Final answer:
Political tribalism involves strong biases based on party loyalty, leading to polarized political climates, while moral ethnicity involves the dominant ethnic group's influence on politics, often overshadowing minority interests. Daniel Elazar's moralistic political culture contrasts with political tribalism by promoting governance for societal benefit and inclusive participation.
Step-by-step explanation:
Political tribalism and moral ethnicity are concepts that relate to the cohesion and division within different groups in society and politics. Political tribalism refers to a phenomenon where affiliations to a particular political party or group are so strong that they can become a primary source of identity and bias, leading to a highly polarized environment where compromise is difficult. Examples of political tribalism can be seen in the partisanship within American politics or the political divides that characterize some elections.
Moral ethnicity, on the other hand, considers the influence of a dominant ethnic group within a society and its effects on political socialization and governmental policy. It suggests that the majority group may expect politics to naturally align with their interests, often overlooking the needs and perspectives of minority groups. Daniel Elazar's concept of a moralistic political culture highlights a contrast to political tribalism, as it emphasizes governance aimed at improving societal well-being and promoting participation by all citizens, beyond partisan loyalties.