Marianne Williamson

Marianne Williamson Wants To Defeat Dark Psychic Forces With New Department of Peace

True to form, the presidential hopeful is turning the conversation around war on its head.


Never before has there been a presidential candidate quite like Marianne Williamson, the Democratic hopeful and purveyor of healing crystals who wants to combat the "dark psychic force" shrouding the White House. But that battle can't be fought in typical fashion, she says. Instead, she suggests that the country create a Department of Peace.

The approach is Williamson's modus operandi, which consists of taking established political norms and turning them topsy-turvy. We don't have a health care system, we have a sickness care system. We cannot just suppress violence, we also need to create nonviolence. We should not wage war, but instead, we must wage peace.

Williamson correctly acknowledges the pitfalls of our current attitude toward defense. "We spend more on our military than the next nine largest militaries in the world," the plan explains. "As has become evident in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, as well as against terrorist enemies like ISIS, at best our military can solve part of the issue, leaving the true, underlying problems unaddressed."

And the way to do that, she says, is to deploy global peace-building support and humanitarian aid resources—food, health care, education, and more—to assist countries in ending conflict.

It's an attractive idea, and parts may even be prudent in countries where U.S. military intervention has contributed to community decay. Take Afghanistan, for instance, where decades of conflict have left many without access to food and water. But would Williamson's plan make a difference?

Probably not.

That our modern-day mindset toward the military has been a failure is largely wrapped up in the regime change wars we've waged. Such endeavors are doomed, most notably because the U.S. does not (and cannot) know the cultural underpinnings of every foreign nation. Why would peace-building be any different?

A 15-year study by Susanna P. Campbell, an assistant professor at the School of International Service of American University, hits at the heart of that very query. After spending time in Burundi, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Nepal, South Sudan, and Sudan, she concludes that international attempts at peace-building fail to produce the desired results, as those efforts are inherently accountable to foreign entities, not the local communities where the work takes place.

Aid workers on the ground—who, in Williamson's plan, would be accountable to the U.S. government—are working to fulfill the demands of faraway stakeholders without fully integrating into the cultural landscape. Success is often measured in how much money workers spend out of the allotted project funds.

"People focus on spending. They have so much to spend and so little time," one international aid worker in South Sudan told Campbell. "People spend 40 percent of their time talking about their burn rate [the rate at which they spend allocated funds]." Campbell suggests a local approach, where international aid groups must answer to communities—not the other way around. Such a model would be fantasy if taxpayers were funneling billions of dollars into the Department of Peace.

Williamson also proposes a broad domestic plan that is conspicuously light on specifics. If president, the spiritual guru would "effectively treat and dismantle gang psychology," "rehabilitate the prison population," and "address factors such as drug and alcohol abuse, mistreatment of the elderly, and much more." Okay, but how?

Part of that would be accomplished with her Peace Academy, she says, a four-year institution to complement U.S. military academies. Graduates will serve at least five years in public service, where they will work toward violence prevention, either domestically or abroad.

It's hard to argue with warm and fuzzy ideas like "violence prevention" and "conflict resolution," which Williamson says she would like to see taught in schools. True to her campaign, the presidential hopeful has taken the conventional conversation and flipped it on its head, making us question why things really are the way they are. But a Department of Peace is unlikely to meaningfully reduce our aimless military pursuits and bloated defense spending—let alone the alcoholism and gang violence Williamson also hopes to fix.

NEXT: Vaping May Be Driving Down Smoking, Says Federal Survey Report

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. If only she decided to call it the Ministry of Peace…

    She’s missing an opportunity to also suggest the creation of a Ministry of Love.

    1. Nice catch

    2. The Ministry of Love already exists. It used to be housed in a discarded chinchilla cage at the back of a certain pet store. It’s current whereabouts are unknown.

      1. Boooooooooo

        1. Ghosts aren’t supposed to have pointy hats, Nardz. Try again.

          1. Low

    3. How about a Ministry of Silly Walks?

  2. I assume that after the election, she’ll be joining the editorial staff at Reason?

  3. Just wait until she finds out that Crystal Palace isn’t made of crystal.

    1. I hear the best crystals are a certain shade of blue.

  4. If we do this can we rename the department of defense back to department of war.

    1. Only if it is an Army only department again.

      1. It included the Navy for a long long time.

        1. Well now, I probably fell into some kind of trap.

          My memory is not exact, but for a long time there were two cabinet positions — army and navy. I do not remember enough history to know their exact names. Maybe the army was called the Department of War; my first reaction was there was one Department of War which included both army and navy, and it was only changed to the Department of Defense when the air force was split off.

          So scratch my comment. I do not know either way and don’t care enough to go look it up.

          1. The Navy broke off from the Department of War in 1798 when a separate Department of the Navy was created. The Department of War was split into the Department of the Army and Department of the Air Force in 1947 prior to the creation of the Department of Defense in 1949. For most of its history it was only Army.

            1. I did care enough to see if you would answer.

              Thanks 🙂

    2. The problems have been more with the corrupt & BS “Nation-Building” than the actual interventions to drive out & defeat terrorist groups…All we have done is supposedly stayed in these shit-hole places for many years to bring the savages FREEDOM & DEMOCRACY, Blah, blah, blah,… But it was really to fill the coffers of the Military-Industrial Complex vendors who are charging $1,000 for a toilet, who then take some of their filthy lucre & send it back to the War Criminal Pols who keep signing off on this crap!

      BTW, to Williamson, we already have the USAID, another BS FED BEAST agency that wastes tons of money to bring water & other good stuff to nations, but usually gets stolen by their strongmen leaders!

  5. the spiritual guru would “effectively treat and dismantle gang psychology,” “rehabilitate the prison population,” and “address factors such as drug and alcohol abuse, mistreatment of the elderly, and much more.” Okay, but how?

    Why are you bothering the poor lady? Nobody else has to answer “but how?” for their dumb ideas.

    1. At this point what difference does it make? They’re all just vying for the most wokest factor. Details as to “how” are just so negative. Maybe you need a crystal of your own…

  6. This reminds me that some coven of witches was supposedly going to throw some kind of hex on Trump. I wonder how that came out.

    1. Probably didn’t work as well on Trump as it did Jack Nicholson.

      1. Ha, remember when some Kabbalists performed a ritual to curse Ariel Sharon and then he fell into a coma?

  7. That’s ok, we can give other countries peace real good.

    Perhaps the Taliban could use some more peace.

  8. Sort of like when we changed it from The War Department to the Department of Defense?

  9. These types of platitudes always seem to catch the attention of the media as being novel, entirely NEW ways of thinking! And they never are. I remember when NPR lost their fucking shit over Kurt Vonnegut suggesting we should create a Department or Ministry of The Future, because no politician anywhere ever talks or thinks about the future.

    I like Vonnegut, but his suggestion is one of the dumbest and most empty political ideas since… since something really dumb and empty I can’t think of at the moment.

    But sure, let’s create a “department of peace” and I guarandamntee you it’ll be bombing people into peaceful conduct within five minutes of its creation.

    1. and I guarandamntee you it’ll be bombing recalcitrant US citizens into peaceful conduct within five minutes of its creation.

      I just love it when I can FTFY

      1. “people” includes the set “US Citizen”.

    2. >>>something really dumb and empty

      Carter Administration still works.

      1. Carter deregulated domestic transportation and appointed Volcker as Fed Chairman.

        His foreign policy was a disaster, and he’s been a horribly obnoxious ex-president, but his domestic agenda wasn’t too shabby.

  10. The first project for this new department will be to get the democrats to make peace with the concept of individual freedom.
    If they can do that, I will vote for her the rest of my life.

  11. love this chick i bet she’s a hoot to hang out with.

    1. She probably wouldn’t hang out with you unless she had something to sell you.

    2. Would spin her chakras.

  12. Part of that would be accomplished with her Peace Academy, she says, a four-year institution to complement U.S. military academies. Graduates will serve at least five years in public service, where they will work toward violence prevention, either domestically or abroad.

    1. I’m sure the admissions process would be just as demanding as the military academies.
    2. Officers in the Department of Peace will be commissioned at ranks according to the progressive stack
    3. I would assume that only SJW degrees would be offered at the Peace Academy.

    1. Peace Academy Officer: “Stop this violence! Or I swear I will say ‘Stop!’ again!”.

      1. It’s not violence when the Department of Peace does it. It’s a kinetic nonviolence intervention.

  13. I am telling all of my friends to donate the max to Marianne. Please God, let her be the Democrat nominee. I promise not to speak ill of Progtards ever again…

    I did my own ‘Fake News’ poll. Every single writer for SNL agrees with me: Marianne represents eight (8) years of job security…. 🙂

      1. Paul….To be honest, Ms. Gabbard interests me. I have not done a deep dive on her domestic agenda, but I find her views on ‘wars of choice’ very much in tune with mine. The US simply does not have a great track record on those wars. And an active member of the National Guard?

        We could do worse (and have).

        But back to Marianne…One can always hope, no? 🙂

          Normal grab bag of bad, unconstitutional gun laws that won’t do shit but punish law abiding citizens

          Typical authoritarian nonsense and opposed to nuclear power

          Supports Medicare for all and wants to raise the payroll tax and tax all stock trades (not just profits). Wants to ban fracking and all fossil fuel use by 2050.

          Free college, wants to study reparations, wants to end the Electoral college, supports $15 minimum wage, supports mandated expansion of family and parental leave.

  14. So she is proposing a department devoted to nation building and foreign aid? That is somehow better than the nation building and foreign aid we currently do, apparently. And since we still need the military, as much of the peace of the free world is dependent on American arms maintaining that peace, this new department will be just a reshuffling of existing bureaucracies like Homeland Security is with undetermined additional spending.

    1. That is somehow better than the nation building and foreign aid we currently do

      Which we already tend to refer to as “peacekeeping missions.”

      “Taken the conventional conversation and flipped it on its head,” indeed.

      “Department of Peace,” which no one has ever thought of before.

      1. Are you saying that a Ministry of the Future wouldn’t result in politicians and government finally thinking of the future?

  15. @Steve_Sailer
    Marianne Williamson is basically the new, improved Hillary. She’s more pleasant to look at and listen to, but she wants to bomb random Muslims in the name of feminism just as much as Hillary did.

    · Aug 17
    The US withdrawing troops from Afghanistan without ensuring the rights and protection of women is is unacceptable. The Taliban’s history of brutality towards women must not be forgotten or ignored in these negotiations.

    1. Really; how peaceful can she get?

    2. The Taliban’s history of brutality towards women must not be forgotten or ignored in these negotiations.

      What until she finds out about sub-Saharan Africa.

  16. Also coming soon: The White House Correspondents’ Dinner and Drum Circle

  17. Uh isn’t this what the State Department already does basically? So she just wants to re-brand that effort. After all their failings of the last few decades might not be a bad idea but I’ll pass since it would just be a boon for the “letterhead” industrial complex with no significant changes made at the managerial level.

    1. Yes and no. This is actually what the UN does alongside NGOs. The problem with making this a USG endeavor is that the US not only takes credit for the success, but also responsibility for the failures. Beyond that, “working to fulfill the demands of faraway stakeholders” should not be a priority of the state. These sorts of things are handled through treaties.

      1. “This is actually what the UN does alongside NGOs”

        I guess if you call their soldiers raping the local women this, then sure

        1. Do bisexuals have a nongovernment organization accredited to the UN?

          If so, it would be a BINGO.

          1. You, sir, earned a chuckle

  18. I propose the government appoint me, at the annual salary of $300,000, to head the Department Of Making Deep Growling Noises While Hiding Under The Washbasin During Reruns Of Petticoat Junction. Can’t be any sillier than Williamson’s idea.

    1. Considerably more achievable, in fact.

  19. You can have peace by eliminating coercion. But her “liberal” friends and followers wouldn’t like that.

  20. If president, the spiritual guru would … “address factors such as drug and alcohol abuse, mistreatment of the elderly, and much more.”

    PLEASE let the Dems nominate Williamson.

    1. “mistreatment of the elderly”

      Like making Joe and Bernie ‘run’ for office?

  21. Gentlemen, you can’t not fight in here. This is the Peace Room.

    1. I don’t want war. All I want is peace. Peace. Peace!
      A little piece of Poland, a little piece of France
      A little piece of Portugal and Austria perchance
      A little slice of Turkey and all that that entails
      Und then a piece of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales

      A little nip of Norway, a little spot of Greece
      A little hunk of Hungary, oh what a lovely feast
      A little bite of Belgium and now for some dessert
      Armenia, Albania and Russia wouldn’t hurt

      A little piece of Poland, a little piece of France
      A little piece of India and Pakistan perchance

  22. Didn’t Dennis Kucinich also propose a Department of Peace?

    1. See my link above. It’s been proposed at least a dozen times, going back to 1793.

      1. If we’d just implement it, we’d have had world peace by now.

    2. One of my favorite old bumper stickers.

      Visualize whirled peas

  23. Why does Williamson think our government can achieve something that Jesus and his followers have not been able to do in 2,000 years?

  24. They could try levitating the Pentagon again.

  25. “Marianne Williamson Wants To Defeat Dark Psychic Forces With New Department of Peace.

    …just when you thought our presidential nominees couldn’t get more stupid…

  26. “Your kids will meditate in school!”

    —-California Uber Alles

    1. +1 Suede-Denim Secret Police

      1. -1 uncool niece

  27. I remember the scene from ‘sneakers’, at the end when everyone gets to pick a reward.
    The one guy asked for ‘peace on earth’.
    James Earl Jones replied as only he could;
    /deep voice
    “We’re the US government. We don’t do that”
    /end deep voice

  28. Next she’ll suggest that the National Anthem be changed to John Lennon’s “Imagine”.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.