Profile image
By John Rolls (Reporter)
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:

Why Do Leftists, Globalists Hate Tribalism So Much? +Videos

Thursday, March 16, 2017 7:31
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.


By Brandon Smith  //

Over the years I have heard the word “tribalism” used consistently as a way to deride and attack conservative groups with political stances outside the boundaries of globalization. Many readers have been exposed to this propaganda recently as “tribalism” becomes the go-to denouncement of the Trump Administration. From The Atlantic to CNBC to The Washington Post and beyond, tribalism is used almost as often as the fascist label, and there are very specific reasons for this.

Tribalism (like nationalism and populism) has slowly but surely been falsely associated with totalitarianism, as if the two are synonymous. The use of “tribalism” as a dismissal of sovereignty concepts is a distinctly globalist and leftist habit; clearly, they hate the very notion of it, so much so that they have sought to turn it into a four letter word. But why?

The fact of the matter is, tribalism revolves around sets of principles; meaning, some people hold principles that are completely incompatible with other people’s principles. Some principles simply cannot be reconciled with other principles, and they cannot coexist. Groups tend to form around principles, and thus, certain groups cannot live in close proximity with other groups. When they do live in close proximity, one will invariably absorb the other or destroy the other.

This is more likely to occur when two groups have diametrically opposing views rather than minor deviations and disagreements.

For example, the mass injection of millions of Muslim immigrants into European nations has in a very short period of time resulted in the steady decline of Western ideals and even the decline of legal frameworks in the areas where the immigrants concentrate. Sharia law is a direct antithesis to traditional Western values such as religious freedom, free speech, freedom of association, individual rights, economic independence, free markets, etc. (It is interesting to note that western socialists and communist ideals run parallel to Muslim culture when it comes to the desire to dismantle sovereignty.) The effects of this clash of principles are quite obvious at this point.

Sharia-based groups have been transplanted into the Western sphere in what I consider a deliberate Cloward-Piven strategy of cultural destabilization of Europe. These groups do not assimilate, they devour the surrounding culture and turn it into something that sublimates in accordance with their principles. This is why the leftist and globalist call for “multiculturalism” is nonsensical. You cannot have two or more diametrically opposed cultures within the same society — one of them has to take precedence over all the others. Globalists in particular KNOW this is the reality, and they use multiculturalism as a means to undermine nations specifically built upon traditional sovereign values.

Leftists are in most cases merely useful idiots that promote multiculturalism as a means of “penance.” That is to say, they believe that traditional western culture should be punished for past transgressions and in due course, phased out completely in exchange for a new utopian system.

Both leftists and globalists will often try to argue that if tribalism was not prevalent there would be no ill will between Muslims and Westerners or any other groups for that matter. But, as stated earlier, what they are glossing over is the inevitability of groups separating based on principals.  The only way for all groups to coexist in close proximity in the multicultural paradise we are being sold is for ALL value systems to be eliminated except for one. And perhaps that is the point.

Globalists prefer an outcome in which traditional values are erased and replaced with a “new world order” mindset; a system that is rooted in collectivist suppression of individual liberty, where freedom is exchanged for “harmony;” one global tribe worshiping one global god — the state.

The existence of tribalism might lead to conflicts if opposing cultures are deliberately mashed together, but it also makes the formation of a single overarching tyranny very difficult. Globalists seek to irritate existing divisions and trigger chaos between groups because ultimately, they want to demonize the very concept of tribalism and make way for a one world ideal that fits THEIR agenda.

Leftists are decidedly less self aware on why they fight so hard against tribalism. They see cultural division of any kind on the part of the west as inherently evil. Ironically, when it comes to so called “victim groups” like Muslims, social-justice warriors will argue that their aggressively divisive behavior is off limits to criticism because you have to be “from that culture to understand it”.  So, tribalism on the part of designated victim groups is beyond reproach, and tribalism on the part of westerners is a cancer that must be eradicated.

To reiterate, leftists love tribalism initiated by those they consider victim groups.  They only hate tribalism when it is initiated by conservatives and the traditional western middle class.  The double standard is evident.

Exactly what is happening here? Well, we are being given a false choice. We are offered tribalism at the cost of endless social crisis (which is being deliberately instigated), or, the erasure of tribalism and traditional principles for the sake of “peace.”  No other solutions are being presented.

Liberty proponents like myself would point out that there is an underlying principle within natural law that could solve many of the problems that arise between groups with differing world views without sacrificing everything to join a one-world collectivist hive mind. That rule would be the “Non-Aggression Principle.”  To summarize, the non-aggression principle holds that no person or group has the right to impose their beliefs or will on another person or group. The only time force of action is warranted is in self defense and the defense of innocents.

If a society was to operate by the rule of non-aggression, and people were to abide by that rule, then most groups and cultures could live peacefully. For the people who do not abide, removal from that society or nation would be necessary. This is the intrinsic advantage of tribalism in its purest form; tribalism allows us to discriminate against groups with destructive principles and behaviors, or against those that have different objectives. Some divisions are useful divisions. This allows for a group with shared goals to accomplish those goals without constant internal obstruction or sabotage. As long as the non-aggression principle is adhered to, tribalism is the ideal system.

Of course, there are certain groups that are incapable of accepting this dynamic.

Leftist ideology depends upon thought control and manipulation in order to remain relevant. Because their values are not based in logic or self examination, they don’t have the ability to win people over through compelling arguments; all they have are lies and force. When in power, they use the force of government. When out of power, they use the threat of the mob. If tribalism and the non-aggression principle were to thrive, the leftists in their current form would represent a failed group, and they would fade away.

Globalists see themselves as social architects, and an architect cannot function if his building materials will not cooperate. Globalism is impotent without the ability to impose will and the ability to undermine practical divisions between ideological opposites. Tribalism in the name of sovereignty and free society is an impassable wall to globalization. Their only option is to utilize and exploit groups that are anti-liberty as a weapon against existing societies that still have some basis in sovereignty. This is much easier to do when anti-liberty groups are organized within those free systems, or, when they are imported into them. A strong, free people cannot be destroyed from without, they can only be destroyed from within.

Social divisions are absolutely rational and healthy, and there is nothing “evil” or totalitarian about organizing only with people that share your values. The real evil comes from those that would suppress our values in the name of “harmonization” — there is no such thing.  Globalists and leftists argue for the adoption and toleration of all ideologies and principles as a means to peace, but what they really want in the end is the erasure of all the ideologies and principles they see as disagreeable in order to make way for their own.

If you would like to support the publishing of articles like the one you have just read, visit our donations page here.  We greatly appreciate your patronage.

You can contact Brandon Smith at:

More great articles here:

We encourage you to Share our Reports, Analyses, Breaking News and Videos. Simply Click your Favorite Social Media Button and Share.

Report abuse


Your Comments
Question Razz Sad Evil Exclaim Smile Redface Biggrin Surprised Eek Confused Cool LOL Mad Twisted Rolleyes Wink Idea Arrow Neutral Cry Mr. Green

Total 6 comments
  • Just me

    Globalism to the extreme is communism. Tribalism to the extreme is fascism. Neither extreme is safe.

    • Canderson

      That is not correct, I think!
      Fascism is corporatism. Public private partnership.
      Communism is always a dictatorship. Fascism is a dictatorship in the extreme.
      Globalism is very very extreme, one: – ruler; – sheeple; – religion.
      They give to us the common good and God, in their slavery system.
      Besides it is the Owners, the oligarchy of the plutocracy that owns the big-corporations, and also the monetary system, in fact it is their system, the whole system is theirs.
      It is Corporatism that runs Communism not the other way around.
      Tribalism is the Nation state, when your own people, consisting of several tribes go together and form a Nation.
      A nation is a collective of people united by common factors such as language, religion, ethnicity, descent, history, culture, traditions, a shared governance and social norms.
      Expression of the nation is nationalism.

      William Cooper – The Truth About Socialism

      • Just me

        So you’re saying Hitler’s philosophy was corporatism? No – both extremes lead to fascism.

    • Canderson

      Critical thinking…the awakening of the intellect to the study of itself.
      You must be asleep to believe in the American dream.
      You have to be stupid to believe in Communism. (That collectivism will serve your personal needs, and you will always have victims to the common good, not always sunshine.)
      “Why Do Leftists, Globalists Hate Tribalism So Much?”
      Because they have been Clockwork Oranged,
      the government dumbed them down, to be suitable for their programming, they now programmed to feel that way, ask them why they react in that manner and they do not even know the answer to that Q themselves, they got no sense of reason left, they just Snoop Doggying, or doggy dogg, follow the stream in collectivism lead by the collective mind.

      They only respond to emotional input, stimulus reaction like one Pavlovian Dog.
      Correct way to react should be:
      directly: (new) stimulus, Thinking then Response.
      long term:(known) stimulus, Critical Thinking then (Correct) Response.

      A Cloward-Piven strategy is a Marxist Communist revolution In Sheep’s Clothing.

      In an op-ed for WND (WorldNetDaily), Norris explained that the two people — Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven — were academics who came up with a plan to

      introduce permanent socialism in the United States.
      Norris said that “the Cloward-Piven strategy is a political plan created in 1966 by two Columbia University sociologists to overload the U.S. public welfare system, the

      goal being to replace it with a national system of ‘a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty.’

      “I echo again that it’s neither a coincidence that Obama graduated from Columbia University nor that others who espoused the Cloward-Piven strategy were a group of radicals who have been a part of his life and education: Bill Ayers, Saul Alinsky, Bernardine Dohrn, George Wiley, Frank Marshall Davis, Wade Rathke and George Soros, among others,” Norris continued.

      The 21 Objectives of the Illuminati By N. Morgan

      N. Morgan mentions the Cloward-Piven strategy but that also includes the Coudenhove-Kalergi plan. C-K was a Freemason and an aristocrat who thought it was a great idea to do the whole Brave New World thing in real life, and right here in Europe. We’re seeing that with the huge influx of Muslims. The gradual Islamisation fits into it
      perfectly because (a) Islam requires blind allegiance (b) it encourages 1st cousin marriages, which decreases IQ by 10% per generation. = easy programmable.

      • Equalizer

        Canderson and Pink Slime…Well done. Cloward-Piven and Agenda 21 must be brought into the light and undermined at all cost.

  • Pink Slime

    It goes a little deeeper than that Brandon. It’s about killing off the race of Issac’s son or Anglo-Saxons and in particularly the tribe of Juhah that brought in Yahusha.

    In another word’s – THE WHITE MAN. You have traitors in your midst always as YOUR Bible will tell you.

    You have LOST your identity and thus cannot describe the problem apropos.

Top Stories
Recent Stories



Top Global

Top Alternative



Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.