Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Recognizing our internal tribalism

Recognizing our internal tribalism
Getty Images

Molineaux is the former co-publisher of The Fulcrum and president/CEO of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

As we watch the tragedies continue in war and conflict zones, we seem to have forgotten our shared humanity. The worst cruelties bring out our need to protect and be protected, which often means responding with cruelty or inhumane actions; we don't know what else to do to prevent more harm to those who need protection.


Protection is important but the use of cruelty sets up a downward spiral that moves us further from recognizing our shared humanity. Just as we cannot bomb our way to peace, we cannot allow our internal tribalism to rule our hearts. I use the term "tribalism" as defined by Dr. Justin James Kennedy, who identifies the neuroscience behind human group identity formation.

When we internalize and elevate our in-group as more important than any other group, our tribal identity becomes a weapon that can be used by authoritarians around the world.

Tribalism is attractive to politicians, because in many ways it is easier than democracy. It abolishes democracy’s inconvenient demand for accountability: failure to deliver real benefits to one’s community is forgivable so long as the other side is faring worse.

As we saw in Northern Ireland, awful consequences—up to and including killing, maiming, and economic collapse—don’t diminish the power of tribalism. They enhance it, because suffering deepens the sense of victimhood that fuels this kind of politics. Self-harm and self-pity form a feedback loop of endlessly renewable political energy. And this perpetual motion machine is also driven by revenge. If you hurt the other side, they will hurt you back, and when they do they prove themselves to be the incorrigible enemies you always knew they were.

Atrocities, even when they are committed by a tiny minority of people, cease to be individual crimes that should be punished by law and become sources either for collective outrage (if they did it to us) or for collective excuses (if we did it to them). Fintan O'Toole writes in the New York Review of Susan Nieman's Left is Not Woke. If you experience pleasure when the "the other" is harmed, you have internalized a tribal identity. Any form of glee, satisfaction, self-righteousness at hearing about or witnessing human suffering of another tribal identity weakens our resolve to self-govern in a democracy.

In Nieman's book, she writes, "What concerns me most here are the ways in which contemporary voices considered to be leftist have abandoned the philosophical ideas that are central to any left-wing standpoint: a commitment to universalism over tribalism, a firm distinction between justice and power, and a belief in the possibility of progress."

What are the universal values you hold? And do you hold these values for all people? Or just your tribe.

Compassion is not a sport. It's a life-giving skill that requires renewed commitment each moment. Commit wisely.


Read More

Dallas County Republicans abandon plan to hand-count ballots in March primary

Election workers hand-count ballots in Gillespie County in the 2024 primary. Dallas County Republicans have abandoned a similar plan for the 2026 primary.

(Maria Crane / The Texas Tribune)

Dallas County Republicans abandon plan to hand-count ballots in March primary

After months of laying the groundwork to hand-count thousands of ballots in the March 3 primary, the Dallas County Republican Party announced on Tuesday it has decided not to do so, opting instead to contract with the county elections department to administer the election using voting equipment.

The decision spares the party the pressure it likely would have faced if a hand-count had delayed results beyond the state’s 24-hour reporting requirements in the state’s closely watched GOP primary for U.S. Senate, among other offices.

Keep ReadingShow less
From “Alternative Facts” to Outright Lies

U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem on January 7, 2026 in Brownsville, Texas.

(Photo by Michael Gonzalez/Getty Images)

From “Alternative Facts” to Outright Lies

The Trump administration has always treated truth as an inconvenience. Nearly a decade ago, Kellyanne Conway gave the country a phrase that instantly became shorthand for the administration’s worldview: “alternative facts.” She used it to defend false claims about the size of Donald Trump’s inauguration crowd, insisting that the White House was simply offering a different version of reality despite clear photographic evidence to the contrary.

That moment was a blueprint.

Keep ReadingShow less
White House ‘Score‑Settling’ Raises Fears of a Weaponized Government
The U.S. White House.
Getty Images, Caroline Purser

White House ‘Score‑Settling’ Raises Fears of a Weaponized Government

The recent casual acknowledgement by the White House Chief of Staff that the President is engaged in prosecutorial “score settling” marks a dangerous departure from the rule-of-law norms that restrain executive power in a constitutional democracy. This admission that the State is using its legal authority to punish perceived enemies is antithetical to core Constitutional principles and the rule of law.

The American experiment was built on the rejection of personal rule and political revenge, replacing them with laws that bind even those who hold the highest offices. In 1776, Thomas Paine wrote, “For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other.” The essence of these words can be found in our Constitution that deliberately placed power in the hands of three co-equal branches of government–Legislative, Executive, and Judicial.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two people looking at screens.

A case for optimism, risk-taking, and policy experimentation in the age of AI—and why pessimism threatens technological progress.

Getty Images, Andriy Onufriyenko

In Defense of AI Optimism

Society needs people to take risks. Entrepreneurs who bet on themselves create new jobs. Institutions that gamble with new processes find out best to integrate advances into modern life. Regulators who accept potential backlash by launching policy experiments give us a chance to devise laws that are based on evidence, not fear.

The need for risk taking is all the more important when society is presented with new technologies. When new tech arrives on the scene, defense of the status quo is the easier path--individually, institutionally, and societally. We are all predisposed to think that the calamities, ailments, and flaws we experience today--as bad as they may be--are preferable to the unknowns tied to tomorrow.

Keep ReadingShow less