Urban vs Rural, backwoods folk vs city folk

[The Straight Story]

There are a few subjects on DU I feel really qualified to talk about from experience. This is one of those very few.

I am 42 and have lived in tiny ass places like Laurelville, Ohio, Circleville, Mount Vernon. I have also lived in Columbus (14th largest city), spent time in NYC (really brief), Chicago (which I love dearly), LA, Bakersfield (the arm pit of CA), and have traveled to a host of other places from Holmes County to Albuquerque.

My parents grew up mostly in small towns and my Granpa was Mayor and Police chief at the same time in Byesville, Ohio.

We can argue all day along about the differences between Urban and Rural, but from my own observation it comes down to us wanting the same things only in different ways.

What you need in NY/Chicago/LA/Etc to fix your problems is not the same thing other folks need in their neck of the woods.

Folks want more local control because the issues they are facing and the concerns they have are not the same ones other have. Your problems are not the same problems other people are facing simply because the population density and diversity are way different. The sore you have on your arm that you need a band aid for is not the same one they have on their leg and need a wrap for.

The resentment comes in when we have small town folk telling us, via votes, how to do things in the big city and vice versa. Different lives and different issues, and different remedies.

YES - there are some common things we all need to address (racism, sexism, etc and so on) but often times we see one group or the other trying to pass laws that just aren't relevant to the other group (and see articles as to why Norther CA wants to break away from southern CA).

The Amish people back in Ohio I saw for so many years and interacted with had no desire at all to tell others how to live - from gay marriage to abortion to smoking to whatever. They just did not care what others did or how they lived their lives. Was none of their business, they were too busy living their lives the way they chose to do. If you wanted to stay with them you could, if you didn't you were free to leave. Folks had a choice about how much to restrict their lives - it was not up to the government or others to do so.

I have spent many a nights with friends out in the country doing things like having a bonfire, roasting hot dogs, etc and so on. Those living in the city cannot have such nights - which is ok because city life is different than country life.

And I think that is where the problems come in - we think that folks in the country should live like we do in the city, or those in wetter climates should like those of us in dryer ones.

Diversity means that you can be different based on the circumstances involved. That old lady way out in the country burning her leaves is OK to me, and restricting people from doing so in a big city is fine with me also because the circumstances are different.

We are not all the same, and where we live and what we do and how it affects others is not the same. Applying the same rules to everyone based on our own environment is bound to breed resentment.

Progressives need to understand that people are different and that we have different cultures in this country. We are not all the same and having the same laws everywhere is not the answer.

Education is and always will be.

Tell me again how telling some person in a small town how they live their life affects you and this country while trying to tell them how you live your life in the city has no effect on them.

It's all about respect and freedom to be diverse. It is a good thing to want that, and it is also a good thing to give that.

Gun control, etc, are issues that don't just affect people in cities - they affect folks out in small town America who need their guns for reasons people in cities don't (and that is just one of many issues).

Diversity is a lot more than how we city folk see it. Those in small town America need to be more open minded about things - but I think we do as well sometimes.

The common ground we all share is a freedom to choose. And those that don't share that have no right to say they are freedom loving patriots.

[rpannier]

1. Good post

I grew up in the suburbs near Oakland.

But my mothers family lives in smaller communities in western Illinois.

What you say is very true.
Different people, different lives, different ways of seeing the same issue.

[blondeatlast]

2. I grew up happily country in KS, CO, and MT and am happily urban now in Phoenix.

I was raised very leftist and have never "gotten" the urban/rural disconnect. Way back in '04, before the election, I wrote a little-seen piece (but much appreciated by those who did see it) onb the meaning of "church" in rural areas (community and security).

We all suffer differently from the same damn things and we'll all be better off if we can see it. Once local government has to severely cut back--and it will--we are all going to see the common threads emerge, and it's a painfully good thing.

But hell yes, it's going to hurt.

[The Straight Story]

5. I live out in the desert now

And I can't have fires like I used to back east.

And that is fine with me and makes sense. Different place, different issues, and different rules we need to follow.

But there are people about 45 miles away from me up in the mountains that get snow and rain and should not be restricted by the same rules we have here - but since we live in the same county they are.

They are small town, we are not. it is not fair to them that we are making them live by the same rules even when their circumstances are totally different.

[ebayfool]

13. I lived in that small town (Glennville?) before moving to the flatland ...

of Bakersfield, trust me - they ARE doing what they damn well please. Laws or no - they have the church inside the classroom, burn on no-burn days, etc.

It is a different life there & I do miss a lot about it (you don't hear the neighbor's toilet flush, cleaner air, trees ... gawd I miss the trees!) but the close-minded humans? Not a bit.

Bako is the armpit, true. But there are smaller towns all around it that are worse, scarey but true.




To the point of your OP though, you're right on some of it. For example - burning in the country (like Glennville) is usually for a different purpose: like heating the home, laundry (yes ... I boiled the whites on the woodstove!), cooking, etc.

But in other areas they have to be forced to play by the rules - ie keeping their church out of the public school, etc.

How the differences can be worked out, I dunno.

[TomInTib]

3. Stop making sense, TSS...

Go back to "Alligator is Eaten by Baby" stories.


Just kidding, friend. That is a great post and one that I am proud to recommend.

Tom

[elfin]

4. Am in supposed McCain Country according to polls BUT

have found in casual conversations with local merchants that they are fed up with status quo and HATE Iraq phony war.

Still love their guns - even though they only use them for hunting.

Very Independent - but HATE what the energy prices are doing to this tourist region.

This is Northern Michigan - as opposed to the UP

[knitter4democracy]

17. I'm seeing that downstate, too.

There may be some McCain signs around, but people are furious. Interestingly enough, it's often the war people bring up now as well as our sucky economy. Michigan's lost many, and people are scared we'll lose more in that quagmire.

[JeffR]

6. 5th rec

Well said.

[annabanana]

7. Good post....

Different strokes. .

[annabanana]

8. I suspect that when we DO see rancor over these divisions... they are

mostly from people who haven't had the breadth of experience of many locales that some others have. We are not "where we live" any more than we are "how much we have". It is good to recall this from time to time..

[uppityperson]

9. It takes all kinds of us to make the world work. k&r

[tularetom]

10. I think it was Edward Abbey that said " If a man can't piss in his own front yard

he's living too close to town".

I live 1/4 mile from my neighbor and together we live almost 3 miles from the next nearest house. I enjoy the freedom to do what I damn please out here and it gives us room for the horses but my wife is getting sort of concerned about the distance from medical facilities (we're in our late 60's), the rattlesnakes, (I shot three of them on our driveway last year). and the lack of social contact.

We've stayed here for a lot of reasons, mostly because we own the place free and clear, but I can see moving to someplace easier to keep up as we get older.

[The Straight Story]

11. What, you have a gun?

:rofl: Don't post that out loud, some might see you as part of the problem of violence in out country ;)

[spin]

20. Plenty of Democrats own guns...

Honest responsible gun owners are not the major cause of violence in this country.

If you examine the crime rate of concealed weapons permit holders you might be surprised that a very very small percentage have their licenses revoked because of crimes committed with a firearm after they received their license. (For example 165 licenses were revoked for firearm misuse between 10/1/87 - 4/30/08. in Florida.) http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/stats/cw_monthly.html

Of course people with a concealed permit have extensive background checks and have to take firearms safety courses.

[Fly by night]

12. The four "rules" for successful living in my neck of the (deep) woods.

Thanks for the post. Though I have lived in several nice urban areas (SF Bay area, DC) and some not so nice (Atlanta), I much prefer life in my deep Tennessee hollow.

When I moved back here over 25 years ago (after serving in the Carter administration and working as a researcher at Stanford), it took a while to get re-acclimated. For instance, when my still-big-city motormouth would dominate the discussion at the local country store, I often wondered why so many of my neighbors would respond to my verbal diarrhea with a simple (and succinct) "Well...". It took me a while to learn that this was short-hand for "Well, are you done yet?"

As I became a member of this close-knit community by purchasing a flat-bed truck and hiring out to haul hay for my neighbors, I gradually learned that there are only four "rules" you have to follow here both to get along, and to be left alone, in this community:

1) Say what you mean and mean what you say. (No "culture of deception" here)

2) Do an honest day's work. (Never leaving a hay-hauling job until the last bale was in the barn, no matter how hot or how threatening the summer thunder-clouds were, proved my worth early on.)

3) Take care of yourself and your own.

4) Don't bring headaches down on the community.

With adherence to those four simple rules, anyone who is fortunate enough (as I was) to discover this place could (in time) be welcomed by the old-timers (some of whose families have lived here since post-Revolutionary War times) to call it their home too. To enjoy the serenity of a pink-hued sunset (I'm looking at it right now) just before the fireflies awaken for another lilac and honeysuckle and magnolia-scented evening. And the pleasure of being left alone to live my life as I choose.

The country folk among us know how fortunate we are. But we are also thankful for the people who choose to live with millions of others in this country's megalopolises. Because they don't live here.

To each her own. Thanks again for the OP.

[The Straight Story]

14. Damn I miss those fireflies out here

And the smell of the earth after a good rain.

Your four points pretty much sum it up for me.

My best friend, who happens to be gay, has lived happily in that small town of Circleville for several years now and has bought a house there. He is accepted there just as much as I was (although i am sure there are a few, just like in the big cities, who don't like him all that much).

Small town folks and big city folks live different lives, but I think in the end they still want something really similar - to be left alone to live their lives and others should butt out.

[Fly by night]

15. Fireflies make good street-lights (and rain on my tin roof the best sound-track), in my experience.

Plus it's nice having to go only as far as my Garden for both my lunch (steamed broccoli, cauliflower and bok choi) and dinner (romaine lettuce, snowpea and spring onion salad, and the first steamed beets of the year). I am now able to feed about 15 families (at least once a week) from the largesse that my Garden provides. And when the blueberries and black raspberries ripen (soon come), all three meals will come from this land.

Just wish I could grow coffee here. Oh well, I need at least one reason to leave the farm occasionally.

BTW, my second favorite place is another backwoods rural area, in the high mountains of New Mexico between Santa Fe and Taos (near Penasco, Rodarte and Vadito). When I helped some friends build their house there a decade ago, they commented that the local elders seemed to like me. I told them that it was because my Tennessee elders/neighbors had "civilized" me. I also think the four "rules" are universal and cross all culture and language hurdles. I am honored that the New Mexico elders (some of whose families have been in those mountains for five centuries) have said that I am welcome to move there anytime. That's the best compliment anyone could receive from people who value their 100 mile vistas and the serenity of their solitude.

[knitter4democracy]

18. Rule #5: Know that most of what people think they know isn't true.

Having grown up in a small town, I learned that early on. Most gossip is flat-out bunk. What people think they know about someone else in town often is just a shadow of the truth or a flat-out lie. I learned to listen for the good nuggets from people who actually witnessed things instead of second or third-hand and ignore the rest.

[Pavulon]

28. Well said

there is nothing that cant be brought in via fedx if you want it and flying to ny metro a few times a year is plenty enough culture for me.

[HereSince1628]

16. "Cost-effectiveness" thinking creates disparities between rural and urban areas

It doesn't matter what public policy is in play, if you divide it by a larger number people it becomes less expensive per capita.

By definion, rural areas can't compete against criteria of cost effectiveness. Consequently, rural areas generally "feel" as if they are left out. They pay taxes but the urban and suburban areas get the lion's share of the benefits.

[eridani]

21. Absolutely not true

Rural areals get the lion's share of taxes, receiving much more than they pay out. Every urban area in WA State gets less than a dollar of services per dollar of tax, and every rural area gets more. And they are the ones always whining about taxes.

[HereSince1628]

23. Generating revenues to cover costs, and cost-effectiveness aren't the same thing.

A quick look at the locations of fixed place assets will show that hospitals and highways are concentrated in populated areas.

Passenger rail service are only maitained for urban areas and the transit of the rail-line is placed to keep the rail moving through areas that average populations as much above 250 people per square mile as possible. Bus-lines are similarly routed through areas the optimize population average along the route.

In a rural areas there generally aren't local professional police or fire firefighters because unincorporated villages and hamlets can't sustain the cost of the service. Even in southern Wisconsin, which hasn't nearly the low population levels of rural areas in wester Nebraska, or the Dakota, a local sheriff's office is likely to be located 10-15 miles away as the crow flies. Fire-fighting and emergency medical service are often volunteers.

Hospitals in rural areas are frequently 20-30 miles away and typically situated in towns where population density rises above a critical minimum that provides "cost-effective" placement. In Southern Wisconsin the Southeast Regional Planning Commission (pronounced sewerpac) has actually black-balled attempts to locate hospitals along the periphery of the suburban Milwaukee metropolitan area because the new facilities undermined the economic viability of existing hospitals with which they might compete. The same thing has happened with the placement of advanced scanning devices over fear that services would undermine the cost-effectiveness of the clinics that purchased them (and would thus endanger the survival of the clinics).

It turns out that the same things that is said in planning the development and maintenance of highway and railway corridors is used in providing police, fire and health services.

The differences in availability and timeliness of delivery of the limited services available in rural areas pretty much demands that people who live in these areas live their lives differently and in doing that, they come to a different perspective.

And you are right that these rural areas cannot generate the tax dollars which are required for creating miles of highway. They require subsidies from outside the local area. But then they also usually serve people who are moving between metropolitan areas rather than living or doing business in the rural areas they transit. And that is why many of the funds available create highways intentionally bypass most small towns and villages rather than provide them with on and off-ramps on the average of every 1/4 mile that are common in urban areas.

Like spokes of a bicycle services become widespread in rural areas and are concentrated in the huns of urban centers.

[Aragorn]

19. yeah, but

selective enforcement of certain laws, against particular groups (based on skin color or local favorites) is NOT an OK difference, right?

[eridani]

22. I think that many urban dwellers resent rural people for having more per capita representation

Wyoming has fewer people than the city of Seattle, and they get two senators.

[Dunedain]

24. Wyoming has one congressional district

Washington state has nine.

[eridani]

25. The House doesn't make up for the domination of the Senate by 15% of the population n/t

[MadHound]

26. No, but the Senate numbers make up for the proportional dominance in the House

Gotta love those checks and balances that the Founding Fathers built in.

This is an argument that goes back to the days of our birth. If you base representation solely on population, then you have the tyranny of the majority. If you portion it out equally, then you have tyranny of the minority. If you have a bicameral legislature with both forms of representation, it all balances out.

[eridani]

27. In other words, the House represents people proportionally

--the the Senate, which does not, can override them.

[MadHound]

29. How can the Senate override them? n/t

[eridani]

30. It's another hurdle that legislation has to pass n/t

[MadHound]

32. Then that's not over-riding, that's simply how a bicameral legislature works,

Which is how it would work no matter how representatives were apportioned. What, you want a single chamber legislative branch?

Frankly I think that the apportionment of representatives is just fine. How else would you do it?

[eridani]

34. Yes, by giving more political power to the rural population n/t

[Critters2]

37. Yeah. And that whole "three branches of government" thing is irritating.

Wouldn't it be much easier with a unitary executive? :sarcasm:

[eridani]

39. What we are talking about is how the Senate is an affirmative action plan for rural Americans n/t

[MadHound]

38. Each chamber gives power to the various states in different ways and different proportions

The House gives out power in such a way as to favor larger states. The Senate gives power in such a way that it favors the smaller states. Taken together, all states have an equitable say in how our country is run.

You seem to be irritated that larger states can't run the show. Do you think that would be fair? Letting the large states run roughshod over the small ones, promoting the tyranny of the majority? Sorry, but your vision would do immense damage to the country, just like letting the tyranny of the minority would damage the country. That is why this compromise is such a work of genius.

We've seen what the tyranny of the majority and the tyranny of the minority can do to countries. I have no idea why you would wish to inflict such damage on our own country, but I for one am happy that our legislative system has the power division in the way that it does.

[Critters2]

36. The Senate represents the states. Each state has equal representation.

No injustice there.

[Critters2]

35. Than urban dwellers don't understand how our goverment works.

The Senate represents the states, not individuals. Wyoming is a state. Washington is a state. They each have 2 senators. Your comparison of a state and a city is apples and oranges. The states are represented in one house and the base population in another precisely to be sure that both rural and urban areas get representation.

You should have learned this in high school civics.

[LWolf]

31. I'm sorry I'm too late to recommend this, but I'll kick it.

:kick:

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[RB TexLa]

33. I found out a long time not giving a shit about what other people do makes life easier.

There are very few people about whom I could care what they do. Granted enjoying watching the ignorant interact can be fun, but it's not my responsibility to do anything to try to fix them.