If I'm interpreting this correctly, it seems that the author falls victim to the same fallacies he mentioned in his post. By assuming that all discussion of politics inherently devolves into tribalism, he invokes the all-or-nothing attitude which, as he mentioned, is often present among politically "engaged" people with minimal experience with views outside their sphere of opinions.<p>It's also worth noting that I notice some people will often conflate, usually accidentally, holding strong opinions (politically or otherwise) with not being exposed to a wide enough range of opinions/not being educated enough.<p>In addition to this, people will often hold a series of political views out of ideological consistency, rather than tribalism, a factor which strangely is minimised in the discourse surrounding it.<p>I find that, as long as you're with reasonably politically aware adults, you can have positive conversations as long as you are both aware of your moral bases and discuss in good faith.
I think this man must feel compelled to write a new post every few days? Every week? I don't see the motivation for posting this otherwise. It embodies no thesis of any consequence.