View Poll Results: How do you Type None?

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

    0 0%
  • SEI (ISFp)

    0 0%
  • ESE (ESFj)

    0 0%
  • LII (INTj)

    0 0%
  • SLE (ESTp)

    0 0%
  • IEI (INFp)

    2 50.00%
  • EIE (ENFj)

    1 25.00%
  • LSI (ISTj)

    0 0%
  • SEE (ESFp)

    1 25.00%
  • ILI (INTp)

    0 0%
  • LIE (ENTj

    0 0%
  • ESI (ISFj)

    0 0%
  • IEE (ENFp)

    0 0%
  • SLI (ISTp)

    0 0%
  • LSE (ESTj)

    0 0%
  • EII (INFj)

    0 0%
Results 1 to 32 of 32

Thread: None's Type

  1. #1
    Provocateur None's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    IEI-Ni ELVF 458
    Posts
    120
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default None's Type

    In honor of my one hundredth post on this forum, I have decided to make a 'What's My Type?' thread. I believe I have left an imprint of my personality such that I have annoyed some, endeared others, but well—mainly annoyed people I think.

    I believe I've also been quite rude at times to certain people. In my post history I've called @Teslobo an illiterate. @Agate a cunt. I called to have @VewyScawwyNawcissist shot. I have called for the suppression of peoples' opinions regarding 'state-ly' matters. I've implied people to be 'retards' more times than I can remember. I said people who push Transgender propaganda ought to end up like the victims of the Reign of Terror.

    So, in general— I believe I've put in a lot of negative energy on this forum. I am surprised I have not at least been warned. To those I have insulted, to those I've been mean to, I apologize. [putting in a political section wasn't my idea!]

    I hope you did not take what I say as a personal attack. Though the things I've expressed were indeed attacks, they were attacks on your thinking and not your person or character. It was not my intention to offend any of you. I call people retards and illiterates for their artistic sensibility as well, [though I haven't had the pleasure to do so on this forum just yet, don't hold your breath because I will!]

    Now with all that said, those of you who would like to can vote which 'type' I am. I do understand that it is preferred for people to fill out questionnaires, however I have no interest in revealing information about my personal life. Expressing outlook on life and attitude towards the world says a lot more about someone than their upbringing.

    I have decided to leave the poll as public, because I am interested in seeing how different posters see me. If there are any questions you have that you want me to answer, feel free to ask.

    To those of you who are interested I have linked a February edition of my Talanov Results.

    Edit: It seems that I come across as a very strong headed person. (That's because I am) and people use that to form a mental picture on me. In real life my appearance has been described as 'fragile' and 'delicate'. [by an EIE woman no less] I am reminded of the description Adam Strange gave of IEIs. He called it a very 'gay' looking personality. I have often been accused of being 'gay' by both friends and family. It always left me puzzled. I never understood why until I got into socionics.
    Last edited by None; 05-27-2022 at 06:49 PM. Reason: Added Physical Appearance

  2. #2
    twiggewed, dewusional, entitwed, snowfwake VewyScawwyNawcissist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Location
    uNdeR yOur SkIn
    TIM
    bNF 641 sx6w5
    Posts
    1,896
    Mentioned
    83 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    EIEs can be offensive like that. CS joseph said it and other ENFJs in the comments
    ur apologizing and more self aware which is not a general trend for SxEs
    u remind me a bit of myself younger but like i try to have multiple layers of self awareness related to perceptions so i dont see myself acting or talking like u do
    like wtf is happening in ur real life that u think u can get away with acting like this, not my personal problem but like other ppl overreact and make the wrong assumptions. i know 2 beta NFs maybe who'd go like that confronting ppl resulting in their having a few frinds or almost none. why cant they figure for so long that most ppl wont reciprocate and some of theri ideas aobut how shit sould be just isnt right. they act overbearing. i havent been one to cut ppl off from my life bc i figured i cant get away with being a bitchy little princess. ironically ist meatheads who try to get away with it the most which forces them to stay meatheads with their loyal gang bros just to whine later about how this snake that snake stfu ur the snake.

    thats why u have to constantly explain urself in multiple layers. this has been an INFJ meme but the meme is also that they are usually smart enough to not talk much. mysterious my ass when ppl can only thing in very rigid ways everything is a mistery. not my fault they're dumb. they even get offended when u dare to think u know something better than them.
    u are reminiscned of other annoying beta NFs on this forum like shazaam awellarmedcat braingel even raptorwizarid with ur idealism

    idk if uve said anything about it, i think ur prolly male. theres htis kind of awkwardness and more forward validation seeking.
    Your face makes your brain and sociotype – how muscle use shapes personality
    I want to care
    if I was better I’d help you
    if I was better you’d be better
    HELLO??? COME BACK!!!!
    i'm afraid it will hurt like hell, i am afraid of screaming and i am afraid of crying, i am afraid of forgetting but i'm not afraid of dying.


  3. #3

    Default

    None has no type.

  4. #4
    Provocateur None's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    IEI-Ni ELVF 458
    Posts
    120
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @VewyScawwyNawcissist
    I don't know how it is which I am 'acting', or how I think I'm 'getting away' with it.
    I act here the way I act in familiar company, with emotional honesty.
    I have [from an outsiders perspective] extreme opinions on 'political' issues. I've said as much in this thread.
    [The next sentence is not directed towards you, but an abstract 'you']
    If you get in the way of my will, I will killyou. That's not a joke or an exaggeration. If you make an enemy out of me you've signed your own death warrant.
    The vast overwhelming majority of people have nothing to worry for because they don't have the strength to sacrifice their lives for anything. To 'oppose' my will.
    Nor have the vast overwhelming majority of people put much thought into the deplorable opinions which they may hold. They only parrot what they've been told without putting in an ounce of critical thinking.
    That's why it makes no sense for me to act rude or bad towards anyone here. People don't have any views of their own. Rather their opinions are constructed through their socialization.

    I did not apologize for my language towards others, I am apologizing if I hurt their feelings as it was not my intention. I understand that some people are more sensitive than others, and using 'Se' language is something many people would not appreciate.

    By the way, when I said I'd have you shot I felt really bad after, I didn't say it because I don't like you- but you were annoying me in that thread by mocking me and repeating what I was saying. I am sure you are a lovely individual in real life and I have absolutely no problem with your personality whatsoever. My accusation against you [for being an Alpha NT] is because I suspect you have a really different way of thinking from me. Not because I don't like you or something.

    I have to 'constantly explain myself in multiple layers' as you say because you are human beings and not my enemy. I'm also scared some of you might have trauma and I may say something which triggers something in you. I don't have that issue because I'm a psychologically tough person. @Djinn hasn't logged in for two months and I remember him being depressed so I worry for him.

  5. #5
    Uncle Ave ipbanned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Belgium
    TIM
    LSI-C
    Posts
    5,656
    Mentioned
    220 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I do think your type is some beta type, but more likely rational than irrational. EIE is possible. Possibly a normalizing subtype.

    EIE-N is a typical philosopher prototype. As per SHS, Nietzsche, Hegel, Voltaire, Marx, all belong to this type and subtype combination. I would add Schopenauer and Evola, though Evola may not have been normalizing (I don't know enough about him though to really say).

    But you could also be LSI, I suppose, which probably sounds weird given that the other type I'm considering is EIE. But you speak about your ideas with an energy and resoluteness I associate with Beta rationals. I do think you come across (at least on here) as being more expressive and nuanced in how you joke and banter than an LSI would be outside the presence of an EIE though, so there's that.
    L'âme a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point

  6. #6
    Provocateur None's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    IEI-Ni ELVF 458
    Posts
    120
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @ipbanned
    Nietzsche is more than likely LSI, as well as Evola. Hegel is an Alpha NT the same as Marx. Likely LII. Schopenhauer or Voltaire I don't know, I haven't engaged with their works.
    EIE is not a philosopher type, they're a poet type. That 1D Ti doesn't do them any good for philosophy.

    Attached Images Attached Images

  7. #7
    Provocateur None's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    IEI-Ni ELVF 458
    Posts
    120
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @VewyScawwyNawcissist
    @ipbanned
    I would like to add that I would not entertain extraverted sociotypes. When you suggest them I will simply switch the ego functions so that the introverted information element is leading. During the Rona pandemic I spent more than one year without any social interaction whatsoever rather easily. I would say my typing of myself is rather accurate, I only want people to correct me if they thing I'm wrong so that I don't spread misinformation about socionics.

  8. #8
    Uncle Ave ipbanned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Belgium
    TIM
    LSI-C
    Posts
    5,656
    Mentioned
    220 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    @None

    From the SHS standpoint from which I mostly operate, most philosophers are EIEs. There are a few exceptions but it's a very common philosopher type from that pov.

    In model G, EIEs don't have such weak Ti as they do in model A. Model G deals with energy and not information, the dualizing function is easy to energize with external contact, and thus EIEs can easily do Ti stuff when engaged to do so by an external source (such as a dual).

    Don't get me wrong though, I'd really like Nietzsche to be my identical lol.
    L'âme a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point

  9. #9
    Provocateur None's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    IEI-Ni ELVF 458
    Posts
    120
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @ipbanned
    Well I operate on model A and Jung's own descriptions of the functions as well as Reinin dichotomies. I entertain other theories but that is how I go by. I've said this before to another person but there is no way in hell that Nietzsche is 1D Ti, someone who's 'madness letters' have a logical consistency. Hegel as EIE is one of the most ridiculous typings I have ever heard in my life.

    I cannot name a single EIE philosopher off the top of my head, I can name an IEI one- Rousseau, and his 'philosophy' is not so much of a philosophy but an 'ideal' he wanted to achieve. I can name plenty of EIE poets and artists.

    Nietzsche is typed EIE because of his love and exaltation of artistry and poetry. It would be like typing myself and Rousseau as SLE for our love of Se.

    Go out and find a nice EIE girl and make her read Nietzsche's essays. It would be almost incomprehensible to her. Make her read his poetry or his prose works like Zarathustra and she just might love it.

    Nietzsche definitely is your identical.

  10. #10
    Not that active Lady Lotus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    TIM
    ESI-Se x EVFL
    Posts
    2,452
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by None View Post
    I am reminded of the description Adam Strange gave of IEIs. He called it a very 'gay' looking personality. I have often been accused of being 'gay' by both friends and family. It always left me puzzled. I never understood why until I got into socionics.
    @Adam Strange Oh my god.

    ROOD.
    Lol wtf
    “Errare humanum est, sed in errare perseverare diabolicum.” —Seneca
    “To err is human, but to persist in error is diabolical.”

  11. #11
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    15,134
    Mentioned
    1458 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Leviathan View Post
    @Adam Strange Oh my god.

    ROOD.
    Lol wtf
    I was misquoted. I said IEI is a very feminine personality, just as SLE and LSE and LIE are very masculine personalities, no matter who gets them. I believe that being gay is NTR.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Location
    Limbo
    Posts
    63
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Would it be okay if I offered an enneagram suggestion as well? From the limited amount of your posts I’ve seen, IEI and ELVF definitely fit..but I find a 9 fix to be a hard sell, especially within the context of 459.


    A lot of your posts seem to indicate two reactive fixes, as opposed to only one (which would be paired with two of the most pliable types no less). Even though "reactive fix" is a bit of a misnomer, you seem to allow emotions of all kinds (including anger) to flow through yourself in a way that would be less typical for 459s. I think 458 would maybe do a better job encompassing your abstract focuses, while still accounting for a tendency for provocation. Generally speaking, 459s are going to tend more towards sensitivity and deep feeling—as opposed to the sharper feeling that the 8 fix brings (opinionated, and more blunt with others regarding the validity of others' opinions). 459s will be more likely to hold back their opinions, or at least couch them in softer expression and avoid rudeness (even if anger is related to the content of opinions rather than the people themselves), so as to not risk alienating others.. and based on your posts (as you seem to be aware lol), this seems to perhaps not be your M.O., at least as pertains to online engagement.


    This isn’t me typing you necessarily, as of course different facets of ourselves can be (mis)represented over the internet. Likewise, enneagram typing should ideally be done on the basis of motivations, rather than behaviors. But within the limited scope of behavioral typing--based on 459s tending to be one of the most tolerant tritypes when it comes to annoyances and other people’s slip-ups--I’d maybe suggest looking into 458 > 459. Please feel free to let me know though if I've misrepresented you; apologies if I did.
    Last edited by aciaradh; 05-28-2022 at 01:57 AM.

  13. #13
    Not that active Lady Lotus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    TIM
    ESI-Se x EVFL
    Posts
    2,452
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Strange View Post
    I was misquoted. I said IEI is a very feminine personality, just as SLE and LSE and LIE are very masculine personalities, no matter who gets them. I believe that being gay is NTR.
    Oof. Yikes. Horrible misquote. Yeah, I agree with what you said here.
    “Errare humanum est, sed in errare perseverare diabolicum.” —Seneca
    “To err is human, but to persist in error is diabolical.”

  14. #14
    Provocateur None's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    IEI-Ni ELVF 458
    Posts
    120
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Adam Strange @Lady Leviathan
    When a man gets this personality type, he often ends up looking (and acting) gay, whether he is or not.
    @aciaradh
    No problem, 458 is my original typing of my enneagram as well. I changed myself to 459 after engaging with Fauvre's works because I 'generally' don't go around being an 8. Though I would have no problem doing so. I consider myself 'tolerant' but not towards enemies. There is no one on this forum I can consider an 'enemy' for example. Yet I have no problem with 'violence' or anything of the sort. Though I believe it has to be systematic rather than 'random'. Certainly some ideas people shared on here are 'enemy' ideas, stupidities mostly in my view.

    Edit: I felt Adam's description was accurate. Who cares if it was 'rude'?
    Last edited by None; 05-28-2022 at 08:25 AM. Reason: Edit

  15. #15
    Shazaam's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lamp
    TIM
    AB-IEI-Ni
    Posts
    13,485
    Mentioned
    575 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't know, maybe when you are saying those things I always sensed you knew it was wrong and could hurt people's feelings- I am more likely to ban/punish people if they act that way and its more like a bragging demon. It's not so much what a person says all the time is the pattern and intention behind what they said that- the reason you haven't been banned is because genuine remorse is a virtue and not really something to punish. Assuming the offense is truly 'redeemable' ofc and YMMV with that, and hopefully you don't hurt people too much irl.

    The very fact you have apologized for any hurt feelings and seem sincere about it is the reason you're not banned- you've already redeemed yourself even as you're insulting somebody. That is kind of the way cyclical-Ni works. I mean if you're just trying to manipulate-an-apology in order to get away with abusing people and not be moderated- that too I think will be revealed in time or a Gamma/Delta mod can see how hurtful you really are and properly punish you instead. I do think you're probably in my quadra.

    Transphobia is puerile and stupid to me, but the way its been shoved down people's throats also feels fake and weird to me, so I've seen both sides with that. Invoking Deep State reptiles is generally not something that makes me feel sorry for a person and their cause. Because the State's job is to be against the individual, and so if you cast Society3 on somebody- it's often sort of a cheap tactic to get your own way and have everybody else suffer - even if you might be the bully yourself.

    OTOH JK Rowling is misguided that trans people are mocking her, she seems insecure and her books are overrated and stupid. ie; I understand this is just a personal bias I myself have- I am not trying to be Umbridge about Umbridges like she is, essentially. Being an anti-Umbridge so much- you just turn around and are the biggest douche Umbridge of them all. That's what she doesn't seem to get.
    Last edited by Shazaam; 05-29-2022 at 04:08 AM.

  16. #16
    Provocateur None's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    IEI-Ni ELVF 458
    Posts
    120
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Shazaam
    I have no problem with transgender individuals whatsoever. I do think however they are in need of immense psychological assistance and therapy. How could I have problems with trans people? Trans people have problems with themselves. That's why they feel the need to mutilate their bodies in order to fit into social molds—because they think women ought to act like X or men ought to act like Y. It's not 'progressive'. It's literally just putting people into Te. You're a man who wants to wear dresses and makeup? You're well within your right to do that. That doesn't mean you should go out and fucking castrate yourself. There are plenty of predators and exploiters involved in the trans movement. I see it and I know it. Those abusers who push the kind of propaganda that I am talking about deserve the worst and I will give it to them. I have no empathy in regards to them. They are one of those abstract 'enemies' I'm always talking about.

    I feel as though you do not like me very much. Or at the very least you are wary of me and treading lightly. When I mention you, you don't mention me. It is sad because I find you endearing.

    Pretty sure JK Rowling is Delta. I put down the Goblet of Fire in the second grade because I thought it was boring. I don't have an opinion on her to give other than that.

  17. #17
    RBRS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    TIM
    That TIM you dislike
    Posts
    336
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by None View Post
    @ipbanned
    Nietzsche is more than likely LSI, as well as Evola. Hegel is an Alpha NT the same as Marx. Likely LII. Schopenhauer or Voltaire I don't know, I haven't engaged with their works.
    EIE is not a philosopher type, they're a poet type. That 1D Ti doesn't do them any good for philosophy.

    Nietzsche was likely EIE
    Hegel Alpha NT, alternatively Beta NF
    Marx was likely Beta ST, alternatively Gamma NT
    Schopenhauer seems ILI.
    Last edited by RBRS; 05-29-2022 at 10:50 PM.

  18. #18
    Rune's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    TIM
    ILI-Ni N 964 sp/sx
    Posts
    581
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by None View Post
    @Shazaam
    I have no problem with transgender individuals whatsoever. I do think however they are in need of immense psychological assistance and therapy. How could I have problems with trans people? Trans people have problems with themselves. That's why they feel the need to mutilate their bodies in order to fit into social molds—because they think women ought to act like X or men ought to act like Y. It's not 'progressive'. It's literally just putting people into Te. You're a man who wants to wear dresses and makeup? You're well within your right to do that. That doesn't mean you should go out and fucking castrate yourself. There are plenty of predators and exploiters involved in the trans movement. I see it and I know it. Those abusers who push the kind of propaganda that I am talking about deserve the worst and I will give it to them. I have no empathy in regards to them. They are one of those abstract 'enemies' I'm always talking about.

    I feel as though you do not like me very much. Or at the very least you are wary of me and treading lightly. When I mention you, you don't mention me. It is sad because I find you endearing.

    Pretty sure JK Rowling is Delta. I put down the Goblet of Fire in the second grade because I thought it was boring. I don't have an opinion on her to give other than that.
    You seem like a rational type. Ie. you have an answer already prepared for everything. You prefer having closure in terms of your opinions.
    Just on the border of your waking mind,
    There lies another time
    Where darkness and light are one,
    And as you tread the halls of sanity
    You feel so glad to be unable to go beyond

    I have a message from another time.

  19. #19
    Provocateur None's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    IEI-Ni ELVF 458
    Posts
    120
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @RBRS
    How can Hegel be a Beta NF? I've read his lectures he gave in university on logic and he comes across as no Beta NF I know. Marx being Beta ST is an idea I can entertain, specifically LSI though I do find it doubtful. How can he be a gamma NT but not an alpha NT. Marx has a way of looking at the world that I don't imagine to be very different from Alpha NT physicists. His Fe PoLR seems very apparent to me with his disputes with Bakunin. If Hegel can be an Alpha NT why can't Marx? Don't take my word for it, but I'd ask @FreelancePoliceman because I am sure he knows far more about the intricacies of Marx's life than I do to be able to type him. An example of an ST, likely LSI 'Marxist' that I know of is Georges Sorel. It is doubtful Se is in Marx's ego as he has rejected the idea of revolution for the sake of revolution in the style of Louis Auguste Blanqui and rather sees Se as a sort of 'final recourse' of proletariat due to the dialectic created in the existing material conditions of society.

    There is nothing to suggest Nietzsche being an EIE other than the fact that he wrote some poetry and loved art. His primary corpus is not what EIEs go around writing about. I know about the interactions which he had with other people and the way he acts around others is not any Fe ego person that I know of. I find the idea of Nietzsche being an extravert to be very dubious. ****** is also typed as EIE (another ridiculous typing) If you would like to then please find me another EIE that engages with the works of Plato and the history of philosophy in the way that Nietzsche does. I can name plenty of LSI who do.


    @Rune
    Rationality in Socionics literature is defined by a focus on actions and emotions whereas, irrationality a focus on states of mind and body. Every type in socionics contains a mixture of rational and irrational functions and, correspondingly, will display a mixture of rational and irrational traits. Thus, not one person fits neatly into one or the other side of this dichotomy, because every type has both rational and irrational functions. In my introductory post from 5 months ago the Talanov type indicator suggested that I have an overwhelming preference for irrationality over rationality. My mother who I type as ESE has described me as 'illogical'. Quite frankly I don't have an answer already prepared for everything. I mean I have an opinion for just about everything but I don't have answers for everything. I don't go around butting into things I don't understand. I don't want to look stupid. I don't know about having a preference in terms of having closure for my opinions. To me they always seem to be in flux and changing with the acquisition of new information. The fact that there are certain things which I have (for the most part) set in stone doesn't really do much to contradict this in my view.

    If I am an EIE then my enneagram is also more than likely wrong and you would have to suggest a new one.
    I hope you don't mind me being critical. Again I have no attachment towards the IEI personality type. I am quite fond of all the Beta Quadra types and have no problem with being any of them. IEI just seems to explain aspects of my psychology in ways which other 'types' have proved to be insufficient.
    The person in my avatar, Filippo Tommaso Marinetti [whom I type as IEI] is that individual whom I find to be most similar to myself.

  20. #20
    RBRS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    TIM
    That TIM you dislike
    Posts
    336
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by None View Post
    @RBRS
    How can Hegel be a Beta NF? I've read his lectures he gave in university on logic and he comes across as no Beta NF I know. Marx being Beta ST is an idea I can entertain, specifically LSI though I do find it doubtful. How can he be a gamma NT but not an alpha NT. Marx has a way of looking at the world that I don't imagine to be very different from Alpha NT physicists. His Fe PoLR seems very apparent to me with his disputes with Bakunin. If Hegel can be an Alpha NT why can't Marx? Don't take my word for it, but I'd ask @FreelancePoliceman because I am sure he knows far more about the intricacies of Marx's life than I do to be able to type him. An example of an ST, likely LSI 'Marxist' that I know of is Georges Sorel. It is doubtful Se is in Marx's ego as he has rejected the idea of revolution for the sake of revolution in the style of Louis Auguste Blanqui and rather sees Se as a sort of 'final recourse' of proletariat due to the dialectic created in the existing material conditions of society.

    There is nothing to suggest Nietzsche being an EIE other than the fact that he wrote some poetry and loved art. His primary corpus is not what EIEs go around writing about. I know about the interactions which he had with other people and the way he acts around others is not any Fe ego person that I know of. I find the idea of Nietzsche being an extravert to be very dubious. ****** is also typed as EIE (another ridiculous typing) If you would like to then please find me another EIE that engages with the works of Plato and the history of philosophy in the way that Nietzsche does. I can name plenty of LSI who do.


    @Rune
    Rationality in Socionics literature is defined by a focus on actions and emotions whereas, irrationality a focus on states of mind and body. Every type in socionics contains a mixture of rational and irrational functions and, correspondingly, will display a mixture of rational and irrational traits. Thus, not one person fits neatly into one or the other side of this dichotomy, because every type has both rational and irrational functions. In my introductory post from 5 months ago the Talanov type indicator suggested that I have an overwhelming preference for irrationality over rationality. My mother who I type as ESE has described me as 'illogical'. Quite frankly I don't have an answer already prepared for everything. I mean I have an opinion for just about everything but I don't have answers for everything. I don't go around butting into things I don't understand. I don't want to look stupid. I don't know about having a preference in terms of having closure for my opinions. To me they always seem to be in flux and changing with the acquisition of new information. The fact that there are certain things which I have (for the most part) set in stone doesn't really do much to contradict this in my view.

    If I am an EIE then my enneagram is also more than likely wrong and you would have to suggest a new one.
    I hope you don't mind me being critical. Again I have no attachment towards the IEI personality type. I am quite fond of all the Beta Quadra types and have no problem with being any of them. IEI just seems to explain aspects of my psychology in ways which other 'types' have proved to be insufficient.
    The person in my avatar, Filippo Tommaso Marinetti [whom I type as IEI] is that individual whom I find to be most similar to myself.
    When I started reading Hegel I thought he was EIE at first, mainly because of two things;

    1; Dialectical-algorithmic cognition. This could be taken as confusion from my part because Hegel is the sort of "official father" of dialectical idealist ( the first "dialectical idealist" was Fitche if I remember correctly) but I think it even permeates the "units" of his dialectic conflicts as well as his overall philosophy (Talking from the standpoint of "lectures on the philosophy of universal history).

    Also, Fe seems evident to me in the way he "conceives" essences or spiritual states, for this he seems to get in tune with a sort of "vibration" different from what one would classically think of when speaking about form/idea/essence.

    I have not put much thought to Hegel's type but I've been jumping from EIE to ILE back and forth from time to time.

    Nietzsche has everything to be EIE. Most of his writings demonstrate a very proficient use of emotional ambience, his works are dramatic, impacting, passionate extravagant, his style is aimed towards expressing, attacking, or affecting some ethical ambient so to speak. Introverted intuition is also evident in him, most of his predictions lacked a solid background yet have been confirmed with time.

    There's also small things here and there, like the latter half of Beyond Good and Evil which point towards aristocratic dichotomy for example, or his regard for Te-Ego types as mediocre tools amongst other things.

    Marx is probably central quadra, 4D Ti type. LSI or ILI is my take.

    ****** is a curious historical character, he's one of the reasons for my questioning of socionic's validity.

    He possesed a proficiency with extraverted feeling that few men in history have archieved, just take a look at how he perfectly designed his public events in his typical wagnerian fashion to create the impact of a theatre play.

    But then he demonstrated strong Te and Se, often being a more competent military general and demonstrating equal if not more extensive military engineering knowledge than top-knotch german officials (often suggesting courses of action whucg ended up being superior to those planned by the high command) all of this while being a school dropout who lived on poverty (often due to his view of labor as degrading) with access to some books and operas at best.

    ******'s capacities seem far less impressing in 2022 because we have access to an endless stream of information as well as the proper guidance to find the materials needed for self learning, but those levels of knowledge and capacity, while lacking formal education, is something to take into account from someone in the 30s.

    Overall if he's to be typed then he was EIE-Ni.

    Sorel was not a marxist, in fact he could be seen as a proto national syndicalist. What we call "fascist" is actually a highly centralized and hierarchical form of national syndicalism so...
    My typing of Sorel was SLE.

    You seem to have nice influences btw.

  21. #21
    Provocateur None's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    IEI-Ni ELVF 458
    Posts
    120
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @RBRS
    I do not know the thinking style of G.W.F. Hegel nor can I possibly explain it right now. I don't know about socionics theory of cognitive style [perhaps I will look into it] and reading Te descriptions of Ti is extremely painful for me and I didn't imagine anything good to be able to come from it (other than using it as more evidence when attempting to type people) What I do know is that the 'thesis-anti-thesis-synthesis' crap is an oversimplification of the 'Hegelian Dialectic' from a professor and popularizer of Hegel and that Hegel was a massive critic of Fichte's subjectivism.


    One of the quirks of Nietzsche is his opposition to philosophical systems a la Hegel. The will to a system for him is a lack of integrity. There can be no complete and total view of things in his view. There is no denying the literary merits of Nietzsche and that he is both 'philosopher' and 'artist' is a testament of his genius. However Nietzsche, though he tried not to be was a philosopher first and an artist second. Nietzsche was, at least from my memory somewhat disgusted by Hegel. Something which I doubt would be the case if the two were identical and something even more likely if they were of different Quadras. His philosophy of the Übermensch is the intellectual journey towards personal morality, not an emotional journey towards the intellect. Wille zur Macht and Ewige Wiederkunft all point to LSI over EIE.


    Sorel was one of the pioneers of the introduction of Marx's work in France. In a way similar to Plekhanov in Russia. There is no such thing as 'Marxists' in the way there are no such thing as 'Newtonians'. I wouldn't call Sorel a 'proto-national-syndicalist' because he was very much so a syndicalist—but 'syndicalism' is not an ideology in the same way that 'schwerpunkt' is not an ideology. The two are tactics to achieve aims in warfare. Georges Sorel's work which was collected and published in two books (Reflections on Violence and The Illusions of Progress) and was very much Historical Materialist and near the end of his life he was a supporter of Lenin and also considered Mussolini a political genius. However, from letters I believe he indicated denouncing both. I don't know enough about Sorel's personal life to be able to type him but from his occupation as an engineer and reading his essays it seems to me that he is a Ti base in comparison to the Se base of Mussolini and Lenin and perhaps Blanqui. The tactics of the latter individual in his view was the fault in contemporary 'Marxist' Revolutionaries.


    I definitely would not call 'Fascism' a 'highly centralized and hierarchical form of national syndicalism'. For starters one of the quirks of Fascism [when I speak of Fascism I speak of Mussolini] was it's lack of centralization. It was certainly more 'central' than 'democratic' governments in the parliamentary sense but the fact of the matter is that Mussolini's government was under numerous checks and balances not just from the King but the Grand Council of Fascism itself. It was a vote that ended up deposing him after all. The equation with Fascism with Syndicalism national or otherwise is a bit revisionist considering the fact their was indeed a syndicalist 'wing' in the PNF lead by life-long syndicalist Edmondo Rossoni and he was very much so 'class conscious' while still being a member of the party. The PNF as a whole was a big tent party made up of such a wide variety of people with individuals who considered themselves aristocrats and others even communists.


    ****** is an oddity, certainly. I think it has more to do with the fact that he is more myth than man and separating fact from fiction in regards to people like him is a difficult endeavor. I certainly don't think he viewed manual labor as degrading. 'Arbeit Macht Frei' after all. There are rumors that he was involved in the Bavarian Soviet during the German Revolution of 1918-19. I base my view on ****** from Adam Tooze's 'The Wages of Destruction' as it is supposed to provide an economic history of the regime with personal moralities and propaganda set aside. Though I do know there are numerous interpretations of the ****** character such as Irving's and will definitely look into the revisionist theories when I have the time. I haven't really looked into ****** in a long time because I have concluded a while ago that he was a German who was very angry at 'Jewish' morality and wanted to fight them. It's why in the ****** thread I typed him as EII. I don't know about ****** having the best grasp of Fe as I explained in the ****** thread. Being a good speaker doesn't mean being a good Fe user. It just means you're a good speaker. EII and IEI both have sincere/soulful speaking style according to socionics literature. His rallies were certainly works of art but in a 'Te' way if you understand what I mean. I don't associate the theatrical music of Wagner with Fe. I'm not the biggest fan of his music as it's a bit too gaudy for me. It reminds me of those 'cinematic' movie soundtracks that are so boring that they are practically telling you what to feel and leave nothing to the intellect.

    You have in my view a much more comprehensive understanding of socionics theory than I do if you are able to type people by their style of thinking. The first point of my Talanov Test results was my interest in 'philosophy' and 'abstract' concepts. That is all the necessary evidence that I will never be a 'philosopher' proper in the way a Ti ego will. The philosopher, as Hegel says thinks concretely whereas the layman thinks abstractly.

    I definitely agree that Marx is 4D Ti but he is in temperament far more Alpha than Beta. Compare Marx, a believer in Alpha 'progress' and Sorel, who was critical of it. The differences between Nietzsche and Hegel alone prove the impossibilities of sharing a type and their philosophies definitely makes me think they are in different Quadras. ILE for Hegel certainly seems accurate. My LSI for Nietzsche is firm.
    Last edited by None; 05-30-2022 at 03:17 AM.

  22. #22
    RBRS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    TIM
    That TIM you dislike
    Posts
    336
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by None View Post
    @RBRS
    I do not know the thinking style of G.W.F. Hegel nor can I possibly explain it right now. I don't know about socionics theory of cognitive style [perhaps I will look into it] and reading Te descriptions of Ti is extremely painful for me and I didn't imagine anything good to be able to come from it (other than using it as more evidence when attempting to type people) What I do know is that the 'thesis-anti-thesis-synthesis' crap is an oversimplification of the 'Hegelian Dialectic' from a professor and popularizer of Hegel and that Hegel was a massive critic of Fichte's subjectivism.

    I did not assign Dialectic-Algorithmic thinking to Hegel on the basis of the classic "Thesis + antithesis = synthesis" (In fact I said if I remember correctly that Fitche was the first "Dialectical idealist" because he was the OG author of the thesis/antithesis/synthesis dialectic) but because what I'm reading from him suggest that form of cognition.


    "The essential distinguishing feature of the Dialectical style, is a view of the universe as a unified struggle of opposites. In speech it often uses syntactic constructions “if-then-else”, the predictive branches of a developing process. Within limits, the Dialectic strives to find an intermediate point of dynamic equilibrium between contrasting extremes. Dialectical cognition is born from the colliding flow and counterflow of thought, the consciousness and unconsciousness. Thinkers of this style are characterized by an express inclination towards the synthesis of opposites, the removal of contradictions, which they so keenly perceive"


    Gulenko evidently takes inspiration on dialectical idealists and materialists alike to come up with a definition for dialectic-algorithmic thinking, which could be throwing off my typing, as his typing of Hegel might be previous to his cognitive style definitions, or both definitions might have been developed complementarily. There you have the article where I take this from.


    https://wikisocion.github.io/content...ms%20cognition


    Take into account that half of what's written there does not correlate with my views on socionics and that in some cases I've been ery, very critical of Gulenko.




    One of the quirks of Nietzsche is his opposition to philosophical systems a la Hegel. The will to a system for him is a lack of integrity. There can be no complete and total view of things in his view. There is no denying the literary merits of Nietzsche and that he is both 'philosopher' and 'artist' is a testament of his genius. However Nietzsche, though he tried not to be was a philosopher first and an artist second. Nietzsche was, at least from my memory somewhat disgusted by Hegel. Something which I doubt would be the case if the two were identical and something even more likely if they were of different Quadras. His philosophy of the Übermensch is the intellectual journey towards personal morality, not an emotional journey towards the intellect. Wille zur Macht and Ewige Wiederkunft all point to LSI over EIE.

    You might not be interpreting socionics correctly or my understanding of it does not correspond with reality. Socionics is a very simple model for human cognition and information processing, rather than proper personality, which is seen at most as "due to" cognition. The model works through setting up some dichotomies from which it derives definitions of the "tools" cognition uses to categorize, understand, process or create any sort of information, and then putting these in a hierarchy of the psyche define by more dichotomies (Some, as Aushra, would tell you the information elements are rather aspects that are external, objective parts of reality and different sociotypes are geared towards perceiving some of these aspects better than the others, but I personally think this is not the case).


    Quadras are to be seen as a group of sociotypes that are part of a full, coherent perception of reality as their link lies in shared valued information elements. Quadra values are thus not specific ideas or opinions but group behaviors, group tendencies and overall a "form" of perceiving the social sphere. Beta quadra types are stereotypically known for clashing with each other in the ideological, religious or philosophical arena, while maintaining some core forms of perceiving, acting on and generating social enviroments that do not seem so opposite.


    Nietzsche's information metabolism, as characterized in his writings, is full of;


    - Internal Object Dynamics (Fe); Perception, malleation, creation, operation on the arena of ethical or excitation states. Be it in his writing style, his analysis of a nation, religion or a continent's psychology, in his perception of different moral states (btw morality =/= Fi) some definition of Fe;


    Perceives information about processes taking place in objects — first of all, emotional processes that are taking place in people, their excitation or subduedness, and their moods. This perceptual element implies the ability to know what excites people, and what suppresses them. It defines a person's ability or inability to control his emotional state, and also the emotional states of other people.


    When this element is in the leading position, the individual has the innate ability to induce or convey his moods to others and energize people with his emotions. He is able to activate the psychological/spiritual lives of other people and their emotional readiness for action. You might say that such a person has the ability to infect others with his moods and tends to impose on others the emotional states that he considers beneficial for their life activities.


    What people usually call emotions or a person's display of emotions is neither more nor less than a form of letting out this internal excitation directly, almost without expending it in muscle activity. A cheerful person who laughs releases an emotional charge and inner excitation through certain movements of the muscles of the face and body. This might be a means for reducing overexcitement, when inner exertion cannot be used for the activity it was intended for. But it can also be a conscious method of conveying one's excitement/agitation to others — inducing one's internal excitement/agitation in the psyches of other people. Anger, for example, is also a way of reducing overexcitement, but it is usually directed not at arousing others emotionally, but at emotionally suppressing and depleting them, at lowering their activity level, or at strictly channeling their activity.



    - Internal Field Dynamics (Ni); Perception, malleation, creation, operation on the arena of dynamic connective strings of reality on constant evolution. Aushra wrote;


    All processes take place in time; they have their roots in the past and their continuation in the future. Time is the correlation between events that follow each other. This perceptual element provides information about the sequence of events and people's deeds, about their cause and effect relationship, and about participants' attitudes towards this — that is, about people's feelings that these relationships engender.
    Such an individual perceives information from without as feelings about the future, past, and present. For example, a sense of hurriedness, calmness, or heatedness, a sense of timeliness or prematureness, a sense of proper or improper life rhythm, a sense of impending danger or safety, anticipation, fear of being late, a sense of seeing the future, anxiety about what lies ahead, and so forth. At any given moment of one's life one has such a sense of time. One cannot live outside of time or be indifferent toward it. Thus, a certain sense of time is an integral part of the individual's psychological state at any given moment. This perceptual element defines a person's ability or inability to forecast and plan for the future, evade all sorts of troubles, avoid taking wrong actions, and learn from past experience



    She was wrong because she was looking for external aspects of reality to correlate with the psychological phenomena she was defining, etiology is closer to Te than to Ni, which is defined by untangible, internal, dynamic connections between objective units over time, but the overall definition applies to the psychological phenomena itself.


    - External Field Statics; Very little of this. Ti is all about the concatenation of logical, categorical, unchanging and apparent links between objective units, often forming systems as a rule when dealing with anything. Some definition of it;


    Ti is generally associated with the ability to recognize logical consistency and correctness, generate and apply classifications and systems, organize systematic and conceptual understanding, see logical connections between things (including logical similarities, differences, and correlations) by means of instinctive feelings of validity, symmetry, and even beauty. It is like common sense, in that it builds on one's expectations of reality, through a somewhat personal, though explicable, understanding of general truths and how they are manifested.

    -2D External Object Statics (Se) at the very least; Perception or malleation of the physical, direct aspect of an objective unit, be it space, potence, "sphere of control"...


    - Devalued External Object Dynamics (Te); Objective units, their definitory qualities and their potential, dynamic changes and transformations.


    - Perception of society through groups defined by some common characteristic, all of them defined by hierarchical relations but at the same time subordinated to his personal ladder of appreciation into another, personal hierarchy, which is the most common way of perceiving reality for Beta Quadra types (They also often see themselves as part of a collective, sometimes hierarchical or part of another hierarchical structure, be it invented by themselves or from the outside, which finds itself in opposition to another collective, hierarchical structure, which also fits Nietzsche and his view on "Free-Thinkers").




    All these are the reasons why I type Nietzsche as EIE. Regardless of the evident ideological differences between let's say Nietzsche and HitIer, the whole argument I did above applies perfectly to both, because socionics is about how your mind metabolizes information, not the particular information itself. (And some things there also apply to Hegel)


    Sorel was one of the pioneers of the introduction of Marx's work in France. In a way similar to Plekhanov in Russia. There is no such thing as 'Marxists' in the way there are no such thing as 'Newtonians'. I wouldn't call Sorel a 'proto-national-syndicalist' because he was very much so a syndicalist—but 'syndicalism' is not an ideology in the same way that 'schwerpunkt' is not an ideology. The two are tactics to achieve aims in warfare. Georges Sorel's work which was collected and published in two books (Reflections on Violence and The Illusions of Progress) and was very much Historical Materialist and near the end of his life he was a supporter of Lenin and also considered Mussolini a political genius. However, from letters I believe he indicated denouncing both. I don't know enough about Sorel's personal life to be able to type him but from his occupation as an engineer and reading his essays it seems to me that he is a Ti base in comparison to the Se base of Mussolini and Lenin and perhaps Blanqui. The tactics of the latter individual in his view was the fault in contemporary 'Marxist' Revolutionaries.

    I'm having some difficulties in answering this since It goes forwards and backwards between what I need to explain about Fascism-National Syndicalism but I'll try my best. I say Sorel was a proto-National Syndicalist because his iteration of syndicalism and socialism later became the foundation for National Syndicalism, originally thought out as a synthesis of integral nationalism with syndicalism, and later becoming the father of fascism (Yeah, National syndicalism was the origin of fascism, or rather, fascism is a variant of national syndicalism).


    To not spend far more time writing I'll C&P a wiki article;


    To Sorel, the integrity and intellectualism of Marxism was decomposing, and the “heroic proletariat” appeared to have been either non-existent or shown to be as “much corrupted by utilitarianism as the bourgeoisie. According to Sorel, the power of democratic-republican governments was debasing the revolutionary initiative of the worker class which forced him to search for other alternatives, including a nationalism, but one devoid of any monarchism. In order to resolve this crisis of socialism, Sorel turned toward an anti-democratic socialism that encompasses a radical nationalism, while still holding to his support of worker-owned factories, but under a heretic Marxism divested of its “materialistic and rationalistic essence.


    In 1909, Sorel published an article in Enrico Leone's Il Divenire sociale, an influential journal of revolutionary syndicalism in Italy, which was later reprinted and championed by Charles Maurras in the L’Action française entitled “Antiparliamentary Socialist. Sorel was not the first to drift towards nationalism and syndicalism. During the years of 1902 to 1910 a cadre of Italian revolutionary syndicalists had embarked on a mission to combine Italian nationalism with syndicalism. They were later to become “founders of the Fascist movement,” and “held key posts” in Mussolini's regime. Generally, Italian syndicalism finally coalesced into national syndicalism during World War I and the months following the 1918 armistice.


    Maurras welcomed Sorel's support in that they both were concerned over French socialism reaching the path of no return in its rush towards “democratization,” coalescing into a formidable Social Democracy movement. To Maurras, the purity of socialism had to abstain from being captured by seduction of democracy, declaring that “socialism liberated from the democratic and cosmopolitan element fits nationalism well as a well made glove fits a beautiful hand. But such thoughts were not unusual for many European socialists during this period, such as Philippe Buchez and Ferdinand Lassalle who “despised democracy and exalted the nation. Due to his aversion to democracy, Sorel and the syndicalists rejected political parties and democratic institutions as well as the “Marxist dictatorship of the proletariat, but remained dutiful to Karl Marx’s opposition to democracy and elections. Earlier, Marx had confessed that his revolutionary activities in the Revolution of 1848 was “nothing but a plan of war against democracy.”


    In an attempt to save Marxism, Sorel gravitated towards the creation of a synthesis of populism and nationalism that also included “the crudest of anti-Semitism. By this time, Sorel and other syndicalists concluded that proletarian violence was ineffectual since the “proletariat was incapable of fulfilling its revolutionary role, an assessment that persuaded many to see the nation-state as the best means by which to establish a proletarian-based society, which later congealed into the fascist concept of proletarian nationalism.


    Many revolutionary syndicalists followed Sorel and his Sorelian socialism towards the allure of a radical nationalism after he praised Maurras and displayed his sympathies for French integral nationalism in 1909. The appeal that Charles Maurras presented was his nationalistic approach against bourgeois democracy, the Enlightenment, and “its liberalism, its individualism, and its conception of society as an aggregate of individuals.” This trend continued and by 1911, revolutionary syndicalists had acknowledged that two important antirational political currents had come together, forging “a new nationalism and revolutionary socialism.” This coalescence finally surfaced as a major facet of Italian Fascism, where Mussolini himself confessed: “What I am, I owe to Sorel.” The Israeli historian Zeev Sternhell, considered a leading expert on fascism, asserted that this integration of syndicalism with unpatriotic nationalism was a factor in why “Italian revolutionary syndicalism became the backbone of fascist ideology.”


    So, let's keep answering...


    I definitely would not call 'Fascism' a 'highly centralized and hierarchical form of national syndicalism'. For starters one of the quirks of Fascism [when I speak of Fascism I speak of Mussolini] was it's lack of centralization. It was certainly more 'central' than 'democratic' governments in the parliamentary sense but the fact of the matter is that Mussolini's government was under numerous checks and balances not just from the King but the Grand Council of Fascism itself. It was a vote that ended up deposing him after all.

    If you want to look at proper iterations of fascism look at Fiume's endeavor (Closer to OG National Syndicalism) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italia...ncy_of_Carnaro and the Italian Social Republic.


    Mussolini's goverment under the monarchy was a compromise between the fascists and the status quo that stabilized Italy's unrest while allowing the monarchy and ruling class as well as italian institutions to survive and keep the fascists in check. The king and Parliament are not keystones for fascism, rather the opposite.


    Furthermore, hierarchical and centralized does not necessarily mean absolute power for the Duce, specially when my claim was fascism is hierarchical and centralized in relation to national syndicalism. To give a fast definition of fascism, the whole idea is to replace what we'll classically view as the parliamentary state with guild-like trans-class vertical organizations (Fascis, Corporations, Syndicates...) in a hierarchical structure through which every aspect of a nation's life from production to monetary policy to cultural tendencies to education or healthcare are ordered by the state, taking mostly into account the co-determinations between the administrators (Be it the owner of the firm or a public official) but giving the state's interests the decisive answer, in contrast with most National Syndicalist organizations from both the 20th century and today that extended the power of the "guilds" and regional structures to the detriment of the central state.


    The equation with Fascism with Syndicalism national or otherwise is a bit revisionist considering the fact their was indeed a syndicalist 'wing' in the PNF lead by life-long syndicalist Edmondo Rossoni and he was very much so 'class conscious' while still being a member of the party. The PNF as a whole was a big tent party made up of such a wide variety of people with individuals who considered themselves aristocrats and others even communists.

    In that you're wrong, as I said, National Syndicalism is the origin of fascism. National Syndicalism was the synthesis of Sorel and Maurras that latter evolved into fascism in italy, but to this day, National Syndicalism is the most influencial branch of "national-revolutionarism" in Spain, Portugal, Poland, Lebanon, and most of Latin America with the exception of Brazil (integralist fascism), Argentina (Justicialism) and Chile (National Socialism [Yeah, I know it is absurd]). Spanish National Syndicalists "came out" of Ramiro Ledesma Ramos, which would later integrate his "National Syndicalist Offensive" with Onesimo Redondo's Juntas of Hispanic Action, thus forming JONS, that would later mix with Primo de Rivera's Phalanx, transforming into FE de las JONS (Spanish Phalanx of the National Syndicalist offensive Juntas). From there most National syndicalist started colloquially calling themselves falangists except for the mexicans who called themselves Synarchists.


    ****** is an oddity, certainly. I think it has more to do with the fact that he is more myth than man and separating fact from fiction in regards to people like him is a difficult endeavor. I certainly don't think he viewed manual labor as degrading. 'Arbeit Macht Frei' after all.

    His personality and tendencies during his youth are better detailed in this book


    https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/..._******_I_Knew


    He was disinclined to work, specially to perform manual labor, which he considered degrading for himself. The fact that he preferred to have worse living conditions than to work in blue collar jobs is quite telling. If it was the other person who had to work, his view was probably different. Overall I think he was just physically lazy, or lazy for things he had no interest on.


    There are rumors that he was involved in the Bavarian Soviet during the German Revolution of 1918-19. I base my view on ****** from Adam Tooze's 'The Wages of Destruction' as it is supposed to provide an economic history of the regime with personal moralities and propaganda set aside.

    I've always considered "The wages of destruction" as an attempt to attack keynesian economics with nazi germany as an excuse It's interpretation of the facts is twisted by an ideological component. Furthermore the Nazi regime came into power through elections and only lasted 12 years, which is not a sufficient timeframe to give out a judgement on the system itself, specially when the geopolitical conditions of that time constricted the german state's decisions, a lot of which were designed to create the pre-conditions necessary to implant the system they desired (such as the early german foreign financial investment strategy, directed towards carving a sphere of influence in the balkans, for which they needed to delay the implementation of Gottfried Feder's financial ideas).


    When reading materials from Robert Ley, Feder, Goebbels... I get the gist that their intent was to do something very similar to what italian fascist intended (In fact they set up the labor front, agrarian corporations...) yet their system would not operate through co-determination but as a top-down command chain. Then there's labor backed currency which you can learn about in Feder's works (MEFO bills had an element of "labor backed currency").


    I haven't really looked into ****** in a long time because I have concluded a while ago that he was a German who was very angry at 'Jewish' morality and wanted to fight them. It's why in the ****** thread I typed him as EII. I don't know about ****** having the best grasp of Fe as I explained in the ****** thread. Being a good speaker doesn't mean being a good Fe user. It just means you're a good speaker. EII and IEI both have sincere/soulful speaking style according to socionics literature. His rallies were certainly works of art but in a 'Te' way if you understand what I mean. I don't associate the theatrical music of Wagner with Fe. I'm not the biggest fan of his music as it's a bit too gaudy for me. It reminds me of those 'cinematic' movie soundtracks that are so boring that they are practically telling you what to feel and leave nothing to the intellect.
    Wrapping up the socionics part of this comment, Fi is not about ethics but about Internal Field Statics, this is, colloquially speaking, perception, judgement, and malleation of subjective, emotional ties between objective units. Fi leads are usually regarded as "moralist" in the sense that they, albeit do not commonly go around parroting morality, have set standards about how to conduct yourself regarding your interpersonal connections. There you have a pretty good example of FiSe;


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZHsmb4ezEk

    Also, ****** viewed racial and ethnic groups as collective entities that coexisted and interacted with each other as a whole and had a set of characteristics that differentiated from group to group and that had an inherent hierarchy within themselves. Under his scheme the jews had taken over aryan institutions and subjugated the aryan peoples through capitalism and specially through the financial system. There's no morality in there, and even if there was, it is not an indicative of Fi. ******'s overall worldview is very Beta Quadra and his information metabolism strongly suggests EIE.


    I definitely agree that Marx is 4D Ti but he is in temperament far more Alpha than Beta. Compare Marx, a believer in Alpha 'progress' and Sorel, who was critical of it. The differences between Nietzsche and Hegel alone prove the impossibilities of sharing a type and their philosophies definitely makes me think they are in different Quadras.
    He had no alpha character, if you want an example of an alpha philosopher, Kant, Descartes or Jung are good examples. There seems to be an influx of Beta quadra characteristics in Marx's works but these could easily be due to the influence of that times economic thought in combination with hegelian dialectics applied to material conditions. Marx's focus on material conditions and the reduction of most social processes to conflicts of individual units in collectives for the ownership of the means of production might have some influx of Gamma quadra social perception, but could as well be an influx from outside authors and social conditions of the time. Being more progressive or less progressive is not indicative of quadra values. I think ILI or LSI.
    Last edited by RBRS; 05-30-2022 at 09:47 AM.

  23. #23
    Provocateur None's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    IEI-Ni ELVF 458
    Posts
    120
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @RBRS
    Excellent post. At least the first half. (ha) I cannot comment on your views of the information metabolism of these figures because that area of socionics is simply not my domain. Though I can read about it and offer a response on it later, but chances are it will be a while until I do because if I wanted to I would have read about it already. But I will say as an example that Marinetti's writing [in my view] is filled with what socionics literature deems to be Se, just the way my own writing is filled with Se. Yet I am no SLE and neither was he. Now time to address the things I actually understand.

    First of all there is no such thing as 'national-syndicalism'. There were no group of people at that time who went around calling themselves 'national-syndicalists'. There is one individual exception to this, Ramiro Ledesma Ramos but he was an intellectual by profession and not a revolutionary. 'National-Syndicalism' is a term popularized by historians such as Zeev Sternhell to differentiate between [in his view] two different tendencies of syndicalism. The intellectuals of this field don't go around calling the CNT of Catalonia 'national-syndicalists' yet they most certainly were 'nationalists' in the meaning most commonly attributed to the word. So 'National-Syndicalism' is simply a way to differentiate between a subjective perception of two different tendencies of syndicalism.

    Speaking about 'proper iteration of Fascism' is already a mistake because there is no such thing as this. There is no such thing as 'Fascism' proper because 'Fascism' is not an ideology but simply a method in governing the state.

    I don't want to 'talk shit' about the exploits of D'Annunzio [whom I type as EIE] however for the purposes of this post we must look at the reality of the Fiume endeavor instead of the myth. Sorel, the philosopher of syndicalism was extremely hostile to the government of D'Annunzio. Mussolini thought it would end up failing and nothing from it would be achieved. Marinetti thought similar and was kicked out after one week because of his differences of opinion from D'Annunzio. The fact of the matter is that the Fiume endeavor was mainly D'Annunzio's theatrics and calling it a 'proper iteration' of 'Fascism' is extremely ignorant.

    The fact that the 'national-syndicalists' which you speak of ended up colloquially referring themselves as 'Falangists' is evidence to the fact that they were not 'syndicalists' at all. Ramos who you mentioned ended up splitting from José Antonio Primo de Rivera completely and knowing what I know about the former individual he would have viewed the violence of the Spanish State against the Catalonian people with great horror.

    I haven't read 'The Young ****** I Knew' and I don't plan to anytime soon because I have been told that it is another demonization of ****** that says he 'tricked' the German people and that the Germans are innocent from any 'wrongdoing'. I know that the 12 years of the Nazi regime isn't enough to 'analyze' it's economics but the fact of the matter is that in Tooze's view as well as my own the purpose of the regime was to topple the Soviet Union. There are people who think ****** did not want war at all and that very well may be true [with the Western Powers] but Mein Kampf indicates that the purpose of ******'s 'revolution' was his Lebensraum in the East. There are people who view ****** as justified because they say Stalin was planning on invading ******, but from my understanding of Stalin's foreign policy of 'Socialism in One Country' this seems to me to be rather unlikely. You are welcome to suggest otherwise.

    I don't think that the NSDAP considered themselves to be similar to the Italian Fascists at all. As I said here Goebbels thought 'Fascism' was lower than 'National Socialism'. In terms of characters involved it was the German Sturmabteilung that was most similar to Italian Squadre d'Azione and the leadership of the former ended up purged on the orders of the senior officials of the latter. The Night of the Long Knives ended up shocking Mussolini. The fact that the economics under leadership of the NSDAP operated as you say 'as a top-down command chain' is another point in showing how dissimilar the two governments were. What you just described was the reason Spengler and Jünger were hostile towards ****** because they viewed it in that singular aspect an imitation of 'Bolshevism'.

    I do not want to get into criticism of NSDAP economic policy because that is not the purpose of this post (but I certainly can if you like) rather the purpose of my post is to show how different the respective governments were from one another. I think Oswald Spengler's 'Preussentum und Sozialismus' can do the talking for me.

    I don't mean to offend Deltas but ******'s racial views as you described are very Fi-Te. Not Beta or EIE at all.

    Marx's focus on material conditions and the reduction of most social processes to conflicts of individual units
    This is not Marx, haha! You're thinking of Positivism!

    Edit: I missed the part of your post which you gave a quick 'definition' of Fascism. I find your definition insufficient and I think it would make Giovanni Gentile raise an eyebrow.

    To give a fast definition of fascism, [...]the whole idea in a hierarchical structure through which every aspect of a nation's life from production to monetary policy to cultural tendencies to education or healthcare are ordered by the state.
    In the way Giovanni Gentile defines 'the true essence' of 'The State', he says that it is necessary to remove from it all of it's empirical features. He defines 'The State' as the universal common aspect of the will. The empirical structure of the state is not something even mentioned yet. The way you say 'ordered by the state' sounds as if you mean this quite literally 'orders from the government'. The French Revolution was also 'ordered by the state'.
    Last edited by None; 05-30-2022 at 12:32 PM. Reason: Added more.

  24. #24
    RBRS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    TIM
    That TIM you dislike
    Posts
    336
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    First of all there is no such thing as 'national-syndicalism'. There were no group of people at that time who went around calling themselves 'national-syndicalists'.
    There were groups of people calling themselves National-Syndicalists, and sections of the syndicalist movement embracing similar ideals in Italy, Spain, Portugal and France.

    There is one individual exception to this, Ramiro Ledesma Ramos but he was an intellectual by profession and not a revolutionary.
    You seem to not understand Ramos circumstances very well. His works were already influenced by authors like Gentile, and from the whole "national-syndicalist" spanish thinkers his conception was the closest one to fascism.

    The intellectuals of this field don't go around calling the CNT of Catalonia 'national-syndicalists' yet they most certainly were 'nationalists' in the meaning most commonly attributed to the word. So 'National-Syndicalism' is simply a way to differentiate between a subjective perception of two different tendencies of syndicalism.
    Not at all. There were various competing labor unions working as ideological platforms to ideals ranging from trotskyites to socialists, among which CNT/FAI was an anarcho-syndicalist horizontal union whose ultimate goal was to organize an anarchist society on the basis of syndical, direct workers management of the means of production. They were opposites to organizations like JONS and often fought each other on the streets if they weren't shoving bullets in each other's heads.

    So 'National-Syndicalism' is simply a way to differentiate between a subjective perception of two different tendencies of syndicalism.
    Nope again.

    National-syndicalists = Fascists and proto-fascists
    Syndicalists = Members of the proper syndicalist movement
    Anarcho-syndicalists = anarchists who want to use horizontal syndicates as the management tool for their stateless society

    Speaking about 'proper iteration of Fascism' is already a mistake because there is no such thing as this. There is no such thing as 'Fascism' proper because 'Fascism' is not an ideology but simply a method in governing the state.
    The "form of goverment" you talk about is corporatism

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism

    Fascism was, and is an ideological position, although it's birth wasn't as doctrinally coherent and well defined as most other ideological positions, it reached that level of doctrinal coherence with time.

    I don't want to 'talk shit' about the exploits of D'Annunzio [whom I type as EIE] however for the purposes of this post we must look at the reality of the Fiume endeavor instead of the myth. Sorel, the philosopher of syndicalism was extremely hostile to the government of D'Annunzio. Mussolini thought it would end up failing and nothing from it would be achieved. Marinetti thought similar and was kicked out after one week because of his differences of opinion from D'Annunzio. The fact of the matter is that Fiume endeavor was mainly D'Annunzio's theatrics and calling it a 'proper iteration' of 'Fascism' is extremely ignorant.
    I call Fiume's initiative "a proper iteration of fascism" because it had all the elements of a fascist state without the constrictions of the previous regime. The success or the "seriousness" of D'Annunzio's regime is a theme for another conversation.

    Most of what D'annunzio developed in Fiume was later adopted by the PNF, the italian fascist state within the confines of it's own possibility, and specially the Italian Social Republic.

    The fact that the 'national-syndicalists' which you speak of ended up colloquially referring themselves as 'Falangists' is evidence to the fact that they were not 'syndicalists' at all. Ramos who you mentioned ended up splitting from José Antonio Primo de Rivera completely and knowing what I know about the former individual he would have viewed the violence of the Spanish State against the Catalonian people with great horror.
    Weren't they a subjective differentiation from the syndicalist movement?

    What actually happened was Primo de Rivera entered a power struggle with Ledesma from which he came victorious. The problems between Ledesma and Rivera mostly come down to the fact that Rivera was redefining the "national" part of national syndicalism (Empresa de destino en lo universal) while Ledesma was bordering ethnic nationalism, and Rivera was also watering down the militant and vitalistic perspective Ledesma originally designed in La Conquista del Estado.

    The spanish civil war was a conflict between the reactionary military officials, the catholics, the Carlists, the falangists and "traditional spain" agains't the liberals, marxists-leninists, and anarchists. It's kickstart was the assassination of Calvo Sotelo (CEDA politician) by the Frente Popular goverment coalition, but before it came five attempted coups from the socialists as well as a failed revolution in Galicia. The military tried to "restore order" through a military coup and the republic didn't surrender, so the war was inevitable.

    At the start of the conflict Rivera proposed a provisional goverment with members of the left and right to avoid the civil war, to no avail because the republicans arrested him and killed him as they had been killing and lynching falangists during peacetime. It was after this that FE de las JONS joined the nationalist bloc and Franco fused all the participants into a single organization (Falange Española Tradicionalista) preventing infighting like that of the republican side between CNT and PCE.

    After the war Franco applied a sort of "consensual set of policies" closer to what the CEDA would have applied. Overall Franco's dictatorship was on the ultra-catholic, authoritarian, with a very small sprinkle of corporatism line of Salazar or the Ustaše, not in the line of Italy or Germany.

    The low level falangists were either sent to the eastern front in the blue division, or even persecuted during the post-war period. The successors to Fe de las JONS (Well, FE de las JONS & Falange Auténtica) denounce and reject francoism as much as you say Rivera would have rejected it.

    Furthermore people like Degrelle or Skorzeny fled to Spain alongside other german operatives and formed nazi cultural associations like CEDADE, from which the leadership (except for Varela) were vitriolic opponents of francoism.

    haven't read 'The Young ****** I Knew' and I don't plan to anytime soon because I have been told that it is another demonization of ****** that says he 'tricked' the German people and that the Germans are innocent from any 'wrongdoing'.
    It does the opposite, it "humanizes" ******, while not idealizing him but pointing most of his personality traits.

    I know that the 12 years of the Nazi regime isn't enough to 'analyze' it's economics but the fact of the matter is that in Tooze's view as well as my own the purpose of the regime was to topple the Soviet Union. There are people who think ****** did not want war at all and that very well may be true [with the Western Powers] but Mein Kampf indicates that the purpose of ******'s 'revolution' was his Lebensraum in the East.
    To reduce the whole of the Nazi ideology on "Lebensraum in the east"... In Mein Kampf, there's a few sections where ****** talks about the need of agrarian lands in the east to support the growing german population, as well as the integration of polish territories. This is a geopolitical stance of the NSDAP that had been present in Germany prior to the birth of the NSDAP, wasn't present in other national socialist parties (like the czech national socialist party, or the Bohemian Germans National socialist party) while being present in paramilitary organizations like the baltic Freikorps or even in the goals of the German imperial goverment.

    The nazis fueled their military industry as they did in order to cover the gap between the german army (greatly diminished by Versailles) and that of the other great powers, which turned into an arms race that ended in an inevitable war. The western powers wanted war with Germany, Germany wanted to carve a sphere of influence in eastern europe and attack the USSR in a moment of weakness, and the soviets wanted to expand their sphere influence in eastern europe, so the German military buildup threw all these interest into escalation.

    I don't think that the NSDAP considered themselves to be similar to the Italian Fascists at all. As I said*here*Goebbels thought 'Fascism' was lower than 'National Socialism'. In terms of characters involved it was the German Sturmabteilung that was most similar to Italian Squadre d'Azione and the leadership of the former ended up purged on the orders of the senior officials of the latter. The Night of the Long Knives ended up shocking Mussolini. The fact that the economics under leadership of the NSDAP operated as you say 'as a top-down command chain' is another point in showing how dissimilar the two governments were. What you just described was the reason Spengler and*Jünger were hostile towards ****** because they viewed it in that singular aspect an imitation of 'Bolshevism'.
    The Nazis were ideologically opposed to the fascist specially on their concept of the state and in their adoption of some parts of the futurist cultural current (that ran on the opposite direction of the National socialists view of state and culture) , which does not mean their method of goverment
    Was not similar. If you take out the co-determination of fascist corporatism and replace the "council" with the NSDAP you have a very similar administration.

    The SA was planning a coup and an assassination attempt on ****** alongside the strasserist branch, similarly to the more traditionalist branch of the NSDAP (which also got purged in the long knives night). This was the official excuse for the purges and judging by quotes from Röhm calling for another "revolution" agains't ****** there's probably some truth to it.

    Spengler was not a fascist, I have not read Jünger.

    I do not want to get into criticism of NSDAP economic policy because that is not the purpose of this post (but I certainly can if you like) rather the purpose of my post is to show how different the respective governments were from one another. I think Oswald Spengler's 'Preussentum und Sozialismus' can do the talking for me.
    Nor was it my intent to defend or proselitize it.

    I don't mean to offend Deltas but ******'s racial views as you described are very Fi-Te. Not Beta or EIE at all.
    I already explained you why that's wrong

    This is not Marx, haha!
    The most I've read of Marx was an adaptation from another author of Das Kapital alongside the communist manifesto that I found on the public library when I was 14 years old... So if you say that's not from Marx (I imagine it's from Engels isn't it? If not then clarify )

    In the way Giovanni Gentile defines 'the true essence' of 'The State', he says that it is necessary to remove from it all of it's empirical features. He defines 'The State' as the universal common aspect of the will. The empirical structure of the state is not something even mentioned yet. The way you say 'ordered by the state' sounds as if you mean this quite literally 'orders from the government'. The French Revolution was also 'ordered by the state'.
    Both definitions are akin to each other, the first one is a "practical" fast, not much thought out, about the method of administration as it historically developed itself.
    Last edited by RBRS; 05-30-2022 at 01:49 PM.

  25. #25
    Provocateur None's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    IEI-Ni ELVF 458
    Posts
    120
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There were groups of people calling themselves National-Syndicalists, and sections of the syndicalist movement embracing similar ideals in Italy, Spain, Portugal and France.
    I suppose my criticism is the lack of any form of coherent organization. With Ramos being the exception. As I have described in my previous post the differences between Ramos and Falange are significant. Yet they are both often described as 'national-syndicalists'. Thus it is necessary to differentiate between 'national-syndicalism' with 'national-syndicalism'.

    You seem to not understand Ramos circumstances very well. His works were already influenced by authors like Gentile, and from the whole "national-syndicalist" spanish thinkers his conception was the closest one to fascism.
    What I know about the circumstances of Ramos is that he attempted to make numerous appeals to the 'Anarchist-Syndicalists' and was rejected by them. I understand that he was 'closest' to 'Fascism' but he described himself to be 'closer to the Redshirts of Garibaldi than the Blackshirts of Mussolini'.

    Not at all. There were various competing labor unions working as ideological platforms to ideals ranging from trotskyites to socialists, among which CNT/FAI was an anarcho-syndicalist horizontal union whose ultimate goal was to organize an anarchist society on the basis of syndical, direct workers management of the means of production. They were opposites to organizations like JONS and often fought each other on the streets if they weren't shoving bullets in each other's heads.
    You misunderstand what I mean when I call Catalonian Anarchists 'nationalists'. Catalonians had a national consciousness, that much is certain. Their fight for 'Anarchism' was their fight for independence. I don't doubt JONS engaged in street battles with CNT/FAI but was this the case under the leadership of Ramos? I don't know so feel free to correct me if he did or did not.

    National-syndicalists = Fascists and proto-fascists
    Syndicalists = Members of the proper syndicalist movement
    Anarcho-syndicalists = anarchists who want to use horizontal syndicates as the management tool for their stateless society
    I have previously distinguished between two principle forms of 'National-Syndicalism'. That of Ramos' JONS and that of Rivera's JONS. Again both considered 'National-Syndicalist' yet have opposing policy. I have given an example of syndicalism proper in Fascist Government under the leadership of Edmondo Rossoni—considered to be 'National-Syndicalist' by 'political scientists', yet considered himself a syndicalist proper and at certain times an Italian Patriot and others an enemy of the state. The differentiation of 'syndicalism' and 'anarcho-syndicalism' is superfluous but necessary. Syndicalism proper is by it's nature 'Anarchist' in that it generally opposes participation in parliamentary life in the same way that Anarchists do [because it does not achieve anything]. Anarchism is many things but from what I see of it's current adherents it is ideology that opposes 'the principle of command' [giving people orders]. There are Anarchists who considered themselves as such who do not follow the aforementioned ideological aspect of Anarchism, so we cannot say that Anarchism is one 'ideology'. The organization of syndicalism proper is 'anarchist' but 'anarcho-syndicalism' itself is Anarchist ideology fused with syndicalism.

    From my understanding of the political aims of Ledesma Ramos, he agitated for the industrialization and modernization of the Republic as opposed the agrarian, distributism aims of Primo de Rivera. The people who I see support Primo de Rivera are not the biggest fans of Ramos and see him as a 'Leftist'. Had the Spanish Civil War not happened I imagine the organizations of the two to be fighting each other in a similar way urban and rural Fascism fought one another in Italy.

    The "form of goverment" you talk about is corporatism
    The problem is that 'corporatism' means different things to different people. Not unlike 'socialism'. The primary theoretician of 'corporatism' in Fascist Italy was Ugo Spirito, student of Gentile and he [from my understanding] viewed it as a temperament correction of Marx's Communism. To give you an idea, the university press of the Fascist Corporative school would publish works from authors that people today would consider 'Marxist'. Correctly or not.

    It does the opposite, it "humanizes" ******, while not idealizing him but pointing most of his personality traits.
    I will take a look then when I have the time. Sadly typing ****** in socionics is not my priority at the moment.

    To reduce the whole of the Nazi ideology on "Lebensraum in the east"
    This is not my characterization of Nazi ideology. Rather it is my characterization of the primary political and material aim of the ****** State. Nazi ideology can be found in the works of Alfred Rosenberg. What I am asserting is that the fulfillment of Nazi ideology could not begin without successful acquisition of the Eastern lands.

    which does not mean their method of goverment was not similar
    Well I suppose what is similar and not is a matter of opinion. However, the way you described and the way I view the Nazi economy was as though it was a command economy in stark contrast to Mussolini who made numerous economic 'experiments' at the suggestion of various competing ministers. The reason I bring up the Night of the Long Knives was not to moralize over the actions of Nazi leadership but to contrast the differences between Mussolini's government with that of ******. There was no Night of the Long Knives under Mussolini, but there were certainly threats and calls to overthrow the government of Mussolini. He instead put them in jail. Between the period of 1922-1940 12,310 political opponents were arrested under Mussoliini. I don't know how many political enemies were murdered after the March on Rome but I have seen estimates it be in the double digits. To put into perspective how different the atmosphere of Mussolini and ****** were, the murder of Matteotti almost destroyed the PNF. If you would like a comprehensive history of Italian Fascism I recommend the works of Renzo De Felice, though few of his works are translated to English.

    Spengler was not a fascist, I have not read Jünger.
    I know that Spengler was not a 'Fascist'. I recommended that you read him to understand his conception of what 'socialism' was, which was not different from the NSDAP's conception of what socialism was. It does not fit into my understanding of what socialism is.

    Nor was it my intent to defend or proselitize it.
    Okay, Yockey!

    I already explained you why that's wrong
    And from your explanation of Nazi Racial Ideology it sounds like it's Te!

    The most I've read of Marx was an adaptation from another author of Das Kapital alongside the communist manifesto that I found on the public library when I was 14 years old... So if you say that's not from Marx (I imagine it's from Engels isn't it? If not then clarify )
    Well from my limited understanding of Marx he did not view individuals as 'social atoms' in the manner of Gamma Liberalism. Rather he viewed individuals to be a product of their nature. In the Why someone becomes a Marxist? thread I posted a list of reading where you can begin understanding his thought. I've only scratched the surface of his corpus.

    Both definitions are akin to each other, the first one is a "practical" fast, not much thought out, about the method of administration as it historically developed itself.
    They most certainly do not! The logical conclusion of your definition is putting people in jail because you don't like their art [and perhaps even worse!] whereas the logical conclusion of mine is that it is the duty of the citizen to participate in the political life of the state.

    Gentile also provides a 'practical' materialist definition of 'the state', and in it he pays great heed to Marx.

    Edit: One more thing

    Fascism was, and is an ideological position, although it's birth wasn't as doctrinally coherent and well defined as most other ideological positions, it reached that level of doctrinal coherence with time.
    If we can characterize Fascism as 'ideology' it is the 'ideology' of the state. That is, there is this thing, called the state, it exists, and you participate in it. What you choose to do in it is up to you. The Fascists certainly have some suggestions!
    Last edited by None; 05-30-2022 at 02:58 PM. Reason: one more thing

  26. #26

    Default

    Kill4me identical

  27. #27
    Ready for some fun in the sun mysteryofdungeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2021
    Location
    xoxo
    Posts
    424
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Should be the name of a gun store lol. Kill4Us.
    how to enlarge your dragon, click here

    Quote Originally Posted by End View Post
    get ready to get cucked
    Quote Originally Posted by roger557 View Post
    got this Socionics stuff caught by the balls

  28. #28
    RBRS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    TIM
    That TIM you dislike
    Posts
    336
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You misunderstand what I mean when I call Catalonian Anarchists 'nationalists'. Catalonians had a national consciousness, that much is certain. Their fight for 'Anarchism' was their fight for independence. I don't doubt JONS engaged in street battles with CNT/FAI but was this the case under the leadership of Ramos? I don't know so feel free to correct me if he did or did not.
    You have an understandable error there, the CNT/FAI was not a secessionist organization. It might appear as such because during the civil war they occupied Catalonia, but that was a split from the republican side. CNT/FAI actually stands for an union between the National Labor Confederation / Iberian Anarchist Federation.

    Ramos had the intention to form a temporary alliance with CNT/FAI to fight their common enemies (marxists-leninists, reactionaries and liberals) to a certain extent he might had seen some compatibility between his ideas and those of CNT/FAI, but the anarchists did not see that compatibility and preferred to side with the socialists.

    I suppose my criticism is the lack of any form of coherent organization. With Ramos being the exception. As I have described in my previous post the differences between Ramos and Falange are significant. Yet they are both often described as 'national-syndicalists'. Thus it is necessary to differentiate between 'national-syndicalism' with 'national-syndicalism'.

    From my understanding of the political aims of Ledesma Ramos, he agitated for the industrialization and modernization of the Republic as opposed the agrarian, distributism aims of Primo de Rivera. The people who I see support Primo de Rivera are not the biggest fans of Ramos and see him as a 'Leftist'. Had the Spanish Civil War not happened I imagine the organizations of the two to be fighting each other in a similar way urban and rural Fascism fought one another in Italy.
    Ramos was closer to romantic, ethnic, sometimes pan-iberian nationalism than to the italian fascists concept of the state, which is one if not the main reason of dissent with Rivera.

    This is pretty much from one of the first formulations of Rivera's Falange program.

    SPANISH FALANGE resolutely believes in Spain.

    ·****** Spain is not a territory.

    ·****** Not an aggregate of men and women;

    · Spain gives, above all, a unit of destiny;

    · A historical reality;

    · An entity, true in itself, that knew how to fulfill -and will still have to fulfill- universal missions”.

    In his second article, "Disgregations of Spain", he cites three obstacles, the first, of course, separatism, and says:

    “Separatism ignores or forgets the reality of Spain. He is unaware that Spain is, above all, a great unit of destiny.

    The separatists pay attention to whether they speak their own language, whether they have their own racial characteristics, whether their region has its own climate or a special topographical physiognomy.

    But - it will always have to be repeated - a nation is not a language, nor a race
    [, nor a territory. It is a unity of destiny in the universal.

    That destination unit was called and is called Spain. Under the sign of Spain, the peoples that make it up fulfilled their destiny – united in the universal.

    Nothing can justify breaking that magnificent unity, creator of a world.”
    (Hegelian AF)

    Ramos agitated for industrialization and modernization, Rivera equally did and claimed that Spain needed a proper revolution and that the republic was too soft and had capped the potential for it.

    The problem is that 'corporatism' means different things to different people. Not unlike 'socialism'. The primary theoretician of 'corporatism' in Fascist Italy was Ugo Spirito, student of Gentile and he [from my understanding] viewed it as a temperament correction of Marx's Communism. To give you an idea, the university press of the Fascist Corporative school would publish works from authors that people today would consider 'Marxist'. Correctly or not.
    Corporatism itself as an administrative structure precedes fascism and has been present to some degree in a multitude of burgs and serene republics, it is mentioned in religious texts...

    I know that Spengler was not a 'Fascist'. I recommended that you read him to understand his conception of what 'socialism' was, which was not different from the NSDAP's conception of what socialism was. It does not fit into my understanding of what socialism is.
    I've read Decay of the west a long time ago, but didn't take a look at Prussianism and Socialism. I thought you mentioned the difference between the NSDAP, Spengler and Jünger as an argument for the differentiation between fascism and nazism, my fault.

    And from your explanation of Nazi Racial Ideology it sounds like it's Te!
    One of us doesn't have a correct interpretation of Te then

    Well from my limited understanding of Marx he did not view individuals as 'social atoms' in the manner of Gamma Liberalism. Rather he viewed individuals to be a product of their nature. In the Why someone becomes a Marxist? thread I posted a list of reading where you can begin understanding his thought. I've only scratched the surface of his corpus.
    It's been more than seven years since teenage me read the "interpretation" of Das Kapital + The communist manifesto + The state and revolution, I imagine I'm not as well versed in marxism as you might be, as there's a huge time threshold and I probably have read far less marxist works.

    They most certainly do not! The logical conclusion of your definition is putting people in jail because you don't like their art [and perhaps even worse!] whereas the logical conclusion of mine is that it is the duty of the citizen to participate in the political life of the state.
    That's a matter of nuance. If there's a conflict between the workers and the firm that's blocking the the co-determination process and leading to problems in production, does the state lack the capacity to intervene? What if the firm takes advantage of the worker's situation to force them to admit worse labor conditions in a staged "co-determination"? ¿What if the co-determinant's decisions runs contrary to the needs of the state during a difficult situation? There's a lot of potential problems that require a goverment intervention under such a system.
    Last edited by RBRS; 05-31-2022 at 12:41 PM.

  29. #29
    Metaphor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2021
    Location
    IDN, SEA, AS.
    TIM
    NH-ILI-Te Sp 5/So 6
    Posts
    344
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Probably EIE, but one question, do you have a certain process to transform your personality without changing yourself or you simply prefer to be yourself and no one else? This question might or might not be related to your type in Socionics, despite I really don't give enough attention of which "system" but specifically, since someone has mentioned about your personality transformation, it might be substantial as well.
    Arthur Schopenhauer (ILI-Ni):

    • “A man can be himself only so long as he is alone; and if he does not love solitude, he will not love freedom; for it is only when he is alone that he is really free.”


    Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (ILI-Te):


    • "The history of the world is none other than the progress of the consciousness of freedom."



  30. #30
    aster reverie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    The Beta Family Cult Ranch of Gulenko
    TIM
    IEI~N™
    Posts
    3,075
    Mentioned
    519 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Something tells me you are a rational type and EIE. But I’ve been wrong before. But I think I my socionics skillz may be improving, slowly but surely, so there’s that?

    ·:*¨༺
    ༻¨*:·.
    𝓽𝓾𝓶𝓫𝓵𝓻·:*¨༺ ༻¨*:·.
    քɨռȶɛʀɛֆȶ
    ♓︎ 𝓅𝒾𝓈𝒸𝑒𝓈 ♓︎ 𝓅𝒾𝓈𝒸𝑒𝓈
    ♍︎ 𝓋𝒾𝓇𝑔𝑜 𝓇𝒾𝓈𝒾𝓃𝑔 ♍︎

  31. #31
    Seed my wickedness Sanguine Miasma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    7,380
    Mentioned
    312 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I see strong draw seeing things through Ti respecting authoritarian lens. That would be EIE(-N, Ti views not Ti producing). Yes, identical types may have very opposing views especially when it comes to this type. You also made a comment about Nietzsche regarding what he wrote as if he had an ability transform himself out of the type mold (=should we grant him or his type extra powers?). It is a higher level view of things where the similarity happens. It may be hard to divorce from one's own views and see some shared processing units and configuration. We are carbon based lifeforms and such.

    It is a possibility to develop a typology for philosophical ideas and philosophers. You hopefully see that this typology would be apples and above would be oranges as the socionics should applicable to all people because philosopher cognition should have less varation than there is variation in the set of all people ( = as such there is a need to step into a democratic mindset from an aristocratic mindset).
    Last edited by Sanguine Miasma; 06-01-2022 at 08:19 PM.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

  32. #32
    Provocateur None's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    IEI-Ni ELVF 458
    Posts
    120
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sorry for my late response, chances are I will often go on hiatus from this website every now on then but I will try to check up on it when I can.

    You have an understandable error there, the CNT/FAI was not a secessionist organization. It might appear as such because during the civil war they occupied Catalonia, but that was a split from the republican side. CNT/FAI actually stands for an union between the National Labor Confederation / Iberian Anarchist Federation.
    That is my mistake for making them out to be a secessionist organization, what I am trying to say is that there was an ethnic component to the CNT and their anarchism can be viewed as a national struggle as such. From what I know during the war and the 'stories' I heard the violence between Spain and Catalonia was in part due to ethnic tensions. It may be so that they were not 'secessionists', but upon declaring the commune in 1936 they have effectively declared 'a state within a state' and they seeked independence from the Spanish Republic and the Falange as such.

    Ramos had the intention to form a temporary alliance with CNT/FAI to fight their common enemies (marxists-leninists, reactionaries and liberals) to a certain extent he might had seen some compatibility between his ideas and those of CNT/FAI, but the anarchists did not see that compatibility and preferred to side with the socialists.
    Of course, that is precisely what I meant, and I think it was a mistake for the Anarchists to not as they were in the end betrayed by the people whom they 'allied' with.

    Rivera equally did and claimed that Spain needed a proper revolution and that the republic was too soft and had capped the potential for it.
    I am not so sure about Rivera's modernization program being equal to Ledesma. Again, that was their contention with one another. Rivera favored a kind of guildism in the catholic sense. I will correct this further and do a bit of research.

    Corporatism itself as an administrative structure precedes fascism and has been present to some degree in a multitude of burgs and serene republics, it is mentioned in religious texts..
    Precisely, but communism also precedes 'communism' in the vein of Marx and Engels.

    One of us doesn't have a correct interpretation of Te then
    Perhaps I don't understand the intricacies of Nazi racial theory but it comes across to me as sort of a mythology to justify their worldview. It's not Fe in the sense that it's not their emotional attitude towards another race, but a kind of moral myth in which the German race is most just and 'pure'. Purity in the moral sense and not the scientific sense, and they even have 'hierarchy' within each race in accordance to their virtue.

    That's a matter of nuance. If there's a conflict between the workers and the firm that's blocking the the co-determination process and leading to problems in production, does the state lack the capacity to intervene? What if the firm takes advantage of the worker's situation to force them to admit worse labor conditions in a staged "co-determination"? ¿What if the co-determinant's decisions runs contrary to the needs of the state during a difficult situation? There's a lot of potential problems that require a goverment intervention under such a system.
    The government is nothing more than an instrument of suppression of one class over another. The Fascists in their propaganda could deny as such but even they admit it to be true in the end. Here is an excerpt from an article published with the approval of the RSI press office by Carlo Alberto Biggini titled: 'Truth and Lies About Fascism'.

    The bourgeoisie must by now understand the meaning of the social and political revolution which is now in progress and must recognize that unifying the classes means unifying the liberties of the classes. But, as long as it insists on ignoring the liberty to which the proletariat tends, it will not be able to understand the difference between liberty and privilege, between rights and arbitrariness. Two classes means two degrees of liberty, and that is precisely privilege and slavery: wanting to defend liberty today by maintaining the distinction between social classes means only rhetoric and bad faith.

    But how are classes and their rights to liberty unified? Obviously, if we are talking about two grades that are quantitatively and qualitatively different, we need a renunciation and a more or less large transformation of one class in favor of the other. That is to say, the bourgeois class must lose much of its liberty which in reality constitutes its privilege and must anticipate a lifestyle change in relation to mass needs. If it is able to convince itself of this necessity, it will collaborate towards unification with the least possible sacrifice; if, on the other hand, it refuses, it cannot but whine helplessly about violated liberties and will make the transition period much more serious and destructive.

    Now, all the protests taking place at home and abroad against the "violations" of liberty characteristic of Fascism are fundamentally due to a misunderstanding of its meaning, and, the greater the misunderstanding, the stronger the revolutionary need to react and to accentuate the contrast becomes. As a result, Fascism's effort to unify the classes is forced to take place increasingly in the sense of sacrificing traditional values to the needs of new exigencies.

    It is this historical necessity that liberalism must convince itself of in the face of Fascism. Meeting the liberty of the masses does not mean, as the old liberal believes or pretends to believe, granting the masses the rights of liberty of the bourgeoisie, but granting—at the outset and as a prerequisite of all other freedoms—the right to work and equal starting positions in the struggle of life. This presupposition implies another set of presuppositions called programmatic economics, economic independence of the nation, constraint of private initiative, transformation of the right to property and, in the international sphere, redistribution of the world's wealth. If, being confronted with these needs, the national and international bourgeoisie shows proof of intelligence and collaboration, the revolutionary process can be carried out with relative tranquility; if, on the contrary, the bourgeoisie reacts by anchoring itself in its privileged position, then the impact, the violence and the authoritarian mediation of the arbitrator becomes fatal. Thus Fascist authoritarianism was born, and, if our adversaries wanted to point to the true culprit, they could only identify it in the anachronistic mentality of the liberals.
    This post is not up to my standards, I have some more to add but I'm a bit busy at the moment. I've also taken a look at that recommended book you gave on ****** and I will add some stuff into the ******'s typing thread [tbh I'm more sure he is EII now]. I have some stuff to add on Rivera's program and I respectfully disagree he was out to modernize Spain in the way Ledesma was (otherwise there would be no dispute between them). I will be adding to this post tomorrow or the day after at latest. I will also add more information on corporatism from the Fascist congress on corporatism.

Posting Permissions

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