Personality Cafe banner

Where Do You All Rest on the Political Spectrum?

[INFJ] 
6K views 83 replies 56 participants last post by  Kirjuri 
#1 ·
Do you have a political ideology, or are you indifferent to all of it? If you do, what would you describe yourself as and why; if not, is there any particular reason why you're disinterested in all of it? Just curious as to what INFJs would get.

I'd describe myself as a dedicated Socialist because it seems to be the only system that works for the benefit of the vast majority of the people while still having a chance of remaining (for the most part) uncorrupted.
 
#2 ·
#5 ·
View attachment 35072

It's like you read my mind! Was having this exact discussion with hubby yesterday. He's an ESTJ and a career Navy man.....he wasn't exactly seeing the light.
Lol, that picture's awesome. Rofl, I can imagine. I have a few friends who believe in Social Darwinism and all of that, and whenever I try to debate with them, they usually resort to slogans and illogical reasons that 'prove their point' with the exception of one who reminds me of Thatcher, in the sense that his views are god awful, in my opinion, but he can put up a good debate [/run-on sentence].

@jd_ : Interesting, have you always felt that way, or was this something that developed with time?
 
#8 ·
I technically qualify as a Libertarian, although I swing right on most social issues.
To be honest, though, I'm largely indifferent, and it wasn't until this last year that I even nailed down a specific political belief system.

Here's my issue with politics:

Nobody's really wrong.
In theory, if everyone was inherently good, always put others' needs above their own, and acted out of love and selflessness, any political system should work.
If all people were charitable and gave freely, conservatism would work, because the government would not need to mandate giving- it would already happen.
If all people were moral, liberal ideals would work, because the government would not be corrupt, and the things it implemented would be good for the people.
Same goes for any other political structure, really. Monarchies would work if all of the leaders were perfect and never acted selfishly. Dictatorships would work if that were true, too!

The problem is that people are selfish, and we look out for ourselves first. Even the moral, loving people are flawed- there is no perfect human.
Which throws a wrench in every political structure, causing each and every one of them to be flawed in some area.

And so, I identify mostly with Libertarianism, but must say that I really, in essence, find it to be the "lesser of all evils" more than anything else.
 
#10 ·
I would be classified as a Centrist, though depending on the issue, I will have different leanings. Financially, I lean more towards Conservative. Socially, I lean more towards Liberal. In regards to foreign policy, I'm actually a little bit isolationist. We have too many problems at home to be indulging in any kind of Hero Complex. We don't need to go save EVERYONE--we can't afford to go save everyone. We meddle too much. It's so annoying.

That said, I tend to be a bit indifferent as far as politics go. I try to avoid it, because if I examine what I have in front of me to work with, I'm constantly disappointed in the selection. It's like, do you want to vote for Douchebag or Turd Sandwich? I like neither of them, so why bother voting? I feel as a citizen, I should help pick the person who's most qualified to run the country, but what do you do when you feel NO ONE is qualified? I don't want to vote for someone because they're "less bad" than the other candidate. That's just...so depressing...

I dunno...the whole thing is a big mess. Maybe we should scrap the whole thing and start over.
 
#11 ·
Liberal Libertarian

My patience and interest in political discourse is very small. I think about it quite often though and I keep up with American politics somewhat. There are so many issues when looking into the political and societal atmosphere of America and the world. Someone will point out a few things here and there, a few very valid and important points. However, our problems are very complex and complicated that just those few things are not adequate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Curiously
#38 ·
That's quite good! Better off than I am, 'cause I fall on my head. =! Not so sure if I'm resting or not!
 
#17 ·
good for everyone

does this even exist in the "political spectrum"?
I think "good for everyone" is subjective though, unless we are referring to the 6 basic human needs.
 
#16 ·
Indifferent. Politics isn't my thing. I'll leave it to my ENTP buddy to be interested in it, even though he's Canadian, lol.

I'm a conservative when I can be bothered to care. *shrug* Less government the better, IMHO.
 
#19 ·
I don't rest on the spectrum.
I'm so torn between theory and practice right now, I don't even know.
There is no right or wrong, only preference, so I go into "fuck everything because it's all made up bullshit anyway" mode to cope.

I'm sure I'll think up something in a few years, but I don't have the time or the energy.
 
#22 ·
I am largely apathetic. It is difficult for me to be political as I realize that all political systems, all governments, nations, borders, traditions, religions etc. are arbitrary; wholly human inventions. Plus I hold some contradictory views stemming from my dissonance at how things are and will continue to be, and how I wish they were (lot of misanthropy and Malthusian influence; not sure how I feel about humans ‘owning‘ the world or parts of it; sadness at the pollution, rapidly vanishing wildlife habitat, and manner in which we treat our fellow creatures, among others).

However, since government and politics seem to be an incurable disease of humanity, if pressed I suppose I would qualify as a left-leaning Libertarian. In every test I have taken, I score as far Libertarian as possible, bordering on complete anarchist.

In my idealistic twenties I was a huge fan of the works of Ayn Rand, and a card-carrying member of the Libertarian party. I prefer small, ineffective government, and think that, in most cases, the government should not interfere in the lives of the citizens. I lean toward the system that allows the most individual freedom, and would limit government to protecting the ‘rights’ of the citizens. I would likewise extend these rights to all creatures (which would make me extremely unpopular, and likely not to find my way into office).

As far as civil liberties go, I am quite liberal. I am pro-choice, pro-decriminalization of drugs (without taxation or regulation), pro-GLBT-marriage (and equality in all matters…for all persons. Perhaps pro-just getting-rid-of-the-institution-of-marriage-altogether, at least as far as the government is concerned), pro-separation of church and state (actually separation of church and state and everything else).

Fiscally, I am more conservative. I live my life debt free, with a balanced budget (with a surplus actually). I see no reason this cannot be accomplished on a large scale. If it cannot be paid for, we do not need it. No more bread and circuses. At the same time, I do think that the medical system needs revamping. Cost are getting out of hand, more due to regulation than the opposite. I firmly believe that there is a certain balance that can be achieved. And it should begin with eradicating the corruption and lobbying.

I am often not a huge fan of the results of capitalism, yet any society of humans is going to function on capitalism at some level. It can be regulated, ignored, etc. but you can bet trade is the backbone. In short, you can wrangle capitalism into submission, and put it in shackles, but it still must be forced into slave labor or society will come to a standstill. Trade makes the most sense for the human animal. Certainly pollution should be curbed, and other ‘rights’ infringements prevented. At the same time I am much in favor of setting aside large swaths of land for national forests, parks and preserves in which humans are not allowed to build, are forced to clean up after themselves, and where their freedom of movement is curtailed.

So yeah, a secular, enlightened, Libertarian society in which humans have learned to love their neighbors as themselves (passively, i.e. they do not throw poo at one another), allow everyone the rights they claim for themselves, voluntarily limit their growth, downsize, live with the environment, and leave as little impact as possible. That’s not too much to ask, right?
 
#23 ·
Political conservative, Social conservative, Libertarian views on government's role in a Constitutional Republic.

Ex: Bush's $3 gas was the end of the world and children were starving and dying
Obama's $4 gas is good because it will push us towards alternative energy
 
#25 ·
I am far left, but a pragmatic far left.

In other words, I believe that goverment should be there to help everyone as much as possible, where help is defined as fulfilling people's desires as best as can be done.

This requires social welfare. It requires giving people the liberty to experiment with and enjoy their own lives. However they want, so long as it doesn't harm other. I think it probably also requires a market economy, although I think that this should be regulated.

Basically, government should work to provide for everyone equally, at least basic needs (including housing), and it should do this however it can so long as people are still free enough to feel like people.

America is an odd case: it has two right wing parties of which a fair amount of the population seem to like neither, causing them to become apolitical (and thus in favour of small government), they then vote right-wing even though they would actually prefer left. It seems that a lot of you don't actually want what you think you want. *sigh*.

(although of course I might be wrong, and I'm not trying to tell you what to think, but it's worth considering *why* you want a small government, when the evidence shows much higher levels of happiness in places with a large government sector)
 
#26 ·
I read in another thread (can't remember which one at this point, might have been an ESTP one) that we haven't had any idealist representatives in government, or at least in a President here in the US. ... At first, I didn't believe it. Surely by now, type wouldn't matter and some idealist would've been in office. We've had so many officials by now. But after reading this thread, well...

It's no wonder that we probably haven't, lol. Must seem like such a waste of time to most of us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brian1
#27 ·
What do you mean by idealist?
 
#28 ·
Okay, did some digging, and found the post I was referring to. Reading it again, it's mostly just a general rant on NFs as a whole from an ESTP, but here's the quote that caught my eye. It may or may not be true, but it made me wonder:

I also think you Idealists, really need to get over yourselves being too good to go into politics,because there's all this mudslinging and negativity, and yet you want to tackle things like AIDS, Global Warming,poverty,but you get offended when an Artisan President, doesn't meet your expectations, because you never bothered to listen in American Government, in college. We've got every type represented as president except the Idealist.
Source: http://personalitycafe.com/estp-forum-doers/58820-you-guys-envious-infjs-2.html

Second page, second post. The thread is about ESTPs possibly envious of INFJs, so I suppose I took this to assume the idealists in question were also primarily INFJs, though as I've said, reading it again it may be referring to NFs in general.
 
#37 ·
I really don't have the best MBTI theory background, and I use what I know or what I think I know. The general rule of thumb in writing is write what you know, and I came from an NF background, in which people scorned politics but were okay with social action, and then complained when Obama broke his promises. And it's like content with being an armchair pundit. You're better,and excuse me, it's late I'm tired , just got home from work,at being the crusader on the outside lobbying for reform. A Ralph Nader figure comes to mind. A person who doesn't compromise. I read your original post...very thoughtful.


Okay, did some digging, and found the post I was referring to. Reading it again, it's mostly just a general rant on NFs as a whole from an ESTP, but here's the quote that caught my eye. It may or may not be true, but it made me wonder:



Source: http://personalitycafe.com/estp-forum-doers/58820-you-guys-envious-infjs-2.html

Second page, second post. The thread is about ESTPs possibly envious of INFJs, so I suppose I took this to assume the idealists in question were also primarily INFJs, though as I've said, reading it again it may be referring to NFs in general.
 
#30 ·
I don't have a need for that hypothesis. I have study a wide range of topics from almost all fields..except politics and economics. I have never feel attracted to politics at all. I think everyone is his own government, our lives are a result of our own choices. Most people feel helpless but that's because they give away their personal power. You always have the last word, never forget that. Your life is your own project and you are the editor, writer and publisher and no amount of government can overthrow that.
 
#31 ·
Were do you all rest on the political spectrum?

I am on the liberal left wing, I am more for social liberalism, social democracy.

I believe the government should stay out of people's personal lifes, they have no right to keep a watch over us all the time as well as recording phone conversations and what websites we use.

And even stupid things like this:

U-turn on taking a term-time holdiay: Plans for a ban and automatic fines are dropped | Mail Online

Nothing to do with the government!!

But I do believe the government's main role should be too look after it's citizens so I strongly believe in social welfare and having most things which are central to the smooth running of a fair society nationalised rather than in the control of corporations that are about profit rather than creating a fair just society.

Politics is complicated though, the left seem to think that those on the right are authoritarian and the right seem to think the same about the left.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top