What would Krishnamurti suggest to the President?
Jiddu Krishnamurti (K) would not offer "advice" in the conventional sense to any political leader, including any president, because he fundamentally rejected the idea of authority, leadership, followers, and external guidance. He dissolved the Order of the Star in 1929 precisely to avoid becoming a guru or authority figure, declaring that truth is a pathless land and no one—not a leader, organization, system, or teacher—can lead another to it. He repeatedly said leaders destroy followers, and followers destroy leaders; both perpetuate division, dependence, and psychological bondage.
That said, based on his extensive teachings on power, authority, nationalism, politics, government, and human conflict (drawn from talks, books like Freedom from the Known, The First and Last Freedom, and public discussions), we can infer what he might point out if hypothetically addressing someone in a position of immense power like a U.S. president. K's "suggestion" would be a radical, uncompromising invitation to self-inquiry and psychological revolution, not policy prescriptions, ideologies, or reforms. He would speak to the individual human being behind the role, emphasizing that the world is a projection of the individual's conditioned mind.Core Points Krishnamurti Would Likely Emphasize
- Reject All Authority—Including Your Own
K viewed political power as one of the most destructive forms of authority. He said: "All authority of any kind, especially in the field of thought and understanding, is the most destructive, evil thing." Leaders (and those who follow them) create mutual destruction. - To a president: Drop the illusion that you (or any leader) can "save" or "fix" the nation/world through power, decisions, or charisma. True change begins when you see that you are not separate from the people you lead—the president is the people, the nation is yourself. Clinging to authority (position, image, legacy) only strengthens division and conflict.
- End Nationalism and Identification with "America First" (or Any Nation)
Krishnamurti called nationalism a disease, a form of self-expansion and separative spirit that breeds war, hatred, and misery. "Nationalism is a disease and it can never bring about world unity. We cannot attain health through disease." Patriotism, flags, borders, and "my country" slogans are rooted in fear, greed, and the desire for security/identity. He would challenge: Why identify with a flag, a border, or "greatness"? This creates "us vs. them," enemies, and endless conflict. See that you are the world—the violence, division, ambition, and suffering in society mirror your own conditioned consciousness. Drop national pride; it is stupidity and a barrier to real intelligence and compassion. - Politics Cannot Solve Humanity's Problems
K was unequivocal: "Politicians are not going to solve a thing." Political action, systems, parties (Democrat, Republican, etc.), elections, and governments are based on concepts, ideologies, power struggles, and the same fragmented human mind that creates the problems.
To a leader: No policy, wall, deal, or "winning" will bring peace or order while the mind is ambitious, fearful, competitive, and self-centered. Politics is often an escape from facing one's inner pettiness, confusion, and sorrow. Real revolution is not external reform (which needs endless further reform) but total inward revolution—ending the "me" with its greed, image-making, and desire for power. - Power Corrupts—Observe Your Own Desire for It
"Why do you want power over another?" Power (over people, nations, or even oneself) arises from fear, insecurity, and the ego's need to dominate or be recognized. All power is evil, whether national, personal, or institutional.
K would ask the president to look directly: Why seek or hold this position? Is it ambition, fear of insignificance, need for adulation, or image? See that seeking power is destructive and perpetuates misery. True action comes from a mind free of power-seeking—anonymous, without motive. - Observe Choicelessly—See "What Is" Without Division
The only "practical" thing K ever pointed to is choiceless awareness: Observe your thoughts, fears, ambitions, nationalist conditioning, anger, hurt, and the whole content of your consciousness without judgment, justification, or escape.
When the observer (the conditioned "I") realizes it is the observed (the nationalism, fear, ambition), division ends. This brings insight, intelligence, compassion, and a different quality of action—not fragmented political maneuvering, but holistic, non-violent response born of clarity.
A mind in such freedom doesn't "lead" through authority; it lives in order, which naturally affects the world. - Stand Alone—Be a Light to Yourself
K's ultimate call: "Truth is a pathless land... You have to be your own teacher and your own disciple." No guru, no system, no followers, no position can give freedom.
To any leader: Step out of the role. Be alone inwardly—not isolated, but free from dependence on approval, power, or the crowd. Only then is there real love, responsibility, and the possibility of a different world—not through speeches or laws, but through a transformed human being.
Why is this almost impossible for the vast majority to do or accept even?
Jiddu Krishnamurti repeatedly explained why the vast majority of people find it almost impossible to truly accept, live, or realize core insights like "the observer is the observed", choiceless awareness, psychological revolution, or absolute freedom from conditioning. He didn't see this as a personal failing but as a deep, structural aspect of the human mind/brain conditioned over millennia by fear, security-seeking, fragmentation, and the illusion of a separate self.
Here are the main reasons he gave, drawn directly from his talks and writings:1. Fear of the Unknown and Ending the SelfThe most fundamental barrier is terror at the ending of the "me"—the psychological entity built from memories, images, attachments, ambitions, fears, and identities.
When the observer realizes it is the observed (e.g., "I am fear" rather than "I observe fear as something separate to control"), the separate self dissolves. This feels like psychological death: no more center to protect, no continuity of the "I," no more accumulation of experiences/knowledge for security.
People cling desperately to this "me" because it provides a sense of identity and continuity in a chaotic, uncertain world. Krishnamurti described this as the mind recoiling from standing completely alone, vulnerable, without any psychological anchor.
This split is ingrained from childhood through education, culture, religion, nationalism, competition, and survival mechanisms. Thought itself is fragmentary and time-bound, so it must create duality to function.
He didn't offer hope through gradual steps but pointed out: only when the futility of the old way is seen totally (with great urgency and honesty) does the impossible become possible—not as an achievement, but as the natural flowering of a mind no longer in conflict with itself.
As he put it in various talks: the mind must see the truth of its own fragmentation without resistance or escape—and most never look that deeply because the looking itself ends the looker. That's why it's rare, not because people are "bad," but because the mechanism of self-preservation is extraordinarily strong.
Here are the main reasons he gave, drawn directly from his talks and writings:1. Fear of the Unknown and Ending the SelfThe most fundamental barrier is terror at the ending of the "me"—the psychological entity built from memories, images, attachments, ambitions, fears, and identities.
When the observer realizes it is the observed (e.g., "I am fear" rather than "I observe fear as something separate to control"), the separate self dissolves. This feels like psychological death: no more center to protect, no continuity of the "I," no more accumulation of experiences/knowledge for security.
People cling desperately to this "me" because it provides a sense of identity and continuity in a chaotic, uncertain world. Krishnamurti described this as the mind recoiling from standing completely alone, vulnerable, without any psychological anchor.
- Without the observer, there's no entity to "become better," achieve enlightenment, gain approval, or escape pain through ideals/future projections.
- This dissolution appears as annihilation to the ego, even though it actually releases tremendous energy and ends inner conflict. Most prefer the familiar misery of division over the unknown freedom.
This split is ingrained from childhood through education, culture, religion, nationalism, competition, and survival mechanisms. Thought itself is fragmentary and time-bound, so it must create duality to function.
- People are educated to choose, judge, compare, suppress, analyze, or escape—never to observe totally without interference.
- Choiceless awareness requires seeing without this habitual filter, but the mind automatically resists because dropping choice feels like losing control or intelligence (when actually, true intelligence arises only then).
- As long as thought dominates, it perpetuates the illusion that the observer is separate and permanent, blocking direct perception.
- Any method or effort reinforces the observer (the "I" trying to change).
- People resist immediacy because it demands total responsibility—no crutches, no excuses, no "process."
- Freedom from the known (psychological knowledge/conditioning) means the mind must die to its accumulations, which feels impossible while living in time-bound thinking.
- Most people are distracted by pleasure, ambition, entertainment, escapes, or superficial pursuits. They don't give undivided attention to their own mind's movements.
- Without this total energy (freed from conflict), the mind remains dull, habitual, and unable to see the truth directly.
- He noted that knowledge alone (understanding the concept intellectually) changes nothing—man has accumulated vast knowledge yet remains violent, ambitious, and miserable.
- People often prefer the known misery (jealousy, nationalism, ambition) over the unknown state of wholeness.
- Society reinforces this: success is measured by achievement, power, comparison—not inner silence or non-division.
He didn't offer hope through gradual steps but pointed out: only when the futility of the old way is seen totally (with great urgency and honesty) does the impossible become possible—not as an achievement, but as the natural flowering of a mind no longer in conflict with itself.
As he put it in various talks: the mind must see the truth of its own fragmentation without resistance or escape—and most never look that deeply because the looking itself ends the looker. That's why it's rare, not because people are "bad," but because the mechanism of self-preservation is extraordinarily strong.