Posts Tagged ‘personality’

Are left wingers and right wingers mentally ill?

August 16, 2014

Recently I have read articles that left wingers in politics are mentally disturbed. I have been asked that question with many twists over the years since I earned my Masters Degree in psychology in 1971 from CSUN using the California F-Scale.  Are communists leftist losers? Do fascists turn peaceful demonstrations into street violence? My thesis was on the authoritarian personality of the right and the left. Today is August 16, 2014 and I am retired, but since more people asked me those questions recently than during my working years (!) I decided to clear up the fascinating confusion about this topic for my readers. Are liberals progressive or regressive? Was Nabile Chamberlain, the British PM a liberal? Is that why he said he could peace with Hitler? Who is the liberal leader today who will try to make peace with ISIS? Do leftists live in reality or in illusion?

As my readers know I went on to get a PhD from USC in 1975. Today I consider myself an expert on the subject of left and right personalities. Are they just different or there is more to it? Let’s start with 2 psychological rules about the left-right dichotomy in perceptions about life predicaments:

Rule 1: Left wingers and right wingers are 2 distinct personalities with distinct thinking processes. The “L” personality represses and displaces fear responses  and the “R” personality supresses and sublimates anger responses. These diametrically opposing programmed mental software in the head since chilhood are intense and they spill over later into politics, economics (business deals, market place), religion, the military, history, philosophy, language, the workplace, home, you name it. For example, in politics the continuum start from left to right and goes through communist, socialist, liberal, democrat, centrist, republican, conservative, ultra conservative and fascist (most terrorists are fascists by personality). And, like any branch the continuum has many offshoots. In economics, for example, the Chicago school epitomizes the differences between Milton Friedman and Adam Smith (abundance orientation) on the right vs. John Galbraith and John Kinase (austerity, scarcity orientation) on the left, what behavioral economists today call Smithsonian vs. Keynesian thinking (if you want to pursue this topic deeper read the papers I presented at UCLA, 2011, University of Valencia, 2012, and University of Rome, 2013).

Rule 2: Extreme left wingers and extreme right wingers are not mentally ill and have never been diagnosed clinically in any of the 5 editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) of the American Psychiatric Association. However, their thinking process exhibit certain mental deficiencies constituting a borderline personality disorder (BPD). Specifically, manifesting itself as a faulty belief system that displaces emotional aspects of reality, i.e., “Believing becomes seeing instead of seeing becoming believing.” They feel so protective (defensive) of the faulty ways they assess reality… that the Socrates dictum, life without reflection is not worth living never occur to them as something they can use for personal growth. They never change. To me the interesting thing is why these extreme personalities cannot be diagnosed as clinically mentally ill. Distorted perceptions of reality, although interfering with rational processing of information, can be diagnosed as mental illness only if the distortion reaches a threshold level of perception that interferes with having a relationship and holding a job.

T, F and B: The differences in feeling, thinking and behaving (verbal and nonverbal) between the “L” and “R” personality types is the prima fascia reason for the discord in human interaction. The world has conflicts, wars, crimes, divorce and poverty because “L” and “R” interpret reality in opposite ways. The “L” says “it’s a head, the “R” says it’s a tail,’ the “L” says it’s a choice, the “R’ says I’m pro-life, and so on. I am a moderate “R” personality and I once I shared an office with an “L” personality psychologist. A hungry young patient came in for an interview, I said, “I suggest you get a job at McDonald’s while enrolling at a community college and learning a trade.” My “L” office partner said, “I suggest you see a social worker first and go on welfare for 6 months to get your mind-set ready for school while looking for a part-time work later.” The patient got a good job and  called in, “My friend suggested that I join a trade union,” he said.  I responded, ‘Don’t, you don’t need one right now.” My leftist partner said, “Do it, you need protection, and make sure the local union is affiliated with the AFL-CIO.”

Over the years I assembled a list of Paired adjectives that describe the differences between the “L” Personality vs. “R” Personality:

*US: Democrats vs. Republicans. UK: Liberals vs. conservatives. Canada: NDP vs. Conservatives. Israel: Labor vs. Likud. Russia: Yeltsin’s liberals vs. Putin’s nationalists.

*LeftBig government (paternalistic, bureaucratic, welfare oriented, scarcity oriented, affirmative action, ideological, pro-abortion, anti capital punishment, internationalist, loose borders, flag burning is consitutional, permissive on crimes and pornography, likes to explain things, mental, gay rights is a political issue, multiculturalism, minorities don’t need to integrate, a country can have 2-3 main languages, diversity, heterogeneous population is good) vs. Right: Small government (big private sector, entrepreneurial, capitalist, helpful but not paternalistic, likes to describe things, behavioral, integrate minorities, one main language, punitive on crimes and pornography, nationalist, flag burning a crime, capital punishment, anti-abortion, closed borders, promote homogeneous population).

*”L” personality beliefs (mental, paternalistic, home is not sacred, absorb illegal immigrants, likes to distribute the wealth by grants, minorities don’t need to integrate, restrict markets but not regulate them, love Clinton’s submissiveness, like unregulated trade unions, guided by social ideology, sees racism where non exists, family less importance, loyalty less important, friends more important, less religious, critical of police, dislike submitting to authority, dislike packing order, less law and order policies, Freudian, more antisemitic, more rehabilitating terrorists, diversity, more permissive,  fear orientated (Stockholm syndrome), gay behavior is a political movement, abortion is acceptable, eliminate capital punishment, forgive (don’t enforce consequences), Covert racism, see grey (in between) a lot, belief placed before fact, physical appearance less important, does’t like uniforms, porno OK, see gay as a civil rights issue, “Right makes might,” more Jews than Christians (ratio), permissive values lead to chaos, tolerant about rigged elections.

*”R” personality beliefs (behavioral, libertarian, home is sacred, rejects illegal immigrants, values loyalty, minorities must integrate, accepts legal immigration only, tax everyone progressively, free markets (regulated), Loves Reagan and Teddy Roosevelt, regulate trade unions, guided by pragmatism, religious, supports police, legislate gun control responsively, submit to authority, law and order, sees things as black or white, personality is not fear oriented (unaffected by the Stockholm syndrome), personality is anger oriented, psychologist Skinner is a model, less antisemitic, more Christians than Jews (ratio), gay behavior is a personal choice, physical appearance is important, likes uniforms, restrict abortion, limit porno, instate capital punishment, fight rigged elections, “might makes right.”

To be continued,



US-Taliban Prisoner Swap: Bowe Bergdahl.

June 5, 2014

Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl was exchanged yesterday for 5 Taliban terror leaders after 5 years in captivity. Who was it worth for? Who benefited?  This posting will help you clarify your view about the swap of the American soldier. If you are a democrat (leftist) by personality you tend to see the exchange as a paternalistic humanitarian issue, get the commando “kid” back to his parents!  If you have a republican personality (Rightist) you tend to see the swap as a value and security issues, who got the best deal here? Will these 5 experienced terror leaders get a chance to kill Americans again? Will this swap cost American lives in the future? If you are a psychologist, your analysis is that the Taliban can gain control over who will be the next US president if they announce in November 2016 that one of the 5 released terror leaders was personally responsible for the killing Americans before the US elections. The democrats then lose the election to the republicans who can point the finger, “I told you so.” But, personally, I don’t think it will come up to that level of sophisticated warfare. I think in the short run President Obama will certainly score ‘swap” points with the American people. Will these brawny points be transferred to Hilary Clinton in 2016? Some probably will among democrats by personality. Israel swapped about 1000 Arab terrorists for each Israeli captive, what were the consequences? The released terrorists returned back to the business of murdering Israelis! Most Israeli voters still reelected those leaders who made the sloppy swap because the personality of most Israeli voters sees extra dead Jews as mere collateral damage. Do American voters see death by terror as collateral? Probably among the democrats, but not as much as the Jews who had collateral damage throughout their history.  All in all, the Bowe swap is good for Bowe, good for his family, good for the idea of no American soldier is left behind, good for Taliban propaganda, good for Taliban recapturing Afghanistan when the American leave in 2015, and above all, good for the democratic party and the election of Hilary Clinton as president in 2016. Harry Reed, the democrat leader of the Senate borrowed a phrase from Hilary when he said yesterday, “What does it matter” about Obama ignoring his own law when he signed 2 years ago requiring him to inform congress 30 days before he made such decisions . It is likely that saying “What does it matter” by both Hilary and Harry about life and death issues will com e to hunt them during future campaigning but at the end it isn’t circumstances that decide people’s votes but personality! Think!

What causes the gridlock in Washington?

October 8, 2013

You know that I always tell the truth in this blog regardless of consequences because I am wealthy and I don’t need side income. Abraham Maslow, the father of the school of psychology called Humanistic Psychology and the creator of the self-actualization pyramid said, “Your vote is only as good as your culture let you act.” The American culture doesn’t educate you to vote for the candidate with the highest governing values for the people, although our leaders are better behaved than the leaders in most other countries. In fact, to vote based on values might be unconstitutional! When I was a professor of psychology on a hiring committee, we got a directive from Sacramento stating that we cannot ask candidates value questions or personal questions. Once we interviewed a candidate for a position of assistant professor of psychology who it was clear to me considered female students inferior to male students. I was not allowed to ask him any questions about personal values as if the personality of the instructor has no effect on students and is irrelevant to teaching in public schools. The same cultural directive you get when you enter the voting booth, “Don’t consider the personal values of the candidate you are electing to office.” (I never voted, went into business with or chose as friends negative people. I had too many in my family). You the voter created the gridlock in Washington that is affecting your life but it not your fault, only your responsibility (You are not taught in school about the huge difference between these two words either). Do you want a better life? Next election you will have to pull yourself up with your own bootstraps. You will have to ask the candidate before you decide who to vote for the simple question, “Is Obamacare gives you the best medical care for the buck”? If the congressman says “Yes, but I didn’t vote for it” he is plain stupid. If he says, “No, but I voted for it” through him out. If he says “No, and I didn’t vote for it” elect him again. Do you want a better life? Start looking for candidates that can answer the question “Please explain to me how Obamacare violate the cost/benefit rule”? Vote for him if can describe the answer well, and if enough of you do that, the next congress will get you a health care program that covers everyone at a reasonable cost!

A psychological observation of a congressmen.

October 10, 2012

I took it easy this morning, Wednesday, October 10, 2012, getting up at 11 AM. I turned on the TV and there was a stupid CNN commercial insulting my intelligence, something about a duck. Usually, I switch channels because I consider CNN commercials childish and too long. Who wants to trade a minute of silly quacks for a minute of silly CNN socializing  masquerading as new? That kind of trade is not my cup of tea…. but, wait a minute, who is that handsome man staring at a witness, “No, you answer my question, Mr Smith, and stop posturing!”

Before I analyse the personality of congressman Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, I have to tell you something about legal immigrants, as an assertive immigrant myself who made it big in the US, I consider most born Americans social push-overs, especially when facing slick government officials who can never-never admit making mistakes. Most congressmen do not  face their responsibilities to the American people. “Mr. Chairman, we at the State Department did our best to protect the life of our deceased ambassador to Libya.” “No, you didn’t, Mr. Smith.” I stared at the TV screen, Who is that Darrell Issa? How dare he pronounce the naked  truth in public, how dare he be himself, direct, not letting those that I pay their salaries get away with banalities! Darrell is a Lebanese-American Christian. His mother a Mormon and his father is Eastern Orthodox, a great combination for religious flexibility. He grew up in a Jewish neighborhood and worked for a Rabbi, a great combination for multicultural understanding. He was an officer in the US military,  served for 10 years and was cited for leadership,  a great way to shed off that terrible American civilian trait of no back bone social deference. He is self-made millionaire, the wealthiest man in congress, and, in his youth he got in trouble with he law, what an opportunity to learn about justice and forgiveness. All in all, in my analysis, if you had a few more congressmen like Darrell Issa, America would get more respect at home and abroad!

BP oil spill exposes Obama’s weakness as a leader!

May 25, 2010

A strong president will veto any company request for drilling for oil underwater unless oil spills are proven scientifically unlikely and if they do occur, the technology available to stop the oil leak has been proven to work right away.

Obama only said “drill baby, drill” and the people lost their livelihood with a “spill baby, spill.” Why didn’t he take charge? I am writing a book on Obama’s 10 personality weaknesses, the major of which is that Obama being so socially likable personality finds it very difficult to oppose strong CEOs, i.e., take command, make demands, or order them to obey him or else! The British Petroleum CEO recognized Obama’s weakness in leadership and took complete British command in handling an oil leak on American soil, may be even trying to salvage an expensive BP platform instead of just plugging the hole!

Here is what should have been done from the very beginning: The drill hole should have been smaller to be more manageable. BP would have made less money pumping out less oil per hour but it would have been more under control.  A plan should have been in place ready on the first day of the leak to insert a smaller diameter tube into the leak hole as far as it would go and inject in material (mud, clay, cement, foam, etc.) that would harden in water and plug the hole.

For the first time in his presidency, Obama’s approval rating is below 50%. People still like him but they question his leadership in protecting their livelihood. If he doesn’t learn how to get tough with CEOs who need restraining, he would not be reelected in 2012!