Is it inevitable that the parties in a 2-party system be split along the personality divide we see now (high openness + low conscientiousness vs. low openness + high conscientiousness), or do the party platforms basically determine how the US divvies itself up psychosocially?
-
Show this thread
-
Related: do we think less of Trait X because The Other Team has it, or do we think less of The Other Team because they have Trait X?
5 replies 0 retweets 29 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @webdevMason
I think less of The Other Team mostly because 99% of them fail to offer an alternative vision that I, being nonbinary femme, can survive within. (the other 1% are, like, neoreactionary femboys) So I rarely get to the point of abstracting that out to traits.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @KivrinAiun @webdevMason
Being part of the team with high Openness, on a political level, is a pact that I'm compelled to make, because the alternatives are either powerless or untenable. Hence, technically (2). But "low Openness, but includes me" feels way murkier, especially if they're Agreeable.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
This makes sense to me... I think most people (myself definitely included) strongly desire to be actively approved of, not just warmly tolerated, but also don't want to be the sort of person who compels/coerces others into approving of them. It generates some cognitive dissonance
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.