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.
It should be obvious that super crowded places overwhelmingly adopt liberal thought while less crowded places overwhelmingly adopt more conservative thought. (On indication is Hillary winning only 500 of 3100 counties but winning the number of popular votes by a considerable margin).
THis is patently obvious in my home state which is a mix of crowded and uncrowded, and the areas divide exactly along those lines. California is the same way. The less crowded areas are almost uniformly conservative while the supercrowded areas are uniformly liberal.
Is there a psychological/sociological reason for this? Do people crowded together tend to end up thinking the same? When people are crammed together does it somehow inspire liberal thinking? Are super crowded places more likely to attract people who side with liberal thought while less crowded places attract more conservative thinking people?
It is an interesting phenomenon to me. I am not sure the answer matters for political purposes, but it is an interesting behavioral science question.
I think it has less to do with population density and more to do with diversity in crowded areas. In the less populous areas you speak of, are people of different races, religions, backgrounds, sexual orientations, or is everyone fairly homogeneous? In more populous areas where citizens are exposed to all kinds of people, it's more typical to have a more inclusive mindset.
I think it has less to do with population density and more to do with diversity in crowded areas. In the less populous areas you speak of, are people of different races, religions, backgrounds, sexual orientations, or is everyone fairly homogeneous? In more populous areas where citizens are exposed to all kinds of people, it's more typical to have a more inclusive mindset.
I cannot speak to all 2600 counties, but from my experience, some less populated areas are populated by minorities and still ten to be conservative. Many are not mixed though, so if they are populated by minorities, it is primarily populated by minorities. I can only think of a few less crowded places where there is a mix of races ( pretty sure those places are also conservative).
So, is your theory that when people of different races mix, they become liberal but if they were in a location of mostly one race, they would be conservative? If so, why do you think that is?
It should be obvious that super crowded places overwhelmingly adopt liberal thought while less crowded places overwhelmingly adopt more conservative thought. (On indication is Hillary winning only 500 of 3100 counties but winning the number of popular votes by a considerable margin).
THis is patently obvious in my home state which is a mix of crowded and uncrowded, and the areas divide exactly along those lines. California is the same way. The less crowded areas are almost uniformly conservative while the supercrowded areas are uniformly liberal.
Is there a psychological/sociological reason for this? Do people crowded together tend to end up thinking the same? When people are crammed together does it somehow inspire liberal thinking? Are super crowded places more likely to attract people who side with liberal thought while less crowded places attract more conservative thinking people?
It is an interesting phenomenon to me. I am not sure the answer matters for political purposes, but it is an interesting behavioral science question.
It has to do with job type and availability. It's not "crowded places", it's CITIES. More educated, white collar professional people tend to be liberal, and these are the people who are in cities because that's where their careers are. It's not like they only became liberal when they moved to the city and got around other liberal people. Group think isn't involved at all.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,585 posts, read 81,206,701 times
Reputation: 57822
I don't think they end up thinking alike, it's just that people don't generally like conflict, so are not likely to express an opposing opinion in a setting where they realize they are in the minority. There are exceptions, but they often result in a lot of shouting and even violence, as we saw during the days leading up to the election and even since. Think of it as like the time I took my in-laws to a concert for their anniversary back in the 80s, with two of their favorites, Mel Tillis and Roy Clark. I was not a fan by any means, but I did still smile and clap a lot. I did not become a fan from that experience.
So, is your theory that when people of different races mix, they become liberal but if they were in a location of mostly one race, they would be conservative? If so, why do you think that is?
It's not just with people of different races, and it's not by magic that you become more liberal. If you (general you) live in what you're calling a "crowded area", it's likely that you encounter all kinds of people on a daily basis. So when an issue like gay marriage comes up it's not just an abstract concept, it's something that affects your dentist and his partner. You can roll your eyes at BLM, but you might come up with a different perspective when you speak to the admin at work about how her teenage son has been unfairly hassled by the police. Or your Muslim neighbor is worried about his family overseas. Or the Hispanic grocery down the street has been vandalized.
When your friends, colleagues, and neighbors are diverse, it's more difficult to stick to a lock-step conservative view the same way one might in a small town where everyone is the same and some social issues are far off.
It's not just with people of different races, and it's not by magic that you become more liberal. If you (general you) live in what you're calling a "crowded area", it's likely that you encounter all kinds of people on a daily basis. So when an issue like gay marriage comes up it's not just an abstract concept, it's something that affects your dentist and his partner. You can roll your eyes at BLM, but you might come up with a different perspective when you speak to the admin at work about how her teenage son has been unfairly hassled by the police. Or your Muslim neighbor is worried about his family overseas. Or the Hispanic grocery down the street has been vandalized.
When your friends, colleagues, and neighbors are diverse, it's more difficult to stick to a lock-step conservative view the same way one might in a small town where everyone is the same and some social issues are far off.
That makes sense, but it only explains a segment of social issues (primarily discrimination related). It does not explain other fiscal issues, abortion, gender roles, State's rights vs. centralized government, freedom of religion vs freedom from religion, foreign policy, different outlooks on litigation and blame, and about fifty other things liberals and conservatives disagree on.
I do not see a lot of cities where there is really any diversity. Yes people of different races/cultural backgrounds live there, but they tend to live in segmented areas in most cities. Rather than accepting each other, it seems to create greater racial tension. I think people mix in New York and In Charleston SC. - and I have exhausted my list. Of course I have not been to every major city, but quite a lot of them. Most are highly segregated.
I wonder if it might be because cities tend to have younger populations. Younger people tend to lean more liberal and frequently lean more conservative as they get older. As people have kids and get older, they tend to move out of/away from the cities. I do not know whether the age difference is significant enough to explain the overwhelming difference in outlooks.
The difference in outlooks is not just city vs. Rural. Look at the election results maps. It is only really big cities that are overwhelmingly liberal. Smaller but still significantly large cities tend to be red.
This question occurred to me because a liberal friend was complaining becasue she had very few options for a place to live if she wanted to be amongst other liberals and most of the options were very crowded and very expensive. At least in her case, crowded expensive places are not more attractive for a liberally minded person.
It should be obvious that super crowded places overwhelmingly adopt liberal thought while less crowded places overwhelmingly adopt more conservative thought. (On indication is Hillary winning only 500 of 3100 counties but winning the number of popular votes by a considerable margin).
THis is patently obvious in my home state which is a mix of crowded and uncrowded, and the areas divide exactly along those lines. California is the same way. The less crowded areas are almost uniformly conservative while the supercrowded areas are uniformly liberal.
Is there a psychological/sociological reason for this? Do people crowded together tend to end up thinking the same? When people are crammed together does it somehow inspire liberal thinking? Are super crowded places more likely to attract people who side with liberal thought while less crowded places attract more conservative thinking people?
It is an interesting phenomenon to me. I am not sure the answer matters for political purposes, but it is an interesting behavioral science question.
I think others have it right when they say it's because you're forced to live and work with people you wouldn't otherwise.
In a larger city you might make more money and/or the opportunity to.
In a larger city you may have more free time to do more "cultural" things like art and music.
You're doing more varied/eclectic things. You're having to come up with solutions to new problems.
If you're around more people, you're talking to more people.
And again, I think that attracts more like minded people from those less populated areas.
So that people can feel "comfortable" for being "different."
And all of those things are considered "liberal."
So I'd venture to guess opportunity and the freedom to do something outside of the norm is a pretty liberal even American ideal. And that one doesn't mind having their beliefs challenged, wanted to escape a certain belief OR doesn't really have a hard and fast belief system other than some basic tenets.
------
Conversely that doesn't mean Conservatives don't have art, or entertainment, or even socialize.
But it stands to reason that those that live more rurally, want their own space; to live, to work and not have views pushed on them. Conservatives tend to believe that what works in the past works today, and that certain Christian values (at least in the USA) provide that backbone of morality.
Churches, however, can get mighty crowded.
-----------
Personally I love the suburbs. Although I'm socially liberal the suburbs are the epitome of moderateness. I like cities in small doses, but I find it very hard to take young hipsters seriously especially transplants. Conversely, I don't care at all for (some) who tend to shy away from discourse or who live in their own bubbles out in the boonies.
Last edited by harhar; 02-17-2017 at 01:00 PM..
Reason: spelling
I think it has less to do with population density and more to do with diversity in crowded areas. In the less populous areas you speak of, are people of different races, religions, backgrounds, sexual orientations, or is everyone fairly homogeneous? In more populous areas where citizens are exposed to all kinds of people, it's more typical to have a more inclusive mindset.
This. People who live more isolated lives interact less with others with divergent opinions. They don't have to learn to live in places where life experiences are widely different, or where there are multiple religions. People who live in small towns or on farms are more likely to find help among their friends, or to feel they should help someone like them who has had some bad luck. This kind of help between community members comes more easily in smaller communities.
When you need help in an urban community, you might not have many friends who can help you, and you might need to rely on a community safety net. And your expenses will be higher as well.
If you grow up in a larger community, it is likely that you will have come into contact with other kids who have different beliefs and attitudes. In a smaller community your friends will be more like you.
If you are unfortunate enough to be notably different than your friends in your smaller community, you might be driven to move to a larger community where you might find people who share your values, are more like you, or are more accepting of differences.
Of course there are many variances of all of these circumstances. But, in general, city dwellers will have encountered more diversity every day of their lives, and be comfortable with it, than small town dwellers who, when encountering diversity might feel threatened or uncomfortable.
It seems to me that people who live in big cities have created their own kind of bubble. Yes, there are more types of people, but many end up thinking the same way, at least politically. Places like San Francisco and New York are very monolithic, politically speaking.
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.
