[luckylion]

> There's no "threat of tribalism". We're living in tribalism.

I understand the point to be "tribalism is great, but we should be one tribe dominating all (or most, with our allies, as long as they are aligned with us) the other tribes". I didn't see any general call against tribalism. "Defending our way of life" is pretty much that: "the tribe's way of life".

[scottlocklin]

> I didn't see any general call against tribalism.

"We are dividing into hostile tribes cheering against each other, fueled by emotion and a mutual disdain that jeopardizes our future, instead of rediscovering our common ground and finding solutions."

The phrase "defending our way of life" isn't in the article.

[dondawest]

>"We are dividing into hostile tribes cheering against each other, fueled by emotion and a mutual disdain that jeopardizes our future, instead of rediscovering our common ground and finding solutions."

This describes the entirety of human history. And CERTAINLY the history of America.

[luckylion]

> "We are dividing into hostile tribes cheering against each other, fueled by emotion and a mutual disdain that jeopardizes our future, instead of rediscovering our common ground and finding solutions."

exactly: I read We to mean "US-citizens", not "humans". Divide and conquer, be divided and you might be conquered, therefore (internal) division is bad. As soon as some intergalactic threat shows up, the same rhetoric will be heard on a planetary level. "This is no time for internal division while the bugs are trying to wipe us out. You've seen what they did to Buenos Aires."

> The phrase "defending our way of life" isn't in the article.

From the article: "When it comes to the defense of our experiment in democracy and our way of life, ideology should have nothing to do with it."