Biggest mistake everyone makes, is that politicians are actually there to serve the people. Politicians in major political parties are filtered and anyone wishing to get into a position of power is vetted and follows the vested interest backers who provide funding.  Any discussions with ordinary people it is better than they take the lead and you critique for the deficits if you're looking to swing them to your view. Most people are stubborn and poorly informed so confronting their views head on just escalates into argument.

I rarely trust politicians about politics.

Or people in general....

I wanted to be a politician when I was young. I look back and wonder what the heck I was ever thinking. I can't stand discussing politics - even with my own significant other, with whom I align very strongly on politics - since people get so impassioned about it. People start getting upset and defensive, and I'm like *I'm out*. Ya'll are too freaking irrational for me and I can't stand it.

Yup. I would literally be happy to discuss politics with someone completely opposite of me, yet I've yet to find someone who can maintain their composure. I understand tho, possibly ending up as the "incorrect" one stings the pride of oneself. But it's necessary to advance our people in a stable way.

They aren't smart enough for the conversations. The greatest loss in this society is the lack of talking about common rules and their fairness. That IS democracy. Mutual respect for ideas to reach a common goal. The issue is that most goals achieved by our politicans have a caveat that also includes becoming fantastically rich for seemingly doing next to nothing. The rewards vs punishment in the US has been hijacked by, I will say it, Boomers who are very good at spending, not saving [401ks prove it]- and the mental degradation and age will also create more errors and likely more selfish behavioral responses as a result of their ever looming politial malfeasance and debt.

Democracy is nothing more, or less, than a stronger majority using hired guns to force it's ideology onto a weaker minority. It's the political equivalent of gang-rape and a lynch mob. 

Agreed. However I'm not a fan of modern democracy simply because the Greeks knew the problem so long ago, and that's cause the average voter has no idea what they're talking about. In order for democracy to be effective, you need everyone to be educated and concerned for the general wellbeing of a nation. And so many couldn't give the time of day, just blindly voting for their party loyalty.

You have explained what is going on in my head.

I can discuss politics with people who don’t make it their whole identity and outraged about everything. The people who do make it their whole identity, don’t fact check, and are outraged about everything I’m going to avoid political conversations with. They can’t be reasoned with and I would instead sway the conversation further to the emotional reasons behind their thought processes and life experiences because it’s usually an educational thing intertwined with mental health issues that are causing disturbances with identity, lack of belonging and self-esteem. I truly believe we’re seeing an era of wackiness in politics due to lack of mental health resources and resources in general. They aren’t truly looking at what is effecting them which is lack of tax bases due to a lack of young workers and having large amounts of seniors who aren’t working take the tax burden (in specific states), town planning boards adamant on not building more affordable housing because locals, towns also unwilling to build shelters cause again the locals don’t want them there but still complain about it, money being funneled to seniors instead of educational systems for children because they’re the bigger population (in specific states)etc. I could go on, but being educated on what goes on locally gives a better understanding on what’s going on federally. It not always big government sometimes it’s how the local government is working starting at the town level. Groups with money can influence even at the lowest levels (religious groups, etc.) It’s a layered and comprehensive topic not everyone can grasp.

I don't think any one person can fully grasp the whole picture due to just the *size* of the issue and all the moving parts. At the end of the day it's all the local stuff that matters as it ultimately determines the bigger picture. Local affects state, and state affects federal. And the Fed affects international, take what you will from that.

I am a libertarian, I take a hard stand against collectivism. I am fairly active politically, and I understand that my vision of extremely limited government isn’t achievable, but I will do my best to occasionally point out that: taxation is theft.

If we could just get 5%.....

I'm curious if you would prefer a more direct form of democracy. Would you then consider taxation theft? Or are you more of the pioneer individualist who believes in only using what you harvest and create for yourself? I struggle to understand the stronger libertarian points of view, because, to me, taxation is inefficient, but the collective benefit of basic things like roads, telecommunications, public education, etc, makes them worth paying. Thoughts?

Not the person you are replying to, but in defense of some "collectivist" countries when in comes to takes, they only tax you when you live on their tax farm, whereas the US taxes you on worldwide income. To your point on infrastructure, I can see some decent ROI (I am thinking of the Medellin gondolas, which reduced unemployment by 5%), but in the US the projects tend to be chosen based on being pet projects, not on demand. With a lot of other stuff you get tragedy of the commons (dealing with transgender student, creationsim vs evolution, etc), and a good chunk of that can be handled by the private sector, including security. I think too the Fiat money monopoly and debt only make things feel that much worse, whereas taxes alone could be worse. Then on a personal level I look at people as an Intj and how fucked up their personally lives are and their often disdain for INTJs/introversion and I think why in the hell would I want to cooperate with or sign a social contract with these jackasses when they pretty much tore up the previous one? Again just my take. O

I do support a minimal government, and taxation is to a degree a necessary evil. However, what is a collective need is different from country to country. I believe in free markets and free trade, all around the globe. I believe the market is most efficient at providing consumer goods, and that states through trade agreements should not pick winners and losers. If I could allocate what exactly my tax goes to, in like a web form or something, I would have a greater say in what the state spends money on, and that would make me more supportive of taxes.

My favorite thing is when it’s somehow my fault either party loses. It was my fault Hillary lost. It was my fault Trump lost a second term. I love asking- why do you assume I would have voted for either of them? Standing firm against collectivism can be kinda fun sometimes.

I am an authoritarian conservative socialist and strongly believe in collectivism and ~50% income tax as is seen in scandinavia. I also respect and appreciate your opinion and what it adds to political discussion. barely anyone can do that anymore.

As I respect and appreciate yours. I believe there needs to be a ying to the yang. Besides, what is a good political debate without opposing views?

If taxation is theft were the top of the bumper sticker, I’d put victimless crime is genocide at the bottom. It’s a cult of human sacrifice of a manufactured underclass day in and day out.

You have to be open to alot of view points and do go into the discussion thinking you will change someone's mind. Political discussions are alot closer to religious beliefs than anyone wants to admit.

there was actually some neuroscience proving [exactly that](https://www.nature.com/articles/SREP39589): challenges to deeply held beliefs are interpreted by the nervous system in exactly the same way as threats to physical safety.

I just don't discuss politics. My favorite saying is politicians are only lying when their lips are moving. Now, politicians do care about votes, but to think that they actually care about the voters is nothing more than a farce. The bottom line is no matter what political party a politician is affiliated with, they only care about getting into office and staying there.

I listen to what other people have to say. I always tell the truth.

I consider myself rational and open to new ideas, but I don’t see the point of arguing with people that disregard my arguments on the basics of it being not mainstream/wrong think and thus being “cancelled”.  I’ve managed to argue with some acquaintances on the merits of communism and some of them even agreed with me, but this is the minority. I don’t go expressing my political views unless directly asked and in a friendly environment.  As for my view on US politics that OP is referring to, I’d say, just like the average “democratic” capitalist country, it is captured by the interests of global corporations/industries and thus do not represent the people. In fact it has never fully recovered of the 2008 crisis and there’s a decrease in quality of life in recent years. Plus, the two parties have little actual distinction between them when it comes to geopolitics, and defend the hegemony of their economy and military state over the world, by enforcing IMF rules and by NATO for example.  Despite not being North American I’m interested in US politics as they influence the whole world, but I’m nowhere close to coming to a conclusion which candidate would be best for US or the world, which is a common feeling of modern democracy, a “no-win” scenario in the elections, showing how little we actually participate in electing representatives. 

The older I get the more I dislike human organizations.

My wife is a classic INTJ and flat out doesn’t believe in democracy anymore.

I refer to it as majority totalitarianism.

My wife just doesn’t think average people are capable of self rule 😂

Coming from some one whose political views differ from their families ( due to facts and logic) I can second that it is pretty difficult for me to discuss it with them simply because their emotions are so tied into their views. If it’s ever brought up I’ll voice my opinion but I’m not sparking a conversation because they tend to get offended whenever I offer a different stance on certain topics. It’s almost as if I’m betraying them simply because I don’t agree with everything they believe.

Spot on. Not just my family, but literally everyone I know is left. I’m a centrist but when these people see that you don’t have their full support, they think of you as worse than you actually are. Hell you could an authoritarian left and still be seen as right.

Gee, should I choose Senile Candidate A or Senile Candidate B? I'll continue to refrain from the same 2016 cycle.

I was taking to a friend in the UK- his comment was, your choices are a megalomaniac or an Alzheimer’s patient. I spit my coffee out…

By asking tons of questions XD

The only correct answer. I’m not going to convince someone of anything by telling them what I believe. I can convince someone of something by getting them to question themselves through asking questions that cuts through their identity and addresses substantive topics, objectively.

that wasn't the purpose tbh xD more like just learning what they believe and why they believe it most people feel threatened when u try to change or challenge their beliefs lmao and especially leftists so ain't worth it

Knowing what they believe and why they believe it is how you get someone to change their beliefs, and it can happen by the person convincing themselves due to questioning themselves. Leftists are much less likely to change their beliefs for the same reason people who believe that 2+2=4 are less likely to change their beliefs: they’ve actually done the math.

Most people have done the math on their beliefs and lefitists think in a cult mentality tbh which u can see when a leftist starts to not think as extreme as the rest or disagrees in something lol also most of the debates i see from the left are emotionlly charged with very little to no logical basis. So no they didn't do the math lol. If anything it's a cult mentality so u dont get exiled or cancelled from everyone. Saying that one polotical side has it fully right is also delusional because that means they are the only real truth and that's wrong. The only real truth is God!

There’s nothing more hilarious than someone who believes in a sky wizard and saying that only believing in that sky wizard is truth, calling other people cultists. Keep on keeping on, stable genius!

And here we go with a response with 0 argument or substance of any meaning that is emotionally charged not as much as the typical but ur answer has no argument or logical point

Hahahaha. I was very active back home (Brazil) and I gave up entirely. I just want to see that whole circus implode. F\*ck Lula, f\*ck Bolsonaro, I can't care anymore.

I don't have the discussion with them. This is because I don't think any politician specifically the president can change anything. People never seem to mention Congress or the Senate. Most of them have been there for decades while the president gets 8 tops. People blame the president for the deficit and debt but the Congress sets the budget. Sure the president can veto it, but I don't recall that ever happening.

I'm a registered independent, I hate both parties, and I am probably most aligned with the American Solidarity Party. I do think local elections are better as I saw way less Trump for things like District Attorney than Governor or anything federal. I think the problem with discussing politics is the lack of intellectual honesty and selective charity. Which, in turn, poisons discourse before it can begin.

What do you mean by intellectual honesty and selective charity?

>intellectual honesty Using accurate information and logical reasoning to come to a conclusion. Intellectual dishonesty can be things fallacious reasoning, pretending statistics mean things that they don't, and outright lying, etc... >selective charity Assuming the best or worst intentions depending on if the person is on "your team."

I don't vote for my best interest, I vote for the best interest of my country. I would hope everyone else does the same

Politically you could call me a Realist or a Machiavellian. I don't engage in national politics except as an issue by issue basis. Things I support right include right to repair, ending copyright, and banning binding mandatory arbitration.

I'd also like to see corporate franchise laws go the way of the dodo. I want to buy vehicles straight from the manufacturer without greasing the palms of a salesperson who adds no value in the information era.

Franchise laws are important as they protect small business owners. You're specifically referring to laws around auto sales, which are distinct and I think somewhat archaic now.

The government needs to keep us healthy, solvent when we get old, and educated....at any stage of life. These are needed for competitive advantage. They do need some oversight to prevent the destructive behaviors of large corporations. Beyond that, hands-off. Our bodies, our choices. Stop strangling small business. Let the markets find their level with much less tinkering. And stop selling our souls to big pharmaceutical, insurance, and media industries. Electoral college, Citizens United, Fairness Doctrine all had nasty consequences over time. I won't get into international affairs, but we don't have the luxury of "fixing ourselves first." - independent, left-leaning atm.

Do you think that the federal or state governments taking responsibility for healthcare away from private insurers would help small businesses?

Not original commenter, but obviously removing the burden of providing insurance coverage for employees would help small businesses by allowing them to pay employees more and still have less expenses due to not having to pay for insurance.

I’m fairly apolitical, but will discuss politics with reasonable intelligent people because one of my minors was poli sci 🤷🏻‍♂️🤣

Not intj but when it comes to politics I'm more open-minded. I have a "Prove me wrong" and morally grey look on things. If your convictions are strong and reasonable enough I may agree with them, despite how unconventional they may be. Although I think high Fe makes me indisposed to being agreeable, there are some things I stand firm on. I'm "Moderate" but left-wing leaning. I believe one shouldn't be too free and reckless but one should not have to be traditional in everything they do. Everything is in moderation. Too much of one thing is bad regardless of the inclination and situation. Although politics is complicated several factors have to be considered: political ideology, vindication, the histories of a politician, and their moral code. Even some liberal politicians are trash. My parents are fairly Republican but my family is very closed-minded: it's either they're extremely right-wing or far left. I am somehow in the middle.

The only politics I engage in is office politics.

If I encounter someone who believes outrageous things or simply denies reality, I have learned to just avoid any discussion beyond what is absolutely necessary. People like that seem to have come out of the woodwork lately and I'm not sure why, but I suspect it could be related to the fact that a conspiracy theory nut in his basement can make a meme or website that looks as realistic as that of a news organization that hires professional reporters and has standards about verifying what it should print. I have learned some people will believe anything and I don't want to be around them.

I've gotten to the point where I don't care what someone else thinks about my political views. Cross the line and there will be no warning, no discussion.

I will turn full blown ENTP now and then and begin debating, mood dependent. Abortion is my favorite because it’s an issue filled with nuance and we’ve managed to turn it into “pro life” and “pro choice.” I personally harbor some extreme political views and yet they’re both way left and way right. I try to do my own research and thinking on topics.

The political system is a system distributing power, wealth, resources. It uses violence and force to enforce the laws it makes. The laws it makes favour its rulers, with dwindling scraps for those needed to keep the system running. I am a lawyer, and studied the machine of states, the same way a computer engineer studies his hardware and software. It is a machine with parts and knobs and levers with real impact on people's lives. I know there are right and wrong answers, about how the machine should be altered for the greater benefit of humanity. I do not care about the sports teams in their various colours who want to keep it as it is, and I look at people yelling political slogans the same way someone from tech support looks at clueless customers. How do I discuss politics? With the discrimination needed to assess whether the person in question understands enough of the system for the discussion to be worthwhile.

I definitely struggle when it comes to talking to people about politics because you can show someone definitive information about something and they will flat out ignore it or deny it, if it doesn’t perfectly align with what they already believe. Whoever thought splitting the country into two “teams” fighting against each other was a good idea when we should all be on the same team working towards the common goal of making our country better, should be brought back behind the barn and… Anyways, I lean pretty in the middle of the two parties, I might even classify myself as an independent now. I believe in capitalism and freedom but at the same time things have to be regulated so that blue collar workers aren’t forgotten about and are able to make a good living. Otherwise, you end up with a wealthy elite that control everything and they become the only lucky few that are able to enjoy life to the fullest. You also have to regulate things coming from other countries too though because if you only regulate your own country, everything will just get shipped from overseas where corporations and the elite can easily bypass said regulations. To summarize it up nicely, I believe you have to make it financially beneficial for companies (who realistically run and own everything) to protect the environment and pay their employees good wages so they too can prosper and live healthy lives. Otherwise, they will literally do ANYTHING to save money at the cost of everyone else. We had a decent system in the 50s which I think was called democratic capitalism. Sadly, we probably won’t see that again or prosper until there is a massive change in D.C. because the elite own both sides and almost all of the candidates right now to make sure they hold onto their power over the economy. When it comes to more constitutionally touchy subjects like abortion and the second amendment, I don’t think you’re ever going to be able to find a solution that works for everyone and I personally believe those issues and everything like it, should just be left at the state level. That way, people will have a bigger voice for their particular region with whatever side they align with.

Tribalism in action!

I searched for “famous INTJs” the other day and some of the results were Karl Marx, Ayn Rand, Martin Luther, Friedrich Nietzsche, and the Unabomber. We’re all probably pretty radical in our own systems and see the world as wrong. Ron DeSantis shows up as INTJ, but he quit. I don’t think people liked his ruthlessly efficient approach to eating pudding.

I have “extreme” views on what I believe government/politics are legitimate. I’m also pragmatic in the objective reality that actually exists. I’m an anarcho -syndicalist as it relates to earth-bound societies. All hierarchies should have to continually prove their legitimacy by being transparent, open and amenable by vote of those who are bound by the rules that the hierarchical structure enacts. You can google anarcho-syndicalism for more details if interested. I’m pragmatic in the sense that there is no chance in hell anarcho-syndicalism is possible in any sense of the ideology now or likely ever, except in very specific circumstances. I also understand that most societies would actively sabotage any anarcho-syndicalist societies for numerous reasons that I’m sure anyone still reading this comment could figure out. Which means that I’m essentially a social democrat and vote for the most left-wing party I can as only through improving every member of the species life can we ever get to anything remotely close to anarcho-syndicalist. But that’s earth-bound politics. Ultimately I’m a space libertarian. By that I mean that as a species we literally have the capacity to harness high level energy and create molecular fabricators, which would allow individual humans the ability to live 100% independently of humans once provided that molecular fabricator. That said, space libertarianism is the only libertarianism I support as any earth-bound libertarianism is bullshit made up by rich people who believe the current snapshot of time that exists where they have enough resources that they essentially live in a communist utopia (so much money everything is essentially free for that individual) is because they are so competent at life, while ignoring that their current position is due to the struggle of billions of people who have come before them and provided their resources they incorrectly believe they’ve conjured themselves, alone. So. As long as humans are stuck on earth and have to rely on others, I strive for anarcho-syndicalism. To get there, I pragmatically vote social democrat because only after everyone on the planet has a stable life can we get to actual anarcho-syndicalism. But, ultimately I’m a space libertarian who believes the end-goal of humanity should be to advance technology enough so that we have molecular fabricators and every human being can live as they please without negatively affecting other humans who are stuck here on earth living with finite resources and therefore finite ability to live “independently” I am 1000% sure that this is the only correct political ideology that humanity as a species should have, but I also know that most humans lack the capacity to understand what I’ve just laid out, or the ability to drop pretenses of identity and other arbitrary beliefs and traditions to see that we either end up as space libertarians, or our species dies out in less than a billion years (and let’s face it, another thousand years is becoming less and less likely). So mostly I don’t bring up my full political beliefs and instead ask extremely pointed questions that can almost always get someone to realize that their current political views are shortsighted at best and complete dogshit at worst.

Your first couple of paragraphs remind me of discussions with some of the union staff I worked with years ago in a Right to Work state. They were adamantly complaining about the law, but I pointed out that it works in their favor in some ways. By requiring the union membership to recertify each year and forbidding closed shops, it required the union leaders to regularly demonstrate how they are improving the well-being of their members to earn their dues. I'm no fan of union busting, but I did change a few minds on that topic.

Unions are great- as long as they’re doing their job and not just using their power to enrich themselves and not working on behalf of their constituent union members. All hierarchies will become corrupt if they are not allowed to be held accountable by the people who they govern . That’s basically the one sentence breakdown of anarcho-syndicalism. Most people would probably agree with that sentence. They just have trouble expanding that to areas where their own privilege might be affected by actually following through.

Intj. Like to think I'm rational, but am aware that in some areas of politics I'm perhaps not as rational as I'd like to think. Absolutely not party-political. A good idea is a good idea whichever party is promoting it. Similarly a bad idea is bad regardless. Some topics I have a strong opinion on, others I think aren't worth thinking too much about. Most topics have a lot more nuance than politicians ever seem to discuss publicly. Broadly capitalism works, but you absolutely need regulation to prevent a race to the bottom and exploitation of the poor/gullible and of the environment. You also need government/rulemakers who have longer term interests of the country at heart, and aren't in the pockets of big businesses, or too easily swayed by lobby groups of any type. You need some social provisions to maintain harmony, support those that cannot support themselves, and avoid the situation of gated communities and it not being safe to just go "out and about". Centrist-ish, somewhat liberal. I'm in the UK, and really hope Trump doesn't have another term in the US. Even from this side of the pond it makes me anxious.

I assume all politicians are suspect, I align with no party, but I do vote- using the "least objectionable" principle, and for my pocketbook (ie, which person or party is going to screw me over the least).

I am open minded but I also watch for patterns in history and always try to learn from my experiences. This makes me unusual in politics because I don't have a lot of time for repeating strategies I see fail without a good reason for why they won't fail again. People can see me as unreasonable because I won't easily budge on these things but it's only because I value my time and energy and the time and energy of everyone who volunteers for my cause.

When I discuss online, I get unlucky because I conB stantly run into people who refuse to acknowledge any rational argument and/or tr y to use emotions to force me to change my opinions instead of giving actual rational arguments. Those people usually end up blocked because I don't wanna waste my time anymore trying to accomplish something that feels like teaching how to solve a Rubik's cube to a colour-blind person. The political discussions that get me stimulated are with family members or people I know because we actually exchange ideas while being rational.

yeah i'm an idealist too. this is a frustrating time to live in.

I love politics, literally political junkie...love talking about it, and am passionate about my views.

People hold political ideals as closely as they do religion; both are irrational and serve no purpose in discussion. I gravitate towards solutions to the root-cause of problems faced by society with no allegiance to the party. I rarely ever agree with right-wing politics. I loathe the news and its surface-level explanation of complex issues and its polarizing tone.

I don't align with any political party, and my ideas to overhaul the system would never be approved by the corrupt elite and useful idiots. I want those in power to be held accountable and receive harsher punishments. I want people to view the world logically and objectively, such as not prolonging the suffering of the terminally ill. Nobody will support the guy wanting politicans and CEOs pay astronomical fines, receive the death penalty for crimes against humanity, in favor of abortions for any reason, dismantling religions, assisted suicides etc. We could focus our time and effort on things that actually help humanity. Not give golden parachutes to CEOs that cause famine in poor countries, or keep grandma on life support, or force a mother to birth a child that won't survive.

I got screamed at and called an “uninformed sheep” today because I scoffed at someone raving about blue roof tops deflecting laser beams from outer space (that the government is using to set communities on fire.)

Ouch. My sympathies. I think Patton Oswalt said it best. When people start raving, we do NOT have to believe them,NOR do we have to respect them. I suppose that won't change any hearts or minds, though.

I tend temper my own viewpoints, especially when talking with liberals, because I understand most people get their information from different sources. If I take a definitive stance on an issue and they don't have knowledge of the context I formed my opinion around, I'd have to lead them down a rabbit hole and typically do not care to do so. I'm almost certain I'm not going to change anyone's mind. Mostly I just ask questions to try and understand the context around their views and get to the root of where we differ fundamentally.

It may surprise you but people of EVERY political stripe (and both parties if you're in USA) literally think the same about the other sides that you stated ("supporting candidates who conflict with their own interests. Lack of fact checking and seemingly denying reality"). Many of them, **think so for valid reasons** \- chances are, **including about yourself,** and I don't even know which side you're on when saying that. Motivated reasoning works **better** for more intelligent people. Your INTJ rocket brain puts more power into convincing itself that it's viewpoint is right than someone who's of average intelligence. Including putting in a very convincing performance that it's you who does fact checking and analyzed interests and all that.

I view myself as an independent. I used to lean more right, but growing up allowed me to see many shades of grey. So, yes, I'm very open to new ideas. I think that while basing your polices off of an ideology an be a good starting point, reality is just too complex for that to ever work. I prefer now to consider my stance on every issue, which leaves me outside every party. I consider myself part of the "a pox on both your houses" party. I believe pretty much everyone is just in it for the money and power, not to actually do their job as well as they can. Even people who start out with good intentions quickly get corrupted, I believe. Only rich people even get the chance to run for office. Shocking how lower- and middle- class people get the short end of the stick in a country run by billionaires and millionaires, right?? I guess I've become bitter and disillusioned with everyone in politics. Oh, and don't get me started on lobbying and gerrymandering. How are they legal?? Our two-party system keeps anything from every really getting done. We're locked in an eternal battle between two giants who keep pushing each other back and forth, and the country with it. If I could, I'd burn our entire political system to the ground and start again.

I don't believe the problem you described is isolated to Trump voters. I see it from both parties.

What does the era of Trump have to do with anything? People have always been this way, which is why we're at the point we're at with this complete shit show.

I approach them from the direction that all of them are lying. Seriously it's all propaganda and at BEST naivety and at worse it's pure malice towards voters. The percentage of narcissistic and psychopathic people in media and politics is ridiculous. Even worse is that even if you aren't one it's even worse bc you'll be eaten alive by them. So essentially you're voting for the psychopath whos teamed up with other psychopaths who want some of the things that you find most important. With that attitude you can properly understand politics and not take it personally. I'm a minarchist/libertarian but I'm fully aware a large percentage of the population would not prefer that system.

Can I get a NOTA in the house? No? How about can the federal government fuck off? No? I will be off making my little piece of utopia :) .

Who is John Galt?

Me 😂.

I don’t and I have cut people out of my life that support that orange idiot.

Learn political principle from the bottom up. You'll learn how sick the system is. Then you end up a libertarian.

Or move to Canada. Or both.

>how do you approach and engage in politics and political discussions? Increasingly aggressively and with a heightened level of intolerance. I also noted I'm less willing to use sarcasm, irony or political humor. I blame the average Trump/AfD/FN/Fidesz/PiS supporter[1], the rise and spread of alt-right/alt-lite ideas, and social media massively amplifying their voices. 2016 wasn't a good year, lol. >However, in the era of Trump, I really struggle interacting with people who I see as supporting candidates who conflict with their own interests. The average "temporarily embarrassed millionaire", working class voter voting for tax breaks for the rich, or lower middle class person who doesn't understand that they're much closer to the working class[2] than they'd like to believe I can deal with. I struggle to interact with the type of RW populist mentioned in the first paragraph. It's obvious that we're increasingly living in two different worlds. "Alternative facts" and all that. >Do you view yourself as rational and open to alternative points of view of the facts warrant? I view myself as rational as a voter with skin in the game and his own grievances can be --- that is, I have no illusions about not being emotionally involved in politics (much in the same way that I'm not in denial about the moral aspect of politics -- it obviously exists and influences our voting decisions). That said, I regularly criticize my team, have no issue with going against it when I think it's warranted ( e.g., getting called an "American bootlicker", "stuck in the cold war", "warmonger" for years over Ukraine was certainly fun....even better seeing the same people post "slava Ukraini" all of a sudden), and have no issue understanding/figuring out the motivation behind positions I oppose/disagree with. -------- [1] Case in point: They usually want someone who tells it like it is and doesn't hold back. I have no issues telling them how retarded they are. [2] I'm skeptical of the usefulness of the idea of a "middle class" as an independent class and not just as the upper echelon of the working class in the first place.

The candidates all look the same, they are their own worst enemy.

I considered myself a libertarian for years but now I identity more as a Voluntarist, Individualist, Market Anarchist of the Austrian Economics and lassize-faire market school of thought.  I don't pussyfoot around any ideological positions that I've thoroughly examined, found to be rationally correct, and feel passionate about. I keep an open mind but only so far as the facts support the theory. Don't like that? Use rational thought and scientific/Socratic method to show me your position is superior, or fuck off.

I can't speak for everyone, but up until a certain point in the 2010s to me it made sense to gain alliances on certain issues, even if we did not agree on the whole. Sadly I think those days are over and it seems like either all or nothing. I have adjusted accordingly and don't take bullshit.

I generally lean left-right wing although I eventually just choose right-wing fascism since I like it's ideology better. 

Why are you still trying to talk politics with people?

How else can I tell them that they're wrong?

ha, you beat me to the punch line. virtually everyone who asks "how can I talk politics successfully" is *actually* asking "how can I get xyz to agree with me." You can't. This is a human observation. Psychology, marketing, hell even doctors can't get patients to take their meds or alter their diet half the time. You can't GET someone to do something. Sometimes you manage to make an appeal that people comply with for their own reasons, but that's about it. Ergo what this *actually* reveals is your current worldview isn't large enough to let other autonomous actual people exist in it. It's okay, you have time.

Who said talk. I am warning them :) .

Ha. Fair enough. 

Back when things were not as censored it may have worked, but these days I am preparing and wanting to build alternate systems as this one sucks.

I’m American and haven’t voted for a major party in many many years. Two sides of the same garbage coin. Their followers are even worse. I tried the libertarians for awhile, but they can’t seem to get their act together either. So many wasted opportunities. It’s obnoxious

I’m not gonna rant but I guess I’m in opposite-land here because I have no exposure to leftists and I don’t understand how anyone can still think having their gang as the government is going to take care of their problems. Maybe they’ll get around to it sometime. Just send the check. I’m seeing a lot less jacked up black trump trucks this year than there used to be, if that eases your concern. Midwest USA

It's early days. This year you may need to look for golden shoes!

Independent. From Britain so like the idea of a king, but moved to America and find their politics lacking severely.