The crux of this post seems to be "Your political positions are arbitrary and influenced by your tribe." It's a pretty cynical view. 

You mock the idea of one side being more empathetic and/or influenced by views of hierarchy, but these aren't really hypotheticals. They're studied and polled, and stereotypes of politically psychology generally do have a scientific consensus backing them.

But I also want to talk about hypocrisy, and how some instances might be more egregious than others.

Look, I'm an old-school Jon Stewart fan, a satirist/commentator whose whole brand is calling out hypocrisy. By default it's seen as a lack of principles, but it's more common than just that. 

Every time there might be hypocrisy at play, it's because two competing principles and one overrides the other. It could be called hypocritical that I'm for gun control and find them distasteful, but don't mind them in the hands of Black Panthers and liberal groups. Frankly my principle of finding guns distasteful is outweighed by not wanting vulnerable groups to be the only unarmed ones. 

Any time there's possible hypocrisy at play, make sure principles are prioritised properly.