1
   

Human Behavior Dept: Clinton, Obama & the Narcissist's Tale

 
 
nimh
 
Reply Thu 1 May, 2008 12:45 pm
Forget the politics: what's the psychology that keeps this race going on and on?

Quote:


Very insightful take on the ongoing race, from a very different perspective.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,075 • Replies: 27
No top replies

 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 May, 2008 01:01 pm
Quote:
1. If I ruled the world, it would be a much better place.

2. The thought of ruling the world frightens the hell out of me.



Exactly why anyone who wants to run from public office should be immediately disqualified.
0 Replies
 
hanno
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 May, 2008 01:08 pm
Great post - jives with my idea bout the dangers of the civic-hero, alpha wolf mindset.

I mean, Libs are cute as speckled pups wanting to save the trees and protesting the war, but come on, they put their pants on one leg at a time just as monsters like me do. When it's the moral high ground all the time, even when Clinton at least is a flaming Machiavellian and and Barack keeps getting bit in the rear by his camp followers, the conclusion I reach is these johnny-bananas don't know any better - they're having delusions of grandeur...
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 May, 2008 12:01 am
Interestingly there is a real example of this dilemma at work in one of our major Presidential elections of the last century.

It was 1940 and the election was a fairly hard-fought contest between Franklin Roosevelt (D) and Wendell Wilkie (R). One of the central issues in the campaign was our posture with respect to the war already underway in Europe and the gathering storm in East Asia. There was a fairly large "America First" organization that bitterly opposed what they alleged was Roosevelt's obvious preparations for American intervention in the war in Europe and American provocation of Japan. The America First enjoyed substantial support from both parties, particularly in the Midwest, and, because the Republican Party and its candidate truly opposed our participation in the war had the potential to significantly sway the result by influencing disaffected Democrats to vote Republican.

Roosevelt earnestly affirmed his intention to stay out of the war under any circumstances (despite a fairly massive military buildup he had already initiated). People in government and those close to the action mostly knew that he was lying, but as they were generally in favor of the intervention themselves, kept silent. Only the working and farming classes were swayed by Roosevelt's promises, and they held the balance of voting power.

Wilkie, not wanting to plunge the country into an extremely divisive campaign, knowingly chose not to challenge Roosevelt's affirmations, despite the rather substantial evidence then available. Roosevelt's rhetoric won the day with working men and farmers and a year later we were at war. Historians now, of course, have available the written record of Roosevelt's contemporary correspondence with Churchill, and other like evidence of his active preparations both for war and for the pretexts he would need to get us into it.

Another era, with very different values in the ruling and working classes, and, as well, among many of the politicians of the era.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 May, 2008 07:05 am
DrewDad wrote:
Exactly why anyone who wants to run from public office should be immediately disqualified.


Laughing I guess running from office is a kind of disqualifier.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 May, 2008 07:11 am
FreeDuck wrote:
DrewDad wrote:
Exactly why anyone who wants to run from public office should be immediately disqualified.


Laughing I guess running from office is a kind of disqualifier.

Shocked

Embarrassed

Laughing
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 May, 2008 07:23 am
georgeob1 wrote:
Another era, with very different values in the ruling and working classes, and, as well, among many of the politicians of the era.

I don't think values today are all that different. You can see the references in the original article at work in Congress. Like the tree cutters, Congress had members on both sides who tried to look out for the good of the nation... and the win at all costers slaughtered them. I think there were congressmen who were honestly convinced we needed to take action after 911 and were manipulated by their positive values and patriotism into supporting what turned out to be a different agenda coming from the executive branch. Very much like the article stated.

Thanks for the article Nimh. Very informative.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 May, 2008 12:27 am
Wow, what a surpise: People who run for the presidency think pretty highly of themselves.

That this is at all perceived as insightful is very telling, and quite depressing.

This is only a revelation to those who have committed themselves, body and soul, to a candidate that "inspires" them.

These elections cannot proceed as they have for decades upon decades without a strange and twisted core group that really believes his or her candidate is All That.

Does it make a scintilla of sense that they do?

Of course not, but the true believers are perfectly prepared to sacrifice reason for zeal.

And why should they not? This sort of behavior is entirely in keeping with the dynamics of a deep forest tribe naming the biggest badass as their chief.

In actuality, I would have greater faith in the choice of the deep forest tribe than our electorate. The former has their lives to lose based upon their choice, the latter is all about bar room debates and MSNBC's Hardball.
0 Replies
 
hanno
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 May, 2008 02:38 pm
You're not not correct, but you're missing the subtleties. Feeling good about yourself, and serving yourself relentlessly is one thing I'm all about. Having a formula for success that you want others to buy into and let you do your thing with is another. No problem so far. But when someone believes the vision is unique to themselves or their group, like they're god's gift or the prophet, and/or if they think little enough about the constituency relative to themselves that it's justified to play the system (like the Kennedy's taking the union vote, Hillary crying to seem sensitive, those Sea-Sheppard jokers assaulting fishermen, or cetacean-er-men I guess, even though they're supposed to be so damn righteous)... I'm not saying it's not the status quo or pervasive, but it is BS and should be rooted out, identified, and met with disdain, and it does exist differentially among the various political entities (like, much less to my mind to among Libertarians).

And beyond that of course there are, I hope, folk and causes of such merit as to transcend the proverbial system - but studs like us don't need yer votes!

It's not just machiavellianism, it's this classical sophist script, like whoever has the talking stick is big ****, and the only way it's cool to get off is if you're a civic hero (again not so much a problem in the sense of big truck maybe meaning inadequate driver whereas Toyota Prius means awesome dude, I'm all about insensitive gen'ralizations and that stuff just feeds the mentality, but in the sense that we've got too many wannabe chiefs and not enough indians in this country). Does it not seem that Hilly, Bill and GW all summarily decided that they should be large and in charge based on their societal pedigrees? That's why it's narcissism, not egoism, the detatchment between the idea of being great and the supporting evidence, along with the pathological compulsion to act on that misconception. In psych terms it's something like keeping the reality gap tight and feeding the need for adulation. On a side note, I'd say a lot of the reason Liberals are liberal even though they love to bitch about the G is that very compulsion.

Whereas in McCain - to bring things full circle - like TR, Jackson and the Sons of Liberty - there we've got the man with the plan who was a proven teammate, not to mention too damn crazy and too much of a beast to bask in the enfranchisement of the masses 35 years ago - he's a patrician, a citizen willing to TCB for the cause for the sake to doing so. To me that means that he's tapped into the higher reality of citizenship such as these alpha-wolf hippy-protesters know only enough to imitate - achieved self actualization as a part of our nation.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 May, 2008 04:36 pm
Finn may have completely misunderstood the point of the article, but I have to give him one thing. No sooner did he describe a certain group of voters as follows...

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
[They] have committed themselves, body and soul, to a candidate that "inspires" them.

These elections cannot proceed as they have for decades upon decades without a strange and twisted core group that really believes his or her candidate is All That.

[These] true believers are perfectly prepared to sacrifice reason for zeal.

And why should they not? This sort of behavior is entirely in keeping with the dynamics of a deep forest tribe naming the biggest badass as their chief.


...or an example to prove his point in extenso came along:


hanno wrote:
[In] McCain - to bring things full circle - like TR, Jackson and the Sons of Liberty - there we've got the man with the plan who was a proven teammate, not to mention too damn crazy and too much of a beast to bask in the enfranchisement of the masses 35 years ago - he's a patrician, a citizen willing to TCB for the cause for the sake to doing so. To me that means that he's tapped into the higher reality of citizenship such as these alpha-wolf hippy-protesters know only enough to imitate - achieved self actualization as a part of our nation.


Impressive, in all.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2008 06:03 am
nimh wrote:
Finn may have completely misunderstood the point of the article, but I have to give him one thing. No sooner did he describe a certain group of voters as follows...

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
[They] have committed themselves, body and soul, to a candidate that "inspires" them.

These elections cannot proceed as they have for decades upon decades without a strange and twisted core group that really believes his or her candidate is All That.

[These] true believers are perfectly prepared to sacrifice reason for zeal.

And why should they not? This sort of behavior is entirely in keeping with the dynamics of a deep forest tribe naming the biggest badass as their chief.


...or an example to prove his point in extenso came along:


hanno wrote:
[In] McCain - to bring things full circle - like TR, Jackson and the Sons of Liberty - there we've got the man with the plan who was a proven teammate, not to mention too damn crazy and too much of a beast to bask in the enfranchisement of the masses 35 years ago - he's a patrician, a citizen willing to TCB for the cause for the sake to doing so. To me that means that he's tapped into the higher reality of citizenship such as these alpha-wolf hippy-protesters know only enough to imitate - achieved self actualization as a part of our nation.


Impressive, in all.




Perfect!
0 Replies
 
hanno
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2008 07:19 am
Hey, who the hell are you people? I've spent about 1/100 the time on this forum that you jokers have and I'm supposed to be a fanatic? A further manifestation of the civic hero mindset - someone breaks rank, has a different set of priorities then they must be the lunatic fringe...
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2008 09:33 am
hanno wrote:
Hey, who the hell are you people? I've spent about 1/100 the time on this forum that you jokers have and I'm supposed to be a fanatic?

That you have made such an impression in such a short period of time is a glowing testament to your fanaticism, hanno. Wear it proudly.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2008 03:49 pm
hanno wrote:
Hey, who the hell are you people? I've spent about 1/100 the time on this forum that you jokers have and I'm supposed to be a fanatic? A further manifestation of the civic hero mindset - someone breaks rank, has a different set of priorities then they must be the lunatic fringe...




Shrugs....you simply perfectly exemplified in yourself what you condemned in others.


It was spectacular.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2008 08:48 pm
hanno wrote:
Hey, who the hell are you people? I've spent about 1/100 the time on this forum that you jokers have and I'm supposed to be a fanatic?

I dont think there's any necessary correlation between posting a lot and being a fanatic - at least not with being a fanatic politically (maybe a fanatic chatter...)

Quote:
A further manifestation of the civic hero mindset - someone breaks rank, has a different set of priorities then they must be the lunatic fringe...

Um no, it doesnt have anything to do with breaking rank or having a different set of priorities. There's enough people I disagree with here whom I'd never describe as a fanatic or a 'true believer' or an idoliser. Take McGentrix. Maybe not a doctrinary conservative, but certainly a hardcore critic and ridiculer of anything liberal. But I dont think I've ever seen him idolise anyone, or even feel particularly "inspired".

Naw, it's much simpler. The bits of Finn's description I quoted simply apply perfectly to your posts about McCain, and the one I quoted in particular. You have committed yourself heart and soul to the candidate that "inspires" you, who you really believe is All That, and if any argument stands out in your zeal it's what Finn called "the dynamics of a ... tribe naming the biggest badass as their chief." Isnt that what you've said time and again impresses you about McCain, that of the three candidates, he's clearly the biggest badass? I think even few of the Obama supporters here speak of their candidate as the kind of great personal hero that you make McCain sound like...

So it was just the perfect sequence of posts, and that's all really...
0 Replies
 
hanno
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 May, 2008 12:21 am
nimh wrote:
[
Um no, it doesnt have anything to do with breaking rank or having a different set of priorities. There's enough people I disagree with here whom I'd never describe as a fanatic or a 'true believer' or an idoliser. Take McGentrix. Maybe not a doctrinary conservative, but certainly a hardcore critic and ridiculer of anything liberal. But I dont think I've ever seen him idolise anyone, or even feel particularly "inspired".



The hell it doesn't, I'm goal oriented and enfranchised and you think if someone's feeling it they must be off the farm. Can't say I'm not, don't got a 6-disc changer in a silver Acura or something to keep me centered, but what's it to you? I fail the congeniality test - don't fit into your social order, overtly so here on the forum because while you like to chat, I don't waste my time if I've got nothing weird to say or the topic don't mean something to me.

The fact that I have recurring themes, could mean I'm fixated or, christ forbid, could mean I've made a few connections, that I've got a unified, well-conceived understanding of the situation. In this case, I think my idea that McCain having been around the block a few times, which is novel in itself since military service ain't seen as the badge of honor it once, perhaps somewhat validly was, is thus disinclined to have or feel the need to have the wrong idea about himself and the office, was off task at all. That's also part of the reason why 'biggest bad-ass' is begging the question, in such a manner as one threatened by non-civic merit would be inclined to...
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 May, 2008 04:22 am
hanno wrote:
nimh wrote:
[
Um no, it doesnt have anything to do with breaking rank or having a different set of priorities. There's enough people I disagree with here whom I'd never describe as a fanatic or a 'true believer' or an idoliser. Take McGentrix. Maybe not a doctrinary conservative, but certainly a hardcore critic and ridiculer of anything liberal. But I dont think I've ever seen him idolise anyone, or even feel particularly "inspired".



The hell it doesn't, I'm goal oriented and enfranchised and you think if someone's feeling it they must be off the farm. Can't say I'm not, don't got a 6-disc changer in a silver Acura or something to keep me centered, but what's it to you? I fail the congeniality test - don't fit into your social order, overtly so here on the forum because while you like to chat, I don't waste my time if I've got nothing weird to say or the topic don't mean something to me.

The fact that I have recurring themes, could mean I'm fixated or, christ forbid, could mean I've made a few connections, that I've got a unified, well-conceived understanding of the situation. In this case, I think my idea that McCain having been around the block a few times, which is novel in itself since military service ain't seen as the badge of honor it once, perhaps somewhat validly was, is thus disinclined to have or feel the need to have the wrong idea about himself and the office, was off task at all. That's also part of the reason why 'biggest bad-ass' is begging the question, in such a manner as one threatened by non-civic merit would be inclined to...


Such objectivity...such rational restraint...such lack of uncritical emotional worship!


"[In] McCain - to bring things full circle - like TR, Jackson and the Sons of Liberty - there we've got the man with the plan who was a proven teammate, not to mention too damn crazy and too much of a beast to bask in the enfranchisement of the masses 35 years ago - he's a patrician, a citizen willing to TCB for the cause for the sake to doing so. To me that means that he's tapped into the higher reality of citizenship such as these alpha-wolf hippy-protesters know only enough to imitate - achieved self actualization as a part of our nation."
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 May, 2008 06:56 am
hanno wrote:
The hell it doesn't, I'm goal oriented and enfranchised and you think if someone's feeling it they must be off the farm. Can't say I'm not, don't got a 6-disc changer in a silver Acura or something to keep me centered, but what's it to you?

I dont understand what this is meant to convey... I dont even understand what it means.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 May, 2008 07:06 am
nimh wrote:
hanno wrote:
The hell it doesn't, I'm goal oriented and enfranchised and you think if someone's feeling it they must be off the farm. Can't say I'm not, don't got a 6-disc changer in a silver Acura or something to keep me centered, but what's it to you?

I dont understand what this is meant to convey... I dont even understand what it means.

It's authentic western gibberish.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 May, 2008 06:07 pm
nimh wrote:
Naw, it's much simpler. The bits of Finn's description I quoted simply apply perfectly to your posts about McCain, and the one I quoted in particular. You have committed yourself heart and soul to the candidate that "inspires" you, who you really believe is All That, and if any argument stands out in your zeal it's what Finn called "the dynamics of a ... tribe naming the biggest badass as their chief." Isnt that what you've said time and again impresses you about McCain, that of the three candidates, he's clearly the biggest badass? I think even few of the Obama supporters here speak of their candidate as the kind of great personal hero that you make McCain sound like...


Talking of the idolisation that true believers are prone to engage in, when caught up in their zeal about their candidate, the biggest badass of them all...

Here's this week's cover story of the Weekly Standard, about John McCain:

A Hero's Life: Remembering John McCain's Teacher

It starts off as follows:

Quote:
Much has been written about John McCain's presidential campaign, about his conservative ideology (or insufficient supply thereof), about his age, his military service, and his remarkable life story. Most of what's been written, however, proceeds from the assumption that McCain, for all his maverick tendencies, is at heart a politician like any other, prey to the same ambitions, vanities, temptations, and weaknesses endemic to all presidential hopefuls.

That's not the case. He's a very different animal, and not just because of his Naval warrior forebears, his indomitable 96-year-old mother, or his experiences as a POW in Vietnam--though all those obviously influenced him profoundly. A major reason he's different is a remarkable teacher we both shared in school, an incalculable shaper of mind and character named William Bee Ravenel III.


TNR's The Plank comments:

Quote:
In case you are concerned that there is no way the rest of the article could live up to this opening, here is a paragraph chosen at random:

    It was not simply Ravenel's academic influence that was so profound, McCain told his audience: "He helped teach me to be a man, and to believe in the possibility that we are not captive to the worst parts of our nature."
To top things off, the piece ends with Ravenel's ire at Brown v. Board of Education (he was "no bigot," you see, but rather had a "blind spot").

Up next: A cover feature on Donald Rumsfeld's favorite summer camp activities.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Human Behavior Dept: Clinton, Obama & the Narcissist's Tale
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/12/2021 at 08:35:21