Introduction: Lessons from the Field
In my earlier piece, The Psychological Mechanisms Driving FAFO, I explored how cognitive biases and social identity fuel rigid political behaviors. But a critical oversight emerged: framing the issue as unique to any single group missed the broader, more corrosive problem plaguing all movements—self-sabotage through infighting.
Reflecting on my years coaching youth sports, I’m reminded of a universal truth: no team wins by tearing itself apart. This lesson applies starkly to politics. When we prioritize ideological purity over collective action, we hand victory to opponents who thrive on our disunity.
The Sports Analogy: Why “Ringers” Aren’t Enough
Coaching kids taught me that relying on a single star player—a “ringer”—might crush unprepared teams, but it’s a losing strategy against cohesive opponents. A real team studies your star, shuts them down, and exploits the gaps left by fractured teamwork. I drilled into my players: “Teams build each other up. Losers tear each other down.”
Politics mirrors this. A charismatic leader or “perfect” candidate might rally the base temporarily, but lasting victories demand unity. Michael Jordan famously said, “Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence win championships.” No messianic figure, no matter how inspiring, can compensate for a movement that cannibalizes itself over minor disagreements.
History’s Warning: Divided Movements Lose
The historical record is clear. From the infighting of the 1960s New Left to the GOP’s 2016 civil war, divided movements falter. In 2020, temporary unity helped defeat Trump, but the refusal to sustain that cohesion led to 2024’s resurgence of extremism.
This isn’t about labels—“progressive” or “liberal”—it’s about human psychology. Social identity theory explains our tribal instincts, but cognitive dissonance blinds us to the cost. We’d rather be “right” in our bubbles than compromise to win broader support.
The Pragmatist’s Playbook: Leave It All on the Field
Critics dismiss incremental progress as cowardice. But pragmatism isn’t surrender—it’s strategy. Protest votes in “safe” states or purity tests that alienate allies? That’s like calling a timeout to sulk in the locker room. It does nothing but waste energy.
Leave it all on the field: Fight for every yard, even imperfect ones. The Affordable Care Act wasn’t single-payer, but it expanded healthcare to millions. Had purists blocked it, zero progress would exist. Meanwhile, misinformation—the political equivalent of trash talk—distracts us. Don’t let opponents get in your head.
A Call for Political Teamwork
To avoid repeating FAFO cycles, we must:
- Deprioritize Labels: Focus on shared goals, not tribal signifiers.
- Celebrate Small Wins: Policy gains, even incremental ones, build momentum.
- Save the Debates for Practice: Argue over strategy before elections, not during.
- Protect the Coalition: Call out bad faith actors sowing division, not allies negotiating compromises.
Conclusion: Play the Long Game
The stakes are too high to indulge in infighting. Just as a team trains to face a common opponent, we must channel energy outward—not inward. Victory isn’t about ideological perfection; it’s about strategic unity.
As I told my players: “You don’t have to like every teammate. But you damn well better fight for them when the game is on the line.” Democracy isn’t saved by ringers or messiahs. It’s saved by teams.