Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
People in cities have to live with each other, so they adopt a more liberal point of view as part of that.
Another word for that is called tolerance.
People outside of cities can adopt that sort of more liberal, tolerant view toward others...
some certainly do, but there is far less need for or influence on them to do so.
Not doing so just won't affect them in the same way.
The latest stats now confirm the long held notion that the people in our vast areas of rural America are just as needy as those in the large cities. The distributive stats of TANF, the 1996 welfare reform system, has proven that our rural towns suffer a large degree of unemployment and underemployment and receive government handouts at a rate constant with their big city counterparts. Why then are these people in the less populated areas so anti government? It has a lot to do with the way in which these folks see themselves as people who aren't connected to the greater metroplexes of power.
While it is true that some of these people often suffer the same lack of jobs, the same lack of education, and the same hopelessness among their youth as those in the big cities, these things are taken in stride, they have "pride", although a misplaced sense of it. The radio shouters of the right wing prey on these people because they know of their fierce independent history. Today though, the truth of these hardworking American's is that they have no place to turn, both of our corrupt political parties have abandoned them, they are inclined to listen to those who claim to hold the same "values" that these rural voters say they believe in, but at days end, they need a benevolent government to see them through the rough days caused by the big money crowd's fleecing them of their labor.
Red, Blue, does it really matter? Idealogical propaganda aside, we who are getting long in the tooth know one thing, we have lived under both parties ruling the roost, and, as Dick Gregory used to say, " if you think you're not getting screwed, just look in your wallet........
Nothing new here. It's been this way forever. Rural people tend to be more independent, self-sufficient, conservative, traditional, religious, in favor of smaller government, etc. City dwellers are more dependent on the government running everything and taking care of people.
Independence vs. Dependence, to summarize.
This thread should be one that prompts a little more analytical prowess than the mindless political rants of other forums. Broad generalizations seldom suffice as proof of anything except the debate participants desire to have their tired political observations heard. This forum has contributors from all corners of our countries political consciousness. That said, it stands to reason that our deep seated philosophical divisions have their roots in socio-economic differences that have shaped this nation over the centuries. It isn't the difference between those in the cities and those in the rural regions that have historically defined these differences, it's the difference between those on top and those on the bottom. Poverty, ignorance, poor education, and a staunch bias against unions does not constitute economic self sufficiency, nor an admirable sense of tradition, nor does it bode well for anyone but the corporations that have ran these backwater burgs into economic destruction.
Agriculture and resource extractive economies create a very different scenario than factory work in the cities, rural populations fall victim to notions of an uneven distribution of taxes, and other lopsided political considerations that they say leaves them in the cold. The truth of course is that they have a lot in common with those in poverty who live in the urban areas and suffer from the same kind of political and socio-economic indifference shown by the upper class who steps on their collective throats all the while telling them that their enemy is the godless city dweller and the government worker that lives high on the hog at their expense. This insistence that the problems of our society are attributable to the size of government, and not the fact that the upper class runs the government, IS the problem..
The election is over, and we have once again seen the battle of the mediocre passing for a democratic event. I'm of a mind that sees the differences between US the people who are supposed to be giving our politicians their direction to govern and those who attempt to keep us apart as the difference that really prevents any real change from happening. We common working class types should, at the very least, be able to see through the ruse of the upper classes need for our supposed philosophical difference, after all, divide and conquer has been the battle cry of those who have dominated mankind from his earliest days in the caves...
I've heard this before but it doesn't really hold true. I have friends and relatives in rural KY and TN. In Eastern KY, near the mountains, there is little employment. Kids graduate from high school and go on welfare - like they've done for generations. People who have jobs drive a long distance and the pay is minimum wage. They get food stamps, etc. This is true for other rural areas as well. There is little work and those who do raise some of their own food still often get some kind of gov't assistance. Families with kids get even more gov't money - and most of these folks have several kids because they tend to get pregnant young and have religious scruples that prevent abortion. Farmers get farm subsidies from the big bad Federal Gov't. I had a discussion on this very issue with a friend who lives in rural TN and when I pointed out how many people he knew who fall into this category, he admitted it's a flawed argument.
I'm familiar with rural Kentucky too, and it never ceases to amaze me that the very people who rely on government assistance to survive vote for the party that hates them and wants to take away that assistance.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,458,803 times
Reputation: 6670
^ ^ I believe the technical term for that kinda thinking is cognitive dissonance, where folks try to reconcile the discomfort of totally conflicting beliefs and behaviors ("we're very independent & self-sufficient" vs "we really depend on the guvmint, Section 8 & food stamps").
So the GOP conveniently provides the ''solution'', which is to keep their pride while blaming whoever or whatever they most depend on... knowing full well the 'enemy' is still gonna 'deliver' anyway. Sorta like being spoiled teenagers!
Location: The western periphery of Terra Australis
24,544 posts, read 56,068,476 times
Reputation: 11862
Cities have always been the intellectual centres, the promulgators of progressive thinking and thus policies so naturally, this spirit of progressiveness (not always for the better) will be strongest in the cities and also attract many young people who are, by their nature, more liberal and hungry for change than their elders who generally want things the way they are used to (but which may've been totally different to their own grandparents generation). I think, however, American politics has been simplified to such an absurd degree that issues like gay marriage take precedence over the issues that really matter, environmental and economic issues, for instance. Basically, if you wanna be young and hip in America you have to support gay marriage or you're labelled a 'bigot.' Meanwhile, in a small rural town in Oklahoma if you express support for gay marriage you're expressing support for immorality, so there's still some peer pressure going the other way. The more young people are connected to the internet and the 'mainstream point of view', however, they won't even need to leave the cities to vote blue. Given the trend to urbanisation, the Republicans cannot keep relying on 'small town America' to buoy them up. They need to change or they will die.
This thread should be one that prompts a little more analytical prowess than the mindless political rants of other forums. Broad generalizations seldom suffice as proof of anything except the debate participants desire to have their tired political observations heard. This forum has contributors from all corners of our countries political consciousness. That said, it stands to reason that our deep seated philosophical divisions have their roots in socio-economic differences that have shaped this nation over the centuries. It isn't the difference between those in the cities and those in the rural regions that have historically defined these differences, it's the difference between those on top and those on the bottom. Poverty, ignorance, poor education, and a staunch bias against unions does not constitute economic self sufficiency, nor an admirable sense of tradition, nor does it bode well for anyone but the corporations that have ran these backwater burgs into economic destruction.
Agriculture and resource extractive economies create a very different scenario than factory work in the cities, rural populations fall victim to notions of an uneven distribution of taxes, and other lopsided political considerations that they say leaves them in the cold. The truth of course is that they have a lot in common with those in poverty who live in the urban areas and suffer from the same kind of political and socio-economic indifference shown by the upper class who steps on their collective throats all the while telling them that their enemy is the godless city dweller and the government worker that lives high on the hog at their expense. This insistence that the problems of our society are attributable to the size of government, and not the fact that the upper class runs the government, IS the problem..
The election is over, and we have once again seen the battle of the mediocre passing for a democratic event. I'm of a mind that sees the differences between US the people who are supposed to be giving our politicians their direction to govern and those who attempt to keep us apart as the difference that really prevents any real change from happening. We common working class types should, at the very least, be able to see through the ruse of the upper classes need for our supposed philosophical difference, after all, divide and conquer has been the battle cry of those who have dominated mankind from his earliest days in the caves...
The urban-rural divide is a rough generalization, but there is a good deal of truth in it.
In rural areas, the overall population and density is a lot lower than in urban areas, and the people someone living in a rural area comes into contact with on a regular basis tends to be many of the same people. In rural areas and small towns, it is much more likely that you will see people you know at any given locale in town. The pace of life is slower, there are generally less conveniences and amenities than in urban areas, and change, when it does occur, is often quite slow and gradual. Also, the kind of work that people due in rural areas (often blue-collar or farm work) is done most effectively when it is routinized and steady. In such areas, people will generally have more respect for routine and tradition, and be suspicious or skeptical of change, especially change coming from outsiders.
Contrast this to urban areas, where you are much more likely to run into people you've never met, because there are just more people, period; and there is a much faster pace of life, where change is a constant and there are many conveniences and amenities, where people get moved around from place to place and job to job moreso than in rural areas, and where many people choose to live because they embrace the constant change and the faster pace of life.
Also, there are differing perceptions of government in rural and urban areas. In rural areas, people generally want to be left alone, and they view the government as being far-away and ill-suited to local needs. In urban areas, government has a greater presence because there are more people, living in a denser area; and the benefits of government are more clearly seen in urban areas than in rural areas, where a lot of people's main experiences with government are as a negative intruder into rural life in terms of taxes and regulations.
All of these are some of the reasons I can think of for why rural and urban areas are so different politically.
People outside of cities can adopt that sort of more liberal, tolerant view toward others...
some certainly do, but there is far less need for or influence on them to do so.
Not doing so just won't affect them in the same way.
I enjoy debating topics in a way described in the defining statement at the top of the page. So far I do not see much of a difference here than in the regular policitcs sections. It is said that simple one liners isn't what this is supposed to be about but here is a topic full of them.
There is a few noted well thought out posts. Seems some can only describe those they may have a disagreement with in terms that would seem to be counter to a decent debate.
Making a generalization, everyone in the end is the same. In both rural and urban settings you will find those who are less tolerant of others concerning how they wish to live their lives.
Maybe in one area you will find those who are not tolerant of certain lifestyles but when you find someone tolerant of that, they end up not accepting of those who want a large soda.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
