The problem is that it is more like cultural divisions (plural)
You might think you're arguing about politics, but it might be about the nature of knowledge, or you might think you're arguing about race but the other guy is arguing class.
Or you might be arguing with someone and don't realize why you're busting your heads together without realizing that one of you might be motivated by a utopian world and another is motivated by a moral world but those two things are not exactly the same.
The article is about the fracturing of knowledge. Information moves extraordinarily fast and not along traditional networks anymore. So what is Knowledgd? How do we know?
These things used to be relegated to college Philosophy classes. Now it's each person's problem to find knowledge/ information, evaluate it and fold it into our existing knowledge and schema.
Sounds exhausting? It is! And (there's more) we're doing it badly! And we're not even sure what it is we are doing! Or not doing! And that's why we're fighting!
There's more to the article. It's long.
Loved the references to the red pill and the blue pill. We XJWs know the metaphor. The blue pill is agreed upon reality. The red pill allows you to see the secret underlying order. But, the Gray pill. That might be the ultimate reality because we admit we really don't know much. Everything is gray and murky and we might end up arguing against the position we thought we had.
Simplistic example. I'm on the political left. I'm for equality of the sexes. But, the transgender thing? I don't know. You don't have to deny your sex to embrace being a strong female. People who say that they knew they were transgender when they were growing up and were treated as the weaker sex and they knew they weren't weak and didn't fit in to that stereotype therefore they didn't identify with women. Well, there were times I was treated the same way, but it didn't cause me to not identify with women, it caused me to be a strong woman who didn't believe the bullshit about what being a woman meant, weak, etc. (Again simplistic. I do believe some people have always felt they have been born in the wrong body so to speak)
I'm a feminist, but I just enraged feminists that are passionate about transgender rights. To them it makes me Not a Feminist. Or Not a Democrat. At which suggestion I am enraged. Isn't it ultimately about getting Trump out of office? I'm sure we can agree on this! But they say, no what it's really about is people being free to be who they are! We are ultimately arguing about different things. People who seem the closest can enrage us the most.
The article lists a few dozen -isms that we may feel particularly passionate about. Believing one doesn't necessarily make you a nonbeliever in another. A certain group of -isms don't put you cleanly on one side and another group the other. And that's what's so confusing. Each new -ism ( or meme as the authors call it) must be evaluated on it's own. It's exhausting, but that's the rate of new information in the new information economy.
Anyhow, that's what I understand the authors to be saying. It's a tough bunch of new concepts.