.
My daughter repeats Oprah’s give away mantra,
“You get a car...You get a car...You get a car”...
But will Oprah want to be the person who says,”...but you don’t get a car”!?
I guess only Mr Douthat knows the truth about “religious individualism, its false ideas and fatal consequences”. Otherwise a very interesting article.
Thanks for an iinteresting piece, Ross, but I don’t think “prophetess” is a word. A prophet is a prophet. “Poetess” is similarly comical.
1
This is nonsense. The attempt here is to cloak Oprah in yards of religious garb to get push back from the conservatives who believe God is a ll all things white. Yes she dabbles in new-age thought and ll that jazz but that is hardly her main menu. By the way, I think Oprah should stay in her lane and leave presidential politics alone.
1
One uber rich entertainment mogul for the other uber rich entertainment/real estate mogul sounds like a repeat performance to me...
2
Stop please. She is a celebrity that cares most about herself and her empire.
Haven't we learned anything?
2
Bernie Sanders would have been the secularist. I think the reason he appealed to Millennials and so many others beside that group is that even though he was Jewish, he wasn't religiously so. Remember why Al Gore lost his home state? His choice of VP Joe Lieberman, who was "too Jewish" for the populace.
6
Trump's election in 2016 has deranged the country. Now Oprah Winfrey who was a very popular talk show host who has created a madly successful brand for herself seems to represent a life line for the demoralized Democrats. Politicians like McConnell and Ryan can use Trump to get an unfair reckless tax cut. Trump floats in his uninformed bubble waiting to launch a full scale plutocracy on the country. Winfrey is more celebrity elite, skip the day to day workings of gov't and go straight to the top. In her case more corporatist democracy.
3
This is a very insightful analysis.It deals with the role of religion in America, the essential need of most of the American people (this mystical body that is constantly abused by politicians' incantations) to drink from the pure waters of religious wisdom.Americans need to be spiritual.Without the spiritual there is only the emptiness of the daily grind.There is no purpose.
Why is this?
Making money , making more of it is not just sanctioned and encouraged in our society; success is rated in the billions' worth of the man or the woman.After having made a lot of money, the big question becomes what to do with it. We watch Bill Gates , Warren Buffet and their class mates agonize how to spend their money fighting to eradicate small pox and tuberculosis, hiring experts as advisors. To organize one's philanthropy becomes a spiritual matter .Wealth management without purpose generates guilt.Living with guilt is no fun.
But where is the spiritual center of America?
We have moved from singing spirituals to barking with rapers.The sweaty , greasy graffity spray paintings have crowded out murals , and our language has deteriorated and is enriched with expletives.The wall between spirituality and spoof has become porous as truth seeking has been replaced by the consumption of fake news."The center does not hold."
I'm surprised that so many of my liberal friends, even my husband, reacted negatively to the idea of an Oprah presidency. I'd be happy with it. Democrats don't have any other real rock star potential candidates; we need someone who can outshine Trump, and Oprah is the only one. She's smart, compassionate and well-prepared to communicate with the people of this country. She'll have the finest most level-headed advisors to help her. She'd study all the issues very carefully. We need Oprah to bring this country back to normal.
4
Please listen to your liberal friends and husband.
CF -- Listen to yourself. What did you just write?
The Nay-Sayers (all Very Serious People) think resume qualifications matter.
Just tell them, "Not if they don't Win - the only qualification that matters is Winning!"
I think Oprah is a genuinely good person and undoubtedly a fine business woman. I am not aware of a string of hundreds of law suits against her or allegations of either corruption or sexual harassment. All of that moves her way up in my list. However, she has never governed and that's a big strike against her. Government should not be something stepped into lightly; we've seen, and continue to see, the problems that arise from people who don't understand how to govern much less what "government for the people" means.
What Oprah does do is empower people by giving them the confidence to examine their lives without fear of what they might find. I imagine it's like the self-examination one does before Catholic confession, or during Ramadan and Rosh Hashanah. As America moves away from traditional dogmatic religion that separates us, what she does is not a bad thing. You can call it religion, if you must, but I think of it more like coaching.
I hope she won't run though. I want her to work at helping us all to achieve good governance by promoting great mayors, council persons, local sheriffs, state representatives, governors, etc. She should work on voting rights and empowering the least of us. However, if she were elected president, I believe she would work to help more people, not just the privileged wealthy, achieve the so-called American Dream while at the same time, protecting democracy.
1
"Bad Religion" is an asset for anyone who seriously think of the phenomena. Or, even for those who are mildly curious about. To me, important parts of the discussions were about American Christianity and Republicanism in the book. All did not happen overnight.
We need another Celebrity running the country? Why not run Dr Phil as her Vice President in 2020? Has Trump opened the Floodgates for Bored Billionaires to get a second career when they have run out of things to conquer? Gone is the learning curve on how government works when you can hire a producer and director. Good people are going to be discouraged from running if this madness with celebrity continues.
7
After at least one --and possibly two-- terms of Trump in the oval office, if Americans don't reject Oprah's possible candidacy in the strongest and most emphatic terms, they'd best get used to being described as "The World's Laughingstock" for at least a generation.
That the American political tradition --which gifted the world with Washington and Lincoln and Roosevelt and Kennedy and Reagan-- could descend to such a level is disheartening.
3
Interesting take on a very prominent strand of American popular thought that goes back at least 90 years to Emile Coue and his psychology of optimistic autosuggestion; his mantra was "Day by day, in every way, I'm getting better and better." From the "Jesus is your friend" wing to the New Age wing (an old leftist friend of mine used to call it "newage," rhyming with "sewage"), it takes for granted that the purpose of life is worldly success. Its goal and promise is to adjust the believer's mental and emotional state to the point of liking one's self as a means to going out confidentlyand effectively to get what the believer wants and thinks s/he deserves. It's as instrumental a form of religion as painting mammoths on the cave wall to make the game come back.
1
What we needed was FDR, what we are getting are celebrities with a squishy intellectual core. The Democratic Party has lost its mooring; the Republicans have been trading in racial divisions since Nixon.
2
When I was a graduate student at Princeton, my political science friends from the MENA countries would challenge me, saying that they would believe the US is a truly democratic country, only after they see a black woman as president of the US.
Unfortunately, one rousing speech (Oprah , last Sunday) does not necessarily make her a good candidate for the most difficult job and 'cannot do anything right" position as President of the United States.
Trump flooded his campaign speeches with 'rousing' half-truths...and see what the US got for President!
Let Oprah be Oprah and complete her life as one who has been admired and loved by many...not one who gets lost in todays, chaotic maelstrom of the US presidency.
You humble-bragged about Princeton in a comment yesterday, Kenell.
Princeton trumps Fordham.
I think your friends are confusing egalitarianism with democracy. You're allowed to be a racist and misogynist in this country, and you are allowed to vote according to your racist and misogynistic tendencies. That's a democracy.
Oprah being president wouldn't prove we're a democracy. It would only prove that we are capable of making one gigantic mistake after another. Ah, the heady feeling of freedom!
1
I hadn't read that O was an "enabler of anti-vaccine paranoia," but recognizing her chameleonic nature, this does not surprise. It only serves to seal a previous conviction that she would never receive my vote. In spite of her media savvy and technical oratorial skill, her preaching is what turns me off the most. This speculation of her possible 2020 presidential run isn't even premature. It's yet another sign of the waste and deterioration of the American intellectual spirit.
2
Maybe we should look at some sports heros instead of tv sytars. Tom Brady
might be a good choice...He has good advisers and works well with his teamates
(his cabinet?) has a lot of experience (he's 40) and good skills. Brady in 2020?
If Oprah allies herself from the get-go with someone like Kamala Harris, if they run as a team, I think they’d be unbeatable!
And this time winning MUST be all. Winning with heartfelt messages from Oprah and the steel-trap, prosecutorial, experienced Kamala Harris.
We brains, experience, assertive women and HEART!
That would be my ticket. Along with Elizabeth Warner for Attorney General.
Place those names out there from the start! I don’t care who’s at the top of the ticket. But don’t discount Oprah’s ability to get votes and get people moving, reading, thinking, urging!
1
America reminds me of a fading celebrity performing in Las Vegas. We cling to a national mythology that believes the frontier and winning WW2 are still relevant, and this informs our political decisions. In the frontier, people were tough and independent, and could take care of themselves. In WW2, we could do anything we set our minds to, including saving the world.
This is yesterday's news. The frontier is used up, and it's anybody's guess who would win if there is another world war, but if it happens, we are in danger of playing the role of the Axis this time around.
Towards the end, Elvis was overweight, addicted to drugs, and given to wearing ridiculous outfits. The good news is that he could still give a great performance.
So what does this have to do with Oprah? Perhaps her and her spirituality are an antidote for a nation that's lost in the wilderness and looking for something, anything, to update its national mythology, which clearly isn't delivering the answers we need anymore.
4
I agree with your metaphorical assessment of America's woes. But advertising and less than savory segments of the media are a major problem in this country, and in my opinion Oprah is too attached to those entities. She is not the national leadership we need.
1
True enough. Perhaps I could refine what I said; the nation is still lost, and people appear to be groping for an antidote, but perhaps I erred in saying that her spirituality is the solution for the nation. Many individuals seem to click with it (hence her popularity) perhaps as a kind of spiritual escapism.
Who is, Gayle? Easy to put Oprah down, hard to suggest alternatives.
1
Oprah is indeed a modern day prophet -- not of spirituality but of transformation. And there is nothing more American than a transformation narrative -- a Horatio Alger, rags to riches story that Oprah embodies better than anyone. For decades she's been inspiring us to be great, and to collectively, make America great. She's been doing the job so many politicians say they'll do. So who is more credible at making America great again than Oprah?
7
Great piece, fresh and insightful, defines the space between secular humanism and the ancient faiths by exposing the Oprah-Osteen commonality. Fits well with the view of America in Kurt Anderson's "Fantasyland". This middle ethic is full of snake oil and card tricks and easier redemption than offered by traditional religion or science, and its a good companion to Trumpism, which preaches the victories are mine and the losses always someone else's fault.
Let me say this for the secular end, that support for Christian behavior without belief in Christ as the son of God is not just a residual from a lost faith but part of a new faith, that my life is a small part of life, that DNA uses us as carriers for meaning on a much longer time scale, that discipline and personal sacrifice can produce more good collectively than any loss personally, and that without ethics these larger goods will be impossible.
5
Enough with the celebrities!
Are we going to change our presidents from one we don't favor to one we think we will like we change channels on our TV to find a better show. Surely we must have intelligent people people who can serve in this country whose primary accomplishments transcend being a television celebrity.
11
Indeed, there are those educated and experienced individuals; yet our increasingly illiterate society opts to tune them out.
2
The mistake that many commentators make (such as Mr. Douthat) is assuming that if Ms Winfrey becomes president she will be a spiritual guru and queen of enlightenment as she is today. Those qualities and more may propel her to the presidency, but once there she will reinvent herself. She is a emotional pragmatist and will realize-that people will want someone who is serious, knows the issues, surrounds themselves with first rate people and is still empathetic and can feel your pain. Obama , for all his talents and smarts, came across as aloof during important times early on his presidency. If Trump was the antidote to Obama just as Obama was the antidote to Bush then Oprah will have to reinvent herself if she is to be the antidote to Trump. Yes she shares his celebrity, charisma and wealth but I think she knows she is going to have to reinvent herself and find a space that falls between the shine and emptiness of celebrity( which we are tiring of) and the wonkiness and boringness of a experienced politician which the country might crave in 2020. If she can pull this off, I think she can win in 2020.
Never heard of her before. But I'd never heard of Trump until he ran for the Republican nomination.
Wouldn't we be better off with a traditional politician, even a "political hack", with government experience and who knew how to forge coalitions? Someone like Lyndon Johnson, who united all wings of the Democratic Party, or the Republican equivalent?
2
I am getting sick of the media anointing and promoting celebrity presidential candidates. I like Oprah but she is no more qualified ti be President than Trump. You would think we would have learned by now.
13
I'm glad for Oprah that she is rich and popular and has her own TV show and TV network (take that, Mr. President) and she can give a rousing speech, but that just makes her the matter to Trump's anti-matter. Michelle Obama is way smarter, has just as much charisma, and doesn't believe in weird, non-scientific nonsense. She'd make a much better President, so why aren't we talking about her instead? This speaks volumes about the leadership vacuum in the Democratic party, which was dominated for 25 years by the now-dead Clintons, the interlopeing Barack Obama notwithstanding. I'd rather have Michelle than Oprah any day. Obama 2020!
7
Good column, Ross. You forgot to mention one ascendant American spiritual tradition, Strident nationalism draped in the Bible. The kind Evangelicals increasingly practice. It preaches that American nationalism is sacrosant, and anyone who doesn't toe the lines - including liberals, Democrats and brown people - are the enemy. And they should be treated with disdain. And it puzzlingly calls itself "Christianity." I imagine they would be the most strident opponents of a hypothetical Oprah candidacy.
2
Oprah's spirituality is neither here nor there. Let US not forget her considerable skill as a journalist and as a businesswoman. She knows how to use facts in a productive way. She knows how to find the best talent to help her achieve her goals.
If she decides to run and if she wins, she would be a better president than Trump.
The United States is US. We get the government we deserve.
2
Oprah would get eaten up in Washington. As Donald Trump is learning, he has to deal with a many tentacled beast that challenges him at every turn. There is a reason most presidents age prematurely from their time in office. Unlike Trump though, I think she would have some semblance of what she was getting into. Having said that, Oprah....leave it alone!
1
Regardless of her potential for success, she ought remain our high priestess and resist impulses to run for office -- for the good of her country. We've already turned the presidency into a cult of personality. We need to fight against its becoming every celebrity's resume capper.
3
I am reminded of the surgeon peering over a patient, scalpel in hand, when an attending nurse notices something very odd. Truth be told, this fellow is no doctor, but he feels empowered to tackle the job because he stayed at a Holiday Inn last night.
Do we really think helping design the future and well being our country is a task to be undertaken by a television personality, even if she is beloved and well-intentioned ? One reason the "debates" were so popular is that Trump entertained us with outrageous behaviors. Hillary, on the other hand, wanted to instruct us with her carefully designed plans. We chose the ear candy and look what a mess we are in.
My advice to Oprah is to be careful what you wish for, and know thyself.
To my fellow countrymen, man-up. Perform due diligence even though it may lack a lot of yuks.
3
Oprah tapped into generational white middle class guilt and has profited handsomely. She is a success because she filled the longing of many to demonstrate that a post racial society was in fact a reality.
But, while this was happening there were more than a few women of color who were making their marks in business, education, politics, the arts, science, and medicine. Instead of advancing Oprah in a feel good moment, a concerted effort should be made to bring these women into the spotlight. Among them is surely a potential candidate for president.
6
Between Douthat's pseudo-theological ramblings and commenters' yearning for a secular Messiah, note recent Oprah coverage, my conclusion is that both sides suffer from the same kind of wishful thinking that gave us Donald J. Trump. Whether Barack H. Obama also was vaulted to the heights by it remains an open question. Celebrity has its place, it remains to be seen if it will be an amusing footnote in our political history or a paradigm shift with unknown consequences.
Americans' intolerance for boredom is a symptom of minds that aren't engaged, that are susceptible to the allure of the shiny object or the newest consumer fad. Long range planning followed by sustained action might be dull and tedious, hard work but the longer it gets put off the more the climate will degrade. If any one problem deserves primary attention, climate change is it. Addressing it comprehensively will break the log jam that has prevented so much other progress. Given the need of Americans for quick results, a Manhattan Project for clean energy is long overdue.
The fossil fuel industries and its lobbyists need to become just that: fossils. Show me a celebrity candidate with that as a central issue and I could accept that, otherwise, I predict more of the same dumbed down platitudes and promises from celebrities and so-called public servants.
4
This is the best comment and aligned with what I wrote in the comments to another piece on Oprah. The Right and Left have more in common than they think - they both want someone to worship. They both seek a Messiah. Why can't the president be a boring man or woman who simply possesses the tenacity to get the job done? Why does that person need to inspire us? America will not be made great again, but neither did we get "hope and change". Enough with the deification of presidents.
4
Ross, why do you have to be so dualistic about belief? Both your insistence that "religious individualism" is a belief in "false ideas" resulting in "fatal consequences" and the anti-traditionalists' insistence that orthodox belief is just as false and just as fatal seem to me to be two sides of a coin minted in base metal.
I cringe as the motivational speaker walks on stage, whether it be at a business, otherwise secular, or religious venue. With few exceptions, they give me the creeps. They are also an American type going back way before the Revolution, so it isn't as if they represent some recent trend anymore than Pope Benedict XVI was effectively the palsied hand of the Middle Ages come to make the modern world receive its wages for sin.
On the interaction of religious belief and the state, I follow my ancestors Roger Williams' and Anne Hutchinson's belief in strict separation of state and religion. Throughout world history the entwining of state and religion has been the most false of ideas with the most fatal of consequences.
I seldom watched Oprah's show because I was working when it aired. I'm glad she encouraged a lot of people to read books. I think she is often a more than competent actress. The motivational push does not move me. I wouldn't vote for her in a Democratic primary and only reluctantly in the general if she made it that far. I'd have to because she doesn't represent the false ideas and fatal consequences of Republicans. That's my dualism for you.
6
An astute and clear description of the American religious/spiritual landscape. Thanks for your clarity!
I have always admired Oprah for her talents, her moral compass, and her way of connecting with people in uplifting ways.
But her potential candidacy? I am inclined to hope that it will never happen, for her sake as much as for the country's.
The path to political power should rarely come through celebrity. If the Trump presidency has taught us nothing else, it has taught us that competence as president requires personal traits and political experience that celebrity doesn't provide and may even preclude.
While Oprah is a woman of substance, imagination, and empathy, with many skills, she has no political experience. It is understandable that Americans have come to belittle politicians and political expertise given the current state of our politics, but it is wrong. If a contractor does a lousy job in building a house, you'd hire a more competent contractor, not a doctor or an astronomer.
The presidency requires skills and competencies that Oprah has not developed yet. If she decides to eventually run for president, she should run for local or state office, then perhaps governor in order to acquire them.
America does not need a guru or a savior in the White House. We need honest, experienced politicians dedicated to public service, who understand and value our political system running for high office. Oprah is honest and dedicated to public service, I think, but an experienced politician? Not at all.
3
Her moral compass? Call it a wealth compass, because that seems to be her true north.
1
Oddly, given my usual antipathy for all things Douthat, I think he describes the Oprah phenomenon fairly accurately. The problem is that he takes it all seriously.
I see Oprah as a particularly skilled huckster. I happen to agree with some of her politics, to the extent anyone actually knows, and she is a surprisingly legitimate actor. But she is essentially a huckster, selling moisturizers for the soul, albeit with all natural ingredients and lovely packaging. Her foggy spirituality, New Age enthusiasm, and odd bedfellows do not make a compelling presidential candidate.
She is far better than Trump, but every high school student I taught last year is far better than Trump.
The Presidency is a position requiring deep experience, a sound, rational understanding of history and the Constitution, and evidence of a genuine commitment to public service.
We don't need Prophets, Priestesses or Queens, no matter how dulcet their tones or gentle their sermons.
8
While comparing Oprah to the current, there is no question that she is far superior. But I wonder if she would be a good campaigner and possibly a confused executor of the job. She has rarely been thwarted in getting what she wants. Politics is all about being thwarted. The bar is as low as it has ever been when looking at alternatives. I hope we don't use Trump as the only bar to surpass.
3
Why not Oprah?
Trump, for better or worse, opened the floodgates to basically anybody running and being elected president, plausibly qualified or not.
I always thought Reagan proved that point once and for all, but still.
Oprah seems to make a lot of people feel better about themselves, and we sure could use some of that, especially after enduring at least a few more years of the current occupant of the office.
7
This is not about Oprah. It’s about progress,inclusion, diversity,wisdom, compassion,sanity and much more.
in other words- it’s about everything that the current presidency is not.
4
Talking passionately, and at length, about her favorite cookie or her favorite bean bag chair or her favorite lamp reveals an Oprah of secularity and materialism - not an Oprah of ideas or acumen in world economics or the problems of unemployed white coal miners in West Virginia. It will be a matter of minutes until she reveals just how truly out of her depth she is, but it does laughably reinforce the strong perception of a democratic party continuing to drift into irrelevancy.
4
An American 'Monarchy' would offer an alternative to 'presidency' for mega- and wanna be- personalities. It would allow them to gain some 'influence' and popularity without the need to interfere directly in politics.
if such a route had been available to Mr Trump, we might all be benefiting now; including himself. Adoration and 'influence' without direct power or responsibility. better a 'king' than a " * king-nuisance".
1
Thank you, Ross. This reflection is brilliant.
Not an Oprah fan. Very odd exuberance over bread in an early weight watchers commercial does not bode well.
2
I hope Oprah does not run. She is smart, passionate, compassionate, and competent. However she does not have the deep understanding of our democratic process, rule of law, or any experience in legislative or judicial process. I always heard, in the United States you can grow up to be anything. That meant working at something long enough to master it and then achieving it. Being a billionaire does not qualify you for the presidency. Unfortunately since Citizens United it seems to have become necessary.
I think Oprah’s ability to tell a story, reveal her passion, and touch people deeply is amazing. Maybe she should give classes to Democratic candidates on how to be alive and engaged. Can you teach that? I hope you can, because I feel we are floundering in a wasteland of dead and disengaged politicians.
7
This is a thoughtful essay. I think the Oprah boomlet will quickly fade and she’ll go back to being a mogul/self-help guru/New Age-y priestess. I hope the next Democratic nominee for president is a deeply experienced political pro who really knows the issues. And by the way: No more septuagenarians — please.
2
Have we not learned anything after electing a TV celebrity to the nation's highest office? Please. Let's not make the same mistake twice.
8
I laughed out loud at the tongue-in-cheek lines in Douthat's column. Oprah the prophetess/priestess originated in Hollywood, and then pursued a path via television to becoming the common woman's popessa. Though she is obviously intelligent, I wonder about her level of education. Did she finish high school? Personal charism is not a substitute for genuine education or for solid political experience. Star power works for movies and television and for a populace that draws daily sustenance from the same. Unfortunately, given the quality of education in the U.S., that populace has increased immeasurably in number.
1
In college, she studied - surprise! - "communications". (Oh, how women excel at "communication." In fact, they seem to be born with the ability, unlike most men, including me.) Anyway, she has no experience in government, no apparent education in law, political science, public administration. Her billions notwithstanding, she strikes me as flakey as Trump is mendacious and squirrelly. Totally unfit for the presidency.
4
It seems she was a good student.
Was Dubya?
Was Trump?
2
Oprah is our heresy laid bare. She will not be president if she runs, she will be Queen by her own deitized divine right. She unlike Trump is charming, and like Trump shockingly different. She has been building a dogma her whole life and that dogma has one rule "How could anyone not like Oprah".
In recent years she has handed her cultural dominance to Ellen, who in her own right is as likely as not to be the follow up act to Oprah. Oprah need only extend the smallest olive branch to conservatives in this country to gain support. After Trump many Americans could use overwhelming kindness and sweetness. Above all else Oprah has defined a moral law "Don't be mean", exactly the opposite of Trump and one that can be caged in Jesus speak.
Like Chamberlin, American culture is assuming a maginot line protects the democracy. The problem is the lady giving out candy who seems to come from the center, is the panzer division coming from the south.
No one will speak as the supreme court is packed by a super majority in the senate. Few will lament hate speech on all sides being restricted by this new supreme court. The media will celebrate as it gets feel good fodder, and a healthy focused population.
If Oprah wins, Civil war is not the outcome. The outcome is the death of America the republic and the rise of America the monarchy. The secular not prophet, but deity will be established in Oprah. It may take 20 years but if Oprah wins, it was fun America.
1
Is there anyone who might want to be President around who has had actual governing experience.
8
That Oprah's candidacy is even being bruited about as a possibility indicates several things: First, that the two-party legacy system from the 19th century is effectively dead. Second, that personality cults will take over governance and the electorate will look to celebrities with "charisma" and "caring" as more viable than career politicians. Oprah will use her status as an African-American woman (as opposed to a black one) to leverage votes via the guilt that such a status could inflict on white suburbia. After all, her show here in Chicago featured many tiers of wealthy suburban women from Winnetka, Lincolnwood and other superrich suburbs of Chicago, so that Oprah could bask in their approval. And they in turn could convey to the TV audience that once tuned into the show, she or he had black TV friend for an hour. And so her candidacy may have legs.
1
The thought of a spiritual "guru" for president is quite lovely at this current time.
5
Oprah Winfrey is much to smart to run for President.
This column's vague meanderings might possibly have some meaning for the spiritually inclined but has nothing to do with politics, despite Mr. Douthat's bizarre effort to link politics to Ms Winfrey's minor interests and his own confused religious beliefs.
Dan Kravitz
Dan Kravitz
2
Paraphrasing the title: trump: Dealmaker, genius ...deity? Look at the gang of evangelicals praying for their anointed leader in the oval office last year. They're not vague about their flavor of alt-Christianity. Read the NYT article "Museum of the Bible Is a Safe Space for Christian Nationalists" at https://nyti.ms/2EdndHG that show how truly scary this group is. They resemble the Iranian tyrannical clerical dictatorship.
Oprah has not made herself pope, but trump has claimed supernatural (deity) powers above all - preaching the gospel of lies and greed.
A secular society allows many religions and faiths to coexist - and is not "anticlerical." A dominant religion will quash secularism and other religions as fast as was done in Iran. Religion by mob doesn't make it right. It should be individual and not imposed on others who don't believe the same.
In a world of absolutist belief between religions, only one can be true, or more likely all are wrong. I'm not sure what is worse: pseudoscience or anti-science? "Evangelical Christians" and "Christian Science" are oxymorons.
Religious indoctrination should be restricted to adults 18 years and over, when they can make an adult decision about whether they want to be indoctrinated, or their anatomical parts snipped.
The character destruction of Oprah has begun, even though she's not running for any office. She won't run because her she will be viciously maligned by the religious right and the Republican Defamatory Machinery.
2
She's also being trashed by the Liberal hate machine, whose emotional thinking is not much different than the Trumpsters.
But celebrities are used to reactive unthinking hate, I think she knows that a Presidential run requires thick skin and a secure sense of self.
Antidote!!!
Someone powerful enough in her appeal across age groups, racial groups, professions etc. to have knocked Trump off the news cycle!
Who else has been able to do that?
Unfortunately, we are in a Constitutional crisis at this moment. And a deranged man, propped up by sycophants and cronies, is able by his anticis and lunacy to rock the news cycles day after endless day.
So, while many disparage Oprah for real reasons or trollish ones, I am trying to think strategically about the mess we’re in, including the Constitutional loopholes oligarchs and sycophants have used to capture nearly all the levers of power (except our sane Free Press and parts of the Judiciary).
My view is that we need to recognize two things. First we need some Constitutional changes to prevent voter suppression and monarchical, despotic misuse of power in our presidential system. Next we must get some research on how to change the third of Americans who steadfastly lack the insight to realize their proneness to propaganda. Who are swayed by charlatans and nonsense. Who view the idea of blowing up the status quo as a good way to get social change. Or any kind of change.
Oprah is inexperienced politically. Normally I would see that as anathema to a run for president.
But we must recapture the levers of power - if only long enough to close the Constitutional loopholes. Led by a person of compassion, honesty, selflessness, able to attract the best advisors. And the VOTES!
4
Oprah's fan base is exactly like Trump's; poorly educated and not wealthy. They see her as successful and believe everything she touts. She has a long list of guests selling very dubious ideas. Dr. Oz launched his snake oil show after appearing with her and her fan base falls for his stupid and sometimes dangerous ideas. She has had financial advisors who are now touting their dubious theories on TV again with the Oprah imprimatur. The list of fraudulent ideas peddled on her show is long; non-fiction books which were not, diets that don't work, health theories like anti-vaxxers.
She is like Evita Perron, living the lavish lifestyle on behalf of her "subjects'. Like Trump, if it doesn't glitter it is not ostentatious enough. She once threw a temper tantrum in Switzerland because a saleswoman wouldn't show her a $38,000 purse. She was in her Oprah get-up, her words, and the woman did not recognize her "royal highness".
When she started her network, if Discovery hadn't supported it for the first few years, it would have been off the air within a year. Yet she takes all the credit. Why does anyone want to kowtow to her or her twin Trump? People think if they attach themselves to glitz, some will rub off on them. They should examine the failures too. Many of her so-called charities have been under investigation. She started her career by being different from Phil Donahue, but now she has become the twin of another man, this time a temper tantrum throwing show off.
3
There was no "tantrum" and she was just offended at not being given service because of the color of her skin. They seemed to think she was going to steal the merchandise. This happens a lot to black people in fancy stores.
5
Ms. Winfrey is a show-woman. Just like The Con Don is a show-man.
Neither are qualified to be president of the United States of America. This is not junior high or high school where popularity gets students elected. This is not college prep school either.
The United States of America needs people well educated in government and the world and, most important, a primary interest in preserving democracy for all. Everyone has self-interest. We must have leaders who put self-interest behind the interest of WE THE PEOPLE who do the work to make this country great.
13
There are no qualifications for being President except one: the ability to Win. That's Trump.
And there are only two qualifications for being a good President: the ability to Win and Character. That's Oprah.
The Presidency is not something you can train for, and if you can't Win your party does not govern. That means Winning is primary.
Furthermore, it's common for a supposedly qualified candidate to lose (Clinton), because governing requires an opposite skill set to Winning.
Winning is really the only real qualification (see Trump), because experience can be delegated.
2
WE THE PEOPLE need to change that, Fourteen. It's ludicrous that there aren't more requirements for such a momentous role. Ludicrous.
Mr. Douthat asks: "What happens if the pope of the American religion considers a presidential run?"
That's easy. We get more of the same.
Somehow it looks as if Americans refuse to learn their lesson when it comes to making the differentiation between TV talk-show icons and real life, and the demands of holding the highest political office in the land.
One might have thought they'd gotten the drift by now, after having already put one into the White House.
This is not to cast any aspersions on Ms. Winfrey, but for all the good she has done, or might even do, the last thing this country needs right now is another TV talk-show host.
5
Oprah is sometimes over produced and Deepak Chopra does not do politics for the simple reason that he wants to appeal to all people. The seductive quality of Oprah's spiritual quests which I find interesting do not make her qualified to be President. We have separation of church and state in this country and unless the Constitution is rewritten it will remain so. A spiritual quest might be more important for some than being part of a political campaign but combining both leads to being a cult member instead of an actively engaged citizen. I have had enough of amateur hour at the highest levels of government.
6
I'd prefer a president who subscribes to a "religious individualism that blurs the line between the God out there and the God Within" to one who's blurring the line between the Devil out there and the Devil Within. After all, we really don't know what's "out there," do we? But after a year of Trump, we certainly know what's within.
11
There is a side to Oprah that no one seems to understand or know. She played the "understand your pain" role well in her TV talk shows and donates a lot of money. So do many of the rich folks. Religiosity is personal and hopefully will stay that way should she be the President.
The key is respect for other creeds, including the atheist perspective, and I think she carries a whole moveable feast of those keys!
1
I am one of those who is not interested in TV shows and their performers. But, if one is thinking about "Opra for President", she would be not better than Ivanka Trump -- both level zero.
7
The serious attention focusing on a the possibility of Oprah considering a presidential run underscores the state of affairs--politically and culturally--we are in. That's the scary part.
21
I think there is something here and I was decidedly on Ross Douthat's side in concurring that pop culture does tell important truths about a societies religion and morals when religious scholar types criticized him for writing about Elizabeth Gilbert in Bad Faith. That said I think of Oprah as being closer to popular moral thinkers like Mr. Rogers, Dale Carnegie or perhaps Jon Stewart if you're strictly areligious than Francis or Graham. Maybe, I'm wrong though there is a more mystical leaning in her views than any of those figures and she does seem to have more have self consciously co-opted religious language and customs.
There are no solutions to a country that is hopelessly divided other than division. Oprah is certainly a head of state that most Americans could get behind but governance is simply not in the cards in a country that has been hopelessly divided since the GOP convention of 1964 when one month after the Civil Rights Act the Republican Platform gave full voice to those calling for hatred and division.
Americans love their country but their envisioned countries do not even resemble one another. If this was a football game Oprah would be called a "Hail Mary". The odds are long but needing a touchdown when you are on your own goal line there is not much left but "Hail Mary".
3
Human being, for most, includes a search for meaning. The inconsistencies of particularistic conventional organized religions are problematic for any rational person - else how would religion be the focus of so much tribalism, war and hatred?
Oprah seems an earnest seeker of universal meaning and rather than dictating this or that; she invites acolytes along for the voyage. Some alleys are dead-ends. And some alleys may seem like schmaltz. But she feeds a large sect that yearns for inner peace. The likelihood that she could continue that mantle in the maelstrom blood-bath of day-to-day politics is awfully dubious. But, given the choice of flagrant animus driving our governance and even the pretense of a justice-seeking journey, I wouldn't be too surprised if MANY gravitated to her, if only in response to the psychic agony we're undergoing now.
4
If celebrity-only Presidents is the new norm, I would much prefer the stark realism of President Bruce Springsteen.
19
I vote for Willie Nelson, he's about the right age too.
1
Enough with celebrities/actors with no political background running for office way above their pay grade:. George Murphy-song and dance man; Ronald Reagan-B class actor; Arnold Schwarzenegger-weightlifter/actor; Jesse Ventura-wrestler and the ultimate bad actor in the White House. Really America? Name recognition seems to be the only qualification - policy positions don't matter. So NO Oprah, don't run! And I'm a left-coast Democrat.
15
It's been obvious since JFK that a presidential candidate's religion is of limited importance to the public. Polls indicate that atheists are still viewed with suspicion, but Trump has shown that even the most transparent lip service is enough to overcome it. This column is obviously intended to portray Oprah's spiritual side as quackery. In doing so, Roth neither elevates his own religion nor any other above quackery, but it does highlight his narrow-mindedness. If Oprah runs for public office she may or may not win. Either way, her religious beliefs will not influence the outcome.
6
I am never moved by sweeping, emotional, passionate speeches of the type Oprah gave, TRUMP gives, and even Obama gave. I am clearly in the minority - everyone I know is raving about Oprah's speech. I don't get it. To me it's a performance.
18
One of the most important points that you set up in your observations, is that Oprah as religious entity is inclusive and welcoming, not pushing any single faith system or doctrine. For many secular and spiritual people, the last year has been uncomfortable to say the least when observing the use of religion as a separating factor or "us against them" mentality. Rather than focusing on a specific belief system, Oprah's message around religion is symbolized by a large tent that welcomes all (you know, like the tenets of all religions before mankind gets involved).
Oprah as a leader would be interesting because it would certainly assist in pushing religious intolerance back to the fringes of society. The real beauty is the self-help vibe that effortlessly flows from her. There is always hope for real learning and transcendence. Let's not forget that it was Oprah who years ago tried to educate white supremacists on her show. It didn't go well then, but I'd love to give her another chance. If anyone can push "we're all the same" and get people to listen, it's Oprah.
One last thought, does anyone really believe that Ms. Winfrey would give anything less than 100 percent in learning the ins and outs of governing based on her success to date? The woman crushes everything she puts her mind to. I have full confidence in her doing her homework when it comes to executing as the head of the executive branch.
69
Oprah's ability to inspire and change the world for the good would far outweigh her "inexperience" with the mechanics of politics.
But does Oprah really want to get down in the cesspool to defend herself from the disgusting insults DJT which we all know he's plotting against her already.
On the other hand, DJT's vile attacks on a beloved woman who personifies Honor, Dignity, Integrity and TRUTH, may well be just the thing that causes his demise.
3
I also think Oprah would recruit top talent to her Cabinet and set things in motion to beef up the workforce in agencies such as the State Department and the EPA. One doesn't do all Oprah does well without a real talent for delegating to others who have considerable talent and expertise.
3
Oprah promotes fake medicines and their practitioners like Dr. Oz. Would she be better than Trump? Of course, but there's plenty wrong with her.
3
What is truly transformative is that Americans are considering a host of non politicians as candidates for the presidency. Trump has opened that box and god help us if celebrity, rather than skill, experience, and brains becomes the deciding factor in future elections.
91
I agree if celebrity is the only reason to vote for a candidate. I see Oprah as having those qualities you listed of skill and brains if not experience in the political realm. Considering the high number of people in Congress with no integrity, skill or brains who may run, I don't see this as a disqualiflying issue.
1
It is more true that those politicians closed the box on themselves. Revulsion was a prime political motive in 2016.
Good point. Yet I might vote for a successful football coach rather than Oprah, because coaching is mostly about achieving success in a competitive environment. Vince Lombardi as POTUS or at least Sec. of Defense, that would be something! FWIW, Eisenhower did a stint as an Army football coach.
I like Oprah, but I hope she doesn't run.
What was much more compelling about Oprah's speech was the inclusion of the story of Recy Taylor, the African American woman from Alabama who refused to remain silent about her brutal rape by wretched white men that led to organizing in the African-American community in the name of justice, civil rights and basic humanity.
America's history is riddled with the dark heart of white supremacy and its corrupt political handmaiden, the 0.1% Prosperity Gospel.
The political antidote for this national political cancer has more often than not been provided by America's great people of color, and frequently by women of color.
Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth, Claudette Colvin, Rosa Parks, Recy Taylor, Fannie Lou Hamer, Maya Angelou, Michelle Obama, Oprah Winfey....all of these great African-American women (and many more) carry the burning torch of freedom inside them that shines for real political justice; all these woman have made America great in their own way by giving voice to oppressed Americans weighed down by America's darkest angels of patriarchy, misogyny, greed, 'tradition' and wretched white supremacy and white privilege.
All of these black women have lifted America up.
And last month, it was the great black women of Alabama who rose up in electoral outrage and redeemed America again by rejecting that despicable fake Christian and tiny Southern white man Roy Moore.
That is the spirit of America...and it "bends toward justice".
153
And don't forget Barbara Jordan. I still hear that powerful voice on my darkest days.
For me the most "telling" part of Oprah's delivery was the "linoleum floor" she claimed to be sitting on as a young girl. No, she wouldn't have one of those these days. But some of us still do, Oprah. And you don't get that.
2
Linoleum was invented in 1855. Oprah is not older than that.
Compared to the optimism of past decades, the arc bending toward justice is getting longer and more difficult as time goes on. Who could have predicted, after the progress made with the civil rights movement, all that's followed? A US criminal justice system that violates human rights, with a much
larger % incarcerated than most other nations, with reduced economic inequality/living standards, more school & n. hood segregation. That our politicians would enflame racial resentments and approve white supremacy rhetoric---in the 21st century.
Is it 1 step forward, and 2 steps back? Or more?
Democrats think they can out-Trump Trump with another celebrity billionaire business person, and that their chances will be even better if the candidate has an aura of warm spirituality. But what we need is a strong, positive, concrete message on the critical issues of our time: the declining middle class, the impact of automation and outsourcing, the concentration of economic and political power in a small number of global corporations, the useless for-profit health insurance system, the exorbitant cost of college, our third rate infrastructure and the militarization of many police departments. Some relevant experience would be very mice as well.
32
...And not just a message, but a method. We need s omeone who knows how to make change happen.
Would Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton be comfortable with Oprah telling them what to do in negotiating the Iran nuclear deal or talking with North Korea? How would they think Oprah would fare with Putin? Would they wholeheartedly accept her ideas linking vaccines to autism or endorse the myriad supplements taken by Suzanne Somers for longevity or the open floodgates of advice from tabloid TV Dr. Oz? Let's inject some sanity here. This case is closed.
Oprah is a philanthropist, a motivational speaker, and a celebrity. We need her help in these areas for the good that she can do. We do not need her to be president of the United States. Hopefully, Oprah will come to her senses soon enough. And she should consider what fellow celebrity The Rock would say. "Know your role."
Now, Michelle Obama -- that might be interesting.
48
Michelle Obama is too realistic, too smart and too thoughtful to want to be president. Which, in a classic Catch-22 fashion, is exactly why she would be such a good one.
53
Blue Moon, I was with you till you got to Michele Obama. Being a first lady is no way a qualification for becoming the head of state of a very large country. She's well-educated, smart, gracious, lovely. Let's not try to turn her into a president.
"Let's inject some sanity here. This case is closed." Exactly. It is sad that we are even having this discussion about Oprah as a Presidential candidate. Scary.
5
Good grief: "...a religious individualism that blurs the line between the God out there and the God Within."
Enough WOOWOO. Enough of celebrity and "spirituality"(fake and otherwise)! Enough of Christian jihad (internal or external), please less "God" in the public sphere (whose "God", whose rules and over whom?). Not celebrity Trump....not celebrity Oprah. Not Christian Sharia Law over the other kind(s).
What happened to the separation of WOOWOO and State? In an era where
faith-based "alternative facts"(organized tribal or not) seem to be trumping (!) evidence/vetted facts, we need less enthusiasm for embracing celebrity/ charisma weaponized WOOWOO (celebrity "spirituality"/religion), not more of it.
No wonder the Texas Republicans tried to get "critical thinking" expunged from their public schools. It undermines "religion".
35
I think we need to draw some lines between celebrities' value to society and contemplating their futures as gurus, presidents, or popes.
Oprah Winfrey, Jeff Bezos, Gwenyth Paltrow...let them serve in an elected office in their home states before egging them on to something higher. If they're not willing to do even that, why should they be awarded with higher positions that allow them to make laws and change policy?
We're still watching the movie about a celebrity becoming president, and it's not very good.
256
Exactly right. Want to be President, the most powerful and influential political position in the world? Fine. But first you need experience in campaigning, crafting policies and a platform. Expose yourself to the rigors and mudslinging of a campaign. Win an election or two. And most importantly: get real experience governing, which means compromising and working with people who don't share your views and who don't have to agree with you. Then we'll talk.
4
You're confusing a good-hearted celebrity with a dysfunctional personality celebrity and concluding that celebrities make bad Presidents. That's bad logic, like having a bug in your computer.
Celebrity is not a sufficient condition for a bad President.
In fact, celebrity is the opposite; it's a major advantage for a President.
This is because the most important qualification for the Presidency is Winning. If you can't win, your party cannot govern.
Since celebrity is defined as the ability to win over audiences, being a celebrity is a very good thing, if you want to Win.
Note that Celebrity was Trump's sole qualification for the Presidency, and he won against all odds.
3
"We're still watching the movie about a celebrity becoming president, and it's not very good."
We did that with Reagan too and pretty much got the same result.
Well, this is a cogent explanation of the thinking of someone who thinks his own Pope is a hippie.
25
I'll listen to criticism of he Oprah for prez movement, but not from a republican and not from a conservative.
14
Wow. A wonderful expression of the closed (liberal) mind.
Neither Oprah or Trump has a clue about science, medicine or engineering. Each perfectly exemplifies the know nothing, dumbed down reliance on TV celebrities that now drives American popularity contests at every level, including presidential elections.
We get the leaders we deserve.
41
“Dumbed-down” is a generous description. Evidently voters want a known personality as a leader. This is the product of a personality-fame cult society. Unfortunately our value system is skewed for the well known not the well qualified.
2
This column seems to me to express an unspoken desire to see the democrats do something as ridiculous as the republicans have done in selling out their party and country to Trump. Not happening, Ross. The oprah chatter is just that, but trump is the real republican president.
19
What in the world is BLUE state spirituality?? I am a church going blue stater and consider myself Christian. The Red stater false evangelism is blasphemous rather than pious. Your divisions are false and not helpful for this country because they help perpetuate the Red stater's false sense of superiority and superficial morality.
35
I am a leftwing person, but I am willing to admit when Ross Douthat is right, as he is today. Oprah Winfrey, as Douthat writes, peddles a mushy, vaguely spiritual therapeutic doctrine of self-help. I agree with Douthat that Oprah will realize that being a rich entrepereur is a easy, lucrative, and makes her beloved by many, while being a politician is hard and will expose her to a firestorm of questions and criticism. Personally, I hope that the Oprah Winfrey boomlet will last about as long as the enthusiasm for Carly Fiorina or Ben Carson, both of whom enjoyed a week in the limelight in 2016, then faded into the background. If Oprah surprises me by becoming the Democratic nominee, I will vote for some obscure third-party candidate in 2020.
124
Being a "rich entrepereur" (sic) is not what makes Oprah beloved. It is her generous and accepting spirit. Put those together with her huge intelligence and compare her to the last Republican slate of 15+ candidates.
3
I never thought I would be able to concludec that Douthat could write something I understand and also agree with!! He must be getting smarter and closer to reality!!
...and give us 4 more years of Trump or the conservative agenda? She would have to be Trump 2.0 for me not to vote for her. At least she knows the difference between a truth and a lie.
5
Wouldn't it be a wonderful idea if a kind of constitutional American Dalai Lama became President? Just inspiring, inquiring, advising ?
3
This is generally a good article, but needs a "correction".
"... The secular approach is post-religious, scientistic, convinced that the laboratory and the microscope will ultimately account for everything that matters, while hopefully justifying a liberal society’s still-somewhat-Christian moral commitments along the way. ..."
Science is a beautiful and sublime magisterium. General Relativity is beautiful, the Burning Bush is petty, small, idiotic. Unlike clerics, scientists know that they don't know. Unlike the breathtaking arrogance of clerics who profess to know things they cannot possibly know, most scientists practice their craft with rigorous intellectual honesty and integrity. The competition, peer review process aspect of the scientific method demands this. No such thing exists in religion. Science provides answers, cures for disease, etc. Religion provides a nonsensical fog cover over the abyss. Science is as vast as the universe itself. Religion is petty and provincial, or as Hitchens would put it, a celestial North Korea.
I will take Misner, Thorne, Wheeler's book "Gravitation" over any sacred text any day of the week.
22
You sound like the most dogmatic of bible-thumping preachers. Such is the arrogance of science that all and sundry must be laid to rest at it's feet.
Consider that hardest of all sciences: physics. Do you realize that science rests entirely on the belief in a miracle?
"The universe, all of it, sprang from a single point of nothingness." That's the limit case for credulity.
If you ask, "What about before that, and before that?" The scientist will say those are wrong questions. A better answer is: "Turtles all the way down."
The problem with any belief is that you're precluded from believing the opposite and both science and religion are beliefs.
All thinking is like that, we never really know - we just think we know. Works well enough for daily living but I'd not make it a fetish. When Holy Science forgets it's limitations it suddenly becomes a religion and starts answering bad questions with bad answers.
1
@Fourteen
You seemed to have miss: "scientists know that they don't know"
Which part of my comment is "dogmatic"? Specifics please.
Science is a process, not a belief system: "The competition, peer review process aspect of the scientific method demands this. No such thing exists in religion."
Mr. Douthat,
Let me preface this comment by saying that NY Times says you are my most read opinion author. Which is a wonderful compliment to you because I mostly disagree with you on everything. Clearly, you write well enough to draw me in anyway. However, this article was unusually mean for you. Usually, you are generous in attributing value where others might snipe. But here you seem to be just sniping. I may feel the same way as you write in this article, but I didn't expect the meanness that I just read.
9
Sort of like the Roman Catholic Church at its most powerful: above kings and dictating war and peace and purity through burning at the stake?
Are you sure you want to discuss religion and power?
Are you sure you want us to remember the powerful sway of local priests only 30 years ago: such power that they could abuse male and female alike without fear of religious or secular punishment.
15
If Oprah is our "pope", Trump is the AntiChrist.
I think it's a sad state of affairs that TV stars are the new politicians. But if it must be (since most Americans only pay attention to name and brand) I will take Oprah over Trump any day. At least she is a true American success story. Not someone who used daddy's money to make billions off of bankrupting other people. At least she is a force for good rather than a force for greed.
17
Back in the 60s hippies invented the term to describe a certain mature female type as an "Earth Mother". You came to her to seek guidance in living your every day life. Oprah connects with many people on that level. It has absolutely nothing to do with the rough and tumble life of politics or an understanding of how the wheels of government work. We have become not a country of practical people but a nation amerced in a fantasy world where super heroes come from outside the world of politics to save us.
10
Interesting essay. It strikes me that O is a fake spiritual leader in the same way that Trump is a fake businessman. Both act a role, and, with little direct contact with reality, have learned to believe in it. Of course it's easy to imagine Oprah as a successful small town minister (or radio host), whereas it's hard to believe Trump would have been able to hold down a job without his inheritance. But that's maybe beside the point, and ignores the way that politics works in America.
Oprah, like the Democrats, preaches inclusivity & empathy from a pulpit of privilege & celebrity; Trump, like the Republicans, assumes that differences are perversities, that empathy oppresses the self-centered. Oprah & the Democrats seem like a corrupted version of something better. Trump & the Republicans haven't corrupted something; they've raised selfishness to an ideal. For them, corruption is the point, and therein lies their authenticity. They don't have to explain why Fox never corrects its "mistakes," or why Ryan's numbers never add up. They work with the image, not reality, which is why they're so often abysmally ignorant, yet successful. Oprah & the Democrats, on the other hand, can be honest & knowledgable, but never authentic. The contradiction is inherent in celebrity culture, in politics as entertainment, in government as a business. The Republicans embody the contradiction; the Democrats want to be something better, but cannot.
110
Martin - Your comment is spot on. In fact, it's even better than the main article.
1
Well said, Martin. But check the litmus paper: Ross is a Republican apologist and propagandist saddled with Trump, but who actually approves of what his party is doing. What else is there to know?
2
Yes, elitism, privilege, wealth, a faux humility, superficial empathy, a sycophantic panderer. Sadly, this is what Oprah has become.
1
Have you for a single moment considered the Church might have been wrong? That it wrongly, misinterpreted christ’s Teachings and propagated it through violent proselytizing?
What if God is truly not out there but within every living non living creature, witnessing the entire creation through its children’s eyes ears nose throat?
For thousands of years we have been forced to have a medium, a go between God and us, in the form of priests of Vedic Times, rabbis, pastors, clergy, mullah and imams. What if we don’t need these middle men? What if we can each access ourselves the shortest and most direct path which is no “secret” at all, it is open and available to all, irrespective of caste creed color denomination faith religion height weight and nationality? It is so obvious we overlook it. Yet, it’s most forgiving compassionate allowing us, giving us the free will, to try again and again.
Ross, just because you choose a Christian faith does not mean you are Preferred. Or chosen. Each one of us by default has that status.
23
This is the nuttiest column I’ve read in a long time.
So Ross Douthat, who repeatedly bemoans the decline of the Catholic Church and is appalled by “individualistic,” non-dogmatic, not-patriarchal religions, has dubbed Oprah as America’s “most important religious leader.” He makes this claim in a snit because he’s appalled by Deepak Chopra and the word “guru.”
Dear Mr. Douthat, many of us who do not attend your church are also appalled by Deepak Chopra and the word “guru.” Most of us are not vegans, and we don’t preach against gluten. We do not worship the moon. We read books and newspapers. Sorry.
Why have Frank Bruni and Ross Douthat gotten hooked by this idea that Oprah might be a ready and plausible presidential candidate? She’s a happy talker. Skilled, yes, and perhaps no more improbable than Trump.
But let’s hope and trust that this country’s voters have learned something by watching a billionaire entertainer never elected to any political office flounder and slop around in the White House.
36
With you 100% except for the snipe about gluten. I have celiac disease and it’s become quite demoralizing to see the responses I get when I inquire as to whether a proffered food has gluten in it. The sort of faces that make me want to say, “what if your face freezes like that forever?”. Referring to gluten eschewing has become shorthand for “nutty snowflake.”
It’s just like the way ADHD, a difficult (and real - I was a special education teacher) became sloppy shorthand for a short attention span, typically referring to the lightening speed of consumer choices.
Because of this backlash against gluten-free eaters, I’m starting to suspect that people think the need to avoid gluten isn’t real, and just silly, so they’re lying to me about whether or not something has a gluten-containing ingredient in it. This is dangerous to my health, and is why I say I have celiac even when I’d rather not talk about my medical diagnoses with a stranger.
Thanks for listening.
5
Did Oprah ever purport a religious perspective, even a squishy-centered, candy-coated one? If not, then she could hardly lead one. Strip away Blow’s religious taxonomic analysis of Oprah and her life and one had a basic, unmentioned, fact becomes obvious: Oprah can give a speech. In our media-centered politics, where policy is considered explaining, and explaining is considered losing, the ability to persuade becomes paramount in a leader. In this area, Oprah is beyond the best. I hope she does it.
2
The more vulnerable members of U.S, society (immigrants, Muslims, gays, the poor, the natural environment) who have been victimized by President Trump and the policies he has enacted don’t feel they have the luxury of voting for an ideal candidate. Nor do I. Oprah Winfrey would not be my ideal candidate, but I’m keeping an open mind as long as the Donald occupies the White House.
Those who are quick to reject Oprah as a presidential candidate, but who loath Donald Trump should bear in mind that an incumbent president, even Trump, has an inherent advantage over his challenger, whoever that person may be. Too many people who oppose Trump naively assume that he will be either impeached, ousted in the Republican primary, or easily defeated in 2020.
As long as Trump’s reelection remains a possible outcome in 2020, I will be evaluating each potential candidate, first and foremost, on the basis of who has the greatest chance of defeating him. Once there was a time when one could cast a vote for their ideal candidate—John Anderson, Ralph Nader, Jill Stein, etc.— because the differences between the two major party candidates were minuscule. Those days are over.
101
AGREED! 100%!
We must recapture the levers of power! We must choose someone dedicated, selfless, proven over a lifetime of success, who already has high favorables and can attract the BEST advisors. And MEDIA ATTENTION!
Also the votes!
If we get excellent people who drone on about policy, we won’t get the votes! We need excitement. Assertiveness. Appealing to every possible group of voters.
2
Absolutely correct. The only qualification that matters is: "Who has the highest probability of Winning?"
Talk of qualifications is from those who would rather self-righteously lose and take the world down with them. I can see them writing-in "Clinton."
John Anderson, Jill Stein, Ralph Nader were all ego-maniacs with tunnel vision and anyone who voted for them was an idiot.
2
Please, Ross. I'm and Atheist, not a Secularist, not an Agnostic. An Atheist.
We need less religion, be it traditional or Esalen mystico-spiritual, in government, not more.
And you're right, it was a long, deep wade to get to your confession that you have no idea what Oprah will do, or how all of what you wrote may apply.
36
The "religious" future of America, and indeed the world, is the growing understanding that we are all responsible for our own “spiritual” awakening. There have always been sages, saints, prophets, seers, old souls, wise men and women, etc. who point the way to a more enlightened existential experience and an evolution of self-consciousness through “right action”; but ultimately, the work of raising oneself up is a personal struggle full of failures, victories – and learning through experience.
As we come to understand that we are all apples on the same tree at different stages of our “spiritual” development, Ivolution Theory, the idea that human evolution has a psychological as well as physical aspect, will become the new science-religion of a world that bows less to dogma and more to a unifying wisdom and reason.
“One of the things that has to be faced is the process of waiting to change the system, how much we have got to do to find out who we are, where we come from and where we are going.” Ella Baker
2
Has aberration #45 set a new, low bar for candidates to leap? I hope not. Saying that Oprah (or virtually ANYONE else) would be "better than Trump" has no meaning for me. My cat would be a better choice for president than the current occupier of the office.
11
"Hey, why not..." thinking is part of how we ended up with Trump. The Presidency is not an entry-level political position.
15
I must admit, I loved the Pope-rah spoof. That Americans would even of think of reaching into Tinseltown for their next potential leader must confirm for our many spectators around the world that, yes, the United States is a political trainwreck in slow but accelerating motion. All we have to do is take the measure — in terms of statesmanship, considerable knowledge of the world, and intellect — of the leaders of all our peer nations and build a resume, one that will almost certainly include a demonstrable record of public service and experience in the dull, line by line political process of compromise and change. These are the skills we need. Let’s start looking for a leader who embodies them. Let’s, as they say, get real. Tinseltown and celebrity have only a tenuous connection to reality.
12
The Oprah! prospect really does feel like something out of 4th or 5th century Roman history, with off-the-charts late emperors filling an unfillable void. There will inevitably come a time when such an American (whatever that will mean) figure will be chosen, making Donald Trump look quite timid and traditional by comparison.
And I imagine you're right, Oprah! will come to her senses and not give up what she's got, which is pretty much everything (except I think some peaceful inner satisfaction, which as you suggest perpetuates the very thing she's selling and the fighting glow her fans so crave).
Then again, imagine a real crisis -- and a desperate mass-turning to some such spiritual/political charismatic salvation transforming panacea figure.
Hail, Caesar!
6
I do appreciate the Cliff's notes version of the continuum of American religious beliefs---not being a religious individual myself, this summary was helpful in understanding the discourse of some of my neighbors. Although I have found these mythical systems, just that mythical. Having said that, whatever gets you through the day, whether going to mass or meditating that's ok with me. What does concern me are not Oprah's personalized get through the day religion---as wacky as some of her beliefs are ---she still holds true to the ideals of all religious systems---grace, forgiveness, empathy, service. There is not a grain of these values in Trump, in fact, quite the opposite. Trump mirrors the hero systems that are developed by individuals and nations to "deny death" (Ernest Becker)---when these hero systems emerge they are capable of doing great harm to nations and civilizations.
8
In some ways, we are all Oprah.
As we all age we form our religious belief systems and political world view. Some of us keep it to ourselves, as we understand that our perspective is just too linked to our limited experience to be of much use to others. Some, like Oprah, find profit in becoming a public media person, the new prophets of this age.
But politics is a difficult profession. It needs professionals.
Just as an airplane needs very experienced and devoted pilots, Congress and the White House need intelligent and experienced professionals to help our Constitutional Republic survive.
Oprah just isn't that person. The Democrats have many great men and women who have been working for decades to learn their craft and to help the rest of us. We need a person with actual political qualifications to run for President, and she doesn't have them. Trump was obviously incompetent in everything except the rough and tumble of electioneering, but he was too arrogant to admit that. I ask that Oprah understand she could be help by getting a real professional into the White House.
Hugh Massengill, Eugene Oregon
139
Unfortunately, Trump is such a skillful manipulator of the media that it may take a celebrity to best him.
He handily defeated a big slate of Republicans better prepared to govern. He went on to defeat an extremely well prepared celebrity Democrat.
If we rally behind the wonks, we may get four more years of this mess.
3
"In some ways, we are all Oprah." Unnnh... no.. No not all of us. I've never paid any attention to her, until now she's become unavoidable. Let Oprah be Oprah. But PLEASE don't let Oprah be the replacement Trump.
1
Hugh, your point seems valid. But let me ask, why couldn't someone as intelligent and well-meaning as Oprah surround herself with experienced right-minded political and military advisors? Her heart is in the right place and she obviously wants positive change in the country and the world.
1
I love Oprah, but this may be the worst idea the media has ever come up with. Would be great for ratings I guess.
Can't someone with actual legislative/governing experience run for president anymore?
13
Governing experience, not necessarily in government, maybe in another type of organization. Leadership ability, which means that people do want to listen to you and follow your suggestions. Intelliegence about the world: out planet, our neighbors on the planet, our history and their histories.
Like many other toxins that have seeped into our political systems, religion began to dominate with the ascendance of Ronald Reagan, which just happened to be synchronous with the ascendance of the moral majority and other movements to mingle church and state. Pop culture frequently has a spiritual tinge somewhere, but in times of economic anxiety especially, religion and spiritualism are especially attractive in politics.
What is frightening about Donald Trump is the tendency of "traditional" evangelical America to assign him "chosen" status. Oprah, on the other hand, likes to assign chosen status to everyone. She's just the latest most eminent figure in America's perpetual self-help and "you can do it" movement that began with Emerson. But as far as "sheer unpredictable weirdness" goes, Oprah's presidency could in no way eclipse that of Donald Trump. Oprah at least has a far broader appeal than Trump, though there is no question she would inflame much of his racist base even more than President Obama did.
What we need post-Trump is a leader who calms America's troubled waters with messages of hope while demonstrating competence in the duties of the nation's highest office. Oprah could deliver the messages of hope as well as anyone and is smart enough to delegate the competence. Unfortunately, her presidency would send Trump's base into even more deranged paranoia and frenzy. We have needed a president who can unite the country for decades, and we're still searching.
7
Watching Oprah's speech on video, I'm amazed at the amount of buzz it created- the woman is a skilled actor and clearly made a calculated effort to create emotional excitement which you would expect to succeed. She is, after all, a master of public speaking and emoting empathy.
That said, Obama could spin speeches with far greater emotional and intellectual power seemingly with no effort in the early years of his political life.
This certainly helped get him elected but it didn't help him govern as much as we might have hoped. Without a campaign to keep his soaring oratory in the ears of the electorate, he lost the congress after only 2 years of trying to fix the mess he inherited and then spent the next 6 in Republican jail.
While campaigning for a second term, he seemed to have decided not to use his oratorical gifts in the same way- maybe because he didn't think he could sell the uplifting church theater promising the salvation of our nations soul a second time around.
At least he ran for president with some political experience under his belt. Oprah for congress!
6
Douthat has obviously not read much, if anything, by Rob Bell. I would argue Bell’s writings constitute a vigorous defense of Christianity. Is he unconventional? Yes. But he is very much within the mainstream of a group of prominent Christian thinkers and writers who are trying to reform the American church and rescue Christianity from the clutches of Evangelicals.
1
i admire Oprah and believe she has been a model of how to use a celebrity platform in a positive way. But as we have been witnessing it is very difficult for a one man or one woman show to make the transition to the confining sandbox of governing. To keep her" priestess, prophet, queen " role of massive influence Oprah needs to remain free .
1
One good speech and all of a sudden she’s The Second Coming? Only in America.
11
It was the very dry ground on which that brief shower fell that made it so notable.
2
"...With her talents, money, and Milwaukee roots, Winfrey could make easy work of (minority governor) Walker. To be sure, Oprah’s dearth of political experience would be a liability at the gubernatorial level (as well as the presidential). But it doesn’t take experience to prevent Republican state legislators from gerry-mandering House districts, or cutting aid to the vulnerable, or paying out billions in corporate subsidies. In (an artificially) GOP-dominated state like Wisconsin, Winfrey’s primary role would be a defensive one that any Democrat could execute — but, perhaps, only a candidate like Oprah could secure." -- from today's article in NYMagazine.
-
Which is to say, if we want Oprah running the Country in the not-too-distant future -- and she's interested in the project -- we should encourage her getting some some valuable experience in the political process THIS AUTUMN, 2018, because along with Paul Ryan, Walker is one of the more transparent Koch Brothers stand-ins. Personally I'd love to see Oprah blow away Mister Walker whilst gaining some valuable, longer term political skill.
8
Where's the beef? Remember that powerful rumor Oprah started? Charismatic. Powerful. She has more influence then Trump over more poor American people thinking they can make all their dreams happen. Did she mention how Puerto Rico could solve their problems? No more billionaires, they could have solved the worlds problems long ago, instead they are building corporations.
2
Here is a line from the book RD wrote and referenced in this article, instructive of RD's approach to religious thinking. "debased versions of Christian faith that stroke our egos, indulge our follies, and encourage our worst impulses." One of the greatest insights the world was given by Jesus, was our tendency to project the conflicts within us, onto the world and the people that make up this world, and this long before Freud. It is this insight that forms the basis of the spirituality that RD thinks has led us astray, not some indulgence of, "It is all about me." The consequence of this realization is the ability to not blame the world for what is in your head, for what are your conflicts. Therefore the individual can really grow along the lines that our spiritual traditions suggest to us, because they are no longer weighted with unhelpful baggage. It can be hard for folks like RD to see that the individuals freed in this way are not actualizing some phony individuality, because they do not look to be developing along traditional lines of say, as one example, family; say single unmarried woman who chose to make their work their child. The irony and paradox of this kind of spirituality, is the fact that while developing their individuality in this way, they truly do become an asset to the larger world around them.
1
Very insightful. But, ready for the secular option, starting in 2018!
1
What? Do you not know that the Constitution entitles everyone to practice their own religion or none free from government interference and does not allow government to impose religion? Nothing new here.
1
The photo at the top of the article is reason enough for me not to want Oprah as president -- it's an emblem of her spiritual individualism, which I loathe.
I think Oprah is quite cynical; she's just a fresher kind of cynic. She deftly panders to what people want: positivity and a sense of transcendence without the tether of accountability to an Other, such as a holy God who assesses us.
I also find Oprah to be joyless. I've never understood why so many people find her compelling. She always looks so empty and unhappy to me. No thank you, to spiritual guidance and to political leadership.
Ross, as a card carrying member of the spiritual but secular left for nearly 40 years, Oprah has rarely represented me.
Oprah proved herself an extremely successful television personality - but IMHO and experience, most of the "spiritual" ideas that she hawked were either half-baked or insulting (with the idiocy of "The Secret" being perhaps the prime example).
For every Oprah Winfrey, there are probably 50 others who brought heart, courage, and inspiration to the challenges that life dished out to them, only to be ground into dust by an often merciless, relentless fate. Insert the name here of your friends and loved ones who were felled prematurely by the slings and arrows of outrageous fate - be it through disease, poverty, or societal violence.
Not everyone who perished on 9/11 or became collateral damage in an American bombing raid or drone strike in the aftermath of 9/11, was harboring a negative thought that day or in their lives. Some of the most negative people that I have either known or observed in life have proved to be among the luckiest - and some of the most hopeful and beautiful among the unluckiest.
As a final point, I note that two of the greatest emotional losers in human history - Adolph Hitler and Donald Trump - were nonetheless able to rise to position of unimaginable prestige and power.
The gospel of Oprah may be wildly appealing, just as the idiocy of Osteen is; but IMHO, it as void of substance as the ideology underlying the Trump presidency.
3
I nod my head when Oprah speaks. She is educated and reasonable and intellectually curious and she truly cares for people and has spent a lot of her money and time on - other people. Our current president isn’t any of that. So why not Oprah?
The biggest issue Oprah has is that she has been off the air a long time. The millennials don’t really know her - as my 15 year old daughter said - she looks and sounds like one of your friends - I don’t know if she is for me - I don’t really know anything about her. That will be Oprah’s challenge.
58
"The biggest issue Oprah has is that she has been off the air a long time."
I'm sorry, but this is a very scary statement.
Your 15-year-old daughter really isn’t a Millennial. Those born in 1982 through 2000 qualify as Millennials.
Vast success as an uplifting entertainer, off the air for awhile, no political track record, seems like a 'friend' instead of a public figure...and this is a 'challenge'?
What will happen is that she’ll lose. If she loses in the primaries, that’ll be it. If she becomes the Democratic standard-bearer, then the Republican will win, irrespective of any other consideration.
Trump is unique. Definite historical impulses and political realities combined to make his election possible, and at that it could have gone either way. America may re-elect him if the economy remains strong and his base (and others) regard his performance after four years to be adequate, but we won’t elect another such for a loooong time. Our next president will be a professional politician or a businessperson with unquestioned hooks into governance and possibly foreign affairs.
It won’t be someone who flogs a worldview “with links to Christian Science that emphasizes the idea of God as ‘infinite intelligence’ and the human capacity to think our way toward godlike power”.
She would be well advised to stick to Ross’s interpretation of her as America’s religious guru, and leave governance to a pro.
Unless, of course, she’s just bored.
3
Yes, Trump is unique.
So is Oprah.
Predictions about Trump uniformly went very far wide of the mark.
3
Mark:
They only went wide by a few thousand votes in a very few unanticipated states.
What an extremely interesting column. It was welcome to hear someone of conventionally religious stripe recognize that alternative spiritualities and the (for want of a better word) philosophy embodied by Gwyneth Paltrow are also part of the American tradition. I think of the Kellogg brothers, the Seventh-Day Adventists whose obsession with wellness found its ultimate temple in a mega-corporation. For that reason, I'm not sure about placing that papal tiara on Oprah's head in the first place—if something like it ever existed. Maybe it was more a mantle, some kind of magic cloak, a protective mystique and not a power fetish, which she took off already anyway for the sake of politics when she endorsed Obama. Or maybe Oprah is a brand, like Kellogg.
I have many concerns about putting forth a celebrity Democrat so early in the race. The bright lights of celebrity shade our promising young candidates and turn them into series extras before they get a chance to establish their character. Don't get me wrong: faced with a choice between Oprah and Trump, I would cast an enthusiastic vote for the truly self-made billionaire who intensely remembers where she came from and who understands what it means to care about people. Despite her showman's openness to the fringe, Oprah isn't afraid of education and achievement. She would surround herself with highly qualified people, and she would be devoted to leaving a better world for my grandchildren. Not the worst thing that could happen.
51
Winfrey has something in common with conservatives. At the heart of her and her entourage of hucksters' philosophy is that failure is due to a moral failing: Not wanting to succeed, not trying, ....
27
That's wrong. "Not wanting to succeed or not trying" is considered a moral failing by Liberals - as well as by Progressives and Conservatives.
Anyone with life experience knows that you need confidence in yourself to make things happen. That's what Oprah is saying and it bears repetition because it's easy to forget as one's courage is battered by life's trials.
Nothing wrong with positive thinking, and it's a lot better than the opposite.
3
Excellent point. While Winfrey certainly can feel for those whose misfortunes are obviously beyond their control (I can't imagine her leaving Puerto Rico to languish like Trump has, for example), one wonders what her approach would be to those too demoralized or stuck in their ways to keep trying to escape generational poverty.
On the other hand, there are any number of the religious and religious individualists who use their belief systems to justify their actions here on earth and bend their particular belief system like a pretzel by cherry picking which part they believe and which parts they reject while not appearing to be hypocrites. The second problem is the division between the religious and the non religious with the religious thinking you cannot have a moral code without religion and the non religious thinking the religious reject science, neither of which is true. Whether they rely on belief or facts, all of them are seeking answers to things we do not know. Yet. It should be whatever floats your own boat to make you live by the golden rule, do unto others what you would have others do unto you.
7
Winfrey is an entertainer and pseudo-scientist. Her ideas have no place in politics.
62
Mordantly, I think that pseudo science is a step up from the science denial on display from the current reign of error.
14
Oh, but Trump's, DeVos', and Carson's do.
6
We have a sample size of one insofar as evaluating billionaires as presidents and the same goes for television celebrities. There are obviously stark differences between what some may expect in terms of a President Winfrey and what we have knowledge of with President Trump, but the differences between what they share in common and what we commoners share in our lives is even more stark.
13
This is one of the few Douthat columns in which I think the analytic base is well grounded; I too have mused on these particular American aspects of self-improving spirituality, though my bias grounds it more in Calvinism and its emphasis on individual economic striving.
My money, though, says Oprah doesn't run. She'd have to give UP a lot of power to become President (as well as a lot of sources of wealth).
But I do see her as an anointer and fundraiser "behind the scenes". And my speculation is that she will support a non-white candidate--a Cory Booker or Kamala Harris, or perhaps someone not currently on the horizon.
32
She is 63, with 3 billion dollars she already made, real money not fake like Trump. A few more billion wouldn't change anything for her. She seems to realize that.
A new challenge is entirely in keeping with what she's done so far.
2
Prophet, priestess, queen...
Mr Douthat don't be silly. She's a very successful business woman and deserves recognition for that. She has become highly visible and has advanced her brand and the fact that she is being considered or encouraged as a Presidential candidate is more of a statement about the depressing state of the American political landscape than anything else. As for her qualities as a "spiritual' leader, well good luck with that. I guess people who need "spiritual" leadership are free to choose their own brand!
103
"She has become highly visible and has advanced her brand"
This is increasingly the most valuable thing in our society, so the rise of the Trump's is in a way perfect (and terrifying). Everyone is focused on Brand Me, and she's the greatest preacher of this weird form of prosperity gospel. Branding has no obligation to truth, integrity or reason: success is it's only prerequisite.
Yes, Oprah would be infinitely better than Trump. But god help us if those are our real choices.
1
While I don’t particularly agree that Oprah is influential as a spiritual leader, I think that Douthat touches on an important concept: that a substantial number of Americans believe:
1)that spiritual belief can be expressed outside the confines of well-established religions; and
2)that the spiritual realm can affect events in the physical realm.
As Douthat posits, spiritual belief can be loosely plotted on a left-right continuum, with New Age adherents on the left and evangelicals on the right.
This is an important trend in American life, and it should be researched and discussed with respect, not derision.
60
With all due respect, what is labeled New Age is perhaps the most ancient wisdom from sages masters Rishis and seers. Truth seekers. There is really no space nor time in this Ageism, new or old. Open access to all, wherever you are, there it is.
5
I'm a liberal Democrat, formerly Catholic, now agnostic, a scientist and engineer. I'm a leftie who doesn't go to Church. I skipped right over that fuzzy "new age" center Ross is talking about. I'm content with my Golden Rule morals which I consider to be much tighter and universal than those Christian morals because I don't make excuses for pedophiles, I don't think homosexuals are abominations, I believe women should be treated equally in both clerical and secular life, and I don't hate the "clericals." I'm getting pretty fed up with being painted as a person who, because of my political views, must therefore be anti-religious-people. Ross does this all the time, and it's a straw man false equivalence all rolled up into one big ball of hogwash.
The "creedal" people are all at each other's throats. I don't know why Ross doesn't examine that particular contradiction with as much fervor as he likes to bash intelligent, educated, thoughtful liberals who prefer the real world under a microscope to the fantasy inspired conflicts of our planet's incessant religious wars where no lessons ever seem to be learned.
But, my real reason for this comment is to send a message to the DNC if they happen to be reading NYT comments to gauge readers' feelings about an Oprah presidency: we're appalled, and we're not going to vote for her. Take note of the state I call home. If Republicans put up a normal candidate, this state would flip.
7
"Or it could be that her religious authority would make the Democratic Party far more popular and powerful, more a pan-racial party of the cultural center and less a party defined by its secular and anticlerical left wing."
Come on, Ross! Why are you always so driven to malign the left as anticlerical and secular, leaving out the one word I'm sure you'd love to use: immoral?
I'm a Roman Catholic democrat, just as you are a Roman Catholic conservative. But the beauty of our first amendment is that any one religion doesn't (or shouldn't) affirm the validity of our political views.
People express their faith in all ways and shapes--even the spiritual prosperity exhortations of admired "seeker" Oprah.
I really hope she doesn't run because these days politics are so destructive that it takes a special calling and understanding of the nation's history and constitutional beauty to make a great leader.
Which we're sorely in need of. So, Ross, as you write a column to jump on the anti-Oprah bandwagon, I hope you can refrain from preaching yourself about what is right and wrong with American culture.
A lot is. But to call Oprah a "our most important religious leader'" seems to display your overall belief that America is going to hell-- rather than living in it as so many feel today.
274
Yes, our politics is horrifying in its destructiveness.
So is our media complex, from which maelstrom Oprah emerged with three billion dollars she made from scratch, and a network and publishing house.
Ask Ann Curry about how badly that could have gone for someone with just talent and promise.
Oprah has survived and prospered, and in an unforgiving place among sharks.
3
What Ross is really describing is an empire in decline as we retreat into our own private "Idahos" and deny reality.
Faced with a demented lunatic as president and a Congress filled with cynical enablers; a tax bill designed to increase the wealth disparity; our lives filled with meaningless, low-paying jobs and a constant struggle to stay above water, many of us retreat into fantasy, whether in the form of religion, sports, games, and/or celebrity worship.
So why not Oprah?
208
Kevin, indeed, why not Oprah? Ross’ latest term paper fails to bring up another reason why, in this day and age, we turn to someone like her. We’ve polluted and twisted the process for choosing out leaders so that anyone in his right mind who is actually qualified for president looks at the gauntlet he or she must endure and says, “no way.” We’ve created the perfect environment for people like the Current Occupant and others to take command, simply because we can’t stand not to be entertained. It’s show biz, folks, and let those with the best charisma win. Empires come and go, and the funny thing is that they all followed the same playbook. As exceptional as we like to think we are, which in itself is a sign of decline, we’re no different. If we’re going down, we might as well enjoy the ride. Hail, Queen Oprah!
6
I agree with Mr. Rothstein - "why not Oprah". Far better to have an intelligent, empathetic, high achieving and inspirational celebrity as a leader than the cynical failed professional politicians who have already been repudiated by so many voters. Trump is a distorted hall of mirrors reflection of public dissatisfaction with the political landscape of recent years. His celebrity was a prime tool in allowing him to capture the attention of the nations' voters. As a Dark Lord he ignited and united a frustrated constituency. Oprah personifies the American Dream and as President could help heal and restore our ailing troubled nation.
8
Your list omits the most prevalent form of escape: the smartphone, or specifically the iPhone which has investors demanding Apple come clean about its addictive qualities. No 12-step programs for Protestant religions. As to "fantasy:" as a pastor I advise families on the fact that it might be time to call in hospice when they don't want to face the reality of their loved one's death, or urge them to plan their funerals as an act of kindness to their survivors, or take the baptismal vows seriously that they aren't going to just let their children be raised by images on screens but by a real, flawed human community that seeks truth by first admitting our own limitations in grasping it. I never knew what "reality" was until entering the religious realm that asks us to bring our beliefs to consciousness, vet them, and act on them.
3