>>801861Externally apparent personality is quite easy to manage. For example, I used to be the average /leftypol/ anti-idpol moron and now I'm some kind of pro-Woke type once I looked at some charts and realised it's shibboleths and fandom all the way down. All it takes is a small amount of tact for this to go from being an insufferable contrarian little man to a very tolerable progressive, despite clearly still holding a lot of views that would rightly have me executed if I said them in the wrong context.
I actually used to be much worse than I describe. I know personality is malleable because I have manipulated my own.I take no view on what people are attracted to (social desirability bias is such that they'll always lie) but judging people by personality is essential. 15 minutes with any opinion survey will tell you that politics today mostly functions as a personality test.
are you a pseudointellectual elitist virtue signaller, or an actually mentally retarded vice-signaller? are you high openness, mid-low conscientiousness, high agreeableness, or are you low openness, mid-high conscientiousness, and low agreeableness?
>>801868Insofar as that's genetic, people with that burden should not reproduce. Insofar as it isn't, society should be structured in a way that alleviates this.
>>801871Autism has a huge spread within it and is a useful illustrative case: Autism should theoretically kneecap your openness and agreeableness while hiking your conscientiousness (which is in practice mostly "rule following") but extremely online autists are
at worst split down the middle between woke transsexuals and 4chan nazis. there is nothing anti-human in loving the former and hating the latter! the latter are themselves anti-human!!
"Judging people for not conforming to societal norms is vaugeposting." it is one thing to judge people for not conforming to a societal norms in a high-openness way (e.g. LGBTQetc) and another to judge them for not conforming in a low-openness way (e.g. open racism).
>>801880Given that you're posting here your "real" personality in big-5 terms is quite possibly tolerable even if you suffer from some kind of emotional dysregulation. Here's a free trick: whenever you read some woke nonsense, do not take the words literally. Ask yourself instead what they're actually trying to say. A lot of the time they're just vent posting about one specific person or signalling generic values!
(e.g saying I post about how Mao was right to kill sparrows. Odds are, I am not saying anything about Mao or Sparrows, I am saying "I am a Maoist and I am willing to say something contrary to widely held opinion to show how much of a true Maoist I am", so an argument that killing sparrows is wrong, or bad policy, will flop because all you're actually doing is giving me another chance to affirm how true a Maoist I am, to defend the honour of the great helmsman like this. Almost all politics are like this, even "centrists", who are mostly performing a vibe. That's why they want to compromise with the right even as it gets more extreme: just another chance to show how moderate
I am!)
However difficult it is to manage the problem in real life, behind a screen where you can hold off replying for 5 minutes you can be whoever you want to be, whoever others want you to be, a synthesis of the two or the opposite of both…
>>801903Big-5 is so reliable in predicting political alignment (particularly if you disaggregate neuroticism into its component parts) that it is hard to hold this view in the face of it. The good news is: extraversion is a total wash, it predicts nothing.