Interesting: I'll just address one sentence :
In the U.S. "...they all typically agree on what is 'good' if you zoom out a bit..."
I disagree with you on exactly this point. For example, a significant portion of the population here is waiting for the 'end of days'. No, not waiting, working toward it. They want to get to heaven, quickly. They need a conflagration in the Middle East so there can be a Second Coming. All policy decisions are governed by this one goal--their idea of good. This ideology represents a significant voting block in the US. It is a rock solid ideological perspective that governs their lives and influences local and national politics.
No matter how far you pull back the lens, it is hard to see how agreement on major policy and value issues can be reached between these believers and people outside the faith.
This is just one, but very important, example of how people in the US don't agree on values, on what good is. As a matter of fact, the greatest schisms in US society come over values.
I don't engage in political discussions here, but your tone is so reasonable, so rational, that I thought I might safely comment without being controversial. By the way, I very much admire your advocacy for animals. I share that advocacy.
I've been emotionally detached from online discourse for many years =)
But although you say this is a significant voting bloc, I am not familiar to who you are referring to, could you specify?
If I look at the two main parties, there is no open discourse to win popular votes regarding bringing on the end of days, so unless the two parties are overwhelmingly failing to represent the people, I'm not sure how 'significant' this proportion of the population is.
It's certainly possible though. One of the main issues in England lately is largely related to this huge divide in thought as a result of open borders, which brings a culture of people who are either unwilling or unable to integrate into society. With 300,000 net coming in from all cultures of the world, that proportion with completely different values is starting to have a voice.
For example, a foreign religious bigot may hate the gays, but their reason is not to be a malicious asshole, but a genuine belief that it is not good, safe or healthy for the gay person's eternal existence; this bigot simply wants the best for that person and/or their culture according to their beliefs (which naturally brings along with it their own ignorance and irrational fears etc). This is what the bigot has in common with the progressive activist.
China sees foreign culture leaking into their own as a threat to their own status quo, aaa poisoning of their proud and ancient traditions. So they legislate to stop it. Then Chinese go over to the US and bring the mindset of the 'enemy' western culture with them. They stick together in hordes of Chinese speakers, no integration required.
Many other examples of this, I'm sure I'm not telling you anything you don't already know. But the point is yes it can happen that a nation can be so extremely divided (look at India), but core values do not divide as much as we think, I think.
It all boils down to Fear + Love
Thanks for that extensive response. Yes, I am aware that throughout history and across national boundaries, people have feared dilution of traditional culture--and civil disruption. These fears I never dismiss because, of course, there is a basis in reality. Even with complete assimilation, national culture is inevitably affected when it comes into contact with "others". These are not easy matters and certainly I don't have easy answers. I'm referring to something different.
In the U.S. there is a strong fundamentalist religious tradition. Dissenters who fled England in the 17th century established some of the earliest colonies (some of my ancestors were among these). I don't know how or when the belief in and desire for Armageddon became entrenched in that fundamentalism--the rise of apocalyptic Evangelicalism (this would actually be interesting to trace,historically)-- but it comprises a solid core of the Republican base in the U. S. The Republican Party can no longer win a national election without its Evangelical base. Secretary of State Pompeo is a devout Evangelical, as is Vice President Pence.
Although, as I say, a fundamentalist streak runs strong in the US, we still have Las Vegas, Hollywood and New York. You can see where it would be hard to reconcile these polar values: Armageddon-oriented fundamentalism with secularism. Ideas about what is 'good' conflict dramatically. Most of us here aren't looking forward to Armageddon :)
(This Guardian article --which I couldn't read because they kept threatening to put cookies on my computer--touches on apocalyptic Evangelicalism in the U. S.)
As I say, I don't talk politics here, and I hope this isn't seen as political. And I never, ever argue. I have fun on the platform. Just thought I'd explain a bit about the socio-political dynamic that at least partly drives modern U. S. politics.
Have a great day!
Again I've been totally unaware of any literal apocalyptic dialogue republicans pander to their audience with so it can't be that big a deal.
googles
Hmm nothing from my keywords, although Americans are somewhat obsessed with the idea of an apocalypse, with many believing in it, but not desiring it.
It would be interesting if true though. One of my fears of visiting the US is being bombarded with religious propaganda, billboards everywhere and the like but at the same time find myself curiously drawn towards it to experience the madness of it all!
I'm unlike you it seems, I love a heated debate or two. Anything that gets me on Google learning something new is good to me!
I'll keep an eye out for these weird folk anyway, cheers!