View Poll Results: Richard Nixon

Voters
8. You may not vote on this poll
  • ENTp (ILE)

    0 0%
  • ISFp (SEI)

    0 0%
  • ESFj (ESE)

    0 0%
  • INTj (LII)

    0 0%
  • ENFj (EIE)

    0 0%
  • ISTj (LSI)

    0 0%
  • ESTp (SLE)

    5 62.50%
  • INFp (IEI)

    0 0%
  • ESFp (SEE)

    0 0%
  • INTp (ILI)

    0 0%
  • ENTj (LIE)

    0 0%
  • ISFj (ESI)

    2 25.00%
  • ESTj (LSE)

    0 0%
  • INFj (EII)

    1 12.50%
  • ENFp (IEE)

    0 0%
  • ISTp (SLI)

    0 0%
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Nixon on the Couch

  1. #1
    WE'RE ALL GOING HOME HERO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,001
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Nixon on the Couch

    I think that this proves that Richard Nixon really was Ti-ESTp:

    - from The New Psychohistory (Lloyd deMause, Editor); pp. 307-309 [CHAPTER 10 – Psychohistory and Psychotherapy by Lloyd deMause]: During the long summer of 1973, as the Watergate hearings began to reveal the full extent of the illegal activities of Richard M. Nixon, I would often have lunch with associates in the mental health field, and invariably our discussions turned to the personality of Nixon. Surprisingly, my friends each described for me quite similar profiles of his character. Previously, they said, it had seemed that Nixon was a typical obsessive-compulsive personality, reasonably well integrated, warding off a great deal of repressed hostility through typical defense mechanisms, chiefly overcontrol of himself and others, and through a variety of over-moralistic projects. In short, he had seemed little different than, say, the average compulsive businessman who was so frequently seen in psychotherapy.
    But, with Watergate, it was becoming more and more evident that this appraisal of Nixon was superficial, that his compulsive traits were only protective coloration which allowed him to blend in with the pre-dominant American personality-type. Instead, it was becoming apparent that he was closer to the psychopathic personality-type, making paranoid lists of enemies and ordering their illegal surveillance and persecution, tape-recording secretly on a wholesale basis, and so on down the familiar list of Nixon-directed activities. Every one of the character-traits familiar to those who regularly treat psychopathic personalities began to be revealed: the shifting moral standards and patchy superego, the continuous confusion between what is right and what is narcissistically needed, the paranoid insecurity and compensatory grandiosity, the shallow inter-personal attachments, the lack of the capacity for guilt or even regret, the overcontrol combined with an increasingly unpredictable impulsivity.
    Sometimes our lunch-table discussions went further, and we would speculate on whether a real analysis of Nixon’s childhood would confirm this diagnosis, since psychopathic personalities generally could be traced to a great deal of emotional abandonment and even violence in the family, whereas the family patterns of obsessive-compulsive personalities usually centered more on the problem of parental overcontrol and excessive demands. But regardless of the different turns our discussion took, we usually ended our luncheon with a weak joke, which usually ran something like: “Well, with all these awful things now coming out about Nixon, I sure hope he doesn’t feel he has to show he still has balls by pushing the little red button or something!”
    Since at that time I had just started a scholarly journal of psychohistory, I made it a point to ask each of these psychotherapists if they would write up some of their professional opinions for publication, including the possibility that there was a danger of Nixon, like other psychopathic personalities, reacting to exposure and ridicule by having to prove his potency, and that this might take the form of precipitating an international nuclear crisis solely for personal interpsychic reasons. As you might suspect, all of my friends refused to commit their opinions to writing. It was not just that they were reluctant personally to state their opinions; beyond this, they appeared to believe that psychotherapists should not be allowed to express professional opinions on political problems, that somehow the professional status of the psychotherapist prohibited him or her from analyzing political behavior. “I’m a specialist,” was the feeling. “Let the social scientists handle political events.”
    A few months later, on October 23, 1973, what we joked about, what we most feared, happened. Using as a pretext a completely insignificant political event, the Russian demand that they be allowed to include some Soviet troops in the U.N. Middle-East peace-keeping force, Nixon pushed the Red Alert Button, and two million American soldiers went into a state of war-time readiness, including the arming of 15,000 nuclear bombs. I don’t know what your personal response to this Red Alert was, but my own reaction was to go home, put my family and dogs into our car, and head north toward Canada. Luckily, as in the Cuban missile crisis, the Russian leaders recognized a case of machismo as well as my psychoanalytic friends did. They quickly backed off on their demand, and for a second time in a decade we all narrowly escaped being blown off the face of the earth.
    The reaction of my friends in psychotherapy to the October Red Alert, like the reaction of the rest of the country, was a studied silence. Their analysis of Nixon’s personality and his need to prove his potency had been proved spectacularly accurate, to the extent of achieving that much-desired scientific goal of prediction. Yet, unbelievably, I now found I could no longer get anyone to discuss anything about Nixon’s personality, nor about the Red Alert. It was if an unspoken agreement existed which considered the topic “bad manners,” “unprofessional” in the extreme. Now when a gap in logic appears in the thinking patterns of a patient undergoing psychoanalysis, the therapist is trained to suspect the existence of a powerful unconscious fantasy. Let us call a shared fantasy of similar effect a “Group-fantasy,” and, further, let us call that Group-fantasy shared by the mental health community which strenuously denies the direct application of the insights of psychotherapy to history “The Group-fantasy of Specialization.”
    This Group-fantasy of Specialization has at least three subordinate beliefs. The first is that there exists a separate group of individuals called “social scientists” who have a body of knowledge somehow beyond psychology which better explains an individual’s public behavior than depth psychology does. The second belief is that there exist entities called “social structures” and “political institutions” which are something over and above the individual psychological mechanisms which psychotherapists are used to dealing with in their patients. And the third belief is that there exist places called “universities” which house these “social science” specialists, who are alone qualified to describe and explain these “social structures” and “institutions.”
    Now, let us for a moment imagine that, through a process similar to that of the lifting of repression in individual psychotherapy, this Group fantasy of Specialization were one day to be rationally examined, and, like all infantile fantasies, to disappear, and psychotherapists were all to realize that their psychological science and their ability to explain, weigh and predict the motivations and behavior of individuals is identical to that science which the "social scientists" had long dreamed of constructing. Let us suppose that psychotherapists were suddenly to realize that the 75-year split between the academic and the mental health community was in fact a reflection of two opposing attitudes, one admitting and one rejecting the existence of unconscious mental activity; that psychoanalytic psychology had been minimally tried and then vigorously rejected by every department in the university over the past four decades; and that, further, most of the theories of the “social sciences” have been motivated by a flight from psychology, a vast defensive response to the growing discoveries of depth psychology.
    The concrete result of such a destruction of the Group-fantasy of Specialization, I would argue, would be for every unit within the mental health field to set up a psychohistory section. This psychohistory section would assume an obligation to accomplish research toward the construction of a new science of psychohistory, which would include everything from political psychology and group psychohistory to the history of childhood and psychobiography. One of these new psychohistory sections might want to reach out into the community and construct a taxology of family types, with generalizations on the kinds of personal and political behavior which result from childhood in differing kinds of families; a third might attempt to reconstruct the Watergate hearings as a kind of group-process, examining its group-unconscious determinants, and so on.


    Here is a link:

    http://www.alice-miller.com/readersm...=2659&grp=0609
    Last edited by HERO; 02-06-2011 at 10:58 AM.

  2. #2
    Bananas are good. Aleksei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    The Rift
    TIM
    C-EIE, 7-4-8 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,632
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You expect me to take seriously a report that basically starts out by calling Nixon psychotic?

    tl;dr in any case. Nixon was ESI.
    What do these signs mean—, , etc.? Why cannot socionists use symbols Ne, Ni etc. as in MBTI? Just because they have somewhat different meaning. Socionics and MBTI, each in its own way, have slightly modified the original Jung's description of his 8 psychological types. For this reason, (Ne) is not exactly the same as Ne in MBTI.

    Just one example: in MBTI, Se (extraverted sensing) is associated with life pleasures, excitement etc. By contrast, the socionic function (extraverted sensing) is first and foremost associated with control and expansion of personal space (which sometimes can manifest in excessive aagression, but often also manifests in a capability of managing lots of people and things).

    For this reason, we consider comparison between MBTI types and socionic types by functions to be rather useless than useful.

    -Victor Gulenko, Dmitri Lytov

  3. #3
    WE'RE ALL GOING HOME HERO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,001
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "Psychopathic" -- not 'psychotic'.



    Personally, I have no reason to believe that Richard Milhous Nixon wasn't Ti-ESTp (Normalizing subtype) [ESTp-ISFj]. If he had any genuine authentic Introverted Feeling, I honestly don't know where it was. I do believe that Nixon was my dual.


    http://www.alice-miller.com/readersm...=2659&grp=0609

    'Morals
    Sunday June 14, 2009

    Hi Alice [Miller],

    In response to a series of questions delivered by Robert Frost (aired on television on May 19th, 1977) relating to the ethical implications of a U.S. president engaging in or at least approving of "listening in" and recording of private conversations, burglaries of private properties and intercepting and reading private mail.

    Richard Nixon responded:
    "Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal".

    These are things my parents did to me as a child, read my private mail, took property from me that was mine and listened in on private conversations that I had with others.

    Having read your work to date I see more and more that childhood experiences do not stay in the past but re-enact themselves through us again and again as adults until we actually listen to the full story of what we had to endure, feel the feelings as they arise and understand how we have been deceived and wronged, painful as this is to do.

    I can see these double standards everywhere.

    It is one rule for those who hold power and another rule for those without power. I can only imagine that Richard Nixon learned this lesson from his parents. The lesson being that his parents could use any means at their disposal to ensure that little Richard conformed to what they expected of him and that he could not dare question their motives. I know this is true of my own history anyway.

    I am having to reconnect with my inner moral compass, the one I was born with, not the broken one my parents forced on me as a child . . .

    G.




    AM [Alice Miller]: Yes, you are right, I hope that people will eventually become aware of the fact that what presidents and parents do can be extremely wrong, even if it is yet not declared as ILLEGAL because they have the power. We must urgently work for making crimes towards chirdren eventually illegal.'

  4. #4
    WE'RE ALL GOING HOME HERO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,001
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    - from the New Psychohistory (Lloyd deMause), p. 307: " . . . they said, it had seemed that Nixon was a typical obsessive-compulsive personality, reasonably well integrated, warding off a great deal of repressed hostility through typical defense mechanisms, chiefly overcontrol of himself and others, and through a variety of over-moralistic projects. In short, he had seemed little different than, say, the average compulsive businessman who was so frequently seen in psychotherapy.
    But, with Watergate, it was becoming more and more evident that this appraisal of Nixon was superficial, that his compulsive traits were only protective coloration which allowed him to blend in with the pre-dominant American personality-type. Instead, it was becoming apparent that he was closer to the psychopathic personality-type, making paranoid lists of enemies and ordering their illegal surveillance and persecution, tape-recording secretly on a wholesale basis, and so on down the familiar list of Nixon-directed activities. Every one of the character-traits familiar to those who regularly treat psychopathic personalities began to be revealed: the shifting moral standards and patchy superego, the continuous confusion between what is right and what is narcissistically needed, the paranoid insecurity and compensatory grandiosity, the shallow inter-personal attachments, the lack of the capacity for guilt or even regret, the overcontrol combined with an increasingly unpredictable impulsivity.
    Sometimes our lunch-table discussions went further, and we would speculate on whether a real analysis of Nixon’s childhood would confirm this diagnosis, since psychopathic personalities generally could be traced to a great deal of emotional abandonment and even violence in the family, whereas the family patterns of obsessive-compulsive personalities usually centered more on the problem of parental overcontrol and excessive demands.


    http://www.socioniko.net/ru/type-foto/fl-fil.html

  5. #5
    Creepy-female

    Default

    Nixon under the Covers

  6. #6
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    bow chicka wow wow
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  7. #7
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,757
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Personally I think LSE is much more likely...his way of pushing too hard and using power like some bartering tool is classic Te methodological bullshit, the hyper-controlled but still obvious anger reeks of weak/unvalued Fe, he seems tense and a bit touchy like a typical over-stressed Ej. I really don't see any semblance of SLE in him when comparing videos of him speaking with SLEs. He's too innately high strung, I don't see him being an irrational type at all.

    I can, on the othet hand, see why comparing the psychological evaluatory criteria with stereotypical notions of Se dominance and Fi PoLR would lead to foolish mistakes.
    But, for a certainty, back then,
    We loved so many, yet hated so much,
    We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...

    Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
    Whilst our laughter echoed,
    Under cerulean skies...

  8. #8
    WE'RE ALL GOING HOME HERO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,001
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    bump

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •