[MBTI General] I'm gonna piss a lot of people off with this thread

[sculpting]

You're a socialist compared to 2013 American Republicans.

There was some survey comparing 2010 perceptions of republicans to 2012 perceptions of republicans, and the Tea Party has swung it right off the rails of sanity. A lot of otherwise-would-be-republicans have temporarily bailed on the party, e.g., this guy: http://www.ericgarland.co/2012/11/0...republican-strategist-regarding-white-people/

What is really wierd to me is that many folks I knew to be more middle minded in 2010, have actually shifted towards being more conservative. People who didnt care about politics have become more conservative.

It has a lot to do with the denial of fiscal reality that is seen with the liberal party which breeds mistrust. Even being a bleeding heart NFP, there comes a certain point where you start to see people do really dumb things in the name of "good" which dont actually fix anything, but make them feel better. But you cant help but go "You arent actually FIXING anything, but are wasting a ton of money!!!" as you raise your hands in the air. It's like putting duct tape and shiny christmas bows on a dam that is about to burst-it looks shinier. Or painting a broken down car-it looks prettier, but still will break down without notice.

When you see examples of common sense being so avoided-you then see cries of socialism.... and it feels right. as why else would we persist on the face of blatant failure, if not to push an underlying agenda of some sort?

growing up poor, and having many poor folks in my family I see how "helpful" some of the changes are....they are non-impactful....but they look pretty from afar in a shiny castle

 

[pathos]

I can only speak for INFJs. I have limited experience with ENFJs.

INFJs certainly do have causes that they get attached to and push, all in the name of harmony. Perhaps this makes socialism a more palatable system, since capitalism has the negatives of inequality and greed (though I'm not sure if these are ever really absent in a socialist society either). Perhaps it is utopia that xNFJs want and the ideal of equality and peace.

I do have to say, the INFJs I know trend to being more liberal, however, I have met a couple that are on the right. It seems that Fe and perhaps even the pairing Ni-Fe in this case, causes the INFJ to attach to a cause and believe it to its full - even when it is extreme or within the realm of conspiracy theory.

 

[Idealistforthefuture]

Personally I like both Socialism and Communism. While you may be true it is a result of Fe. Here is the thing about that. For one you don't have an Fe tendency so it makes sense you wouldn't understand it, but mainly because we have feelings for people. The reason we would dislike you wanting as much money as humanly possible is because it greedy as fuck. To us certainly, maybe not you. Personally I think it is extremely greedy for one reason, I ask you what will having as much human money do for you as a person let alone the community as a whole.

 

[Dudesowin]

Your post is confused as all hell, I'm NTJ and I'm not capitalist, I hate capitalism.

I like your avatar though.

Which form of capitalism would you attribute primarily? And does that have to do with tax codes, implementation, or what in particular?

 

[Lark]

Which form of capitalism would you attribute primarily? And does that have to do with tax codes, implementation, or what in particular?

Attribute primarily? I'm sorry I've no idea what the meaning of this is

 

[Dudesowin]

Can you prioritize which form of capitalism in particular that you primarily attribute such hatred towards? Simply saying it doesn't work and flushing everything down the toilet doesn't work either, leaves us all swimming in our own shit. A lot of times most things never work because they have never been tried in their fullest sense. If any form of government system exists then how can one say that its economy is capitalist therefor the ideals of capitalism are all inherently blindsided anarchy. What we have in a capitalist society most of the times is a round robin style Bourgeois.

I'm going to level with you this is not my forte, I was just curious about your opinion.

 

[En Gallop]

I'd describe myself as somewhere in the middle, watching the Communists and Capitalists on either side of me get further and further away from my personal views haha. There are no right answers when it comes to politics/economics anyway, it's a messy subject, so it's not that interesting a topic to me. If you are a Capitalist, you should probably think about investing in Gold, Silver, and fossil fuels pretty soon, as western paper money will be worth almost nothing in a few years.

 

[Lark]

I'd describe myself as somewhere in the middle, watching the Communists and Capitalists on either side of me get further and further away from my personal views haha. There are no right answers when it comes to politics/economics anyway, it's a messy subject, so it's not that interesting a topic to me. If you are a Capitalist, you should probably think about investing in Gold, Silver, and fossil fuels pretty soon, as western paper money will be worth almost nothing in a few years.

 

[En Gallop]

Haha well there aren't! You try proving scientifically than one opinion is better than another. It's all bullshit.

 

[Lark]

Can you prioritize which form of capitalism in particular that you primarily attribute such hatred towards? Simply saying it doesn't work and flushing everything down the toilet doesn't work either, leaves us all swimming in our own shit. A lot of times most things never work because they have never been tried in their fullest sense. If any form of government system exists then how can one say that its economy is capitalist therefor the ideals of capitalism are all inherently blindsided anarchy. What we have in a capitalist society most of the times is a round robin style Bourgeois.

I'm going to level with you this is not my forte, I was just curious about your opinion.

I personally believe that all capitalists are more or less alike, the same is true of capitalisms, although keynesianism is superior to monetarism and neo-classical economics in my view, the only thing approaching keynesianism is the social market economy in the EU.

What is important is that the economy is a mixed economy, public/state ownership and private ownership, manufacturing, retail, commerce, finance.

Economies such as the UK or US which have lop sided economies dominated by military-industrial complexes or finance are going to run into problems because these sectors will dictate public, social and economic policies, influence public opinion, even influence dissenting opinion so that opposition, upheavel or public outrage will also benefit them.

No government in the world would risk treating financial interest groups in the manner in which governments treated the trade unions in the eighties, and yet the financial interest groups are today putting the unions to shame as examples of anti-democratic and selfish operators.

 

[Lark]

Haha well there aren't! You try proving scientifically than one opinion is better than another. It's all bullshit.

You'd have to define what you mean by science but if you mean that there's objectively a correct and empirically proveable or evidence based approach to analysing politics then I'd say yes.

 

[En Gallop]

You'd have to define what you mean by science but if you mean that there's objectively a correct and empirically proveable or evidence based approach to analysing politics then I'd say yes.

No matter how perfect the solution, people will always fuck it up. The problem with Capitalism and Communism is not the theory (both are quite brilliant) but the people implementing it.

 

[Lark]

No matter how perfect the solution, people will always fuck it up. The problem with Capitalism and Communism is not the theory (both are quite brilliant) but the people implementing it.

I think that's a bit simplistic, its also oddly medieval religious in outlook, all people being fallen, irredeemable souls who can not but occasionally or exceptionally be any good.

It is possible to build systems which respond to individual or personal failings or flaws. They may not be able to eliminate them but they can mitigate them enough for to make them matter less.

If this were not the case then there could not be what exists already in terms of law, education, economy etc.

 

[En Gallop]

I think that's a bit simplistic, its also oddly medieval religious in outlook, all people being fallen, irredeemable souls who can not but occasionally or exceptionally be any good.

It is possible to build systems which respond to individual or personal failings or flaws. They may not be able to eliminate them but they can mitigate them enough for to make them matter less.

If this were not the case then there could not be what exists already in terms of law, education, economy etc.

Haha I didn't think it was a religious viewpoint, but if so I agree with the theists in that respect. I believe they have a good point.

Exactly - THIS is the best we can do. You've made my point beautifully, thanks!

 

[Blackmail!]

No matter how perfect the solution, people will always fuck it up. The problem with Capitalism and Communism is not the theory (both are quite brilliant) but the people implementing it.

Once ideologies’ claim to total validity is taken literally they become the nuclei of logical systems in which, as in the systems of paranoiacs, everything follows comprehensibly and even compulsorily once the first premise is accepted. The insanity of such systems lies not only in their first premise but in the very logicality with which they are constructed. The curious logicality of all isms, their simpleminded trust in the salvation value of stubborn devotion without regard for specific, varying factors, already harbors the first germs of totalitarian contempt for reality and factuality.

-Hannah Arendt

 

[En Gallop]

Once ideologies’ claim to total validity is taken literally they become the nuclei of logical systems in which, as in the systems of paranoiacs, everything follows comprehensibly and even compulsorily once the first premise is accepted. The insanity of such systems lies not only in their first premise but in the very logicality with which they are constructed. The curious logicality of all isms, their simpleminded trust in the salvation value of stubborn devotion without regard for specific, varying factors, already harbors the first germs of totalitarian contempt for reality and factuality.

-Hannah Arendt

*nods*

I'm not sure who that is, but I've been saying similar things less well for ages haha. I totally agree.

 

[Blackmail!]

*nods*

I'm not sure who that is, but I've been saying similar things less well for ages haha. I totally agree.

Well, what that dear old Hannah tried to show here is the exact opposite of what you claimed here.

The problem is always the theory in itself, not the men who implement it. An ideology will always remain that: an ideology, and ideologies are simplified, seductive abstractions which lure us away from the complexity of the real world.

 

[En Gallop]

Well, what that dear old Hannah tried to show here is the exact opposite of what you claimed here.

The problem is always the theory itself, not the men who implement it. An ideology will always remain that: an ideology.

A theory, in itself, is never a problem. But to actually try to bring it into the world requires many people to believe in it, which is when it becomes an ideology* and goes wrong.


*I tend to think of ideologies as things groups of people believe in, not just the theory maker.

 

[Blackmail!]

A theory, in itself, is never a problem.

Do you think theories, ideas and ideals are that innocent and pure, that they appear out of nowhere, that they have no history of their own?

 

[Lark]

Haha I didn't think it was a religious viewpoint, but if so I agree with the theists in that respect. I believe they have a good point.

Exactly - THIS is the best we can do. You've made my point beautifully, thanks!

And what a point it is...