Seth Godin talks about tribes in his book, called, well...Tribes[0]. Worth reading. He has a few interviews on Youtube where he talks about finding your people (if you don't want to read a whole book).

[0] https://www.amazon.com/Tribes-We-Need-You-Lead/dp/1491514736

Suggested readings:

"The Culting of Brands" - https://www.amazon.com/Culting-Brands-Turn-Customers-Believe...

Blueprint for Revolution (as mentioned in Adam Grant's Originals) - https://www.amazon.com/Blueprint-Revolution-Nonviolent-Techn...

Tribes by Seth Godin -https://www.amazon.com/Tribes-We-Need-You-Lead/dp/1491514736

The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements - https://www.amazon.com/True-Believer-Thoughts-Nature-Movemen...

I've read the first three. The fourth is on my short list. The common theme? Start in a tight niche and establish a core of "fanatics". With a niche and a core your odds of traction and sustainability drop off.

If it helps, use any major religion as a reference point. That is, Christianity wasn't always the dominate (?) force it is today. But it started very small and tight.

A community isn't much different. Perhaps less extreme (?), but the same basic elements remain.

Well, it's not without precedent https://www.amazon.com/Tribes-We-Need-You-Lead/dp/1491514736

It is indeed good, but my concern is that some will take this to mean that they don't need to take other people at there word, and that consequently any attempt to form a common ground philosophically will not even be made (let alone whether such attempts could actually be successful).

More suspect is the notion, not necessarily implied by Scott's piece but but explicitly stated in the post he linked[0], that those with religious beliefs specifically should not be taken at their word.

This is not a defense of religion. Rather, why does a belief in some bearded guy in the sky suddenly invalidate the content of your other, when belief in "The Equality of Humanity" or "The Progress of History" or "The Zeitgeist" or "Free Markets" or other such fluffy abstractions not[1]?

Also, because this notion of tribalism is trending, I fear it risks becoming the new psychoanalysis (i.e. "everything wrong with you can be explained by repressed childhood trauma!"). We don't behave philosophically as often as we like to pretend, but that doesn't mean we don't ever.

I think the realizations about tribalism are primarily useful insofar as we are introspecting to understand our own motivations behind our political/social behaviors, and hopefully allow us to overcome those aspects of our psychology in an attempt to reach that philosophical common ground with our enemy tribes.

The only other application will be those who employ such knowledge in a pursuit of power[2] or money[3].

[0]http://www.meltingasphalt.com/religion-is-not-about-beliefs/ [1]https://unqualifiedreservations.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/how... [2]https://www.amazon.com/Rules-Radicals-Practical-Primer-Reali... [3]https://www.amazon.com/Tribes-We-Need-You-Lead/dp/1491514736