Why most city slickers are liberal and country bumpkins are conservative

[navy-vet]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/25/rabbi-lapin-explains-why-youre-instinctively-pre-primed-towards-liberalism-in-a-city/

My apologies if this has already been posted. I did a search and didn't find it...
I found it rather interesting, including the comments.

[fr33]

I do have to agree with it. To sum it up; it's dependency, stupid.

[fr33]

It's also a reason why people concerned about over-population do have a valid concern.

[thoughtomator]

Human beings in large numbers rarely exhibit the positive side of human nature. Most often you only ever see the good side of people in a one-on-one situation.

[bolil]

The threat of overpopulation. There is much land that is under utilized or not utilized at all. Perhaps, if people were responsible with it growing regions could be varied... but even then wouldn't the land eventually become barren?

One thing is sure: Pandora's Box will never run out.

[CaptUSA]

A lack of communication leads to distrust of the intentions of others. When you distrust your neighbors, it is very easy for the State to convince you that the power of your neighbors should be lessened. "I'm ok with a gun, but not that guy!... I may be able to smoke a joint, but those guys are bad people..." It also breeds envy - and not the good kind of envy which makes a person work harder to get things - but the kind of envy that makes you want what your neighbor has without earning it.

Interesting side-note to history... This was the reason for the Louisiana Purchase.

[fr33]

The threat of overpopulation. There is much land that is under utilized or not utilized at all. Perhaps, if people were responsible with it growing regions could be varied... but even then wouldn't the land eventually become barren?

One thing is sure: Pandora's Box will never run out.

If people were allowed to be responsible and independent, there would be more rural dwelling people. The state allows people today to depend on products and services that enable them to live irresponsibly. My favorite thing to point out on GMO discussions is the high rise apartment. Do you think these people could either grow or depend on local growers to supply them with food? Of course not. It's basic math. Instead those people stacked on top of each other will choose GMO food full of preservatives. It is a logistic solution. The same logistics can be applied to healthcare, abortion, and other family planning. If they are provided an unnatural subsidized way of living, then they live an unnatural subsidized lifestyle.

[heavenlyboy34]

Silly stereotypes are silly. This part is especially stupid:
“Conservatism is linked to reality,” he asserted. “It is based in how the world really works. Liberalism is based on how the world would be if we could wish it was something else.”
They're both delusional "philosophies" (if they can be called such) and detached from reality.

[navy-vet]

Seems to me, since I just finished perusing the three pages of comments on the tail end of the piece, that there are a substantial amount of credible ideas worthy of consideration than what the rabbi asserted.

[navy-vet]

Seems to me, since I just finished perusing the three pages of comments on the tail end of the piece, that there are a substantial amount of credible ideas worthy of consideration than what the rabbi asserted.
Not to demean or criticize him as a lot of what he said makes sense to me.

[PaulConventionWV]

It's also a reason why people concerned about over-population do have a valid concern.

Why is that?

[PaulConventionWV]

//

[tod evans]

Why is that?

Did you read the article?

[Southron]

Human beings in large numbers rarely exhibit the positive side of human nature. Most often you only ever see the good side of people in a one-on-one situation.

Isn't this an argument against more immigration?

[tod evans]

Isn't this an argument against more immigration?

How about opening the borders and walling off the cities?

We'd be better off...

[Ender]

The threat of overpopulation. There is much land that is under utilized or not utilized at all. Perhaps, if people were responsible with it growing regions could be varied... but even then wouldn't the land eventually become barren?

One thing is sure: Pandora's Box will never run out.

Anybody living in the the midwest knows that there are 1000's of acres of under utilized land.

Have a friend that is a science genius/physicist that has shown me how to collect water and grow food in the desert. Heck- the Mormons did something similar in the 1800s.

Land will not become barren if taken care of properly. In fact it will become better and "growable".

[cajuncocoa]

People in (or near) cities tend to be more tolerant of other cultures and lifestyles as they are more likely to be exposed to more diversity....I say that as a positive thing. Take it for what it's worth.

[Cutlerzzz]

Anybody living in the the midwest knows that there are 1000's of acres of under utilized land.

Have a friend that is a science genius/physicist that has shown me how to collect water and grow food in the desert. Heck- the Mormons did something similar in the 1800s.

Land will not become barren if taken care of properly. In fact it will become better and "growable".

The US is currently the 179th most densely populated country in the world, so we definately have space.

[thoughtomator]

Isn't this an argument against more immigration?

No. It's an argument against artificial population density. I can make plenty of arguments against immigration and do on those topics.

[tod evans]

The US is currently the 179th most densely populated country in the world, so we definately have space.

When the "city slickers" start migrating there'll be wars...

[thoughtomator]

When the "city slickers" start migrating there'll be wars...

There's little need to worry. It's amazingly easy to keep "city slickers" inside their cages, I mean cities. They don't want to leave them.

[AuH20]

Jefferson warned everyone of cities. Cities are fantasy land and mesmerize their population into a state of compliance and corruption.

[fr33]

Why is that?

The more people in any given area, the more they rely on others to provide for them. Eventually they become barbaric cannibals.

[enoch150]

I wonder how many people in this thread expressing their opinions on why cities are liberal have ever actually lived in a city. Or really understand human nature outside of their immediate existence.

The liberal ideology, from their point of view, isn't about living at others' expense. From their point of view, it's about helping people in need.

If you have a child in need of frequent emergency care, you move to a city. That's where the hospitals are. Hospitals are staffed with people who live in the city. They see people who need help all day long. Those kids go to school. The schools are staffed with people who live in the city. Cities have a disproportionate number of sick kids in need, because that's where the hospitals are. Teachers see kids who need help all day long. Cities, obviously, have more people. More people means more unemployed people, even if it's the same ratio as a rural area. When an unemployed person stands by Home Depot with a "Will work for food" sign, it gets a lot of views in a city. Everyone driving by sees someone in need. In the high crime areas people hear the sound of shots fired followed by the blare of an ambulance. They know that the high crime areas need help and have a problem with criminals with guns. So they want to make guns harder for criminals to get. It goes on and on like that.

The sick kids, the homeless, and most of the other people who are actually in need... they don't generally vote. It's not the dependent class that causes cities to be liberal. It's who sees them.

And fr33... yes, the cities will starve if their is a catastrophic economic collapse. And the people in the country will be living like it's the 1700's, if they're lucky.

[Ender]

I'm from So.Cal and yes, there are problems that come from city living, but overall, most everyone I knew were pretty decent people.

[AuH20]

I wonder how many people in this thread expressing their opinions on why cities are liberal have ever actually lived in a city. Or really understand human nature outside of their immediate existence.

The liberal ideology, from their point of view, isn't about living at others' expense. From their point of view, it's about helping people in need.

If you have a child in need of frequent emergency care, you move to a city. That's where the hospitals are. Hospitals are staffed with people who live in the city. They see people who need help all day long. Those kids go to school. The schools are staffed with people who live in the city. Cities have a disproportionate number of sick kids in need, because that's where the hospitals are. Teachers see kids who need help all day long. Cities, obviously, have more people. More people means more unemployed people, even if it's the same ratio as a rural area. When an unemployed person stands by Home Depot with a "Will work for food" sign, it gets a lot of views in a city. Everyone driving by sees someone in need. In the high crime areas people hear the sound of shots fired followed by the blare of an ambulance. They know that the high crime areas need help and have a problem with criminals with guns. So they want to make guns harder for criminals to get. It goes on and on like that.

The sick kids, the homeless, and most of the other people who are actually in need... they don't generally vote. It's not the dependent class that causes cities to be liberal. It's who sees them.

And fr33... yes, the cities will starve if their is a catastrophic economic collapse. And the people in the country will be living like it's the 1700's, if they're lucky.

I grew up in NYC. Ignorance and delusion runs rampant here. I really think some people think that steak comes wrapped in cellophane. Detached from reality. That is the spell that cities cast on the populace. Self-absorbed fantasies that disarm one of basic protective instincts.

[enoch150]

I grew up in NYC. Ignorance and delusion runs rampant here. I really think some people think that steak comes wrapped in cellophane. Detached from reality. That is the spell that cities cast on the populace. Self-absorbed fantasies that disarm one of basic protective instincts.

My experience, having gone to college in a city (population 130,000), lived in an urban large town (population 75,000), lived in a large suburban town (population 45,000), lived in a small suburban/semi-rural town (population 6,000), and lived in a very rural farming/fishing area (population 200) is that people are ignorant and delusional everywhere. Only what they're ignorant and delusional about changes.

[heavenlyboy34]

My experience, having gone to college in a city (population 130,000), lived in an urban large town (population 75,000), lived in a large suburban town (population 45,000), lived in a small suburban/semi-rural town (population 6,000), and lived in a very rural farming/fishing area (population 200) is that people are ignorant and delusional everywhere. Only what they're ignorant and delusional about changes.
+1

[AuH20]

My experience, having gone to college in a city (population 130,000), lived in an urban large town (population 75,000), lived in a large suburban town (population 45,000), lived in a small suburban/semi-rural town (population 6,000), and lived in a very rural farming/fishing area (population 200) is that people are ignorant and delusional everywhere. Only what they're ignorant and delusional about changes.

I think that is true. But the city environment encourages you to become completely detached from a myriad of real world challenges, from resource management to self defense and so on. It's an artificial reality. The fog of city life is simply unsustainable, especially with the innumerable debt which has been accrued in these municipalities. They will turn into death traps in due time.

[tod evans]

I wonder how many people in this thread expressing their opinions on why cities are liberal have ever actually lived in a city.

I've spent about a third of my 5+ decades in a large city.

Given that I believe I can speak with experience rather than philosophy.

[newbitech]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/10/25/rabbi-lapin-explains-why-youre-instinctively-pre-primed-towards-liberalism-in-a-city/

My apologies if this has already been posted. I did a search and didn't find it...
I found it rather interesting, including the comments.



In a city you don’t have self-reliance; you don’t have freedom; you don’t have independence.

This is something I've recognized for quite some time. Also, I found this infographic pretty interesting as it speaks to how much land it will actually take to be 100% FOOD independant. Basically about 2 acres for a family of 4.
http://www.treehugger.com/green-food/infographic-how-much-backyard-is-needed-to-feed-a-family-of-four.html

[newbitech]

Anybody living in the the midwest knows that there are 1000's of acres of under utilized land.

Have a friend that is a science genius/physicist that has shown me how to collect water and grow food in the desert. Heck- the Mormons did something similar in the 1800s.

Land will not become barren if taken care of properly. In fact it will become better and "growable".

I have developed a very strong interest and have been collecting research in to what I would call "terraforming". NASA has been experimenting with growing food in space of all places. Space is the most barren climate I can think of. For instance, I have been somewhat pleased to learn that tomatoes can be grown just about anywhere that won't freeze. My theory has always been, if I can grow a tomato in space, I can grow anything anywhere.

[tod evans]

Growing tomatoes in space might be easier than growing them in a city cut off from rural supplies.

[libertariantexas]

My experience, having gone to college in a city (population 130,000), lived in an urban large town (population 75,000), lived in a large suburban town (population 45,000), lived in a small suburban/semi-rural town (population 6,000), and lived in a very rural farming/fishing area (population 200) is that people are ignorant and delusional everywhere. Only what they're ignorant and delusional about changes.

Yup.

If you think country folks are more "enlightened" than city folks, spend some time in rural Mississippi or Texas or wherever. You'll find plenty of people who are colossally ignorant (and some who aren't- just as you'll find in cities).