One Puer ganged up on by three Senexes

[carolinayellowdog]

This Jungian polarity came to mind in another context entirely, an election in a spiritual organization, and the best description of it I found relates the archetypes to such groups:

http://www.mudra.co.uk/mudra_individuation.html

But its applicability to contemporary politics jumped out at me. If Obama's expression of hope and idealism was countered only by Hillary's piecemeal pragmatism, then the two archetypes would be evenly balanced in this race. But what we have is one Puer with three Senexes ganging up on him. Both Clintons plus McCain are all expressing the same contemptuous attitude: the hope Barack represents is an illusion, his voters are all silly fools, and we who have been around the block dozens of times know the score and know he can't win and if he won could not govern. MoveOn and all anti-war activists are foolish children, best ignored. Here is an excerpt explaining the dynamic:

The influence of the Senex archetype over the maintenance of systems and organisations unfortunately has a dark unconscious shadow. At its most shadowy Senex becomes rigid, dogmatic and ruthless tending to disenfranchise and control any who question its authority. When Senex forms and structures begin to ossify they become dry and stale, blind to the potential for change and flexibility...When organisations become increasingly patriarchal and authoritarian they are seldom able to recognise the degree to which they disempower and deny individual freedom of self-expression. When a system or form becomes too solid it can gradually destroy the essential vision that gives it life and inspiration. While the establishment of orthodoxy comes under the aegis of Senex, reformation and regeneration come under the aegis of Puer. Individual creative expression also comes into being through the Puer archetype and in organisation this can often threaten established order.

(END QUOTE)

The damnedest thing about this is that Bill Clinton ran in 1992 as Puer against Bush Sr.'s Senex, and has now become the same bitter, entitled, out of touch, vastly wealthy elitist he ran against. As to "when a system or form becomes too solid"-- inheritance of the presidency from father to son or husband to wife makes our presidency way too "solid", dangerously patriarchal and quasi-monarchical.

[DevonRex]

1. Fantastic analysis. Thank you so much! K&R

[juno jones]

2. K&R!

But probably too intelligent for this place. Love it tho...