|
Post by vincent on Aug 22, 2020 15:00:01 GMT -5
It seems to me that he doesn't mention duty as a justification of his fight itself, but also as a justification of HOW he is fighting.
It resonates with "I choose to focus on both"
The focus on justice and dignity isn't just a focus in opposing Israel violations of those principles, it's a focus on embodying those principles in himself and fighting with and within them.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Aug 22, 2020 15:03:06 GMT -5
Right. He seems principle-centric, not people-centric. And again, standards for the sake of standards, which is perfectionistic, idealistic, as with 4 'art for the sake of art'.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Aug 22, 2020 15:04:39 GMT -5
The grandmother seems to be the 'standard' he has to 'measure up to'. It could become personal to him before he was born because standards are transcendent, they're IMpersonal.
|
|
anthony
Terra9Incognita
Posts: 1,537
Enneagram Core Fix: 9w1
|
Post by anthony on Aug 22, 2020 15:06:23 GMT -5
Right, hmmm...One also gets the sense when reading his article(s) and watching the interviews, it seems, that he’s holding back /something/ about to erupt, the rigidity and pursed lips... www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/16/bds-movement-omar-barghouti-denied-entryIn this article it DOES seem like a lot of his “cases” are essentially just bullet-pointed lists intended to illustrate injustice, and it’s also full of what appears to be a conflict between reaction-formation and guilt and stubbornnness, for instance: “I have decided not to miss any of my speaking engagements, joining via video in the middle of my nights, but I cannot possibly compensate the personal loss of missing my daughter’s wedding. I am hurt, but I am far from deterred.” I have the feeling that if he were 6 lead, the focus would be more on the CASE made itself than just...a ‘listing’ of instances where injustice has taken place with the main message essentially being “it must be fought!!!!” “ Despite the efforts of Israel’s governments and its supporters in the Trump administration, we shall intensify our common fight against oppression and racism in all its forms through our struggle for freedom, justice, and equality.”
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Aug 22, 2020 15:07:06 GMT -5
So part of the typing problem here is that sp/so is the Sixish stacking and so/sp is the Oneish stacking. Here we seem to be dealing with whether.6 or 1 leads and whether the stacking is sp/SO or SO/sp, so it's the border zone of the two stackings anyway.
|
|
|
Post by vincent on Aug 22, 2020 15:10:36 GMT -5
From the wikipedia article :
I think it's quite significant that he has been attacked with allegations of hypocrisy.
Accused of not following his own principles and not upholding his own standards.
And his answer to those attack are all about "orthopraxy".
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Aug 22, 2020 15:26:31 GMT -5
Well, see, there is also the issue of his limits-setting. Talking style 'setting limits' is 6 but it seems with him like the limits are preset and he is just pronouncing them. With 6 you'll see the process of setting them (sometimes extremely, as with TPAS) OR you'll see a counterphobic over-insisting. With him it's more like 'slicing a cake'. Of course Palestinians can't observe the boycott; it sounds almost dismissive. Sounds more like 'gut knowing'. Thus to me it resembles E1 talking style 'sermon' > 'limits setting'. And in the article anthony posted, he really reels out the whole nine yards of the Progressive Church. Similar to Hedges, a One, or to Chomsky (either a very Oneish 5w6 or a One but not a Six), once you're on board you're uncompromisingly on board. There just seems to be no effort or exertion with him about what's 'right'; what I mean is neither doubt nor counterdoubt seem to lead.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Aug 22, 2020 15:32:50 GMT -5
All that said, if say last fix is 2w1(1w9) it might not even matter. And I'm not decided and he might not be a nut we're able to crack at this time but it's good to try.
btw he does not seem to display the rhetorical flourishes of so/sp, tablets coming down the mountain. It all seems very 'workmanly'.
|
|
|
Post by vincent on Aug 22, 2020 15:37:01 GMT -5
Well, see, there is also the issue of his limits-setting. Talking style 'setting limits' is 6 but it seems with him like the limits are preset and he is just pronouncing them. With 6 you'll see the process of setting them (sometimes extremely, as with TPAS) OR you'll see a counterphobic over-insisting. With him it's more like 'slicing a cake'. Of course Palestinians can't observe the boycott; it sounds almost dismissive. Sounds more like 'gut knowing'. Thus to me it resembles E1 talking style 'sermon' > 'limits setting'. And in the article anthony posted, he really reels out the whole nine yards of the Progressive Church. Similar to Hedges, a One, or to Chomsky (either a very Oneish 5w6 or a One but not a Six), once you're on board you're uncompromisingly on board. There just seems to be no effort or exertion with him about what's 'right'; what I mean is neither doubt nor counterdoubt seem to lead.
Yes, that sounds right to me.
That's what i meant by "all about orthopraxy". He seems remarkably not ideological, relatively speaking.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Aug 22, 2020 15:38:55 GMT -5
#3 I'm rewatching the two videos here. The still photos at the beginning of the first one really look sp first imo.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Aug 22, 2020 15:47:33 GMT -5
That's what i meant by "all about orthopraxy". He seems remarkably not ideological, relatively speaking.
Right. And in the last article posted. there is like this cookie-cutter reeling out of the 'schpiel'. All points covered. Anti-racist, solidarity with LGBTQPZ++ against the supremacists...and he has not a single thing to add to this. It's like it's the contract you sign when you're building a progressive movement. It could be a business contract or an apartment lease too. It's purely functional. He covers all bases but it's boiler plate.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Aug 22, 2020 15:50:57 GMT -5
He seems pragmatic > passionate; contractual > visionary, politics-wise. All of this seems sp/so > so/sp.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Aug 22, 2020 15:54:21 GMT -5
That's in the last article, where he actually expounds on the ideological underpinnings. It's remarkably boiler plate.
Earlier, it was still conviction and principles > passion, vision, ideology, intimacy...
|
|
|
Post by vincent on Aug 22, 2020 16:01:27 GMT -5
He seems pragmatic > passionate; contractual > visionary, politics-wise. All of this seems sp/so > so/sp.
Yes, i agree.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Aug 22, 2020 16:06:07 GMT -5
He seems to be in the business of disrupting Israel's business and he seems to be very efficient at it too. He takes a moment to tell you about missing his daughter's wedding "I am hurt" and then, back to business. Even his saying he's hurt seems proficiency and 'currency'. He is unsentimental and determined. So I'm with sp 1 atm. I feel like you could dig and dig with him and you'd never come up with the hangnail of a toenail of 'feet of clay' (which is cph 6).
|
|