Have you heard of Grave's value systems (or levels of psychological existence)? It has solid references to Maslow's pyramid of needs and advanced psychological coaching. It goes beyond just beliefs; the relevant NLP term is "value elicitation". A pop version of the theory is Spiral Dynamics.

There are 6, 8 or 12 core levels, depending on whom you ask. Briefly, the 6 basic levels are:

1. Basic survival and immediate gratification values; reactive, instinctive behaviour. Think of a city ghetto.

2. Tribal bonding values; respect for custom, group stability.

3. Machiavellian alpha/authoritarian values. It is better to be a leader, godfather than lower in the group. Includes royals.

4. Conservative/class society values. Seeking a meaning, justification. Religion is important.

5. Personal welfare, autonomy values. Entrepreneurship, technology acceptance. Opportunistic, pragmatic.

6. Progressive humanistic values. Most of ET readers must be here.

Note that odd-numbered value systems are individualistic, while even-numbered - social oriented. The enumerated sequence reflects well lifelong developments from birth. The higher number points to a larger required resource base rather than to a higher merit, one might say.

The next six levels 7-12 supposed to be "quantum jumps" of the basic six, respectively. But empirical evidence is negligible beyond level 8. Individuals in the "higher" value systems are aware of existence of the other levels, and therefore can adopt themselves when needed. Original versions of the next 2 levels:

7. Individualistic, hedonistic values. Flexible self-interest, optimistic.

8. Global environmental values. Can sacrifice own lifestyle and others. (Think ecoterrorism.)

There is surely much to discuss here. But relating to the diary subject: People make choices (and vote) according to their value systems. The thing is, our level 6 is not very much liked and well understood by others... In the last 2-3 decades, the progressive-humanistic values are taking quite a beating really. The few recent achievements (say, LGBT rights) are rather symbolic in relation to lost ground. Isn't it amazing how individualistic 5s and 7s got so co-operative against us? Apparently, the 6s were caught off-guard and lost most of influence, reputation and connection to (gradually less educated) masses. The 6s turned out to be poorly competitive in leadership, and not proactive enough for their values.