Do Blacks copy ESTP black culture? Do white people sometimes even copy it too?

[violet_crown]

Very interesting read, thank you for that.

Seconded.

 

[Nicki]

Why does this thread exist?

 

[RaptorWizard]

Why does this thread exist?

Because I wonder and wish how I can evolve into black ESTP.

 

[Nicki]

Because I wonder and wish how I can evolve into black ESTP.

That sounds like fun. Guess you want gangsta swag.

 

[The Great One]

Because it seems very much like they all want to be gangsters, and your archetypal gangster is a black ESTP (or ISTP I guess).

Yes, it seems like every black rapper subconsciously tries to look ESTP.

 

[Infinite Bubble]

Because I wonder and wish how I can evolve into black ESTP.

Trade at level 35 holding a Moon Stone.

 

[RaptorWizard]

Trade at level 35 holding a Moon Stone.

The aliens will guide us to the mount moon treasure!

 

[EJCC]

[MENTION=16405]LeaT[/MENTION]: Way to bring actual, relevant expertise into a thread like this.

I second johntherobot and Wind-Up Rex: Nice job. Props to you. And thanks for posting.

Trade at level 35 holding a Moon Stone.

+1

 

[Entropic]

And lol at the bolded. My friends would slap a black man for saying that

I take it that he identifies strongly with black culture and black struggles and rather not try to leave his current socio-cultural position by trying to "act white" that I think was common among many middle class blacks in the 40-60s? You might want to look into Frantz Fanon's Black Skin, White Masks to get a better grasp of the concept.

[MENTION=4945]EJCC[/MENTION] I remotely studied post-colonialism as a part of my anthropology degree. I'm more of a gender buff though

 

[Hate]

[MENTION=15371]RaptorWizard[/MENTION]

I’m curious, which people in the media do you consider to be ‘gangsta?’

 

[RaptorWizard]

@<a href="http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/member.php?u=15371" target="_blank">RaptorWizard</a>

I’m curious, which people in the media do you consider to be ‘gangsta?’

I don't know names; I've just seen random stuff, like this:

 

[Il Morto Che Parla]

You might want to look into Frantz Fanon's Black Skin, White Masks to get a better grasp of the concept.

OT, but I consider this to be a very dangerous man, probably thousands, if not tens of thousands, of people were killed by those inspired by his writings.

There is one problem with post-colonial studies, it does not ask why some societies evolved into a position where they were able to colonize, and others remained in a pre-industrial or, IMO, primitive state.

 

[Entropic]

OT, but I consider this to be a very dangerous man, probably thousands, if not tens of thousands, of people were killed by those inspired by his writings.

There is one problem with post-colonial studies, it does not ask why some societies evolved into a position where they were able to colonize, and others remained in a pre-industrial or, IMO, primitive state.

I think the very nature of your question reveals a certain bias in the way you choose to formulate things, but to answer it, the answer is pretty simple: resources. Europeans had to look for resources elsewhere because we emptied ours. Ever played a strategy game, real-time or otherwise where in order to sustain your survival in the game requires one to secure resources? It is interesting to point out that the resources are always finite. Why? Because if they weren't expansion of territory would for most of the part be unnecessary and forcing the player(s) to expand creates conflict as players must now fight over securing resources in order to continue their expansion and thus secure victory.

It's really the same logic in a nutshell. Pretty much all of our conflicts throughout history have been caused over obtaining the control of resources (resources don't always have to be physical, concrete things).

 

[Eric B]

Because it seems very much like they all want to be gangsters, and your archetypal gangster is a black ESTP (or ISTP I guess).

I always associated the typical loud black attention whore to be an ENFP.

Here's an example of a black ESTP:

Here's an example of a black ENFP

The black community is heavily ISTJ, and the so-called "party people" among them at the center of attention, stand out. The more serious and critical ones would be ESTP, and the ones more friendly and into "fun" for its own sake (especially stuff like dancing), would be ESFP. Among the critical ones, there seem to be plenty of ENTJ's and ESTJ's as well. (Run-DMC always struck me as more ESTJ; perhaps I for DMC). Black community is heavily S, and N's stand out as rather philosophical. Like the "Five Percenter" religion (which heavily influenced hip hop) would be an N thing. "Gangsta" rap had its way paved by a heavily philosophical-political period in the late 80's (the original "New School"). There were most likely a lot of INTJ's involved in that. The graffiti culture that accompanied hip hop may have been very ISTP.

The "gangsta" image might be ESTP, but it could just be "In Charge" in general, and a more reserved version of it, fit Chart The Course (IST/INJ). Overall, obviously more "directive" in approach.

ENFP's would probably fit in with the ESFP's, but be a bit less physically oriented. Thy might be more the jokesters at the party. Fresh Prince seemed like the perennial black ENFP.

So it's not really a matter of "copying ESTP". Those who copy the culture will gain some aspect of ESTP behavior, but a lot of other types, especially SFP, STJ and NTJ are mixed in with it.

 

[Il Morto Che Parla]

I think the very nature of your question reveals a certain bias in the way you choose to formulate things, but to answer it, the answer is pretty simple: resources. Europeans had to look for resources elsewhere because we emptied ours. Ever played a strategy game, real-time or otherwise where in order to sustain your survival in the game requires one to secure resources? It is interesting to point out that the resources are always finite. Why? Because if they weren't expansion of territory would for most of the part be unnecessary and forcing the player(s) to expand creates conflict as players must now fight over securing resources in order to continue their expansion and thus secure victory.

I do have a bias. I favor the western model of liberal democratic capitalism and I do not regret that western countries triumphed over other societies, which would not have developed beyond their existing "modes of production".

The question still remains, if we believe your answer, why did European societies produce a surplus, leading to the development of towns and early industry (prior to industrial revolution), necessitating more resources, while "primitive" societies did not.

 

[Entropic]

I do have a bias. I favor the western model of liberal democratic capitalism and I do not regret that western countries triumphed over other societies, which would not have developed beyond their existing "modes of production".

The question still remains, if we believe your answer, why did European societies produce a surplus, leading to the development of towns and early industry (prior to industrial revolution), necessitating more resources, while "primitive" societies did not.

They didn't produce surplus in such a sense. They simply exhausted the natural resources faster than they were replenished. Also, perhaps I need to remind you that many of the societies that you here label as "primitive" are as capable of producing surplus goods (I also think the word "surplus" is misleading. It's not that more is created per se; it's just that the methods to create goods became more effective so less raw materials and production energy went to waste during production yielding higher production value) and some of them achieved a higher technological standard way before even Europeans developed effective farming methods (Ancient China, Ancient Egypt etc.). However, their overall attitude towards said resources is more of a sustainable one (speaking as a whole), but many great societies in history have collapsed because of their inability to create a sustainable society.

Jared Diamond writes about this extensively in Germs, Guns and Steel.

 

[Il Morto Che Parla]

They didn't produce surplus in such a sense. They simply exhausted the natural resources faster than they were replenished.

They had the basis of the technolgocial ability to colonize, before such an intention existed. The colonized societies did not have the technology to do so to Europe.

 

[Entropic]

They had the basis of the technolgocial ability to colonize, before such an intention existed. The colonized societies did not have the technology to do so to Europe.

Reread my edited post if you didn't. I added new information in it.

Anyway, why should they if they manage their resource production in a sustainable way so there was never a need for them to expand the territory? Also, I don't think I need to remind you that many societies located in the same geographical area experience(d) inter-society conflict. A perfect example are the inter-tribal rivalries among the Germanic tribes such as the Celts. Conflict doesn't need to expand to a new continent and many societies developed complex trade routes e.g. Vikings instead of forcefully conquering another resource-rich area simply because the former is a more efficient way of acquiring them, to use two European examples.

 

[Elocute]

Hmm, I certainly don't. I honestly think my white friends are into it. Most of Hollywood espouses the ESTP stereotype, especially with new reality TV. It's "empowering" to live in the moment, be logical, and fearless which h appends to coincides with that people think of ESTPs. Furthermore, it isn't as if blacks would make up for the significant sales of "ESTP black culture". Also, a great deal of these rappers are not ESTPs (JayZ for example) but rather are in persona and have no issue telling you so (Nicki Minaj)

 

[Il Morto Che Parla]

Reread my edited post if you didn't. I added new information in it.

Anyway, why should they if they manage their resource production in a sustainable way so there was never a need for them to expand the territory? Also, I don't think I need to remind you that many societies located in the same geographical area experience(d) inter-society conflict. A perfect example are the inter-tribal rivalries among the Germanic tribes such as the Celts. Conflict doesn't need to expand to a new continent and many societies developed complex trade routes e.g. Vikings instead of forcefully conquering another resource-rich area simply because the former is a more efficient way of acquiring them, to use two European examples.

Sustainability is no good if it implies living like animals.

The proof is in the results. European cultures triumphed and continue to triumph, despite occasional setbacks. Now Pope Francis will restore the vision of the west.

IMO some cultures are not inferior because they are subordinate, but subordinate because they are inferior.