Obama, the Democrats and the Left

[mikemex]

I see all kinds of complaints coming from the Left all over the world: they complain about a candidate (now a president) who pretends to be a Socialist but is not. Who pretends to be a representative of the Left while he's, at the same time, dealing with the forces of the Right.

Why?

Well, in my opinion, it is wrong to call Obama a Socialist and a member of the Left in the first place. The reason? Because Socialism (as we know it) and the concept of "Left" are mostly Alpha in nature. You can see the typical representatives of that current being Alpha, say, Voltaire, but up to modern examples like Bill Clinton and Al Gore.

However, Obama is Delta. And Deltas tend to float somewhere between the formal definitions of the political wings. Some Deltas are known for their Right wing affinity (usually STs) while others have more affinity for the Left (usually NFs).

So, is it a bit too constraining to have a two sided game when there are actually four forces playing? What kind of politics do really Deltas promote?

[Drommel]

He's Delta? I thought everyone agreed that he was ENFj.

[mikemex]

IEE. I don't think he values Fe at all.

[Topaz]

Braintypes has him as ENTP.

[07490]

He is an ENFj.

[jewels]

I don't see ENFj or ENTp at all. I think he's most likely INFp and if not that, then ENFp. Definitely an NFP.

He also makes a lot of the same expressions as my Ni subtype INFp male friend. And people say they resemble each other (even though he doesn't physically look like him).

Then again, my very first impression of him was that he reminded me of an ENFp male ex (Ne subtype)

His speeches are full of the idealist phrases, but he doesn't act at all like an ENFj. There is no jumpy emotion, or intense energy. He is very steady, calm -- like an (N subtype) ENFp or INFp.

I have wondered what type Michelle Obama is. My guess was ESTj. She's very straightforward and social too.

[hellothere]

I dunno, "very steady" and "calm" aren't the words I'd usually associate with an Ne subtype ENxp. I guess calm works for Ips though.

[Simon Ssmall]

I thought he is INFp.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

INFp

[jessica129]

I don't know what type he is but I know he can't be ENFJ. I don't know where people got that idea. He does seem like he belongs in Delta.

[munenori2]

I have to admit my first encounter with Obama was reading his books and I was convinced then that he might be delta, because I connected a lot to how his style of thinking came out in the prose. My views on his type these days are pretty nonchalant tbqh.

[UDP]

The real answer is this:

If he has a great next 4 years, he's clearly delta.
If he screws up, he's clearly beta.

[jewels]

I dunno, "very steady" and "calm" aren't the words I'd usually associate with an Ne subtype ENxp. I guess calm works for Ips though.

Yeah, ENFps don't come across that way when we're silly and excited. But at work or in a professional situation ENFps hide that aspect. I always had co-workers describe me as "stable" and "calm." I'm not always that way when I'm excited or at a party or something, but I have seen many other ENFps come across that same way when they're quiet or at work.

To get to the level Obama is at, he would have to learn to manage his self-presentation. So I think it's possible for an ENFp to come across like he does.

If he is INFp (which there's a good chance he is), then he's clearly worked on looking at times like an extrovert (something that most INFps are pretty good at pulling off anyway).

If he is an INFp, does anyone know what Michelle would be?? They seem really good together.

[Slacker]

The real answer is this:

If he has a great next 4 years, he's clearly delta.
If he screws up, he's clearly beta.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I'm apparently full of bullshit today, but my perceptions:

Alpha: Liberal
Beta: Libertarian
Gamma: Conservative
Delta: Diplomatic. All of the above, none of the above. And everything inbetween. I agree, I think Delta politics are hard to figure out. I think this ironically somehow makes them understand society/cultures the best, so they make the best egalitarian leaders. You can't really type Delta politics, so that's why I think they work the best overall.

I'm pretty much very comfortable with any Delta being in high office. As long as I don't have to work directly for them lol. In fact, I'd probably be much more suspicious if somebody in my own quadra was in political power. But they wouldn't anyway, as our views are kind of the absence of needing government to me.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

I'm apparently full of bullshit today, but my perceptions:

Alpha: Liberal
Beta: Libertarian
Gamma: Conservative
Delta: Diplomatic. All of the above, none of the above. And everything inbetween. I agree, I think Delta politics are hard to figure out. I think this ironically somehow makes them understand society/cultures the best, so they make the best egalitarian leaders. You can't really type Delta politics, so that's why I think they work the best overall.

I'm pretty much very comfortable with any Delta being in high office. As long as I don't have to work directly for them lol. In fact, I'd probably be much more suspicious if somebody in my own quadra was in political power. But they wouldn't anyway, as our views are kind of the absence of needing government to me.

Typing goverments by quadra can be a vague business full of errors. Look at an office for instance on the small scale, and the difference of an ESTj being the manager in comparison to an ISTp. Look at the difference in Obama and Hilter.

[mikemex]

what Michelle would be?? They seem really good together.

She's an ST. That means, either beta or delta. However, I see no reason to believe she's beta. Not only her Fe is weak; it also seems unvalued. I've also read a little about her and there seems to be a preference for the Fi-Te loop. So either LSE or SLI. She doesn't seem extroverted though.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Typing goverments by quadra can be a vague business full of errors.

Well, duh. Anything dealing with psychology deals in general gists.

[hellothere]

Yeah, ENFps don't come across that way when we're silly and excited. But at work or in a professional situation ENFps hide that aspect. I always had co-workers describe me as "stable" and "calm." I'm not always that way when I'm excited or at a party or something, but I have seen many other ENFps come across that same way when they're quiet or at work.

To get to the level Obama is at, he would have to learn to manage his self-presentation. So I think it's possible for an ENFp to come across like he does.

fair enough, but then couldn't an ENFj do the same thing (learn to manage self-presentation)? In fact I thought that was what that type ("The Actor") is generally noted for

[jewels]

yeah, you're right...of course all types can improve their self presentation. But I think it would be nearly impossible for an ENFj to hide their Fe for very long.

I've never seen Obama "lose it" or get angry or emotional, but maybe an instance of that would clear up whether he is ENFp or INFp or values Fe or Fi. I agree that I don't see a lot of Fe coming off of him. But I've seen INFps hide their Fe before (for short periods of time), and I've never seen an ENFj that didn't have tons of Fe.

Mikemex -- interesting! I never would have considered SLI, but she could be a very outgoing one. My guess is LSE...maybe the Te subtype...they can appear more introverted imo. Though of course, if Obama is INFp, that would make them conflictors and they seem too happy for that...hmmm

[duality is cringe]

I'm apparently full of bullshit today, but my perceptions:

Beta: Libertarian

In fact, I'd probably be much more suspicious if somebody in my own quadra was in political power. But they wouldn't anyway, as our views are kind of the absence of needing government to me.

I guess there may be no 'objective' answers or opinions on the matter, but I'm not really seeing this at all.

I don't think libertarianism is inherently closest to beta nor that betas are more likely to be attracted to libertarian philosophy. Most betas I've known have had little, if any, issue with the size and scope of government or the power of politicians to influence their lives. In fact, most, if not all, of them generally have faith in the ability of government to benefit well-being of the populace, so long as it's done under an ideology they agree with and think is best.

While betas might experience problems with hierarchy on a small scale where someone else is likely to make arbitrary rules that directly (and needlessly) govern the betas' personal lives (such as hierarchies at home and work), I tend to think that on a larger social scale, betas are likely to be the one's doing the bulk of the 'social organizing' and promoting themselves as worthy 'leaders.'

As for Obama, the man reeks of beta NF to me. His hopelessly idealistic language of "We will change this country, we will change the world" and that his election meant that "Americans sent a message that we have never been just a collection of individuals" (emphasizing the collective as being of greater importance than the individual) have not changed my opinion.

I also agree with hellothere that just because Obama is not foaming at the mouth and is able to maintain posture and 'calmness' doesn't mean he isn't beta or EIE.

[duality is cringe]

I've never seen Obama "lose it" or get angry or emotional

I actually think almost all of his speeches contain a great deal of emotion and emotional appeals rather than appealing to logic and explaining why certain policies would 'work best' or are most economically sound.

[Creepy-]

The real answer is this:

If he has a great next 4 years, he's clearly delta.
If he screws up, he's clearly beta.

Hahaha. Awesome.

[Sirena]

fair enough, but then couldn't an ENFj do the same thing (learn to manage self-presentation)? In fact I thought that was what that type ("The Actor") is generally noted for

I guess there may be no 'objective' answers or opinions on the matter, but I'm not really seeing this at all.

I don't think libertarianism is inherently closest to beta nor that betas are more likely to be attracted to libertarian philosophy. Most betas I've known have had little, if any, issue with the size and scope of government or the power of politicians to influence their lives. In fact, most, if not all, of them generally have faith in the ability of government to benefit well-being of the populace, so long as it's done under an ideology they agree with and think is best.

While betas might experience problems with hierarchy on a small scale where someone else is likely to make arbitrary rules that directly (and needlessly) govern the betas' personal lives (such as hierarchies at home and work), I tend to think that on a larger social scale, betas are likely to be the one's doing the bulk of the 'social organizing' and promoting themselves as worthy 'leaders.'

As for Obama, the man reeks of beta NF to me. His hopelessly idealistic language of "We will change this country, we will change the world" and that his election meant that "Americans sent a message that we have never been just a collection of individuals" (emphasizing the collective as being of greater importance than the individual) have not changed my opinion.

I also agree with hellothere that just because Obama is not foaming at the mouth and is able to maintain posture and 'calmness' doesn't mean he isn't beta or EIE.

I actually think almost all of his speeches contain a great deal of emotion and emotional appeals rather than appealing to logic and explaining why certain policies would 'work best' or are most economically sound.

YES YES YES, a million times YES! This is exactly what I've been thinking and was going to comment on, but you put it so well I'm afraid there's not really much I can add.

I'm confused as to why people are considering IEE for Obama, even some of the IEEs here. Some here seem to be playing into the stereotype that all EIEs are inevitably hopelessly eccentric and animated. Having Fe as a dominant function would indicate being very adept at manipulating the emotional atmosphere appropriate to the circumstances and in order to achieve the desired outcome. He tried (successfully) to become the president, not work in showbusiness. Strong Fe would be really good at knowing what to say and how to act to move and draw people towards a cause. He's nothing if not charismatic.

Note that by saying this I'm not implying that EIEs have no personality or ideas of their own and simply go around "acting" the needed role to achieve their purpose (though if this were their intent, they would be more effective at it than most other types). Neither am I saying that this is necessarily the case with Obama (that he's pretending to be something in order to get support). I'm just trying to show how nothing about him contradicts the case for EIE. On the contrary, as DeAnte said, his ideals and style are actually very typical of Beta NF and exactly the reason I always saw him as "style over substance" (as my favorite SLI put it) and therefore not appealing to me. Makes me feel manipulated and gives me a sense of looking around a crowd and thinking "are people really buying this stuff, is this really enough to gain their support, where are the facts".

Afterthought: the whole appealing to the masses thing, to a communal ideology seems very Beta and always gives me a weird feeling. Delta appeals seem more individualistic and straightforward, lacking that seemingly hypnotic mass emotionalism.

I would much prefer someone I perceive as a straight-talker that would "appeal to logic and explain why certain policies would 'work best' or are most economically sound" (as stated by DeAnte).

[dbmmama]

YES YES YES, a million times YES! This is exactly what I've been thinking and was going to comment on, but you put it so well I'm afraid there's not really much I can add.

I'm confused as to why people are considering IEE for Obama, even some of the IEEs here. Some here seem to be playing into the stereotype that all EIEs are inevitably hopelessly eccentric and animated. Having Fe as a dominant function would indicate being very adept at manipulating the emotional atmosphere appropriate to the circumstances and in order to achieve the desired outcome. He tried (successfully) to become the president, not work in showbusiness. Strong Fe would be really good at knowing what to say and how to act to move and draw people towards a cause. He's nothing if not charismatic.

Note that by saying this I'm not implying that EIEs have no personality or ideas of their own and simply go around "acting" the needed role to achieve their purpose (though if this were their intent, they would be more effective at it than most other types). Neither am I saying that this is necessarily the case with Obama (that he's pretending to be something in order to get support). I'm just trying to show how nothing about him contradicts the case for EIE. On the contrary, as DeAnte said, his ideals and style are actually very typical of Beta NF and exactly the reason I always saw him as "style over substance" (as my favorite SLI said) and therefore not appealing to me. Makes me feel manipulated and gives me a sense of looking around a crow and thinking "are people really buying this stuff, is this really enough to gain their support, where are the facts".

Afterthought: the whole appealing to the masses thing, to a communal ideology seems very Beta and always gives me a weird feeling. Delta appeals seem more individualistic and straightforward, lacking that seemingly hypnotic mass emotionalism.

I would much prefer someone I perceive as a straight-talker that would "appeal to logic and explain why certain policies would 'work best' or are most economically sound" (as stated by DeAnte).

ditto, ditto, ditto on all counts.

[hellothere]

though, as a delta, I still found it hard not to get swept up in the Obama wagon

even if he is in the opposite quadra to me, he still strikes me as a very decent person, so I didn't mind that he seemed style over substance (though from my perspective, which admittedly is limited, given I don't even live in the US, it was more like style AND substance... though maybe the former overshadowed the latter)

[mikemex]

I'm personally not closed to the idea that Obama might be beta. But, how to be sure?

It would be a matter of asking to an LSE, I supose. If he's really IEI, there is going to be some heated critic.

[UDP]

EIE>IEE

I'm sure, somewhere on earth, there are LSEs who would support someone from the democratic party, even if they were their socionics opposite. Or like some, perhaps it was a choice of choosing between "the lesser of two evils".

[Smilingeyes]

One ESTj's opinion: Obama's INFp.
Though McCain is ESTj, I still would have voted Obama in the election had I been able to. With a bad taste in my mouth but I would have done it.

ENFj's tend to be more personally dynamic, aggressive, energetic. Obama's noted for personal calm and serenity. He's noted for muted, egalitarian responses and ability to compromise. None of those are ENFj strengths. They're INFp strengths.

Of the more famous people currently associated with Obama, types that I have a feeling of Warren Buffett is INTp and Future Chief-of-staff Emanuel (Rahmbo) Rahm is (probably and apparently) ESTp. (on Rahm from Wikipedia: Emanuel is said to have "mailed a rotten fish to a former coworker after the two parted ways."[17] On the night after the 1996 election, "Emanuel was so angry at the president's enemies that he stood up at a celebratory dinner with colleagues from the campaign, grabbed a steak knife and began rattling off a list of betrayers, shouting 'Dead! ... Dead! ... Dead!')

I don't think an ENFj would have any use for Buffett (much less vice versa) and I don't think Rahm has any use in a delta administration.

[Binky]

The last time I freaked out,
I just kept looking down,
I st-st-stuttered when
You asked me what I'm thinkin' bout
Felt like I couldn't breathe
You asked what's wrong with me
My best friend Lesley said
"Oh she's just being Miley!"

[jessica129]

She looks like a horse.

[Binky]

Don't try to change the subject.

[UDP]

ENFj's tend to be more personally dynamic, aggressive, energetic. Obama's noted for personal calm and serenity. He's noted for muted, egalitarian responses and ability to compromise. None of those are ENFj strengths. They're INFp strengths.

I saw a clip of him playing basketball. He didn't "suck" - that's not why i'm saying this - but how he moved struck me as very NF and I can see IP>EJ; which fits in with those above observations.

[munenori2]

(on Rahm from Wikipedia: Emanuel is said to have "mailed a rotten fish to a former coworker after the two parted ways."[17] On the night after the 1996 election, "Emanuel was so angry at the president's enemies that he stood up at a celebratory dinner with colleagues from the campaign, grabbed a steak knife and began rattling off a list of betrayers, shouting 'Dead! ... Dead! ... Dead!')

[Creepy-Diana]

.

[JRiddy]

I see all kinds of complaints coming from the Left all over the world: they complain about a candidate (now a president) who pretends to be a Socialist but is not. Who pretends to be a representative of the Left while he's, at the same time, dealing with the forces of the Right.

Why?

Well, in my opinion, it is wrong to call Obama a Socialist and a member of the Left in the first place. The reason? Because Socialism (as we know it) and the concept of "Left" are mostly Alpha in nature. You can see the typical representatives of that current being Alpha, say, Voltaire, but up to modern examples like Bill Clinton and Al Gore.

However, Obama is Delta. And Deltas tend to float somewhere between the formal definitions of the political wings. Some Deltas are known for their Right wing affinity (usually STs) while others have more affinity for the Left (usually NFs).

So, is it a bit too constraining to have a two sided game when there are actually four forces playing? What kind of politics do really Deltas promote?

I find this whole approach to be horrendously off base. Quadra values and political values certainly have relationships, but not at such a simplistic level. I'm decidedly Alpha and I am anything but a socialist. Any type can hold any variety of political positions. The type is much more likely to tell you how they come to their conclusions and how they behave politically than it is to tell you what someone believes.

Deltas, like members of every quadra, promote a variety of different political views. The thing that makes the views Delta is much more subtle than whether they tend to be liberal or conservative, even if those designations had more well-defined meanings.

[mikemex]

I find this whole approach to be horrendously off base. Quadra values and political values certainly have relationships, but not at such a simplistic level. I'm decidedly Alpha and I am anything but a socialist. Any type can hold any variety of political positions. The type is much more likely to tell you how they come to their conclusions and how they behave politically than it is to tell you what someone believes.

Deltas, like members of every quadra, promote a variety of different political views. The thing that makes the views Delta is much more subtle than whether they tend to be liberal or conservative, even if those designations had more well-defined meanings.

Yeah, because socionics itself is not limited to quadras, but temperaments, clubs, etc. However, I'm choosing to restrict my observation to quadra values only.

[JRiddy]

Yeah, because socionics itself is not limited to quadras, but temperaments, clubs, etc. However, I'm choosing to restrict my observation to quadra values only.

Socionics doesn't explain everything about someone's behavior or opinions. There are just too many variables for a (fairly simple) reductionistic model to take into account. This is not saying that Socionics is bad, but merely that there limits to what I can and can't speak on.

Additionally, there are many ways in which I could argue that Socionics itself would lean against socialism being an Alpha-oriented view. The most important of these is that Alphas are democratic. Whatever theoretical explanation you might give for this, it is an observable trait of Alphas and Gammas that they tend to dislike the power structures that come with most forms of social government. Now, if you suggest that some of the social ideas of leftism and socialism are rooted in alpha, that may be more or less true. Egalitarianism and such ideas seem pretty matter-of-course to me, in that I think that way without thinking about it. However, the leftism that we see in the US today has support and opposition from members of all quadras, for a variety of reasons. To say that someone cannot really be socialist without being Alpha would be a narrow characterization that reifies socionic models to a much more quantifiable level than experience leads me to believe is practicable.

I think the better question to ask would be to look at what members of certain quadras believe, and attempt to find out why they ascribe to that ideology, and how they go about supporting it.

[mikemex]

There are just too many variables for a (fairly simple) reductionistic model to take into account.

Well, the notions of "Left" and "Right" are also very vague. I don't really see the fault about comparing two systems with about the same level of vagueness.

I support your proposal about describing natural political tendencies for each type.

[JRiddy]

Well, the notions of "Left" and "Right" are also very vague. I don't really see the fault about comparing two systems with about the same level of vagueness.

I support your proposal about describing natural political tendencies for each type.

Good point. Even two dimensional models, that compare preference for levels government involvement in the economy and society fall short of categorizing beliefs very well.