David Pinsof wrote Dec. 15, 2025: “Partisan hatred is not a whoopsie. You want to know why partisans hate each other? It’s not because they gave in to a dumb, primitive urge called “tribalism.” It’s not because they had a senior moment and forgot to check for disconfirming evidence of their propaganda. It’s because they’re locked in zero-sum competition over the coercive apparatus of the state—the thing that forcibly puts human beings in prison at gunpoint. The stakes are high. And what do we do in a high-stakes competition? We fight dirty. We demonize the competition. And we deny we’re doing this—and embellish how much the other side is doing it—because denial and embellishment are useful weapons to wield in the fight.”
The tension surrounding Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Minnesota illustrates the reality of institutional power. When groups vie for control over the mechanisms of law enforcement and deportation, the conflict naturally becomes visceral. This struggle involves the authority to dictate who stays in a community and who is forcibly removed from it. Because the outcome of this competition determines the direct application of state force, the participants treat the process as a battle for survival rather than a mere policy debate.
Pinsof’s perspective strips away the idea that political vitriol is a mistake or a result of poor communication. Instead, the aggression serves as a strategic tool. In a zero-sum environment, any gain for one side represents a total loss for the other. This dynamic encourages stakeholders to use every available rhetorical weapon. They portray opponents as existential threats to justify their own tactics. In Minnesota, where local and federal jurisdictions often clash over immigration holds and courthouse arrests, these high stakes turn every administrative decision into a flashpoint for broader partisan warfare.
