Exhausted Majority: US Politically Made Up of Seven Tribes - Progressive Activists Tribe Make Up 8%

The report also leaves me wondering how the “disillusioned,” “passive” and “disengaged” segments of the Majority got so Exhausted.

drummerboy said:
There is one reason for today's polarization, and that is, as ml1 has pointed out, the republican/conservative promulgation of an alternate reality. There is no place to compromise when one size is essentially crazy.
All of this "tribalism" stuff is nonsense.

 Right.  Every time i hear a talking head say something like ‘we’re not even using the same set of facts’ I lose my sh1t.  As if there is equal culpability.  How do you compromise with anyone who believes the world is flat?  

I fear progress will only come with the passage of time and generation.  Those who have been suckered must live through the suffering caused by the one they put in power.

RealityForAll said:

 Do you agree with authors' premise that the US is, more-or-less, politically comprised of seven ("7") different "tribes"?

I'm not sure.  I see it adds to 100%, but I don't see myself in any of the categories.

What category do you see yourself in?

Early in the report, the authors note the biases of self-reporting when it comes to ideological labels. They appear to take at face value, however, self-reported attitudes toward minority groups (as long as the minorities aren’t too activist):

On the temperature test of Americans’ attitudes towards different groups, the polarizing status of Black Lives Matter activism is highlighted by the fact that 70 percent of Devoted Conservatives hold ‘very cold’ views toward Black Lives Matter activists. This diverges radically even from the Politically Disengaged and the Moderates, of whom only about 20 percent have such feelings.

This number is partially mirrored by feelings about police officers, with colder feelings for law enforcement from the more liberal tribes, although the effect is not as extreme. The coldest feelings toward police officers are held by Passive Liberals, but only 12 percent have “very cold” feelings towards police officers (and 6 percent of Progressive Activists do). In other words, Conservatives are less tolerant and sympathetic toward activists than liberals are toward the police.

On the other hand, this does not translate into either of the Conservative tribes expressing hostility in general towards African Americans. Eighty-three percent of Traditional Conservatives and 79 percent of Devoted Conservatives say they have generally warm feelings toward African Americans, and 82 percent of Devoted Conservatives and 88 percent of Traditional Conservatives report warm feelings toward Hispanic Americans. More than three quarters of people in both of these segments believe that African Americans share some or all of their values. However, Americans in the conservative tribes express less racial hostility than common stereotypes might suggest.

This excerpt is for Runner_Guy:

Recognition of white privilege does not necessarily amount to support for all efforts to address the legacy of segregation and discrimination. While the majority of Progressive Activists (60 percent) believe race should be considered in the college admissions process, the rest of the country does not hold this view. Indeed, there is only half as much agreement among the next most supportive group, the Traditional Liberals (28 percent agree, while 72 percent believe race should not be a factor). And only 15 percent of Americans hold this view, leaving Progressive Activists largely alone in this particular viewpoint.

No wonder we have such a high percentage of racists in this country.... tribalism is alive and well.

Mr. Lost - I don't blame you for asking that question.  If you're not obsessed with MSNBC (or your own version of MSNBC that your "tribe" tells you it is) then you wouldn't make that connection.

paulsurovell said:

LOST said:

paulsurovell said:
MSNBC pushes an idea of why Americans are so divided, but I won't say it because this thread would have to be moved to the Sub Forum.

 Then why mention it?

It was a sarcastic comment to contrast the rational discussion here on American political divisions with the less-than-rational discussions on MSNBC.
On the matter of activist vs passive progressives, I'm hoping the "passives" will join the "activists" on this existential issue:
https://thinkprogress.org/as-new-green-deal-democrats-cement-their-hold-climate-change-emerges-as-a-top-priority-21d5449b0ec7/
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2018/11/19/green-new-deal-our-civil-rights-movement-john-lewis-joins

sprout said:

RealityForAll said:

 Do you agree with authors' premise that the US is, more-or-less, politically comprised of seven ("7") different "tribes"?

I'm not sure.  I see it adds to 100%, but I don't see myself in any of the categories.
What category do you see yourself in?

 The authors of the report have also created a quiz where you answer questions so that your responses can be analyzed.  And, thereby tell you to which "tribe" that you belong.  Link to quiz:  https://hiddentribes.us/

Let me know whether the quiz and analysis are helpful.

RealityForAll said:

Let me know whether the quiz and analysis are helpful.

"America has never felt so divided. Bitter debates that were once confined to Congressional hearings and cable TV have now found their way into every part of our lives, from our Facebook feeds to the family dinner table. But most Americans are tired of this 'us-versus-them' mindset and are eager to find common ground."

Meanwhile, take our quiz to find who your us is!

dave23 said:

RealityForAll said:

Let me know whether the quiz and analysis are helpful.

"America has never felt so divided. Bitter debates that were once confined to Congressional hearings and cable TV have now found their way into every part of our lives, from our Facebook feeds to the family dinner table. But most Americans are tired of this 'us-versus-them' mindset and are eager to find common ground."
Meanwhile, take our quiz to find who your us is!

 Are you letting us know that you are generally non-compliant and unwilling to answer questions in the form of a quiz?

RealityForAll said:

 Are you letting us now that you are non-compliant and unwilling to answer questions in the form of a quiz?

 Love the bureaucracy-speak. But am I willing (compliant, even!) to take a quiz based on the pre-defined buckets they pretend to abhor? Of course I am.

I got caught up a bit at the very beginning because I wasn't sure whether Vegas brothels were considered "places of worship." 

Then they really gave themselves away early with:

Which statement do you agree with more?

- Government should take more responsibility to ensure that everyone is provided for

- People should take more responsibility to provide for themselves

Then it got weird when it turned into an Are You Jeffrey Dahmer? quiz

- One of the worst things a person could do is hurt a defenseless animal.

Turns out that I'm a 60-year-old man from Indiana.

here's my take on this quiz and the organization that set out to do this research project.  They are called "More In Common", and their description of their mission makes it clear that they set out to design a project that highlighted division in the country.  If the research had shown that Americans had more in common with each other than not, what would be the raison d'etre for a "More in Common."  So I don't think it's a stretch to say that the research set out specifically to prove that the country is divided into "tribes."  And as I mentioned earlier, just the use of the loaded term "tribes" shows their bias.

The quiz itself is purposely designed to force the segments apart instead of allowing them to drift toward each other.  Many of the questions are binary, such as one that asks if a person believes success is the result of mainly luck or mainly hard work.  In the real world how many people really believe that the answer is only one of those two alternatives?  There are many questions like that.

There is no doubt we have divisions in our country across a range of social issues.  Is it worse than ever before?  I don't think so.  The 60s were a pretty divisive time.  The Gilded Age had the same kind of wealth inequality we have now.  The Civil War and the decades preceding it were of course a time of bitter division.

And is the answer to the division that we must all meet in the middle?  More in Common appears to want to persuade us of that.  But that IMHO is a facile response to a world that is more complicated that that.  Sure we can meet in middle ground on the question of how much the minimum wage should be increased or how big the federal budget deficit should be, or what the top marginal income tax rate should be.  But where's the middle on building a border wall?  (Build a wall with doors?  Build a screen?)  Where's the middle on supporting white supremacists? 

These kinds of projects make headlines and allow "centrists" feel good about themselves because they are supposedly superior to the "tribalists."  But I don't see how this kind of work leads to a real road map forward.  Without making value judgements about the rightness or goodness of the various positions on the "extremes" and assuming the "good" place is always in the middle, it runs the risk of abandoning a set of shared values of what is good and right for our country to stand for.

While Krugman himself is a very polarizing figure, he has a pretty good explanation in today's column for what's dividing our country:

The New Economy and the Trump Rump

dave23 said:

Turns out that I'm a 60-year-old man from Indiana.

   That guy was all over that study.

RealityForAll said:

sprout said:

RealityForAll said:

 Do you agree with authors' premise that the US is, more-or-less, politically comprised of seven ("7") different "tribes"?

I'm not sure.  I see it adds to 100%, but I don't see myself in any of the categories.
What category do you see yourself in?

 The authors of the report have also created a quiz where you answer questions so that your responses can be analyzed.  And, thereby tell you to which "tribe" that you belong.  Link to quiz:  https://hiddentribes.us/


Let me know whether the quiz and analysis are helpful.

 I failed question 2. I guess I'll pick one just to see how dumb the other questions are.

ridski said:

 I failed question 2. I guess I'll pick one just to see how dumb the other questions are.

 I'd pick this one.

dave23 said:

Which statement do you agree with more?
- Government should take more responsibility to ensure that everyone is provided for
- People should take more responsibility to provide for themselves

 Am I allowed to answer "neither" or "both"?

October 25, 2018 response of Glen Ford, Executive Editor of Black Agenda Report, to the MoreInCommon report is reprinted below.  Or, see https://www.blackagendareport.com/great-un-blackening-corporate-project-erase-black-people-politics

====================================================

The Great Un-Blackening: The Corporate Project to Erase Black People from Politics

Corporate rule imposes a duopoly system in which one party is overtly white supremacist and the other party refuses to tackle racial oppression – but both pursue austerity and war.

“Class has been effectively suppressed, except as racialized euphemisms and code words of American politics.”

While Donald Trump’s Republicans strive to maintain electoral majorities through blatant appeals to white supremacy and constant scapegoating of Blacks and browns, corporate Democrats masquerade as the sensible political “center,” around which most Americans -- except for small, “polarizing” minorities at the extremes of the spectrum -- can unite. The latest corporate attempt to paper over the nation’s class and race contradictions was launched earlier this month by an outfit called More in Common , which works closely with corporate media and think tanks in the U.S. and Europe. Its new report, titled “Hidden Tribes : A Study of America’s Polarized Landscape,” is an attempt to obscure the racism that animates majorities of white voters and to erase Black politics, entirely.

The More in Common study claims to have discovered seven “tribes” of political belief and behavior that comprise the American spectrum. None of these tribes revolve around race and class, yet, according to the authors, they each possess “distinctive beliefs, psychology and levels of engagement.” The villains of this imagined tribal order, arrayed at opposite ends of the study’s poles, are Progressive Activists, who supposedly make up 8 percent of the population, and Devoted Conservatives, at 6 percent. “Although they comprise just 14% of the population, their voices dominate public debate in the digital age,” the More in Common folks lament. “They are more ideologically dogmatic, more hostile towards the other side, and more active in elections and on social media.” This is considered a very bad thing.

“The villains of this imagined tribal order are Progressive Activists, who supposedly make up 8 percent of the population, and Devoted Conservatives.”

A national political consensus can supposedly be found among the middle groups: Traditional Liberals (11%), Passive Liberals (15%), Politically Disengaged (26%), Moderates (15%), and Traditional Conservatives (6%). When you subtract the disputatious and “highly ideological” Progressive Activist and Devoted Conservative “tribes,” according to the authors, “most Americans – including both liberals and conservatives – are actually more reasonable than people on the other side are made to think.” More in Common claims to have found that, once a person can be located among its seven previously “hidden” tribes “their views on a wide range of current issues could be predicted more accurately than by referring to their visible traits such as race, gender or income.”

This is utter nonsense, with no grounding in race, class, or history. Stark differences have long separated Blacks and whites on issues of living wages and union rights (Black women are the group most in favor of unions, white men the least); war and peace (Blacks are most opposed to US military adventures abroad, whites most warlike, Hispanics in between, as usual); and the fairness of the criminal justice system, of which Blacks are near-universally skeptical.

“Stark differences have long separated Blacks and whites.”

Majorities of white people, across class and gender lines, voted for the virulently white supremacist Donald Trump -- with Trump piling up supermajorities in the Deep South. The GOP has thrived as the White Man’s Party since 1968, supplanting the southern Democrats (Dixiecrats) precisely because white supremacy is the most dependable mass organizing principle for a rightwing corporate electoral party in the United States.

Race works like a charm for making white folks forget about class in the United States, which is why the moneyed classes have constructed a duopoly electoral system that gathers the most racist whites in one party, while Blacks and other despised peoples are corralled in the other corporate party -- with both parties supporting global U.S. empire and warfare. Class has been effectively suppressed, except as racialized euphemisms and code words of American politics: “middle class,” meaning “hard working, salt-of-the-earth, patriotic white folks,” versus “the underclass,” signifying “predatory” and criminal Blacks and other darker people, who need to be kept under surveillance and containment.

“White supremacy is the most dependable mass organizing principle for a rightwing corporate electoral party.”

The More in Common outfit would have us believe that most of the anger and rancor in the U.S. polity is caused by the 14 percent of the population described as Progressive Activists, on the left, and Devoted Conservatives, on the right, who are determined not to get along, and that an “exhausted majority” of 67 percent of the people are ready for “compromise” on most issues. This is in synch with the aims of leadership of the Democratic Party, dominated by Wall Street and the high-tech oligarchs in Silicon Valley. The party’s corporate leadership has no intention of yielding to demands for living wages, job security, single payer health care, and free universal college tuition, nor are they willing to lift the state of siege that has been imposed on Black America by the mass incarceration regime. The Democrats depend on the votes of Blacks and other minorities, and those whites that haven’t thrown in with Trump’s brand of white nationalism, but offer no programs that would substantially ameliorate deteriorating economic and social conditions -- nothing but more austerity and war. Therefore, the political crisis must be blamed on strident voices of the “far left and far right” -- like “Progressive Activists” and “Devoted Conservatives,” the political categories invented by the More in Common political conjurers. Race must be erased as a demographic marker, along with class, on the theory that if you don’t recognize racial and class conflicts, they will disappear.

“The Democrats offer no programs that would substantially ameliorate deteriorating economic and social conditions -- nothing but more austerity and war.”

Corporate Democrats believe they can attract enough disaffected Republicans to their side to make up for the leftish voters that abandon the party in disgust. The More in Common study is designed to encourage such an alignment. It urges traditional “moderates” of both parties to unite and form an effective electoral majority from the “center.”

This is all about reinforcing the corporate “center,” which has been destabilized, not only by Donald Trump’s takeover of the GOP and surprise election victory, but most fundamentally by the collapse of wages and job security and the general demoralization caused by endless austerity and war -- the core policies of both corporate parties. Americans must be made to reject the “extremes” if the corporate consensus is to be reestablished. But racial oppression cannot be tackled without massive, and expensive, transformations of society, requiring whole new layers of democratization. To the extent possible, therefore, race must be eliminated from the conversation (except to avow that America loves all races). The More in Common brand of race-less and classless social science, which claims to more accurately describe Americans’ political views “than by referring to their visible traits such as race, gender or income,” is a perfect tool for corporate consensus-makers. The rulers won’t have to do anything for anybody, because real demographics cease to exist.

“To the extent possible, therefore, race must be eliminated from the conversation (except to avow that America loves all races).”

The assault on “extremes of left and right” by the oligarchs that control the Internet -- most of them Democrats -- is another front in the escalating corporate war to reestablish the hegemony of the ideological “center” by purging those that cause “dissension” in society -- with or without a Russian connection.

Corporate pollsters have already largely disappeared the Black demographic from their surveys, which nowadays often neglect to break down public opinion by race. Some surveys even lump all “minorities” together, despite the fact that Hispanic opinion is most often somewhere near middle of the chasm that separates whites and Blacks. This, in a nation whose currently ruling political party, controlling all three branches of government and most state legislatures, shouts its white supremacism to the world.

The result is a two-corporate party system in which half of the duopoly is overtly white supremacist while the other half appeals to most of the nation’s non-white voters but doesn't have the vocabulary to even begin to discuss the dismantling of racial oppression.

BAR executive editor Glen.Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com.

COMMENTS?

Sometimes fiction and/or popular culture are more enlightening than "expert studies".

Townsperson: Why should I break my head about the outside world?  Let the outside world break its own head….

Tevye: He is right…

Perchik: Nonsense. You can’t close your eyes to what’s happening in the world.

Tevye: He’s right.

Rabbi’s pupil: He’s right, and he’s right.  They can’t both be right!

Tevye:  (Pause). You know, you're right.

Sheldon Cooper: Evolution is not an opinion it is a fact.

Sheldon's Mom: And that is your opinion!

RealityForAll said:

sprout said:

RealityForAll said:

 Do you agree with authors' premise that the US is, more-or-less, politically comprised of seven ("7") different "tribes"?

I'm not sure.  I see it adds to 100%, but I don't see myself in any of the categories.
What category do you see yourself in?

 The authors of the report have also created a quiz where you answer questions so that your responses can be analyzed.  And, thereby tell you to which "tribe" that you belong.  Link to quiz:  https://hiddentribes.us/

Let me know whether the quiz and analysis are helpful.

Yes - very helpful. Now I'm even more convinced that I'm not aligned with any of the 'tribes' because my priorities were not well represented in the questions, and the answer choices tended to be missing my point of view. 

Did you align well with a 'tribe'?

The result is a two-corporate party system in which half of the duopoly is overtly white supremacist while the other half appeals to most of the nation’s non-white voters but doesn't have the vocabulary to even begin to discuss the dismantling of racial oppression.

BAR executive editor Glen.Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com.

COMMENTS?

You know, he's right.

This whole thing feels like an elaborate ruse that will end up as yet another bland David Brooks column.

LOST said:

dave23 said:
Which statement do you agree with more?
- Government should take more responsibility to ensure that everyone is provided for
- People should take more responsibility to provide for themselves

 Am I allowed to answer "neither" or "both"?

No -- because it's an annoying binary forced choice question which is designed for quick classifications, not for accuracy. 

LOST said:

The result is a two-corporate party system in which half of the duopoly is overtly white supremacist while the other half appeals to most of the nation’s non-white voters but doesn't have the vocabulary to even begin to discuss the dismantling of racial oppression.
BAR executive editor Glen.Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com.
COMMENTS?
You know, he's right.

It's hard to argue against Mr. Ford's points.  He makes a lot of sense.

Here's the issue I have with this segmentation. I knew I'd be in the 8% "extreme" group of "progressive activists."  I guess I'm an "activist" because I made a donation to an advocacy group, and I attended a political meeting.  But I'm a guy living in an upper middle class neighborhood.  I'm not against capitalism, and I'm not against a society that has wealthy people.  I don't believe that we should legislate equal outcomes.

But I do think we should have a social safety net more like European countries, and I think we should have affordable health care, affordable higher education, and decent retirement income.  People who work should have a living wage.

If all that makes me an "extremist," there's something wrong with the tool that came up with that conclusion.

sprout said:

RealityForAll said:

sprout said:

RealityForAll said:

 Do you agree with authors' premise that the US is, more-or-less, politically comprised of seven ("7") different "tribes"?

I'm not sure.  I see it adds to 100%, but I don't see myself in any of the categories.
What category do you see yourself in?

 The authors of the report have also created a quiz where you answer questions so that your responses can be analyzed.  And, thereby tell you to which "tribe" that you belong.  Link to quiz:  https://hiddentribes.us/

Let me know whether the quiz and analysis are helpful.

Yes - very helpful. Now I'm even more convinced that I'm not aligned with any of the 'tribes' because my priorities were not well represented in the questions, and the answer choices tended to be missing my point of view. 
Did you align well with a 'tribe'?

 I aligned somewhat under the MoreInCommon quiz.  However, there were no questions (that I remember dealing with libertarianism or useful in identifying libertarians).  For example, the Cato institute has a libertarian identification quiz.  See https://www.cato.org/libertarianmind/libertarian-quiz  This Cato quiz compares results against liberals, moderates, etc.  I found this quiz more useful for me as I would categorize myself as a libertarian-classical-liberal-left-with-respect-to-social-issues-and-a-US-constitutional-fundamentalist (I believe that the Constitution's Bill of Rights should be interpreted in a manner to maximize individual rights).

I think that the MoreInCommon quiz is generally helpful.  However, because libertarians only make up a couple of percentage points of the electorate there is almost no focus on libertarians in the MoreInCommon quiz.  The reason as to why the MoreInCommon is generally helpful is that IMHO most US folks do not spend the amount of time discussing and nuancing issues that is common on MOL (especially in Soapbox: All Politics).  As a result, most US persons do NOT have the nuanced opinions often found on MOL and thus the generalizations found in the MoreInCommon quiz are more accurate for them.

ml1 said:

LOST said:

The result is a two-corporate party system in which half of the duopoly is overtly white supremacist while the other half appeals to most of the nation’s non-white voters but doesn't have the vocabulary to even begin to discuss the dismantling of racial oppression.
BAR executive editor Glen.Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com.
COMMENTS?
You know, he's right.

It's hard to argue against Mr. Ford's points.  He makes a lot of sense.

 I agree with some of Mr.  Ford's points.  However, Mr. Ford alleges that FB and Google have "blacklisted him."  See https://blackagendareport.com/facebook-not-your-friend

==================================================

Excerpt from the above linked article:

Facebook is Not Your Friend

“Facebook is indispensable to maintaining the global corporate monopoly on truth -- as is Google.”

Facebook has declared war on political dissent. In a rash of purges last week, the behemoth corporation banned 30 pages, with a total of 22 million fans, on the grounds that the accounts were “created to stir up political debate in the US, the Middle East, Russia and the UK.” At the top of the list were the anti-police lawlessness pages Cop Block , Filming Cops , The Free Thought Project and Police the Police, with a combined audience of 8.1 million. The other banned pages range across the non-establishment spectrum , from the reactionary Right Wing News, to Punk Rock Libertarians and the pro-marijuana page, Hemp.

These pages are “inauthentic,” Facebook claims , because they “use sensational political content” to “drive traffic to their websites.” Of course, the New York Times , the Washington Post  and virtually every other organ of corporate media also maintain Facebook pages that are designed to “drive traffic to their websites.” The daily content of these imperial propagandists is filled with “sensational” stories that are designed to inflame the public, laying the groundwork for endless wars -- most often on evidence that turns out to be fictitious. Yet Facebook has enlisted as “fact-checkers” the same corporate media that vouched for the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, spread lies about Viagra-fueled mass rape by Muammar Gaddafi’s soldiers in Libya, and continue to mask the U.S. alliance with al Qaida fighters in Syria. These same corporate “news” organs have treated allegations of Russian collusion with Trump during the 2016 elections as fact -- without a shred of evidence -- in order to whip up a new Cold War.

RealityForAll said:

ml1 said:

LOST said:

The result is a two-corporate party system in which half of the duopoly is overtly white supremacist while the other half appeals to most of the nation’s non-white voters but doesn't have the vocabulary to even begin to discuss the dismantling of racial oppression.
BAR executive editor Glen.Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com.
COMMENTS?
You know, he's right.

It's hard to argue against Mr. Ford's points.  He makes a lot of sense.

 I agree with some of Mr.  Ford's points.  However, Mr. Ford alleges that FB and Google have "blacklisted him."  See https://blackagendareport.com/facebook-not-your-friend

it's not implausible:

Delay, Deny and Deflect: How Facebook’s Leaders Fought Through Crisis

ml1 said:

RealityForAll said:

ml1 said:

LOST said:

The result is a two-corporate party system in which half of the duopoly is overtly white supremacist while the other half appeals to most of the nation’s non-white voters but doesn't have the vocabulary to even begin to discuss the dismantling of racial oppression.
BAR executive editor Glen.Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com.
COMMENTS?
You know, he's right.

It's hard to argue against Mr. Ford's points.  He makes a lot of sense.

 I agree with some of Mr.  Ford's points.  However, Mr. Ford alleges that FB and Google have "blacklisted him."  See https://blackagendareport.com/facebook-not-your-friend

it's not implausible:
Delay, Deny and Deflect: How Facebook’s Leaders Fought Through Crisis

 Agree as to plausibility.  However, Mr. Ford describes this POV on blacklisting of website as fact (which I believe is over-reach at a minimum).

In my opinion being an "activist" or being "devoted" are positives. Who are the movers and shakers? Who are the great leaders?

Further, should positions on issues not be evaluated on their merits? 

LOST said:
In my opinion being an "activist" or being "devoted" are positives. Who are the movers and shakers? Who are the great leaders?
Further, should positions on issues not be evaluated on their merits? 

I would instead say:  positions on issues should be evaluated based on principles advanced and diminished (rather than are the ends good).  I am extremely suspicious/cynical of ends-justify-the-means analysis (government torture, drone strikes and government surveillance all have been justified in this manner).