The “confusion of tongues” were differences of opinion. That at least is what Emanuel Swedenborg suggested as an explanation for what is meant by Genesis 11: 7: “Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.”
In his massive work, Arcana Coelestia, among many things Swedenborg discusses verse 5, chapter 10 of Genesis: “By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.” “[E]very one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations” signifies that these were according to the genius of each. “[E]very one after his tongue” is “according to the opinion of each.” 
“That ‘tongue,’ or ‘language,’ in the internal sense, signifies opinion, thus principles and persuasions, is because there is a correspondence of the tongue with the intellectual part of man, or with his thought, like that of an effect with its cause.” 
Inferring from this, it can be surmised that the confusion of tongues at the building of the Tower of Babel means a confusion of opinions.
Genesis was written by people in the Bronze Age times, roughly 3,000 B.C. to 1,000 B.C. Those people had a hugely different perspective from ours. René Schwaller de Lubicz (1887 – 1961) was an Egyptologist. He and his family stayed in Egypt for 15 years, studying at Luxor. In the Introduction to his two-volume work, The Temple of Man, de Lubicz urged caution in our interpretations of ancient peoples, i.e., that we avoid putting our own templates over their peculiar culture: “From our own observations we can always come to conclusions that correspond to what we are and to what we know today. We always run the risk of allowing our own mentality to cloud the consciousness necessary to feel and understand the mentality of the Ancients.” 
The persons who wrote the Old Testament had a poetic way of describing things. In the Book of Jonah it is told how Jonah was cast into the sea and swallowed up by “a great fish.” Jonah lived in the belly of that “great fish” for three days and three nights. (Jonah 1: 16-17). Modern persons, putting their own template upon this, scoff and say, “How ridiculous! No one could survive three whole days in the belly of a fish!” Yet such persons are missing the forest for the trees. A fabulous tale covers a deeper meaning: In Jonah by the “belly” of the great fish, into which he was cast, are signified the lower parts of the earth, as is evident from his prophecy: Out of the belly of hell cried I, and Thou heardest my voice (Jonah 2:2), where “hell” denotes the lower earth. 
Confusion of Tongues
There was “confusion of tongues” (difference of opinion) between Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson. Would a National Bank be Constitutional? Jefferson objected on the grounds that the United States federal government did not have the authority to erect corporations. Enumerated powers meant that since Congress had no specified authority to erect corporations and the proposed National Bank would have “subscribers” (stock holders) and be a corporation, such a creature was unconstitutional. (Background: Cheese From the Moon, Ersjdamoo’s Blog, August 29, 2015.)
To this Hamilton replied with what I call his “cheese from the moon” argument: The authors of the Constitution had not specified that Congress could not erect corporations, therefore it was implied that Congress could erect corporations. Nowhere in the Constitution did it say, “Thou shalt not import cheese from the moon,” therefore it was implied we could, if we wanted to, import cheese from the moon. 
But think what a lot of “thou shalt nots” would have been necessary for the authors of the Constitution to have covered all possibilities. And even then they would have missed many things. Hamilton’s argument rests upon supposition of omniscient foreknowledge and is therefore invalid.
Did the Supreme Court ever render a decision upon Hamilton vs. Jefferson? The Court first convened on February 2, 1790.  Hamilton wrote his “Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank” on February 23, 1791. So the “difference of tongues” could have been debated before the Supreme Court. But was it? This I do not know. The court’s first decision was West v. Barnes, decided on August 3, 1791. 
Some may say that a precedent has by now been established. The corporation known as the First Bank of the United States was chartered, for a term of twenty years, by the United States Congress on February 25, 1791.  “It is ancient history and a done deal,” some may say. I am far from an expert on the subject of precedent. However it could be that a suit might be brought still before the Supreme Court challenging the right of the federal government to erect corporations.
A Federal Reserve Act erected another corporation on December 23, 1913.  This incorporation too might be challenged.
——- Sources ——-
 Arcana Coelestia, by Emanuel Swedenborg. Number 1157.
 Arcana Coelestia, by Emanuel Swedenborg. Number 1159.
 The Temple of Man, by René Schwaller de Lubicz. Rochester, VT: Inner Traditions, 1998.
 Arcana Coelestia, by Emanuel Swedenborg. Number 247.
 “Cheese From the Moon”, Ersjdamoo’s Blog, August 29, 2015. https://ersjdamoo.wordpress.com/2015/08/29/cheese-from-the-moon/
 “Supreme Court of the United States”, Wikipedia, August 30, 2015.
 “West v. Barnes”, Wikipedia, August 30, 2015.
 “First Bank of the United States”, Wikipedia, August 30, 2015.
 “Federal Reserve Act”, Wikipedia, August 30, 2015.