You're asking the wrong question. Conflicts arise not just from differing views on general questions about governance, but from competing groups each fighting for their own self-interest. "Agreeing with views", for one fleeting moment in time, means little for the long-term cohesion of a country, or the prosperity and sovereignty of a people.
See for example Kashmir [1] - whether the coming immigrants agree with the natives on e.g. the tax rate, term limits for politicians, or environmental laws, don't even come up as concerns. Nor did Czechoslovakia split over gay marriage, or Yugoslavia over differing views on abortion.
This focus on "views" to the exclusion of all else is a purely American phenomenon, and a recent one at that - only six decades old.
See for example Kashmir [1] - whether the coming immigrants agree with the natives on e.g. the tax rate, term limits for politicians, or environmental laws, don't even come up as concerns. Nor did Czechoslovakia split over gay marriage, or Yugoslavia over differing views on abortion.
This focus on "views" to the exclusion of all else is a purely American phenomenon, and a recent one at that - only six decades old.
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/08/08/kashmirs-new...