One kind of tribalism exists in academic tribes whose discourses are bounded by specific turfs such that problems (which do not respect the boundaries of turfs) cannot be solved.

Dear Humberto,

There is an important example of economic and political tribalism in California which dates back to the 1980s or earlier.

A considerable amount of immigration from foreign countries (Mexico, Vietnam, and others) had been taking place for decades. Many in the white majority felt threatened and were susceptible to propaganda that claimed that the younger, new immigrants were recipients of tax moneys for schools and welfare that the generally older white majority were paying.

At the same time, in the 1980s, the property tax burden on many older people was becoming excessive. So, a referendum called "Proposition 13," was held to bring down property taxes. It was easily passed. As a result, the funding of public schools and other social welfare benefits was slashed.

Hidden in this referendum, was a provision that stated that any new taxes would have to be approved by 2/3 majority of the electorate.

This was the beginning of a tax rebellion in the United States of America and in other parts of the world. This tax rebellion is a very important factor in the decline of social services, especially in public education. (See: "Paradise Lost: California's Experience, America's Future," by Peter Schrag, 1998, University of California Press.)

This was the result of the older white majority tribe resenting their tax dollars being used to help fund services for people outside of their tribe.

Modern-day,  tribalism the fundamental problem in our societies in any country namely, India, USA, USSR, etc.

To all: It is interesting to note that whenever one tries to discuss apparently objective facts/observations that challenge a modern-day tribalism, most adherents of this tribalism will dispute them or try to deflect the discussion away from the topic at hand. To them, their association with the tribe is more important than facts. This will be their modus operandi until or unless they are facing a hardship that directly affects them or someone dear to them (such as unemployment or sickness or death).

During the Great Depression, the wholesale hardships people faced forced them to forget about narrow tribalisms and embrace their neighbors and countrymen as fellows with a common pain.

I hope we do not have to wait until calamity forces us to be brothers.

Before that happens, we need to find ways to reduce the tribalism by using our brains and hearts, not our base impulses towards people who, superficially, may look or act differently from us. 

Antonio, you will find it difficult to find root causes of something that is not properly defined. If one includes basically every expression and occasion of inter-group competition or conflict, then one can of course say that t is relevant in most cases. However, as one can see below, basically everyone has another very personal understanding of what this "modern tribalism" entails. This is the outcome of a problem simplification that goes too far. If a term is too broad it loses its explanatory power.

Dear Olaf,

There is always a danger of generalization, and one must keep in mind the context and the implicit assumptions one is making. But, it is refreshing to be able to broaden one's perspective and see where phenomena may have a common root cause. Otherwise, one is always limited to the particular. In this case, I think it is very useful to find something in common that explains a diversity of phenomena; and, in fact, I think it offers potential solutions that otherwise, without this broader perspective, would be overlooked. 

Dear Umberto, you are confirming my point. I have come across tribalism myself and am aware that your perspective on it is of course a valid one. It may, however, not serve as a basis for a generalisation. Sometimes the indiscriminate labeling of different sets of problems by a single stamp, in this case tribalism, is counter productive. The result would be a search for a panacea because problems are reduced to a single element. That has never worked as we had to experience with one-size-fits-all policy recommendations. Best wishes.

To all:

An interesting case of tribalism causing harm that is self-inflicted:

My family migrated from Denver, Colorado, to Los Angeles, California, in the 1940s and 1950s. My uncle chose to settle on the east side of Los Angeles where the population was predominantly Mexican-American. My father chose to settle in west Los Angeles which was predominantly mainstream "white" American.

One of the reasons my uncle chose East L.A., was because he felt more comfortable there, in spite of various disadvantages.

A major reason my father chose West L.A. was because of the various advantages and because he felt self-confident that he could succeed on his own.

My uncle was seeking a tribe to belong to. The results for him and his family were not good. The worst outcome of all being his grandson being murdered by gang members.

The results for my father and his family were very much better. The best result for my father and his family was better economic and education opportunities, without any dangers to our family. 

Interesting variant of "tribalism" that I shall add to my list. Sounds very much like a culture of organised petty crime. 

To All:

Two anecdotes of other experiences I have had with tribalism in Africa; one is traditional tribalism, the other is modern-day tribalism.

In the 1960s, I was was in East Africa for three years.

While I was student-teaching at Namilyango College, in Uganda, I witnessed a case of traditional tribalism in which an old lady who was from Ruanda and a member of the Bahutu tribe was living outside of Kampala, Uganda among the predominant Baganda tribe. She depended on foreigner's charity to survive; the people around her didn't care if she lived or died.

While I was stationed in Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania, I noticed that there were many, many exclusive social clubs: one for the Brits, one for the Goans, one for the Greeks, one for the Italians, and so forth. Each modern-day tribe had its own exclusive social club. The result was a general cultural stagnation and distrust and perpetuation of stereotypes of the "other." 

Is modern-day tribalism the fundamental problem in our societies?

Dear Lucero, we have found this as an interesting question/concern. Generally you have said it all. However, let us narrate the cause of tribalism as narrated by Lucero in the entire three categories. In this world people are generally  moved by feelings/subjectivity and not reasoning/objectivity.  In this regard, people enjoy affiliation, friendship and general decision making through feelings instead of reasoning. It is through this, we find that government nominates people who do not disclose competencies palatable for the respective job. We must learn to affiliate and make decisions through objectivity or competence based mode. If we shall be driven by competence, then we shall see the end of bias, tribalism, redtapism and so forth. 

Dear Norman,

I am glad you are turning the conversation toward solutions. That is what makes this conversation worthwhile.

In the formal education of children and adolescents, it has been found that years later students often attain a fulfilling and successful life if they learn two important life lessons: (a) grit; and (b) self-confidence.

Grit would mean having courage and determination to not give up easily.

Self-confidence would mean having the courage to stand up for what you believe is true and not simply go with the crowd.

These same life lessons would serve many people well to thoughtfully resist the emotional attraction of devoting your whole being to belonging, believing, and defending your tribe, almost without limits.

Having grit and self-confidence will allow you to identify, to a limited extent, with various tribes (clan, racial, ethnic, nationality, economic, educational, political. etc.). But, you will be able to select which attributes of each of these tribes you will embrace and which ones you will reject. You will be an eclectic person, capable of critical thinking and innovation, since you will be operating from a base of diversity which offers you multiple points of view.

To all: an interesting video that is pertinent to this discussion:

www.ted.com/talks/paul_zak_trust_morality_and_oxytocin#t-975237.

One kind of tribalism exists in academic tribes whose discourses are bounded by specific turfs such that problems (which do not respect the boundaries of turfs) cannot be solved.