@XSGeek , just want to let you know that your poli-sci instructor's insight about the "political axis is a circle" has really shifted my understanding of how society thinks. I think it might be more of a spiral/spring model, but more noodling is required. 🙂

@XSGeek I think we're all just trying to peel away at this stinky onion called society. Thanks for removing one more layer for me! 🙂

@XSGeek , I disagree. Tribalism is more generic and is associated with the individual's self-referenced identity. You might be tribal, but extending the irrelevant attributes is groupist. i.e. "Conservatives are moral, Liberals are immoral."
You could also be tribal and not be a groupist. Sport fans are tribal, but probably don't assign irrelevant attributes to all of their fellow fans or rivals.

I would like to propose a new term to replace "Racism". "Groupism" calls out the same, twisted logic that assigns an irrelevant attribute to the entire group. Racism is a subset of Groupism. We're seeing groupism applied to Dems, R's, Libs, Conservatives, Catholics, Protestants, Californians and Politicians. If the group is defined by the attribute - such as Blondes have blonde hair - that is not groupism. Racism is Groupism applied to a race. Notice how the RNC rhetoric is groupist.

@XSGeek Maybe "extremely principled view" is the same as "dogmatic"? I'm OK with dogmatic as the descriptor. The intent was to address both ends of the political spectrum and describe how they are virtually the same minds with different starting points. And, it's not about moving them to the center. It's about calling out that they are on a completely different axis that cannot be argued incrementally.

@corlin Agreed that the Fed will never "run out of cash", but it would be devalued once the debt-stability is compromised by the drop in tax revenues. Every one of these steps probably requires a cogent paragraph.

@XSGeek , my definition would be anyone with an extremely principled view which conveniently ignores unambiguous truths and thread of logic. This should encompass both ends of the conservative-liberal spectrum.

Most of the radicals I've encountered do not have the ability to deconstruct complex concepts into more simple components. It's always one big issue. They gut-check it because that's the only tool they have and trust. Therefore, arguing is a pointless exercise.

17. Like-minded state governors establish groups to pool resources and coordinate efforts
18. These new groups give themselves a name
19. Citizens of these new state-groups begin to use that name to differentiate themselves from those with opposing values
20. The federal government runs out of cash, with the currency now highly devalued, and cannot afford to enforce its influence over the groups of states

13. The federal government re-purposes its forces on compliant states with populations with similar values as the leadership
14. State governors establish boarder checks to mitigate the catastrophic condition in violation of the Constitution
15. Federal courts rule against the states
16. State governors with boarder checks ignore the Federal court

10. Re-purpose funding to domestic security efforts due to increasing civil unrest - which is supported by one division of the society
11. State governors, who have managed to mitigate the catastrophic condition, begin to act against the federal security efforts and encourage citizens to identify with the state and not the federal government
12. The state governments become more trusted relative to the federal government
state-groups

7. Keep mitigating the economic impact to the people with sustaining-capital (not investment capital) and do it using debt
8. Sustain the economic suppression so that the tax revenue is significantly reduced
9. Sustain the funding until the currency begins to be devalued by traders and inflation begins to accelerate

4. Accelerate the divisions of the people by associating their values to their reaction to the catastrophic condition (such as wearing a mask)
5. Sustain the conditions for an extended period by ensuring that the catastrophic condition is not fixed (such as opening up too early)
6. Create an environment where the economy is suppressed into a deep recession.

How to bring down a country in 20 easy steps:
(We are at step 5)
1. Split the people based on their personal values and not the collective values of the country
2. Accelerate that condition with divisive leadership
3. Insert an unavoidable, catastrophic condition into society that impacts everyone's lifestyle (such as a pandemic)

I've been building COVID dashboards for my own use, but maybe people here might find them interesting or useful. Have a look!
https://bit.ly/coviddashboardsweb

Your daily dose of terror and misery: https://bit.ly/covid19dashboards

My broad-stroke opinion:
Conservatives and Liberals can both be intelligent.
But, the difference in their intelligence occurs upfront, when they are considering the information to define their position.
A conservative is dominated by a "belief structure" where their data-filter is less discerning unless it conforms to their beliefs.
A liberal approaches the data from a discerning perspective and with fewer belief-biases.
This is why the word "truth" has different meanings to them.

Some breaking, good news for civil rights: https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/15/politics/supreme-court-lgbtq-employment-case/index.html

@just3nanalysis Maybe we need to surface the absurdity to be rid of it?

@Kalos, a deeper pattern to discuss. And if the profession attracts authoritarians, then there needs to be a better process for mitigating that propensity. I too have friends that are cops. Very good people. So I don't believe it is the profession that creates the bad cop. If there is a propensity, then address that. But grouping and disregarding any further parsing doesn't get us closer to a solution. And, the label we assign to the group makes it even harder to see the solution. Labels hide.