I would expect that some parties know that they will never form a coalition with certain other parties. If so, do these "incompatible pairs" show more inclination to accuse each other of ideological blindness?

There is a party that is shunned by most other parties because it is almost universally agreed upon to be a racist party (even by themselves in some cases). To a certain extent, the answer to your question is yes. Nevertheless, the present attempt to form a government involves negotiations between a somewhat right-wing separatist party in one part of the country (got almost 30% of the votes in that part) and a somewhat left-wing socialist (yes they call themselves socialists. It's not an insult in Europe) party. The negotiations have been going on for many months, and many colourful analogies have been used (yesterday I heard the separatists compared to Hannibal, and the socialists to the Romans), but I have yet to hear either of them accuse the other of ideological blindness.

It sounds like people within your country are pretty ideologically homogeneous.

Perhaps the ideology here is closer to mono-modal than the ideology in the USA. But is this ideological inhomogeneity in the USA a cause or a consequence of the political system? Politicians in a 2-party system have an incentive to polarize : it ensures they get a large amount of voters for their party, and then they just have to focus on the small amount of "swing voters" remaining in the center.

Your homogeneity leads me to expect that your country is relatively small.

True. I'm sure the Netherlands have a similar system. I don't know what the largest country with a true many-party system is.

Does the "ideological blindness" explanation sometimes get invoked when talking about why people in other countries chose those policies?

Yes.