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.
Well.....that is very optimistic and encouraging that such is your reality.....REALLY. I am in my 50's now....and that has hardly, hardly been the reality that I witnessed and experienced growing up in Michigan, and like you, living on both sides of the state.
I only had time to skim through all your guys comments but I will touch on a few things. I'm only 23 so you can say I have only been in the "real world" for a few years. You on the other hand was in the real world before I was even thought of so obviously yeah our experiences are much different. But I stick to my comment when I say most liberals I know in Michigan have never been in a union in their lifetime. And one of the things I love most about MI (well Detroit) is the black culture. I know a ton of middle class blacks even without college degrees and black business owners. There are also alot of offerings for blacks in Detroit. They are not "left out". Detroit ranked 4th nationally for black owned businesses. On another thread in the City vs City forum talking about the best cities for blacks Detroit constantly made the top 10 in most categories like number and percentage of black professionals, home owners, middle class, over income $50,000 over $100,000 ect. I can't find the thread for you right now but I'll look for it later. This is why I feel like there isn't anything that minorities can't do in Michigan. Look at all the businesses the middle eastern people own, they're doing pretty well out here.
On those links you gave me, as I said many blacks got by in MI without a college degree and when MI economy took a turn for the worst it hit them. And then of course it's the white flight of the past that moved jobs out of black neighborhoods during racial tension. But if you look at your links, you have some of the liberal places right up there with Michigan. In your first link NYC and Chicago was top 5, basically right up there with Detroit. And they are blue cities. In your second link, Minnesota and Illinois ranked even worse than Michigan for blacks and you said yourself that Minnesota is a true liberal state. I never been but I know SF is a liberal place but I hear there is quite a bit of inequality there as for blacks. It's just more that plays into this than politics.
The situation in Ann Arbor is both better and worse than is being described here.....
Spoiler
There are many good people in Ann Arbor. In general, Ann Arbor has a lot to offer. It seems like a clean, functional, and upscale town on the surface. The University of Michigan is academically solid and offers many cultural opportunities to the general public. There are a good number of professional jobs.
However, there is a large segment of the population in Ann Arbor which is indeed hostile to conservatives. This element is also not restricted to obviously political activities and other places you'd expect to find Leftists. There's a good chance that they dominate the activities and social groups that interest you.
Many of the Leftists in Ann Arbor are of the modern, militant variety. It's risky to interact with this type of Leftist unless you are very familiar with their views and ideologies. Even if you think of yourself as a Democrat or generally left-leaning, there's a good chance that you don't fully understand this strain of Leftism. Some key points to be aware of:
* They expect you to already know their version of Leftist ideology. Never mind that most Americans are unfamiliar with this ideology and wouldn't agree with it even if they were familiar with it.
* They don't tolerate dissent. At best, you may get one verbal warning to immediately discontinue whatever action or viewpoint offended them. Even that's not guaranteed.
* If you are in a group considered "privileged", keeping your political views to yourself may not be good enough. You may be assumed to have the wrong views by default unless you actively express the "correct" views.
* They don't really distinguish between the hard right, compassionate conservatives, and moderates. Many don't even believe there is such a thing as a moderate.
* Shunning is likely. It's also far from a worst case scenario. This breed of Leftist often believes in damaging their political opponents' careers and reputations.
The culture of Ann Arbor is passive-aggressive. This is good and bad in this situation. It's good because overt violence, as has happened in Berkeley recently, is less likely. It's bad because it may not even be immediately obvious that you're being shunned.
I'm only one data point, but I'm a political moderate who was openly opposed to the Presidential candidacy of Donald J. Trump. I'm also openly Christian. I got the cold shoulder from many people in Ann Arbor. Even so, I met many quality people, especially at my Christian church and in professional groups.
It's not just conservatives who need to be very careful in Ann Arbor. It's almost as unsafe for moderates. It's not even safe for liberals who deviate from the modern, militant strain of Leftism found there.
In all fairness, in 2017, Ann Arbor is far from unique in this regard. Many American cities offering a similar level of professional and cultural options are as bad or worse.
In all my 33 years living here as a middle of the road, gun owning, Church going, moderate I have never experienced what you describe.
How long have you lived in Ann Arbor may I ask? I have always lived on the SE side in the area of Packard and Platt.
Once upon a time I was an estimator/foreman for a local roofing contractor in Ann Arbor (28 years) and interacted with people all over the city, people who owned homes, not transient students. So I am not naive about this.
I only had time to skim through all your guys comments but I will touch on a few things. I'm only 23 so you can say I have only been in the "real world" for a few years. You on the other hand was in the real world before I was even thought of so obviously yeah our experiences are much different. But I stick to my comment when I say most liberals I know in Michigan have never been in a union in their lifetime. And one of the things I love most about MI (well Detroit) is the black culture. I know a ton of middle class blacks even without college degrees and black business owners. There are also alot of offerings for blacks in Detroit. They are not "left out". Detroit ranked 4th nationally for black owned businesses. On another thread in the City vs City forum talking about the best cities for blacks Detroit constantly made the top 10 in most categories like number and percentage of black professionals, home owners, middle class, over income $50,000 over $100,000 ect. I can't find the thread for you right now but I'll look for it later. This is why I feel like there isn't anything that minorities can't do in Michigan. Look at all the businesses the middle eastern people own, they're doing pretty well out here.
On those links you gave me, as I said many blacks got by in MI without a college degree and when MI economy took a turn for the worst it hit them. And then of course it's the white flight of the past that moved jobs out of black neighborhoods during racial tension. But if you look at your links, you have some of the liberal places right up there with Michigan. In your first link NYC and Chicago was top 5, basically right up there with Detroit. And they are blue cities. In your second link, Minnesota and Illinois ranked even worse than Michigan for blacks and you said yourself that Minnesota is a true liberal state. I never been but I know SF is a liberal place but I hear there is quite a bit of inequality there as for blacks. It's just more that plays into this than politics.
Metro Detroit has one of the largest concentrations of blacks in America. If not for the rapid growth of Atlanta, Houston and Miami the last decade, Detroit MSA/CSA would be about 4 or 5 in terms of black population in the nation. Thus, it stands to reason that Detroit would rank high in the number of black owned businesses.
Minnesota is a little more nuanced. About a quarter of blacks in Minnesota are recent immigrants from Africa, mostly Somalians, Liberians, Nigerians, Ethiopians. Another large percentage of blacks are poor migrants from Chicago and Gary.....in other words, imported poverty and problems that originated in Chicago and Gary. My point being that Minnesota did not create the conditions of many of its black residents. Michigan black folks have been in Michigan awhile and their problems and conditions have strong organic Michigan influence (as well as legacy influences to the culture and economics brought from the south).
Principle Cities (the core city of the metropolitan area, usually where the skyscrapers are) tend to mostly be Democratic. NYC is crazy large. Its over 8 million people. Thus, the way the state goes politically is heavily influenced by those 8 plus million people in the city. Also, NY is even more heavily union than Michigan. The East Coast is heavily unionized. Thus, it goes Democrat almost always....and people there just don't really care about stuff....live and let live, which comports to liberalism I guess. They are into themselves.
Chicago is a smaller version of NYC. Its a huge city and cities nearly always go blue. Hence, the influence of such a large city on the results for the state is powerful, and that state has heavy unions too. Indiana is a good state to juxtapose with Michigan, because its borders Michigan but is clearly a red state. Its one of the weakest states in the Midwest in terms of union membership rates. It's biggest city, Indianapolis, has had 6 mayors since 1968 and all but two of them have been Republicans. If Michigan union membership rate mirrored that of Indiana the last 40 years, Michigan would be as consistently red as Indiana.
Inequality exists socioeconomically between the races in Michigan (and the nation). Whether you see it in your daily life or whether or not you feel bounded by race does not alter that. Something happened to create that inequality or it would not exists. Maybe it was mostly formed in the generations before you and hence you do not notice it in your generation. I mean, you cannot see how things were created unless you were there to see it, but because you have not witnessed it does not mean that it does not explain why things are shaped the way they are....because the way things are is much more a product of the past...than the present.
Here is the thing. Every issue that is important to you, every pet peeve, every "ism" you have, every etc, has to be represented politically by one of two choices. You might only like one song on the album, but if you really want that song you have to buy the whole album because they don't sell it as single. More for your generation, you might only want to watch one Channel that comes on Cable, but you have to buy the whole package of channels just to get that one, because they don't offer JUST that channel. Thus, what you have in America politically is similar to buying Cable or an Album. I mean, are you REALLY a liberal if you only vote democrat for one or two issues? Are you really a conservative if you only vote for Republicans because of one or two issues?
As I noted before.....the two party system forces people to becoming either Democrat or Republican, just to get the one or two issues that is most important to them, when really, there should be, like in Europe, multiple parties, including a Labor party. There are just way to many interest to be represented by two parties. Hence, in America, how you vote does not really define your beliefs, because the definition becomes based upon the package you chose and the assumption is made that you support the whole package, and not just a couple items in the package.
Last edited by Indentured Servant; 05-19-2017 at 02:27 PM..
The irony of someone who uses the word "leftist" as an insult accusing others of intolerance.
I have never seen someone in Ann Arbor but into other's conversations or visibly shun another person. People who live here have Trump bumper stickers on their cars and they are not vandalized. There's a liquor store on UM's campus with a "We Stand With Israel" sign that has been there for years in a place with semi-regular BDS actions.
I suspect that what REALLY happens to many of the people in this thread is that they feel triggered by overhearing conversations or seeing political actions around town that are hostile to their beliefs and views. It can suck to be a Christian and overhear someone make fun of Jesus or something in casual conversation, but that does not mean that people are going to pry the Jesus fish from your car or interrupt your conversation about church to tell you that GOD IS A LIE, OVERTHROW THE BURGEOISES. That is just not real. It's a college town, there are (still, in 2017) Bernie Sanders signs all over the damn place. The local Women's March and March for Science dwarfed those in much larger cities, including Detroit. If that is "threatening" to you, if you feel intimidated by being in a city where someone might casually call Trump a fascist within earshot, I might suggest that you are the one who has issues with tolerating differing viewpoints.
ETA: People also fundraise for the ACLU and Planned Parenthood on the streets here. Again, if being presented with people soliciting donations for those organizations disturbs you, I think you are beyond help in terms of understanding the irony of your stances.
I think you're in denial brodie734. I consider myself a "moderate" and even I have been shunned by liberals recently in Grand Rapids for even suggesting a moderate stance on something. And knowing several people who are high up in the AA social scene, I can completely see it happening. Trump fans and ultra conservatives in our area have become quite emboldened after the election, and so has the other side. Many have gone completely black-and-white on a lot of issues, which to me seems anti-progressive. A sucker who totes the party line and only the party line on either side is still a sucker in my book.
I blame social media and the echo chamber it amplifies.
Yeah, but so have the parties Before 1912, Democrats were conservative and Republicans were liberal
Quote:
Originally Posted by magellan
If it weren't for the UAW and its long history in Michigan, we'd probably politically align more with Indiana (very conservative).
No way. Indiana is very unique in the midwest. See what I quoted from Geo-Aggie
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geo-Aggie
Also, Michigan is not culturally the same as Indiana, Ohio and Non-Chicago Illinois. It is much more culturally similar to Wisconsin and Minnesota. This is due to who settled the areas. The Upper Midwest was settled by New Englanders, who were culturally distinct from the settlers of Greater Appalachia. They held different values, different governments. Michigan is, at its heart, a liberal state - much like Wisconsin and Minnesota - this is due to its New England influence, which has only been moderated by an influx of Southern and Appalachian immigration over the course of the last century, but overall Michigan is still very much a "Yankee" state. That is its roots. There's a great book about this called American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America, if you're interested.
Today, Indiana is the most conservative, most evangelical, least insured, least educated, least paid midwestern state.
And for a N=1 - My ancestors followed the very typical migration pattern:
My German and Irish ancestors came over in the mid 1800s to NY, then moved to either Ann Arbor or Scranton PA (then Ann Arbor). My English ancestors came to Mass in the 1640s, then moved to Ann Arbor mid 1800s
I think you're in denial brodie734. I consider myself a "moderate" and even I have been shunned by liberals recently in Grand Rapids for even suggesting a moderate stance on something. And knowing several people who are high up in the AA social scene, I can completely see it happening. Trump fans and ultra conservatives in our area have become quite emboldened after the election, and so has the other side. Many have gone completely black-and-white on a lot of issues, which to me seems anti-progressive. A sucker who totes the party line and only the party line on either side is still a sucker in my book.
I blame social media and the echo chamber it amplifies.
Well, "moderate" is relative. I live in Boston (plan to relocate to the UP in the next couple years, and am from the LP), which is obviously extremely liberal (as are virtually all places with high per capita educational levels) but we do have conservatives here. Some are of the Trump variety and consider themselves exempt from fact, logic, and proof, but we do have quite a number of conservatives and moderates in the style of old (reasoned, well researched, and intellectually curious, but cautious, both in terms of societal change and economic risk). Those folks I very much respect. And they know, because it is fact if anyone cares to really look at the history books, that the center has shifted very much rightward, so "moderate" is really a relative thing. Criminy, Nixon would be a flaming leftie by today's standards and Reagan wouldn't have made it within a lightyear of being nominated.
I'm curious as to how many people you see as liberals have shunned you. I'm curious because I've also seen the polarization post-Trump and am interested in it. In my opinion, conservatives have always been far more likely to reject a liberal out of hand then vice versa (which is backed up by a variety of studies which show that conservatives are far more psychologically tribal - which has both good and bad connotations), but now with the extremist situation that Trump represents, I do see a number of liberals rejecting conservatives without even hearing whether they support Trump, believe in climate change, etc. It's just kind of assumed that they exist in the "post fact", "alternative fact", "I don't care because he's on my team" world of many conservatives today.
I think also that the liberals assume that the self-identifying conservatives are hateful, given the freedom that Trump's brand of "conservatism" has given to evil idiots everywhere. I mean, just the other day I was out rescuing an injured duck and some old lunatic started filming me doing it, telling me that what I was doing was illegal, that he was going to get me arrested, and then deported. I'm of Irish extraction, so I'm pretty damn white, but even that didn't matter to him. This was now "Tumps America!" and what I was doing was wrong in his opinion, so I didn't have anyplace in this country, period. This gave me a bit of pause about how anyone not white as snow, without an accent, possibly of any minority status, and not in one of the most liberal states in the union would be treated by someone so emboldened.
Even I am starting to reject someone who self-identifies as conservative just because the majority of the people who I've seen do so of late are dumb as a box of hair (see above) and filled with an abundance of undefined frustration and hate. I feel bad about this because, not only do I try to hold myself to a higher standard, I happen to have a couple degrees in philosophy, so I'm actually trained to not be prejudicial and to examine things on the merits. Taking shortcuts of any kind really is an embarrassment, but lately, talking to most conservatives inevitably leads to strained discussions about those 97% of scientists who find that climate change is real and man made are just pawns of the deep state, or of liberal media, or are "cucks" who couldn't find their ass with both hands. Or that Tumps is right and he didn't win the popular vote because of illegal voting or illegal immigrants (of which there is zero proof). It gets tiring, so in a busy world where you just don't have time to listen to the conspiracy theories of imbeciles, anyone who claims the same banner of conservative gets labeled as giant wastes of time. You don't really give them the chance to buttress their arguments in the theories of John Locke or Adam Smith, or even basic evidence and logic, because they almost certainly can't do so.
My hope is that those people who could be defined as classically conservative start standing up for themselves and making a distinction between themselves and what much of conservatism has come to be today. I guess it's the same call that many conservatives want to make upon Muslims, i.e. having those who are not hateful and who exist in a wold of modern reason reject those who are just filled with hate and who care not for any kind of reasoned analysis or discussion of the world - that they define at least two distinct parties. Humans are imperfect, and no one knows everything, so it's IMPORTANT to have all points represented in a democratic society, but it's equally important that such parties do so in a logical, reasoned, fact-based manner. When either side looses track of how to define objective reality, that side dies.
Last edited by douggie77; 05-20-2017 at 02:37 AM..
Well, "moderate" is relative. I live in Boston (plan to relocate to the UP in the next couple years, and am from the LP), which is obviously extremely liberal (as are virtually all places with high per capita educational levels) but we do have conservatives here. Some are of the Trump variety and consider themselves exempt from fact, logic, and proof, but we do have quite a number of conservatives and moderates in the style of old (reasoned, well researched, and intellectually curious, but cautious, both in terms of societal change and economic risk). Those folks I very much respect. And they know, because it is fact if anyone cares to really look at the history books, that the center has shifted very much rightward, so "moderate" is really a relative thing. Criminy, Nixon would be a flaming leftie by today's standards and Reagan wouldn't have made it within a lightyear of being nominated.
I'm curious as to how many people you see as liberals have shunned you. I'm curious because I've also seen the polarization post-Trump and am interested in it. In my opinion, conservatives have always been far more likely to reject a liberal out of hand then vice versa (which is backed up by a variety of studies which show that conservatives are far more psychologically tribal - which has both good and bad connotations), but now with the extremist situation that Trump represents, I do see a number of liberals rejecting conservatives without even hearing whether they support Trump, believe in climate change, etc. It's just kind of assumed that they exist in the "post fact", "alternative fact", "I don't care because he's on my team" world of many conservatives today.
I think also that the liberals assume that the self-identifying conservatives are hateful, given the freedom that Trump's brand of "conservatism" has given to evil idiots everywhere. I mean, just the other day I was out rescuing an injured duck and some old lunatic started filming me doing it, telling me that what I was doing was illegal, that he was going to get me arrested, and then deported. I'm of Irish extraction, so I'm pretty damn white, but even that didn't matter to him. This was now "Tumps America!" and what I was doing was wrong in his opinion, so I didn't have anyplace in this country, period. This gave me a bit of pause about how anyone not white as snow, without an accent, possibly of any minority status, and not in one of the most liberal states in the union would be treated by someone so emboldened.
Even I am starting to reject someone who self-identifies as conservative just because the majority of the people who I've seen do so of late are dumb as a box of hair (see above) and filled with an abundance of undefined frustration and hate. I feel bad about this because, not only do I try to hold myself to a higher standard, I happen to have a couple degrees in philosophy, so I'm actually trained to not be prejudicial and to examine things on the merits. Taking shortcuts of any kind really is an embarrassment, but lately, talking to most conservatives inevitably leads to strained discussions about those 97% of scientists who find that climate change is real and man made are just pawns of the deep state, or of liberal media, or are "cucks" who couldn't find their ass with both hands. Or that Tumps is right and he didn't win the popular vote because of illegal voting or illegal immigrants (of which there is zero proof). It gets tiring, so in a busy world where you just don't have time to listen to the conspiracy theories of imbeciles, anyone who claims the same banner of conservative gets labeled as giant wastes of time. You don't really give them the chance to buttress their arguments in the theories of John Locke or Adam Smith, or even basic evidence and logic, because they almost certainly can't do so.
My hope is that those people who could be defined as classically conservative start standing up for themselves and making a distinction between themselves and what much of conservatism has come to be today. I guess it's the same call that many conservatives want to make upon Muslims, i.e. having those who are not hateful and who exist in a wold of modern reason reject those who are just filled with hate and who care not for any kind of reasoned analysis or discussion of the world - that they define at least two distinct parties. Humans are imperfect, and no one knows everything, so it's IMPORTANT to have all points represented in a democratic society, but it's equally important that such parties do so in a logical, reasoned, fact-based manner. When either side looses track of how to define objective reality, that side dies.
I think it's important to note that only about 25% of the voting age population voted for Trump, yet many extreme liberals seem to lump everyone who doesn't like Bernie, who is pro-business and doesn't think that Universal healthcare is the best idea is immediately branded as an "enemy" of human rights and a supporter of Trump (which couldn't be further from the truth).
I mean moderate in that generally it's OK to support the business community, especially small businesses. That sometimes those businesses should receive tax breaks if they legitimately create economic expansion/jobs. That sometimes it's OK to raise taxes to help pay for things that are investments in a community (infrastructure especially). That a single-payer healthcare system in the U.S. would be a disaster, and that health insurance companies are not inherently evil. That the ultimate goal of "safety nets" is a temporary situation, with a more educated and higher paid workforce being the ultimate goal. That overbuilding affordable housing is not a solution. That taxpayers subsidizing affordable housing is not a good solution or a good use of taxpayer dollars. That there's no place for the advocacy of one particular religion in any public school or publicly funded institution. That the days of churches receiving subsidies (tax exempt status) should be over. That employers should not be able to discriminate based on their "religious" beliefs. That any two consenting adults of any gender should be allowed to legally marry, period. Etc etc etc. But please don't confuse me with a libertarian.
I have friends and social media connections with people of all stripes but most of the (few) Trump fans I know have pretty much quieted down in the last few months, but the liberals are screaming complete lunacy every time Trump makes a tweet. You talk about intellectualism but this throwing rocks from the perimeter and carrying humorous anti-Trump signs and creating Facebook memes as if it's actually going to affect real change has gotten ridiculous. Instead of working from the inside to create new Democratic, Republican and viable third-parties that aren't the laughing stock of the modern world.
My hope is that those people who could be defined as classically conservative start standing up for themselves and making a distinction between themselves and what much of conservatism has come to be today. I guess it's the same call that many conservatives want to make upon Muslims, i.e. having those who are not hateful and who exist in a wold of modern reason reject those who are just filled with hate and who care not for any kind of reasoned analysis or discussion of the world - that they define at least two distinct parties.
Coincidentally I hope those people who could be defined as classically liberal start standing up for themselves and making a distinction between themselves and what much of liberalism has come to be today......rioting anarchists who destroy the property of innocent people and reject the 1st amendment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by douggie77 meant to say
I live in Boston.... which is obviously extremely racist
Playing broad generalizations and stereotyping is fun....thanks for introducing me to the concept.
Honestly I don't know about that. Detroit, Oakland co, Ann Arbor, Flint, Lansing, Muskegon and Kalamazoo always go blue I believe. If democrats have a high voter turnout then Grand Rapids, Macomb co, as well as some other counties go blue as well. That's the majority of Michigan's population right there. This was a low voter turnout for democrats and a big turnout for republicans and it was still pretty close in Michigan.
Oakland has only gone blue in recent years - it used to be solid red. A lot of people have moved in to escape the problems of Flint and Detroit. Also, our immigrant population has grown a lot in the past 10-15 years. There have been a lot of demographic changes.
Oakland is more "purple" rather than solid red or blue these days.
Trump was the perfect candidate to turn Macomb into a "red" county because he attracted the "rank and file" union members who were turned off by Hillary. Southern Macomb county (Warren, Roseville, St. Clair Shores, Mt. Clemens) tend to go blue because labor. However, northern Macomb is a lot more rural and tends to go red. That was the only reason why I actually wanted Trump to be the nominee because I knew from experience that you can't put up a traditional conservative and expect them to win Macomb County. Ted Cruz wouldn't have won Michigan as much as the die-hard conservatives wanted to make believe that it really would have happened this time. (Sigh)
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.
Before 1912, Democrats were conservative and Republicans were liberal
