I believe that most people are far more similar than different—in their core drives, flaws, and potential—and that our obsession with highlighting differences (tribal, ideological, cultural, or identity-based) is one of the biggest sources of unnecessary conflict and misery in the world.
Most people seem to disagree. They treat group identities, political teams, or cultural backgrounds as profound, almost mystical dividers that justify vastly different moral standards, expectations, or levels of empathy. “My side’s flaws are understandable; yours prove you’re evil.” Or “Our culture is uniquely virtuous/oppressed; yours is uniquely problematic.” This mindset fuels everything from cancel culture to wars, from family feuds to endless online rage.
In reality, strip away the surface labels, and you’ll find the same basic human software running on nearly everyone: status-seeking, pattern-seeking, self-justification, fear of uncertainty, desire for belonging, love for kin, resentment when thwarted, bursts of altruism mixed with self-interest. The variance within any group is usually much larger than the average differences between groups. Intelligence, personality, kindness, cruelty—these distribute across all populations in overlapping bell curves, not neat silos.
Acknowledging this similarity doesn’t mean ignoring real statistical patterns (e.g., in behavior, outcomes, or biology where evidence supports them). It means refusing to let those patterns become moral armor or weapons that let us dehumanize the “other.” It means judging individuals as individuals, not avatars of their category. And it means recognizing that most “profound differences” are amplified by incentives: media, politicians, and social platforms profit from division, while cooperation and trade quietly make the world better.
This view gets pushback from almost every direction—left, right, nationalists, globalists, identitarians of all stripes—because it undermines the comforting narrative that “we” are special and “they” are the problem. But the evidence from history, psychology, economics, and genetics points strongly toward underlying human universality. The more we lean into similarity and shared humanity (while still allowing honest disagreement and competition), the freer and more functional society becomes.
It’s not naive optimism. It’s a clear-eyed bet on what actually scales: treating people as messy, flawed individuals first. Most seem to prefer the drama of eternal tribal combat. I think that’s a mistake.
Most people believe that having more information always leads to better decisions. However, too much information can actually make decision-making harder. When people overthink and try to consider every option, they often become confused or stressed. Instead of finding the “perfect” choice, it is often better to choose an option that is simply good enough and move forward.!!!