Monday, February 28, 2011

I'm an INTJ

I'm doing a "30 Day Challenge" thing on tumblr where you basically list off 30 things about yourself over the course of 30 days. I liked this one, and I thought it could be here too. THIS ISN'T A LIVEJOURNAL PERSONALITY TEST OKAY, THIS IS SCIENCE.

Carl Jung proposed that there are 16 different personality types. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is a questionnaire based around these personality types. There are many different tests throughout the internet, but this one is probably the most accurate. All the tests I've taken throughout the years always tell me I'm an INTJ.



Wikipedia


  INTJs are one of the rarest of the sixteen personality types, and account for about 1–4% of the population.

[...]

INTJs are analytical. Like INTPs, they are most comfortable working alone and tend to be less sociable than other types. Nevertheless, INTJs are prepared to lead if no one else seems up to the task, or if they see a major weakness in the current leadership. They tend to be pragmatic, logical, and creative. They have a low tolerance for spin or rampant emotionalism. They are not generally susceptible to catchphrases and do not recognize authority based on tradition, rank, or title.


INTJs are strong individualists who seek new angles or novel ways of looking at things. They enjoy coming to new understandings. They tend to be insightful and mentally quick; however, this mental quickness may not always be outwardly apparent to others since they keep a great deal to themselves. They are very determined people who trust their vision of the possibilities, regardless of what others think. They may even be considered the most independent of all of the sixteen personality types. INTJs are at their best in quietly and firmly developing their ideas, theories, and principles.—[15]

Hallmarks of the INTJ include independence of thought and a desire for efficiency. They work best when given autonomy and creative freedom. They harbor an innate desire to express themselves by conceptualizing their own intellectual designs. They have a talent for analyzing and formulating complex theories. INTJs are generally well-suited for occupations within academia, research, consulting, management, science, engineering, and law. They are often acutely aware of their own knowledge and abilities—as well as their limitations and what they don't know (a quality that tends to distinguish them from INTPs). INTJs thus develop a strong confidence in their ability and talents, making them natural leaders.


In forming relationships, INTJs tend to seek out others with similar character traits and ideologies. Agreement on theoretical concepts is an important aspect of their relationships. By nature INTJs can be demanding in their expectations, and approach relationships in a rational manner. As a result, INTJs may not always respond to a spontaneous infatuation but wait for a mate who better fits their set criteria. They tend to be stable, reliable, and dedicated. Harmony in relationships and home life tends to be extremely important to them. They generally withhold strong emotion and do not like to waste time with what they consider irrational social rituals. This may cause non-INTJs to perceive them as distant and reserved; nevertheless, INTJs are usually very loyal partners who are prepared to commit substantial energy and time into a relationship to make it work.


As mates, INTJs want harmony and order in the home and in relationships. The most independent of all types,[16] INTJs trust their intuition when choosing friends and mates—even in spite of contradictory evidence or pressure from others. The emotions of an INTJ are hard to read, and neither male nor female INTJs are apt to express emotional reactions. At times, INTJs seem cold, reserved, and unresponsive, while in fact they are almost hypersensitive to signals of rejection from those they care for. In social situations, INTJs may also be unresponsive and may neglect small rituals designed to put others at ease. For example, INTJs may communicate that idle dialogue such as small talk is a waste of time. This may create the impression that the INTJ is in a hurry—an impression that is not always intended. In their interpersonal relationships, INTJs are usually better in a working situation than in a recreational situation.


Other source

INTJs are perfectionists, with a seemingly endless capacity for improving upon anything that takes their interest. What prevents them from becoming chronically bogged down in this pursuit of perfection is the pragmatism so characteristic of the type: INTJs apply (often ruthlessly) the criterion "Does it work?" to everything from their own research efforts to the prevailing social norms. This in turn produces an unusual independence of mind, freeing the INTJ from the constraints of authority, convention, or sentiment for its own sake.


[...]

Personal relationships, particularly romantic ones, can be the INTJ's Achilles heel. While they are capable of caring deeply for others (usually a select few), and are willing to spend a great deal of time and effort on a relationship, the knowledge and self-confidence that make them so successful in other areas can suddenly abandon or mislead them in interpersonal situations.


This happens in part because many INTJs do not readily grasp the social rituals; for instance, they tend to have little patience and less understanding of such things as small talk and flirtation (which most types consider half the fun of a relationship). To complicate matters, INTJs are usually extremely private people, and can often be naturally impassive as well, which makes them easy to misread and misunderstand. Perhaps the most fundamental problem, however, is that INTJs really want people to make sense.


----------------------------------------------


Eerily accurate. People may interpret my silence and stiffness as awkwardness, but to be awkward requires you not to understand social rituals. I understand them perfectly fine (except for flirting, that shit's worse than calculus). It's just that I consciously choose not to partake in the rituals I deem stupid. Why should I? If I don't like it, then I'm not doing it. My friends who are annoyed at my outright refusal to drink or dance unironically will know what I'm talking about. OOPS, INTJ, YOUR PROBLEM NOT MINE, DEAL WITH IT, WHOOPSIE, INTJs REPREZENT FUCKERS.







Monday Youtube Post

Saturday, February 26, 2011

Wisconsin police defy governor to side with the people

Amazing.

From RAN ally Ryan Harvey's facebook page:

"Police have just announced to the crowds inside the occupied State Capitol of Wisconsin: ‘We have been ordered by the legislature to kick you all out at 4:00 today. But we know what’s right from wrong. We will not be kicking anyone out, in fact, we will be sleeping here with you!"


Walker's Budget Bill Passes the Wisconsin House

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Scott Walker crank-called by a gonzo journalist pretending to be David Koch. Walker buys it, reveals that what he's really doing

Before we get to the actual story, you should learn who David Koch is.

We need to go all the way back to the the Citizens United case from early last year. It all started when a non-profit corporation called Citizens United made a film critical of Hillary Clinton. This violated the McCain-Feingold act, which prohibited all corporations and unions from airing “electioneering communications.”

Citizens United took it all the way to the Supreme Court, where a close 5-4 landmark decision struck down the McCain-Feingold Act. What this means is that our democracy is now for sale. Corporations were given the same freedom of speech rights as individual persons. There is no limit to the amount of money they can spend on the politician of their choice, and political bribery is effectively legalized. A century of struggles to keep these assholes out of our government was tossed. Justice Stevens wrote in his 90-page dissent:

At bottom, the Court's opinion is thus a rejection of the common sense of the American people, who have recognized a need to prevent corporations from undermining self government since the founding, and who have fought against the distinctive corrupting potential of corporate electioneering since the days of Theodore Roosevelt. It is a strange time to repudiate that common sense. While American democracy is imperfect, few outside the majority of this Court would have thought its flaws included a dearth of corporate money in politics.


And this part is important, so I'll just quote directly from the Wikipedia entry. This is where the Koch brothers come in:

A year after the decision, Common Cause asked the Department of Justice to investigate conflicts of interest on the part of two of the Justices in the majority. The organization noted that Thomas's wife was the founder and president of Liberty Central, a conservative political advocacy group that would be empowered to accept corporate contributions to run campaign advertisements. In addition, Scalia and Thomas had participated in political strategy sessions organized by David H. Koch and Charles G. Koch, who stood to benefit from the decision.


The goal of those political strategy sessions was to "change the balance of power in Congress this November."

This is huge. Two Justices on the Supreme Court are in bed with two super conservative billionaires who run an energy conglomerate. Those two Justices then voted in favor of legalizing bribery.



Above: shitheads


The Koch brothers are not small time. Koch Industries is the second largest privately owned company in the United States. If they were a public company, they would rank around 16 on the Fortune 500 list. They're oil men. Since the 1980s, they have given more than $100 million dollars to conservative and libertarian organizations, such as the Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, and Americans for Prosperity.

Now enter Scott Walker. According to Mother Jones,

Walker's gubernatorial campaign received $43,000 from the Koch Industries PAC during the 2010 election. That donation was his campaign's second-highest, behind $43,125 in contributions from housing and realtor groups in Wisconsin.


But here's the kicker. Walker's budget proposal says:

16.896 Sale or contractual operation of state-owned heating, cooling, and power plants. (1) Notwithstanding ss. 13.48 (14) (am) and 16.705 (1), the department may sell any state-owned heating, cooling, and power plant or may contract with a private entity for the operation of any such plant, with or without solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best interest of the state. Notwithstanding ss. 196.49 and 196.80, no approval or certification of the public service commission is necessary for a public utility to purchase, or contract for the operation of, such a plant, and any such purchase is considered to be in the public interest and to comply with the criteria for certification of a project under s. 196.49 (3) (b).


What this means is that Scott Walker, whose second highest campaign donation was from the Koch brothers, would be able to sell Wisconsin's energy contracts to Koch Industries without allowing any other bidder come to the table. This would give them a monopoly over Wisconsin's energy.

To sum it all up: Two Supreme Court Justices attend a conference hosted by the Koch brothers with the intent to "change the balance of power in Congress." Those two Justices vote in favor of allowing corporations to give limitless donations to any candidate. The Koch brothers then give Scott Walker his second highest donation. Once Scott Walker is elected, his first budget proposal allows the Koch brothers to buy Wisconsin's power plants for pennies on the dollar with no transparency and no oversight -- in addition to taking away collective bargaining rights of nearly all public employees. Scott Walker is bought. The Governor(s) of Wisconsin are corporate interests.

So here's what just happened



Someone from Buffalo Beast called Scott Walker's offices pretending to be David Koch. Walker believes it is David Koch, and has a conversation with him for twenty minutes. The whole thing was recorded.

Unfortunately, the prankster didn't really seem to know what he was doing. As a redditor said,

The "Koch" scam caller did nothing but crack stereotypical right-wing-asshole lines, which the governor basically chuckled along with politely but mostly dismissed. Had the prank caller done some homework, he could have destroyed the governor's career. Instead, he ended his secretary's.


There was nothing illegal, and it's not as mindblowing as the internet is making it out to be, but it's still a PR nightmare. I would strongly suggest you take a listen for yourself, but here are the main things:
  • Walker revealed that, in spite of what he's been saying, he will not negotiate in good faith, and he is not going to budge.
  • He confirmed that this is not about the budget. It's about busting unions, and he confirmed that Republicans plan on spreading this to other states.
  • He was planning on tricking the state senate dems into meeting so he can hold the quorum open, even without their presence.
  • Walker considered planting provocateurs in the middle of the protests.
  • He dismissed a dem as not being "one of us," referring to himself and Koch. Let me reiterate: Scott Walker considers himself and a billionaire who meddles in politics, as belonging to the same group.

Although this may not have been career-ending, what gets me was simply the mood of it. Walker just seemed to know that when this guy asks questions, you answer them. That may not be anything. I just want to know why he acted as if a conversation like this was normal. Here it is.



Tuesday, February 22, 2011

Maddow Annihilates Scott Walker

And the best journalist in mainstream media award goes to

Newest right-wing smear: Barack Obama is the Anti-Christ

Right now I'm reading a book about Richard Nixon and the political divide of the 60s/70s (highly recommended), and it's made me realize something. These paranoid right wing fucks dominating the media right now may seem silly and sometimes frightening to a 20-something year old who's never seen anything like it, but they really have nothing on the right wing psychopaths of the 60s. Holy. Shit. I was so naïve, and I'm sorry.

I mean, there were certainly left wing militants in the 60s, but most of the dirty hippies were too obsessed with sitting in shacks and smoking pot with their heads up their asses to actually do anything. The fringe on the right wing was absolutely batshit. It was the birth of fascism in America, in all but name. And in a way, the right wing's potential now is even more frightening and dangerous. Reagan gave the lunatics a window into the mainstream, and our cowardly media rarely calls any of them out. But still, we're not here yet:

In Champaign, Illinois, [in 1965] leaders of peace demonstrations got stickers on their mailboxes reading, "You are in the sights of a Minuteman." In Queens, the DA seized an arsenal, to be used by the right-wing vigilante group the Minutemen in assaults on "left-wing camps in a three-state area," including mortars, bazookas, grenades, trench knives, over 150 rifles, a "half dozen garroting devices," and over a million rounds of ammunition.


But it certainly doesn't help when we get McCarthyists like Glenn Beck stoking the fears of what little audience he has left. Here's Rachel Maddow talking about Beck's latest obsession: the end times.