Topic: Personality Types

[Florestan]

I chose Socialist for every question because every one sounded socialist/communist to me.

Collectivism Test
result icon
You tried to distinguish socialism from Nazism and fascism and got it right 40% of the time.
You were able to correctly identify:

0% of Fascist statements.
0% of Nazi statements.
100% of Socialist statements.

Hah! 

Well, Mussolini started out as a Socialist activist and journalist, and Hitler's party was called the National-Socialist Party of the German Workers. 

[drogulus]

I do think and do believe that inveterate rapists and paedophiles should be punished severely, much  much much more severely than pickpockets  or corrupt politicians. They are abnormal people who should be prevented by all necessary means to do the abnormal things they bask in.

     I was thinking more along the lines of introverts or gold bugs, or artists, perhaps.

Wait a minute! Are you saying, implying and stating that a Fascist should be accorded the same protection of the law as everyone else, no more and no less? If you do, then you are far more tolerant than me --- I would have all Fascists, Nazis and Communists hanged on the spot, right now, right there!

     They are, and since I don't see how a society could remain free otherwise, they should have the protection of the law. However, I'm intolerant personally more than I am philosophically. To gold bugs I say......Get Thee Hence!

     

grouped under collectivism

      .....collected under groupism.....

[Florestan]

    I  don't see how a society could remain free otherwise, they should have the protection of the law.

Imagine Lenin was hanged immediately after setting foot on Russian soil and began propagandizing for Communism. Or HItler was hanged immediately after the Beer Hall Putsch.  Had not the world been a better place?

Freedom must be protected at any cost, including curtailing the freedom of all those who would curtail the freedom of anybody else. I say hang here and now all Communists, Fascists and Nazis!

[71 dB]

I take them all just for fun, and so should you.

I do. 

These test make one-dimensional questions when the answers are often multidimensional (e.g. I support X if also Y is done, but if Y is not done I don't support X either, because it only makes sense with Y). The lack of multidimensional questions are made up having many one-dimensional questions and a simplistic algorithm tries to figure out how the person would have answered to fewer multi-dimensional questions. 

Democratic Socialism - Social Democracy - Capitalism
What is the main difference, briefly, between these three?
So the USA is Capitalism and you are for Social Democracy? I thought Bernie was for Democratic Socialism.

Societies and economy are so complex systems, that the differences are hard to explain.

In democratic socialism all or most means of production are owned by the people as a collective and how these means of production are run is decided democratically. This is the furthest right version of socialism and differs from socialism by having democratic process instead of the state telling what to do.

Social Democracy is the furthest left version of capitalism. It's build on capitalism, but also contains strong wellfare programs and many things are run by the state instead of private sector or together with private sector with heavy regulation (e.g. healthcare).

In Capitalism it is thought that poverty is a failure of the individual rather than the society and wellfare programs are kept minimal as an insentive to try harder and succeed in life. Those who do succeed can gain extreme wealth.

Hopefully this clarifies there terms a little bit for you, but be aware that these terms aren't defined that well and people may disagree about details, but this is more or less how I define them.

The US is not pure idealistic capitalism. It's crony capitalism. If the US was capitalistic, Exxon Mobile would not get $4 billion of subscidies each year just because it has bought the politicians to make it so. Legal bribery in the US makes the country crony capitalism aka corporate socialism.

Bernie Sanders calls himself a Democratic Socialist, but he has the terminology wrong. His political agenda is to advocate Social Democracy, the system used in countries like Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland which has empirically been very successful.

[Florestan]

In democratic socialism all or most means of production are owned by the people as a collective and how these means of production are run is decided democratically.

There has not been, there is not, and there will not be anything even remotely ressembling democratic socialism.

The people as a collective is a fiction.

Democracy is a fiction.

[drogulus]

Freedom must be protected at any cost, including curtailing the freedom of all those who would curtail the freedom of anybody else. I say hang here and now all Communists, Fascists and Nazis!

      I'd rather not kill it to save it.

[drogulus]

There has not been, there is not, and there will not be anything even remotely ressembling democratic socialism.

The people as a collective is a fiction.

Democracy is a fiction.

     I call them enabling assumptions. We get the kind of freedom we have because we are predisposed to act on them.

[greg]

I do. 

These test make one-dimensional questions when the answers are often multidimensional (e.g. I support X if also Y is done, but if Y is not done I don't support X either, because it only makes sense with Y). The lack of multidimensional questions are made up having many one-dimensional questions and a simplistic algorithm tries to figure out how the person would have answered to fewer multi-dimensional questions. 

Societies and economy are so complex systems, that the differences are hard to explain.

In democratic socialism all or most means of production are owned by the people as a collective and how these means of production are run is decided democratically. This is the furthest right version of socialism and differs from socialism by having democratic process instead of the state telling what to do.

Social Democracy is the furthest left version of capitalism. It's build on capitalism, but also contains strong wellfare programs and many things are run by the state instead of private sector or together with private sector with heavy regulation (e.g. healthcare).

In Capitalism it is thought that poverty is a failure of the individual rather than the society and wellfare programs are kept minimal as an insentive to try harder and succeed in life. Those who do succeed can gain extreme wealth.

Hopefully this clarifies there terms a little bit for you, but be aware that these terms aren't defined that well and people may disagree about details, but this is more or less how I define them.

The US is not pure idealistic capitalism. It's crony capitalism. If the US was capitalistic, Exxon Mobile would not get $4 billion of subscidies each year just because it has bought the politicians to make it so. Legal bribery in the US makes the country crony capitalism aka corporate socialism.

Bernie Sanders calls himself a Democratic Socialist, but he has the terminology wrong. His political agenda is to advocate Social Democracy, the system used in countries like Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland which has empirically been very successful.

Ok cool, I think I get it now, thanks for the explanation.

[71 dB]

There has not been, there is not, and there will not be anything even remotely ressembling democratic socialism.

Not perhaps democratic socialist countries, but there has been politicians and political parties in many countries advocating these ideas. For example Mikhail Gorbachev wanted to move the Soviet Union towards democratic socialism.

The people as a collective is a fiction.

You might have a differing opinion when a Romanian athlete wins Olympic gold. 

Democracy is a fiction.

Perhaps people in Romania feel that way, but there's plenty of countries including my country Finland which are pretty democratic.

[71 dB]

Ok cool, I think I get it now, thanks for the explanation.

You're welcome. 

[greg]

Discovered two new systems the last two days- one is a bit complex and hard to understand, the other is pretty simple (it involves motivation styles and is from India). Not sure I'll ever discuss them, but they will be fun to dig in to.

Just a thought, but I often go to personality-database.com and do a search for some character (often fictional ones) and it seems that lately I've been very accurate lately on my guesses for their enneagram type (on the page it will give a bunch of votes from other people).

So it means that I'm understanding the enneagram system more and also I'm seeing the same thing that other people are seeing as the predominant traits of that character. It is statistically unlikely I would have the same guesses as others so often if the (main idea of) the system was a bunch of nonsense.

[Rosalba]

The Artist, mainly - but with bits and pieces from the duty-fulfiller and the nurturer.
I might have had the originality spoken of but was crushed into timidity by a fierce and tyrannical father.

[greg]

Here's one that people might find fun:

Murderous Villain Test
https://www.idrlabs.com/villain/test.php


I don't know if I agree with the results and am also not so familiar with this evil villain, so for this test is a dud.  But could be a fun test for others.

Albert Speer
Albert Speer
Minister of Armaments in Nazi Germany
"One seldom recognizes the devil when he is putting his hand on your shoulder."

Personality Match

Like Albert Speer, you are intellectually minded. You see yourself as an observer of events rather than as a partaker in them - as someone who analyzes rather than influences, and thinks rather than does. However, you should remember that your detached analytical stance does not make you an innocent bystander in life and that all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing. Passivity is also a choice that affects others.

Words of Warning

Points to consider for people with your personality - have you ever:

Shrugged your shoulders and given up trying to apply your own sense of what you knew was right, simply because other people's outlooks seemed so far from yours?
Come across as insensitive and absent-minded because you were so lost in your own inner analyses that you did not want to extend your attention to anything else?
Put your considerable analytical skills to work at solving problems that it would perhaps not be entirely ethical to solve, thinking only of the technical side of the situation, and not the moral one?
Diminished your own productivity by ceaselessly hunting down minor imperfections and mistakes in your own work, and constantly undoing the progress that you had made?
Knowingly wasted your talents because you "did not see the point" of all the striving and self-assertion that usually goes along with accomplishment and achievement?