In a proper democracy some of these tribes wouldn’t exist because all voters would be educated and have proper information about the state of the world and would vote based on what they think is the correct way forward, not based on irrational fears.
Doesn’t really work if one of the tribes is fundamentally about denying human rights to a specific group of people. Any compromise with that position is already accepting that position as viable. Also the right outright denies the problem of climate change all together - and therefore are not interested in any compromise about something they don’t believe exists, too.
The left and center parties can still work together but sadly the right has drifted too far away from what reasonable positions that you can compromise with are.
You don’t need unanimous decision making, as long as people’s voices are represented. But I do indeed hope that a large majority of people will always refuse to compromise on denying human rights to specific groups of people.
Democracy only works if people are more or less on the same page about reality - since than they can find a conses or compromise. If people can’t agree on the nature of reality (is climate change real, is there a problem with immigration, are viruses even real? ) than democracy can do nothing, since there is no way to bridge that differences in a peaceful manner.
The five tribes identified are not present in each country, but rather it is a regional split according to which topic is dominating the current political debate.
In Southern Europe it is economic turmoil, in eastern Europe it is Russian agression, in some areas of western and central Europe it is climate change and in other areas it is migration. Finally there is the Covid, which is an issue in all countries.
Yeah I mean, all tribes that are present among the voting populace should be represented. (I was mainly just making a dig at the US’s two-party system :P )
And in proper democracies, all of these tribes are represented in parliament and make policy together.
In a proper democracy some of these tribes wouldn’t exist because all voters would be educated and have proper information about the state of the world and would vote based on what they think is the correct way forward, not based on irrational fears.
Doesn’t really work if one of the tribes is fundamentally about denying human rights to a specific group of people. Any compromise with that position is already accepting that position as viable. Also the right outright denies the problem of climate change all together - and therefore are not interested in any compromise about something they don’t believe exists, too.
The left and center parties can still work together but sadly the right has drifted too far away from what reasonable positions that you can compromise with are.
You don’t need unanimous decision making, as long as people’s voices are represented. But I do indeed hope that a large majority of people will always refuse to compromise on denying human rights to specific groups of people.
Democracy only works if people are more or less on the same page about reality - since than they can find a conses or compromise. If people can’t agree on the nature of reality (is climate change real, is there a problem with immigration, are viruses even real? ) than democracy can do nothing, since there is no way to bridge that differences in a peaceful manner.
That is another sign of a well-functioning democracy, indeed.
The five tribes identified are not present in each country, but rather it is a regional split according to which topic is dominating the current political debate.
In Southern Europe it is economic turmoil, in eastern Europe it is Russian agression, in some areas of western and central Europe it is climate change and in other areas it is migration. Finally there is the Covid, which is an issue in all countries.
Yeah I mean, all tribes that are present among the voting populace should be represented. (I was mainly just making a dig at the US’s two-party system :P )
And in a proper democracy, each citizen votes directly on matters.
Someone who represents only some of your views cannot effectively act as your representative.
Mir si im momänt grad chli unbeliebt, darum wei sis nid ghöre… aber säubschtverständlech hesch rächt