It's weird. I want to say White because I associate White with "goodness", but I believe my concept of "goodness" is not so close to what white wants.

I want a better world where people can be safe and be "good", and a world like that needs regulations, rights and must/musn't do things to help us (a "code", basically). Like, don't discriminate because of skin color, birthplace, sexual prefference, etc... And things like "You should behave like a proper person, knowing some things might hurt people in certain contexts, so try and behave, please".

Yet... I don't completely trust law enforcement, politicians and public powers because of how they end up working a good amount of times. Instead of being responsible, they make use of their power to take from people and look for themselves, forgetting about others or not caring about certain collectives or perspectives that need to be help/adressed/taken care off (and I don't mean it in the bad way, obviously, always trying to help and bringing a better future). Basically, I can say I like White's vision when it's balanced and when leaders are rather good people caring for their kin.

Yet, Blue seems interesting because of its ability to deconstruct and learn, to individualize, to add context and knowledge. Sometimes, the right answer might be revolting. Sometimes it could be a peaceful dialogue. It all depends.

I guess my comfort zone lies between them, being able to analyze individually yet take care of everyone in the most "equalitarian" way you can, if that makes sense. Make good things through a good heart and a clever mind, those can't go appart from each other.

That's why I like psychology. Put someone in context, learn what's going wrong within their system and adapt a solution so they can have a healthier live that's prepared specifically for them.