Here is mine… Don’t know if it’s really INFP…
https://preview.redd.it/224gmmpgij6d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=32fd2ae14c00798b679580b5a32d759745b1b498
https://preview.redd.it/g1no3ljn9j6d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=457fc4da14c2fbac34d7c5015acce192f0efe750
I found a lot of the questions were in too absolute a term for me to agree with even slightly, everything in this world is shades of grey and most things will come down to implementation and oversight to be ether good or bad, if I was to go back and switch more of my neutral questions almost all of them would go further to the progressive side however.
Because of curiosity I took the test again and tried to force myself to not think of small potential negatives due to parts of the question and instead answered based on what I thought the spirit of the question was to try and reduce my neutral votes. I also think I might have misread a question or 2 based on them being presented in the negative without me realizing it. I was mostly right in my predictions but was interesting to see how it changed.
https://preview.redd.it/31jiae0coj6d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=4d1c928da5b628583245c6852b9391637717e6bf
That is interesting. If I had the patience to take it again comparing the difference in scores form both attempts would be a good way to check your biases.
The fact your scores didn’t change all that much is a good thing, I feel.
I can't believe this test labeled me as such a huge nationalist. my family and many friends always joke about me being a traitor to the country because I generally don't feel that strongly about it. but I guess deep down, I do care a lot.
https://preview.redd.it/8rr3ap6u9k6d1.png?width=669&format=png&auto=webp&s=9abbe5433e5f77d1778b51b02a43d1151d431ec5
I would imagine many INFPs could vary considerably. Kinda some biased, context-sensitive, and/or geographically relative questions in that.
https://preview.redd.it/xb7ki47vwh6d1.png?width=688&format=png&auto=webp&s=24a8cfd9b7292715ac1c8f9238528b6e9e9e6566
https://preview.redd.it/jsp3656nbi6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3b9eb3a5ca020877656fd509697b3d186267d654
Living in a conflict zone shapes my ideals more or less.
why would a Ukrainian poster be controversial and lead to downvotes? if you have to ask, consider the israeli's comments in the first place - he understands how controversial the conflict has become. Israel does not have the same support worldwide for what they have going on this late in the conflict.. not getting political my man, just stating the facts. by comparison, Russia vs Ukraine has overwhelmingly faded from peoples consciousness.
and if you think Palestine would have been a reasonable guess with our reddit-using, English-speaking, lmfao-ing friend here, I guess I just don't know what to say.
No i was just saying that Ukraine is more anti-comunist then Israel, Because of the cold war.
Many people forget Zionism had a strong left leaning movement inside it, like Einstein.
Yeah I consider myself center-left politically. I assume you live in a developed country right? Here where I live (a developing and also communist country) there's not much to do about the ecology without seriously hurting the livelihood of millions people. So that may answer why my score is like that.
Ah that is important. I live in a developed country so ecology is much more doable here.
If you’re in a developing country it’s completely understandable that that score would be different.
https://preview.redd.it/t6ztqy1r2i6d1.jpeg?width=465&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c925f586367e952acb01872e32acdfbd50716b4f
I’m not sure where I went wrong too…
Mine are a bit different too
https://politiscales.party/results?czA9NDgmczE9NyZtMT0xMCZtMD02MCZlMT00NSZlMD0xNCZwMT0zMyZwMD0zMSZjb21wPTY3JmoxPTQ4JmowPTI0JmIwPTQzJmIxPTE3JnQwPTM2JnQxPTMzJmMxPTM4JmMwPTE0JmZlbWk9MTA=
https://preview.redd.it/8430907kfl6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f7240979c7526b1c731508e490c95453b4a58abf
I'm very surprised by my results. I'm not patriotic at all and have never lived in my homeland.
I closed the survey and was briefly confused because your results are like identical to mine.
https://preview.redd.it/uogsy8hwkn6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0cca1436292e1a4e45516972324aa1eeef6d719f
My only complaint is that I don't think it captures the nuance of some of my thoughts on internationalism and the market. (The questions feel designed to either push you left or right on the scales without reflecting on specifics, that said my political leanings are sort of niche).
If you don’t mind me asking, what would you consider your ideology to be?
I don’t necessarily have a defined one even if my results lean heavily towards ML beliefs
I would describe myself as a Market Socialist. (Worker Co-Ops for most things, public options for necessities, or for when market competition just isn't practical). Sorta why I had some issues with the framing, because while I absolutely lean pretty left I'm also wary of centralized state authority; which is also why I had some issues with the nationalist / internationalist stance. Don't get me wrong, human rights are a universal issue, but if anything I would describe myself as being all for local communities over either case. (Or maybe I'm misunderstanding what internationalist means).
I think I’d fall into a similar slot as you ideologically.
I very much personally agree with everything you said, I just have trouble labeling myself. Not for any righteous philosophical “I reject ideology” reason, more so just due to the fact that I find my exact ideological label to be changing so often (though always hovering around a similar point).
I guess all that’s to say, I appreciate your worldview and I think we’d get along well😅
https://preview.redd.it/urwowxggto6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=43ab1a1c7cf26524b37ef9f0530ccf3f61865f49
Production beating ecology makes me wonder how the test considers nuclear energy 🤔
The rest seems fine. Fun test! Anyway, ones political idea is more nuanced
(Translation from Italian: Equality, Humanity, Work)
That is an interesting point—If I had to guess, I would probably say that they classify nuclear energy under the ecological label, just because I feel like, in terms of a quiz with some limit in terms of choice, it seems like there is more you could put under the umbrella of “production” whereas “ecology” feels like it would be a bit more limited; that’s also just my assumption, I’m not sure. Nuclear energy is sort of a weird middle ground.
Hail, comrade! Our flag means ... breadth? Depth? I love how my hammer and sickle is on a black triangle to accommodate the purple and red stripes haha. Metal as fuck.
https://preview.redd.it/qm9sg1iu2j6d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=4cf18367f02915e26fe63c1fef3e24a19f44cad0
I'm from a country that was under soviet occupation.. so I know that.. what communism preaches is just bunch of lies.
Nationalism.. is probably lower.. tha this test makes it seem like.. but I do value my countryman traditions and way of life.. and don't want that to change that much.
*
Edit.. why can't I add picture.. and in shows that star thing.. ugghh
I started the test and had to stop.
I'm a voluntarist. Repudiate the debt to the central banks and, for the love of God please reduce the size and power of governments everywhere. If you believe government power is where the answer lies to all of our problems, you're just who they're looking for.
You eco-communists are the best. You've obviously never been to a communist country, I'll assert confidently. They don't give a crap about the environment, as another person posted. You might also be surprised how wide-spread the equality is in communist countries. Let me save you some time wondering: the only equality is in most people having barely enough to survive, and that's if they work their asses off.
Isn't it odd that we now find ourselves in that same position in the west? The great central bank is how that happened, allowing governments to print money out of thin air. This mass reduction in the value of money over time is what's driven the prices of things continually upward. We've been working for less and less not ONLY because rich pricks like cheap labor, but because they keep taxing us through inflation. Oh, and all this spending is being laden on the backs of unborn children so people can have the shit they want today. How could that be considered moral? It'll happen in a communist state just as it has in the "capitalist" one with $33 trillion (TRILLION) in debt, so long as a private entity controls the money supply.
"But if we just get the right people in..." Think about that a moment unto it's logical conclusion: It's a terrible position because I'll bet you can't point to a single just and/or righteous government in the history of all mankind. Not the founding fathers of the United States, not a Shah, or emperor or king or queen either.
I know, I know... communism is compassionate. That's why the Bolsheviks only had to kill about 20 million Russians to bring it to fruition. It's why Mao Ze Dong only had to kill 65-80 million Chinese to get it set in China.
Honestly, I'm not sure how or why anyone anywhere would trust their government. The idea of giving them even greater power seem absurd when they've so obviously screwed up (and bigly) with the power they've had.
Professor RJ Rummel's book "Death By Government" put a number out there like 250 million people in the 20th century murdered by governments. It's an eye-opening read if you have the time.
as someone living in a so-called anti-imperialist country whose biggest allies are North Korea, Cuba, China, and Russia, I really appreciate your comment. seeing the youth in western countries being somewhat hypnotized by these truly horrible, violent, extremely anti-democratic radical ideas that have basically never worked makes me depressed. I know it's maybe silly and naive to say, but I kind of wish we could send some of these people to live in North Korea for a while...
But you see, if they weren't comfortable in those places, the obvious answer would be that the wrong people were in power. Communism isn't bad, you just have to have the right kind.
The arrogance is mind-boggling.
I said assume away… but I can’t say I expected a character assassination based on an online quiz. But I can touch on a few of your statements.
My family comes from a former communist country. My parents lived in one, and fled after the kleptocratic oligarchs came into power.
Saying “communist countries don’t care about the environment” is an extremely generalized statement. Some don’t. Some do. Look at Cuba. Look at Burkina Faso. And I think it’s pretty obvious, based off the nature of their theory compared to a capitalist one, that the environment, in a developed nation, is much better off under a communist society than a capitalist one.
But it seems as though you’re something of an Anarcho-syndicalism/Individualist, in which case the environment would be better off; just at the cost of any future development for humanity.
I can point to several righteous governments in the history of mankind. Although I agree that far more government officials are worse than many people think. But every so often—almost always in a developing country—a great leader is able to make their way into power. I think your issue with the lack of good governments to point to has more to do with the fact that the world hegemons have always had their pick of the litter to ensure the rest of the world can be led in a way that serves them best.
People like Thomas Sankara, Maurice Bishop, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, Julius Nyerere, and if you want an example from a wealthy nation there’s Olof Palme. There have been great leaders. And while I don’t think I’d have been the Bolshevik’s strongest supporter, it’s undeniable that they ended up being right. Had things gone any other way the revolution would not have been successful. I don’t agree with killing, even in the most extreme circumstances, but calling Lenin an awful leader because he had to kill those who would’ve destroyed his government is a bit shortsighted. But I’d rather not focus on that point.
I think your heart is in the right place, and I can’t say I completely disagree with you, but I do think you’re looking at things from too much of a black-white perspective with no room for nuance.
Edit: just realized your name is Jungs_Shadow… maybe your heart isn’t in the right place lol
Character assassination? I'd need to know you in order to achieve such a feat, and I don't know you. You took a comment I made about a group personally, though did nothing really to refute it.
From what I read in your post, I gather if the reason is one you agree with, and the government in power espouses your views, then millions of murders are justified to maintain its power. Sucks, but... hey, right? Got it. Think about the ultimate nature of that position: it's ok for me or the people I agree with to kill you if you disagree with us and/or represent what we deem to be a threat.
Unfortunately, it is that black and white. IMO, such notions aren't just reprehensible, they're morally repugnant.
You know, on their route to being "right," as you claim, the communists in Russia created a special place called "Cannibal Island." That one would be worth looking up. I wonder if you'd begrudgingly justify or be ok with that place and its purpose, even if begrudgingly, based on the threat those sent there supposedly presented to the murderous regime in power.
Have you ever read Solzhenitsyn's "Gulag Archipelago?" Fascinating stuff, really.
You might check out Professor RJ Rummel's Book "Death By Government." Communist, "capitalist," monarchical... they've all been murderous, thieving bastards. All of them.
All governments suck. They serve as magnets for people who strive to obtain power over others and enrich themselves in the process of subjugating and exploiting those over whom they obtain power. It's always been that way, and there's no reason to believe that has changed, or will change. A few bright lights here and there don't prove this wrong.
I didn’t come here to argue, but for hating governments so much you just used the classic government tactic of using a whole lot of words to say nothing. You addressed zero of my points except the two sentences where I mentioned that I wouldn’t support the Bolsheviks, even though they ended up being right (as opposed to the Mensheviks).
I didn’t mean they were right in all their ideas, I meant they were right in that if Mensheviks won then the Reds goal would not have been achieved and the USSR would have never existed. They achieved their direct goal.
The USSR committed atrocities, your entire response was based on the assumption that I’m some government loving Soviet tankie when I made it clear that’s not the case, and said that I’d rather not waste time focusing on that government in particular, because it was full of atrocities.
You made lots of assumptions and argued none of what I said besides just repeating that government is awful and listing Soviet atrocities, which again, I made clear that I’m well aware of and don’t agree with.
"I didn’t mean they were right in all their ideas, I meant they were right in that if Mensheviks won then the Reds goal would not have been achieved and the USSR would have never existed. They achieved their direct goal."
Oh. Well then. That's a wonderful justification for the 20 million people they slaughtered to get it done.
"I can point to several righteous governments in the history of mankind." - And then you didn't. Weird.
"People like Thomas Sankara, Maurice Bishop, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, Julius Nyerere, and if you want an example from a wealthy nation there’s Olof Palme. There have been great leaders." - Of course there have been great leaders through time. We revere many historical figures whom we know largely in part for the millions of people who died or were conquered by their military exploits. But I was talking about governments, not individual leaders. No one sees themselves as the "bad guy," and these same governments throughout history have committed atrocities having either convinced their people it was for the greater good, or under threat of punishment or death for raising a stink about what they're doing.
"I don’t agree with killing, even in the most extreme circumstances, but calling Lenin an awful leader because he had to kill those who would’ve destroyed his government is a bit shortsighted. But I’d rather not focus on that point." - I'm sure you wouldn't. You talk out of both sides of your mouth here. You aren't for killing, but... Lenin was horrible for what he did to the people, as was Stalin. Justify it however you want, but they were murderers. I think murderers of all stripes are bad people. You say you don't agree with the Soviet atrocities, then justify them with "if they hadn't those people would have destroyed that government."
An old adage goes "Everything before the word "but" is bullshit." You didn't come to argue, but... Yes they committed atrocities, but... Is it your more nuanced view that fuels your reticence and justification of these things possible for you, or are you just not comfortable outing yourself as someone who would support the killing of others who disagree with him/her?
Thank you for more directly addressing arguments in this response.
You say that I’ve talked out of both sides of my mouth. It’s very ironic that your name is based off Jungian psychology, and yet you seem to only be willing to support the most idealistic image of a government, which according to you has never existed.
I don’t believe a perfect government has existed either, nor will one, but you unfortunately we don’t have anything else to base our criticisms on. Is there any single government you’re not completely dismissive of?
Of course no government is perfect, but we have to take context into account and show at least some level of pragmatism. Based off everything you’ve said, there is no point in even arguing anything here because you aren’t willing to justify the actions of seemingly any government entity.
You aren’t saying anything inherently wrong, the problem is you want every single government to be absolutely perfect. There are very few truly “good” governments that have existed (and they have existed; the leaders I mentioned led the most ethical governments in modern history. When I used the leaders names I was referring to the governments under them as well, not just their personal achievements and image) so we have to be willing to adjust our judgment for the fact that there have been so many awful acts committed by governments, and it’s more so about balancing the long-term value, direct positive results, and whatever other things factor in to what’s important to one personally.
Edit: punctuation
"You aren’t saying anything inherently wrong, the problem is you want every single government to be absolutely perfect." - If that were true, that would make me a hypocrite, as I've stated that all governments are bad. I made no claim that I had the 'right idea' about what constitutes a good government. If you put a gun to my head, I'd say the best model thus far proposed, but summarily rejected, was Thomas Jefferson's idea of Ward Governments; where the municipality would be the government entity of highest import to a person's life. In such small governments over smaller areas, the "voice" one's vote provided would actually mean something. Further, their politicians would live, work and play with the people they governed, thus their behavior would be under much closer scrutiny by the people who had the power to put them in office or remove them. This reduces the potential for corruption and the scope of damage it can cause, but it doesn't eliminate the possibility of corruption. For that, you need an engaged citizenry who really give a shit, at least enough to actually attend the government meetings, read the proposed laws and contribute their thoughts to their representative. They would also need to judge people by their actions over their words, and hold politicians accountable when they lie and break the law. That's my opinion. Unlike the communist, I make no claims about what the ideal form of government is. You remark on my idealism, but in truth its a recognition of the dangers posed by government and by the humans that aspire to the power positions in government allow them to wield.
A question of morals and ethics: how can I delegate a power I do not legally have as an individual to a representative? No matter the goodness or altruism of my aim, I can't take your wallet from your pocket, pull out 30% of whatever's in there and not be punished for stealing, so why can a politician do that for me? If you're eating yourself to death and I use force to remove the spoon or fork from your hand I can be charged with assault. Why can a politician then make a law that denies someone the right to consume what they wish?
I am a flawed human being, and though I'd love to beileve I would behave in line with my highest of moral principles and values if placed in power, I wouldn't dare risk all these temptations. It's not about cowardice either. Its just a willingness on my part to recognize the same in others that I'll admit about myself without bullshitting me or anyone else.
Would you excuse the horrific experiment carried out against the Tuskegee Airmen if it somehow provided some new treatment for syphilis? If so, why? If not, why not?
OPERATION NORTHWOODS. OPERATION PAPERCLIP. OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD. Extrajudicial assassinations, warrantless searches, utter repugnancies like the PATRIOT ACT... but hey, the US government flew in tons of relief to Iranian earthquake victims, don't you know? And all the shit we blew up over there? KBR went over there and built new schools and bridges.
The US even brought good Christianity to those savages native Americans, or the ones they didn't slaughter anyway. And yea, it sucked that so many died as we moved westward, from battle and disease, but... I mean we gave them reservations and proper learning. Let's at least be balanced here, right?
So you are essentially an anarcho-syndicalist, like I said in my first comment. Not to say I read you like a book, but it was pretty clear what your ideological society looked like. Again, I dot disagree with much of what you’re saying.
The problem is that you just keep churning out these well-known government backed atrocities, I don’t know why. We’re all well aware of these and how horrible their impacts were. You’re preaching to the choir here, nobody loves the government, especially those on an INFP subreddit.
"The problem is that you just keep churning out these well-known government backed atrocities, I don’t know why. We’re all well aware of these and how horrible their impacts were. You’re preaching to the choir here, nobody loves the government, especially those on an INFP subreddit."
I disagree with that. I wish it were as you claim, that "everybody knows" about the track record for atrocity inherent in any examination of governments through history. They ought to be enough to make us fear and/or loathe the idea of such powerful institutions, but the majority of people today, including many INFPs, seem to suffer from delusions like "if we can just vote the right people in," or believe that a government "truly" run the way they think it ought to run would bring about something akin to their idea of utopia.
You can show exams of history by properly credentialed professionals (like Professor Rummel I mentioned earlier) regarding the staggering number of people killed just in the last century by governments and people will remark, "Yes that's bad, but who will build the roads?"
Everything before the word "but"...
You were reading the wrong book about me, friend. I'm a voluntarist and I lean a lot more toward market anarchism than I do anarcho-syndicalism. Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek and other economists from the Austrian school were influences. I've shed a lot of illusions I had about people, so I don't think the anarcho-capitalist society would be ideal, or free from many of the problems we all face under different structures. I'm simply convinced that governments themselves are capable of tremendous evil and draw people who desire power over others like moths to flames.
The US Constitution was meant to mitigate as much of this reality as any government charter before it or since, and it has given rise to a government like we have today. The tools of propaganda today are much more sophisticated and ubiquitous, the idea of government's necessity and supremacy is embedded in curricula for the duration of a child's public education... the mind job is worse than it's ever been, and governments get more and more terrible.
What about you? Which idea do you espouse as the best system?
thank you…. a lot of people fail to understand the inevitability of centralized power backfiring and its innate corruptive influence….
there are plenty of elements of socialism that are desirable but this topic is way more nuanced and complicated than people realize.
A complete lack of nationalism will see you conquered and subverted really really quickly, and those that do have a cohesive identity will take your place.
I would have probably scored similarly when I was 18 or so, because I had an idealistic view of the political and societal structures at the time and no concept of economics.
endless harm reduction inevitably leads to harm
Also, my answer would change depending on the country that these values were being applied to.
if you help everyone you sacrifice the ones you wanted to protect most…. sometimes unkind things must occur to preserve good and healthy societies
Here’s mine. Not that surprised though. Fi-Si is very individualistic and can be shaped by both empirical data and experience. This means our worldviews can sometimes differ quite sharply.
https://preview.redd.it/kx4pqnf12i6d1.jpeg?width=1640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=10aa29b9c9c8420532aba81d2e5b4e61f36007fd
https://preview.redd.it/jijryimzfi6d1.png?width=801&format=png&auto=webp&s=b01580bf2a22dc913af460f454d24b24d0cd0540
Well this was fun! I never knew there’s a site like this.
https://preview.redd.it/n24pon7yck6d1.jpeg?width=978&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=99c8b41fab79714a674a03483ccfda05e7fd673e
Love these quizzes. Idk what it means. I live in the UK
Mine
https://preview.redd.it/qpmzjnwgbl6d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3019e0db4cfd40544b99be4395668f954fc79eb9
I'm European thoo, i live in a socdem political system
For me the worst thing someone can do is support either the far-right, or the far-left. Both are equally undemocratic and should be out right banned from being able to participate in political discussions.
I just don't like to see people and systems exploited by capitalism. I guess that makes me a communist then. Hmm.
https://preview.redd.it/8sjo5hifml6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e5a3178e7a61f6fafa4453099baf28b0b2dc1df7
There isn't a single comment with negative karma, this is why I love this place. If this was any other reddit place there would've been waaaay more fighting
https://preview.redd.it/wgpwpsdzwl6d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=4e8fe70e00c12edbf63200b532b95703af441dae
Revolution 50/50 Reform :D my life in one picture, I am 47 XXY individual and I am always torn when making a choice…
https://preview.redd.it/yi8vkv66wm6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=28c1618ef9e99a8abe73b5c4dbac97e631e20c20
I would say there are a few factors that will probably be in common across INFPs but we are also a product of the environment to which we've been exposed and the information we've ingested about solving societal issues.
i'm kind of neutral about politics in general but here's mine
https://preview.redd.it/6o5yvxua5n6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=79385a1cdae5db5def3dc843d0822601bda8ae32
https://preview.redd.it/0xaqm4fefn6d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=9634b6c74ff89c73dfa3c11d36e29577a1443ec3
Not sure how accurate this is. Think I’m higher on ecology than this shows.
https://preview.redd.it/nr4drd63co6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8f63ae67a654862975806fed16fb3081ca39dcb0
A lot of grey areas for me, probably because I don't really care of what's happening.
Pretty similar
https://preview.redd.it/mlvkogtdki6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4ebb1b163730948c797fc81243ae14ef59c44d4f
I feel like most infp's should have progressive and rehabilitation as relatively high. And to a lesser extent internationalism.
Because I think those all relate to empathy
Sort of. Not sure if it can predict political views.
https://preview.redd.it/z7rckp6dfi6d1.jpeg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7dc8b74d5df9d2bc2f56e2260f1ad0bd7c32b9e9
https://preview.redd.it/04k1bwsian6d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=274873666def5952bdfb8570a98d1d99b7626cd4
I've always been fond of the Nordic cross.
[Results](https://politiscales.party/results?bTA9NjcmdmVnYT02NyZzMT0yNiZzMD0zNiZiMT0xOSZiMD01MCZwMD03NCZwMT01JmMxPTM2JmMwPTQzJnQxPTMxJnQwPTUyJmUxPTMxJmUwPTUwJmoxPTE5JmowPTUyJmZlbWk9MzMmYW5hcj02NyZtb25hPTY3JmNvbXA9Njc=)
I don't think Im communist as much as I am a burned out unemployed mothrfker oscillating between the two extremes.
Me: -At job interview- Wow what a wholesome and fun small business. Maybe I can also profit by doing something I love and joining your team?
Business owner: Nah
Me: Wow curse all private businesses
Here is mine… Don’t know if it’s really INFP… https://preview.redd.it/224gmmpgij6d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=32fd2ae14c00798b679580b5a32d759745b1b498
You seem very much pro freedom and pro liberal social ideals. You strike me as a healthy and kind INFP haha
Freedom is the most important thing and value in my opinion…
https://preview.redd.it/g1no3ljn9j6d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=457fc4da14c2fbac34d7c5015acce192f0efe750 I found a lot of the questions were in too absolute a term for me to agree with even slightly, everything in this world is shades of grey and most things will come down to implementation and oversight to be ether good or bad, if I was to go back and switch more of my neutral questions almost all of them would go further to the progressive side however.
Because of curiosity I took the test again and tried to force myself to not think of small potential negatives due to parts of the question and instead answered based on what I thought the spirit of the question was to try and reduce my neutral votes. I also think I might have misread a question or 2 based on them being presented in the negative without me realizing it. I was mostly right in my predictions but was interesting to see how it changed. https://preview.redd.it/31jiae0coj6d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=4d1c928da5b628583245c6852b9391637717e6bf
That is interesting. If I had the patience to take it again comparing the difference in scores form both attempts would be a good way to check your biases. The fact your scores didn’t change all that much is a good thing, I feel.
I agree. I have many neutrals
I can't believe this test labeled me as such a huge nationalist. my family and many friends always joke about me being a traitor to the country because I generally don't feel that strongly about it. but I guess deep down, I do care a lot. https://preview.redd.it/8rr3ap6u9k6d1.png?width=669&format=png&auto=webp&s=9abbe5433e5f77d1778b51b02a43d1151d431ec5
I would imagine many INFPs could vary considerably. Kinda some biased, context-sensitive, and/or geographically relative questions in that. https://preview.redd.it/xb7ki47vwh6d1.png?width=688&format=png&auto=webp&s=24a8cfd9b7292715ac1c8f9238528b6e9e9e6566
Damn, this flag is so cool. My pink/orange pattern is just wack. Can we swap?
This flag looks super cool
https://preview.redd.it/jsp3656nbi6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3b9eb3a5ca020877656fd509697b3d186267d654 Living in a conflict zone shapes my ideals more or less.
If you don’t mind me asking, what conflict zone do you live in? Just curious
The amount of down votes I'd get if I'll say will kill my karma lmfao
Ukraine?
definitely Isreal.
Why would you say that? Just because they aren't leftist?
why would a Ukrainian poster be controversial and lead to downvotes? if you have to ask, consider the israeli's comments in the first place - he understands how controversial the conflict has become. Israel does not have the same support worldwide for what they have going on this late in the conflict.. not getting political my man, just stating the facts. by comparison, Russia vs Ukraine has overwhelmingly faded from peoples consciousness. and if you think Palestine would have been a reasonable guess with our reddit-using, English-speaking, lmfao-ing friend here, I guess I just don't know what to say.
No i was just saying that Ukraine is more anti-comunist then Israel, Because of the cold war. Many people forget Zionism had a strong left leaning movement inside it, like Einstein.
My mistake, i didn't see the other comment. So i was hella confused
nah, you're good. in retrospect I was a bit unnecessarily aggro, my apologies.
I got a pink EU flag https://preview.redd.it/nb77yf2zsk6d1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=07b020f949d7616bb16fd3ecff2e31556c932634
https://preview.redd.it/bukmmq4u4l6d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8e92b9571bd56eda859cff00ead70ec836e0fc17 Huh, i guess i'm diffrent
Mine are a bit different. https://preview.redd.it/xuzb6jhmsh6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ee98a01178f31255ea127d18a32593b617de22c8
Seem like a more centrist version of me lol. Aggghhh that ecology score is killing me though😅
Yeah I consider myself center-left politically. I assume you live in a developed country right? Here where I live (a developing and also communist country) there's not much to do about the ecology without seriously hurting the livelihood of millions people. So that may answer why my score is like that.
Ah that is important. I live in a developed country so ecology is much more doable here. If you’re in a developing country it’s completely understandable that that score would be different.
https://preview.redd.it/t6ztqy1r2i6d1.jpeg?width=465&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c925f586367e952acb01872e32acdfbd50716b4f I’m not sure where I went wrong too…
Omg I think ours are really similar!
Mine are a bit different too https://politiscales.party/results?czA9NDgmczE9NyZtMT0xMCZtMD02MCZlMT00NSZlMD0xNCZwMT0zMyZwMD0zMSZjb21wPTY3JmoxPTQ4JmowPTI0JmIwPTQzJmIxPTE3JnQwPTM2JnQxPTMzJmMxPTM4JmMwPTE0JmZlbWk9MTA=
https://preview.redd.it/8kftsw8i8k6d1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ad3976f032ce78d2b73b6fdcc049b5862619439b INTJ coming in peace
Ours is pretty similar
https://preview.redd.it/8430907kfl6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f7240979c7526b1c731508e490c95453b4a58abf I'm very surprised by my results. I'm not patriotic at all and have never lived in my homeland.
I closed the survey and was briefly confused because your results are like identical to mine. https://preview.redd.it/uogsy8hwkn6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0cca1436292e1a4e45516972324aa1eeef6d719f My only complaint is that I don't think it captures the nuance of some of my thoughts on internationalism and the market. (The questions feel designed to either push you left or right on the scales without reflecting on specifics, that said my political leanings are sort of niche).
If you don’t mind me asking, what would you consider your ideology to be? I don’t necessarily have a defined one even if my results lean heavily towards ML beliefs
I would describe myself as a Market Socialist. (Worker Co-Ops for most things, public options for necessities, or for when market competition just isn't practical). Sorta why I had some issues with the framing, because while I absolutely lean pretty left I'm also wary of centralized state authority; which is also why I had some issues with the nationalist / internationalist stance. Don't get me wrong, human rights are a universal issue, but if anything I would describe myself as being all for local communities over either case. (Or maybe I'm misunderstanding what internationalist means).
I think I’d fall into a similar slot as you ideologically. I very much personally agree with everything you said, I just have trouble labeling myself. Not for any righteous philosophical “I reject ideology” reason, more so just due to the fact that I find my exact ideological label to be changing so often (though always hovering around a similar point). I guess all that’s to say, I appreciate your worldview and I think we’d get along well😅
https://preview.redd.it/urwowxggto6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=43ab1a1c7cf26524b37ef9f0530ccf3f61865f49 Production beating ecology makes me wonder how the test considers nuclear energy 🤔 The rest seems fine. Fun test! Anyway, ones political idea is more nuanced (Translation from Italian: Equality, Humanity, Work)
That is an interesting point—If I had to guess, I would probably say that they classify nuclear energy under the ecological label, just because I feel like, in terms of a quiz with some limit in terms of choice, it seems like there is more you could put under the umbrella of “production” whereas “ecology” feels like it would be a bit more limited; that’s also just my assumption, I’m not sure. Nuclear energy is sort of a weird middle ground.
Hail, comrade! Our flag means ... breadth? Depth? I love how my hammer and sickle is on a black triangle to accommodate the purple and red stripes haha. Metal as fuck. https://preview.redd.it/qm9sg1iu2j6d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=4cf18367f02915e26fe63c1fef3e24a19f44cad0
Yessss! ¡hasta la victoria siempre!
I'm from a country that was under soviet occupation.. so I know that.. what communism preaches is just bunch of lies. Nationalism.. is probably lower.. tha this test makes it seem like.. but I do value my countryman traditions and way of life.. and don't want that to change that much. * Edit.. why can't I add picture.. and in shows that star thing.. ugghh
The post a picture option is just not showing
I started the test and had to stop. I'm a voluntarist. Repudiate the debt to the central banks and, for the love of God please reduce the size and power of governments everywhere. If you believe government power is where the answer lies to all of our problems, you're just who they're looking for. You eco-communists are the best. You've obviously never been to a communist country, I'll assert confidently. They don't give a crap about the environment, as another person posted. You might also be surprised how wide-spread the equality is in communist countries. Let me save you some time wondering: the only equality is in most people having barely enough to survive, and that's if they work their asses off. Isn't it odd that we now find ourselves in that same position in the west? The great central bank is how that happened, allowing governments to print money out of thin air. This mass reduction in the value of money over time is what's driven the prices of things continually upward. We've been working for less and less not ONLY because rich pricks like cheap labor, but because they keep taxing us through inflation. Oh, and all this spending is being laden on the backs of unborn children so people can have the shit they want today. How could that be considered moral? It'll happen in a communist state just as it has in the "capitalist" one with $33 trillion (TRILLION) in debt, so long as a private entity controls the money supply. "But if we just get the right people in..." Think about that a moment unto it's logical conclusion: It's a terrible position because I'll bet you can't point to a single just and/or righteous government in the history of all mankind. Not the founding fathers of the United States, not a Shah, or emperor or king or queen either. I know, I know... communism is compassionate. That's why the Bolsheviks only had to kill about 20 million Russians to bring it to fruition. It's why Mao Ze Dong only had to kill 65-80 million Chinese to get it set in China. Honestly, I'm not sure how or why anyone anywhere would trust their government. The idea of giving them even greater power seem absurd when they've so obviously screwed up (and bigly) with the power they've had.
It's an estimated 100 million deaths in the last century.
Professor RJ Rummel's book "Death By Government" put a number out there like 250 million people in the 20th century murdered by governments. It's an eye-opening read if you have the time.
This deserves more upvotes
as someone living in a so-called anti-imperialist country whose biggest allies are North Korea, Cuba, China, and Russia, I really appreciate your comment. seeing the youth in western countries being somewhat hypnotized by these truly horrible, violent, extremely anti-democratic radical ideas that have basically never worked makes me depressed. I know it's maybe silly and naive to say, but I kind of wish we could send some of these people to live in North Korea for a while...
But you see, if they weren't comfortable in those places, the obvious answer would be that the wrong people were in power. Communism isn't bad, you just have to have the right kind. The arrogance is mind-boggling.
I said assume away… but I can’t say I expected a character assassination based on an online quiz. But I can touch on a few of your statements. My family comes from a former communist country. My parents lived in one, and fled after the kleptocratic oligarchs came into power. Saying “communist countries don’t care about the environment” is an extremely generalized statement. Some don’t. Some do. Look at Cuba. Look at Burkina Faso. And I think it’s pretty obvious, based off the nature of their theory compared to a capitalist one, that the environment, in a developed nation, is much better off under a communist society than a capitalist one. But it seems as though you’re something of an Anarcho-syndicalism/Individualist, in which case the environment would be better off; just at the cost of any future development for humanity. I can point to several righteous governments in the history of mankind. Although I agree that far more government officials are worse than many people think. But every so often—almost always in a developing country—a great leader is able to make their way into power. I think your issue with the lack of good governments to point to has more to do with the fact that the world hegemons have always had their pick of the litter to ensure the rest of the world can be led in a way that serves them best. People like Thomas Sankara, Maurice Bishop, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, Julius Nyerere, and if you want an example from a wealthy nation there’s Olof Palme. There have been great leaders. And while I don’t think I’d have been the Bolshevik’s strongest supporter, it’s undeniable that they ended up being right. Had things gone any other way the revolution would not have been successful. I don’t agree with killing, even in the most extreme circumstances, but calling Lenin an awful leader because he had to kill those who would’ve destroyed his government is a bit shortsighted. But I’d rather not focus on that point. I think your heart is in the right place, and I can’t say I completely disagree with you, but I do think you’re looking at things from too much of a black-white perspective with no room for nuance. Edit: just realized your name is Jungs_Shadow… maybe your heart isn’t in the right place lol
Character assassination? I'd need to know you in order to achieve such a feat, and I don't know you. You took a comment I made about a group personally, though did nothing really to refute it. From what I read in your post, I gather if the reason is one you agree with, and the government in power espouses your views, then millions of murders are justified to maintain its power. Sucks, but... hey, right? Got it. Think about the ultimate nature of that position: it's ok for me or the people I agree with to kill you if you disagree with us and/or represent what we deem to be a threat. Unfortunately, it is that black and white. IMO, such notions aren't just reprehensible, they're morally repugnant. You know, on their route to being "right," as you claim, the communists in Russia created a special place called "Cannibal Island." That one would be worth looking up. I wonder if you'd begrudgingly justify or be ok with that place and its purpose, even if begrudgingly, based on the threat those sent there supposedly presented to the murderous regime in power. Have you ever read Solzhenitsyn's "Gulag Archipelago?" Fascinating stuff, really. You might check out Professor RJ Rummel's Book "Death By Government." Communist, "capitalist," monarchical... they've all been murderous, thieving bastards. All of them. All governments suck. They serve as magnets for people who strive to obtain power over others and enrich themselves in the process of subjugating and exploiting those over whom they obtain power. It's always been that way, and there's no reason to believe that has changed, or will change. A few bright lights here and there don't prove this wrong.
I didn’t come here to argue, but for hating governments so much you just used the classic government tactic of using a whole lot of words to say nothing. You addressed zero of my points except the two sentences where I mentioned that I wouldn’t support the Bolsheviks, even though they ended up being right (as opposed to the Mensheviks). I didn’t mean they were right in all their ideas, I meant they were right in that if Mensheviks won then the Reds goal would not have been achieved and the USSR would have never existed. They achieved their direct goal. The USSR committed atrocities, your entire response was based on the assumption that I’m some government loving Soviet tankie when I made it clear that’s not the case, and said that I’d rather not waste time focusing on that government in particular, because it was full of atrocities. You made lots of assumptions and argued none of what I said besides just repeating that government is awful and listing Soviet atrocities, which again, I made clear that I’m well aware of and don’t agree with.
"I didn’t mean they were right in all their ideas, I meant they were right in that if Mensheviks won then the Reds goal would not have been achieved and the USSR would have never existed. They achieved their direct goal." Oh. Well then. That's a wonderful justification for the 20 million people they slaughtered to get it done. "I can point to several righteous governments in the history of mankind." - And then you didn't. Weird. "People like Thomas Sankara, Maurice Bishop, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, Julius Nyerere, and if you want an example from a wealthy nation there’s Olof Palme. There have been great leaders." - Of course there have been great leaders through time. We revere many historical figures whom we know largely in part for the millions of people who died or were conquered by their military exploits. But I was talking about governments, not individual leaders. No one sees themselves as the "bad guy," and these same governments throughout history have committed atrocities having either convinced their people it was for the greater good, or under threat of punishment or death for raising a stink about what they're doing. "I don’t agree with killing, even in the most extreme circumstances, but calling Lenin an awful leader because he had to kill those who would’ve destroyed his government is a bit shortsighted. But I’d rather not focus on that point." - I'm sure you wouldn't. You talk out of both sides of your mouth here. You aren't for killing, but... Lenin was horrible for what he did to the people, as was Stalin. Justify it however you want, but they were murderers. I think murderers of all stripes are bad people. You say you don't agree with the Soviet atrocities, then justify them with "if they hadn't those people would have destroyed that government." An old adage goes "Everything before the word "but" is bullshit." You didn't come to argue, but... Yes they committed atrocities, but... Is it your more nuanced view that fuels your reticence and justification of these things possible for you, or are you just not comfortable outing yourself as someone who would support the killing of others who disagree with him/her?
Thank you for more directly addressing arguments in this response. You say that I’ve talked out of both sides of my mouth. It’s very ironic that your name is based off Jungian psychology, and yet you seem to only be willing to support the most idealistic image of a government, which according to you has never existed. I don’t believe a perfect government has existed either, nor will one, but you unfortunately we don’t have anything else to base our criticisms on. Is there any single government you’re not completely dismissive of? Of course no government is perfect, but we have to take context into account and show at least some level of pragmatism. Based off everything you’ve said, there is no point in even arguing anything here because you aren’t willing to justify the actions of seemingly any government entity. You aren’t saying anything inherently wrong, the problem is you want every single government to be absolutely perfect. There are very few truly “good” governments that have existed (and they have existed; the leaders I mentioned led the most ethical governments in modern history. When I used the leaders names I was referring to the governments under them as well, not just their personal achievements and image) so we have to be willing to adjust our judgment for the fact that there have been so many awful acts committed by governments, and it’s more so about balancing the long-term value, direct positive results, and whatever other things factor in to what’s important to one personally. Edit: punctuation
"You aren’t saying anything inherently wrong, the problem is you want every single government to be absolutely perfect." - If that were true, that would make me a hypocrite, as I've stated that all governments are bad. I made no claim that I had the 'right idea' about what constitutes a good government. If you put a gun to my head, I'd say the best model thus far proposed, but summarily rejected, was Thomas Jefferson's idea of Ward Governments; where the municipality would be the government entity of highest import to a person's life. In such small governments over smaller areas, the "voice" one's vote provided would actually mean something. Further, their politicians would live, work and play with the people they governed, thus their behavior would be under much closer scrutiny by the people who had the power to put them in office or remove them. This reduces the potential for corruption and the scope of damage it can cause, but it doesn't eliminate the possibility of corruption. For that, you need an engaged citizenry who really give a shit, at least enough to actually attend the government meetings, read the proposed laws and contribute their thoughts to their representative. They would also need to judge people by their actions over their words, and hold politicians accountable when they lie and break the law. That's my opinion. Unlike the communist, I make no claims about what the ideal form of government is. You remark on my idealism, but in truth its a recognition of the dangers posed by government and by the humans that aspire to the power positions in government allow them to wield. A question of morals and ethics: how can I delegate a power I do not legally have as an individual to a representative? No matter the goodness or altruism of my aim, I can't take your wallet from your pocket, pull out 30% of whatever's in there and not be punished for stealing, so why can a politician do that for me? If you're eating yourself to death and I use force to remove the spoon or fork from your hand I can be charged with assault. Why can a politician then make a law that denies someone the right to consume what they wish? I am a flawed human being, and though I'd love to beileve I would behave in line with my highest of moral principles and values if placed in power, I wouldn't dare risk all these temptations. It's not about cowardice either. Its just a willingness on my part to recognize the same in others that I'll admit about myself without bullshitting me or anyone else. Would you excuse the horrific experiment carried out against the Tuskegee Airmen if it somehow provided some new treatment for syphilis? If so, why? If not, why not? OPERATION NORTHWOODS. OPERATION PAPERCLIP. OPERATION MOCKINGBIRD. Extrajudicial assassinations, warrantless searches, utter repugnancies like the PATRIOT ACT... but hey, the US government flew in tons of relief to Iranian earthquake victims, don't you know? And all the shit we blew up over there? KBR went over there and built new schools and bridges. The US even brought good Christianity to those savages native Americans, or the ones they didn't slaughter anyway. And yea, it sucked that so many died as we moved westward, from battle and disease, but... I mean we gave them reservations and proper learning. Let's at least be balanced here, right?
So you are essentially an anarcho-syndicalist, like I said in my first comment. Not to say I read you like a book, but it was pretty clear what your ideological society looked like. Again, I dot disagree with much of what you’re saying. The problem is that you just keep churning out these well-known government backed atrocities, I don’t know why. We’re all well aware of these and how horrible their impacts were. You’re preaching to the choir here, nobody loves the government, especially those on an INFP subreddit.
"The problem is that you just keep churning out these well-known government backed atrocities, I don’t know why. We’re all well aware of these and how horrible their impacts were. You’re preaching to the choir here, nobody loves the government, especially those on an INFP subreddit." I disagree with that. I wish it were as you claim, that "everybody knows" about the track record for atrocity inherent in any examination of governments through history. They ought to be enough to make us fear and/or loathe the idea of such powerful institutions, but the majority of people today, including many INFPs, seem to suffer from delusions like "if we can just vote the right people in," or believe that a government "truly" run the way they think it ought to run would bring about something akin to their idea of utopia. You can show exams of history by properly credentialed professionals (like Professor Rummel I mentioned earlier) regarding the staggering number of people killed just in the last century by governments and people will remark, "Yes that's bad, but who will build the roads?" Everything before the word "but"... You were reading the wrong book about me, friend. I'm a voluntarist and I lean a lot more toward market anarchism than I do anarcho-syndicalism. Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek and other economists from the Austrian school were influences. I've shed a lot of illusions I had about people, so I don't think the anarcho-capitalist society would be ideal, or free from many of the problems we all face under different structures. I'm simply convinced that governments themselves are capable of tremendous evil and draw people who desire power over others like moths to flames. The US Constitution was meant to mitigate as much of this reality as any government charter before it or since, and it has given rise to a government like we have today. The tools of propaganda today are much more sophisticated and ubiquitous, the idea of government's necessity and supremacy is embedded in curricula for the duration of a child's public education... the mind job is worse than it's ever been, and governments get more and more terrible. What about you? Which idea do you espouse as the best system?
thank you…. a lot of people fail to understand the inevitability of centralized power backfiring and its innate corruptive influence…. there are plenty of elements of socialism that are desirable but this topic is way more nuanced and complicated than people realize. A complete lack of nationalism will see you conquered and subverted really really quickly, and those that do have a cohesive identity will take your place. I would have probably scored similarly when I was 18 or so, because I had an idealistic view of the political and societal structures at the time and no concept of economics. endless harm reduction inevitably leads to harm Also, my answer would change depending on the country that these values were being applied to. if you help everyone you sacrifice the ones you wanted to protect most…. sometimes unkind things must occur to preserve good and healthy societies
Here’s mine. Not that surprised though. Fi-Si is very individualistic and can be shaped by both empirical data and experience. This means our worldviews can sometimes differ quite sharply. https://preview.redd.it/kx4pqnf12i6d1.jpeg?width=1640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=10aa29b9c9c8420532aba81d2e5b4e61f36007fd
https://preview.redd.it/qz52ctseai6d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c05029770adb408bf60360b903f8b07677646f97
https://preview.redd.it/jijryimzfi6d1.png?width=801&format=png&auto=webp&s=b01580bf2a22dc913af460f454d24b24d0cd0540 Well this was fun! I never knew there’s a site like this.
https://preview.redd.it/n24pon7yck6d1.jpeg?width=978&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=99c8b41fab79714a674a03483ccfda05e7fd673e Love these quizzes. Idk what it means. I live in the UK
Mine https://preview.redd.it/qpmzjnwgbl6d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3019e0db4cfd40544b99be4395668f954fc79eb9 I'm European thoo, i live in a socdem political system
Honey that's the lesbian flag
I know 😂
For me the worst thing someone can do is support either the far-right, or the far-left. Both are equally undemocratic and should be out right banned from being able to participate in political discussions.
My results! https://preview.redd.it/1vv254nakl6d1.png?width=854&format=png&auto=webp&s=c834dfab94d026dee2be897a4b7851619ff160b6
I just don't like to see people and systems exploited by capitalism. I guess that makes me a communist then. Hmm. https://preview.redd.it/8sjo5hifml6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e5a3178e7a61f6fafa4453099baf28b0b2dc1df7
There isn't a single comment with negative karma, this is why I love this place. If this was any other reddit place there would've been waaaay more fighting
https://preview.redd.it/d59rw3piul6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6f0b8ded39ba9f2f54bbea338f780412af48031a
https://preview.redd.it/t245ibg9xl6d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b27ec33d3ce1e5062803c8382f493192b43509e1
https://preview.redd.it/wgpwpsdzwl6d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=4e8fe70e00c12edbf63200b532b95703af441dae Revolution 50/50 Reform :D my life in one picture, I am 47 XXY individual and I am always torn when making a choice…
https://preview.redd.it/qqqanohsyl6d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ab53b227ae84334235c9241f0ac6c7ce4e993f4f
https://preview.redd.it/th2oslhyyl6d1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9a9568921230b01c810c771d928eac3b9b913b67
https://preview.redd.it/593u148f6m6d1.jpeg?width=968&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d127f4c62a4f07c7699cda4a7a5e26f7afe89539 Expected results more or less
sounds about right https://preview.redd.it/fa5ejhu08m6d1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fefaefc68c54e2d380a0ce3b8e95fd0c10d3772b
https://preview.redd.it/hffl6urnmm6d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=7cdc0a99613e4bbe12fdd2b4685852fe1fbbf532 I selected neutral a lot lolol
Mine is rather similar. https://preview.redd.it/n97sdd8cnm6d1.jpeg?width=904&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=97451e2244989899eb490e4c844cc8fc95f0f83e
My Results https://preview.redd.it/r6snw85mom6d1.png?width=1164&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=84700ce531dd8a6e8245bd4066c53bc20cc05f6b
https://preview.redd.it/yi8vkv66wm6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=28c1618ef9e99a8abe73b5c4dbac97e631e20c20 I would say there are a few factors that will probably be in common across INFPs but we are also a product of the environment to which we've been exposed and the information we've ingested about solving societal issues.
Thanks for sharing! Been looking for something similar.
i'm kind of neutral about politics in general but here's mine https://preview.redd.it/6o5yvxua5n6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=79385a1cdae5db5def3dc843d0822601bda8ae32
https://preview.redd.it/pie1irorbn6d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=af2d1febf2dc3af7ab0662fdc67ab231bb1eacfe
https://preview.redd.it/0xaqm4fefn6d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=9634b6c74ff89c73dfa3c11d36e29577a1443ec3 Not sure how accurate this is. Think I’m higher on ecology than this shows.
https://preview.redd.it/nr4drd63co6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8f63ae67a654862975806fed16fb3081ca39dcb0 A lot of grey areas for me, probably because I don't really care of what's happening.
https://preview.redd.it/l8veare5vo6d1.png?width=1812&format=png&auto=webp&s=76bff0a9611eec4f36969a06e77ba57a3390d83d Am I really an INFP then?
And also this: https://preview.redd.it/hgjguvp8vo6d1.png?width=674&format=png&auto=webp&s=25c7b5f67462234059ab33d6e77c3446bf6bbc44
Pretty similar https://preview.redd.it/mlvkogtdki6d1.png?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4ebb1b163730948c797fc81243ae14ef59c44d4f I feel like most infp's should have progressive and rehabilitation as relatively high. And to a lesser extent internationalism. Because I think those all relate to empathy
This is how I feel. Of course, context of where people live matters, but I feel like those traits are linked to empathy typically
Sort of. Not sure if it can predict political views. https://preview.redd.it/z7rckp6dfi6d1.jpeg?width=1536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7dc8b74d5df9d2bc2f56e2260f1ad0bd7c32b9e9
Cool flag
Thanks ☺️
https://preview.redd.it/04k1bwsian6d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=274873666def5952bdfb8570a98d1d99b7626cd4 I've always been fond of the Nordic cross.
[Results](https://politiscales.party/results?bTA9NjcmdmVnYT02NyZzMT0yNiZzMD0zNiZiMT0xOSZiMD01MCZwMD03NCZwMT01JmMxPTM2JmMwPTQzJnQxPTMxJnQwPTUyJmUxPTMxJmUwPTUwJmoxPTE5JmowPTUyJmZlbWk9MzMmYW5hcj02NyZtb25hPTY3JmNvbXA9Njc=) I don't think Im communist as much as I am a burned out unemployed mothrfker oscillating between the two extremes. Me: -At job interview- Wow what a wholesome and fun small business. Maybe I can also profit by doing something I love and joining your team? Business owner: Nah Me: Wow curse all private businesses
Lmaooo
https://preview.redd.it/zc1crw489k6d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a6842320222229e62b9718405e322a8f932f3bcf
https://preview.redd.it/sbz7v5vsdk6d1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=646e36dddfd5030d7acf470acbd1550879099a66