Geopolitics

[The Persnickety Platypus]

Looking at the red state/blue state maps from last election, you begin to notice a certain phenomena. Urban counties are almost exclusively blue, while their rural counterparts are typically red. What factors account for this phenomena? Why are cities more liberal than the countryside?

I have a few ideas.

Cities are comprised of a wider diversity of people, and represent a larger scope of lifestyles. Special events occur in shorter succession, and life moves at a faster pace- in such a fashion that societal change barely registers on the radar.

Rural America, by contrast, is just the opposite. Change typically takes a longer time to permeate society. Life is slow. Consequently, tradition and ritual find a particular stronghold... and the people are much slower to let go of them.

This simple realization sheds light on another phenomena, one which has recently been of particular annoyance to me. Why is Europe so liberal compared to the US? A tell-tale sign is the geography- European populations are so much more congested than in America.


Ideas/comments? What other factors could possibly contribute to an area's political climate?

[McCulloch]

In Ontario, urban ridings are more usually Liberal red or NDP (Labour) orange, and the more rural and suburban ridings are Conservative blue. So your pattern seems to apply here too.

[micatala]

I think there are also other factors to consider:

1. I haven't done the research, but I would bet that urban areas are on average wealthier than rural ones. This is not to say that there is not great poverty in urban areas. Obviously economic conditions have great variation. However, I think the average and median incomes for urban areas would prove to be higher than that of rural areas.

What effect this has on politics and why would be an interesting question.

2. Educational opportunities, both within schools and through 'life experience', are more robust in urban areas, again 'on average.' Rural area schools can be very good, but because of size limitations, their curriculum is also sometimes limited. I think the result is that there is probably less variation in educational offerings in rural areas, and that on average, students in urban areas have many opportunities that rural students do not.

3. It is easier to maintain local control in rural areas than in urban. This 'control' can mean control, or at least great influence, over the local schools, both with respect to the curriculum and who gets hired. In can also be a more informal exercise of control through social interactions, e.g. peer pressure. A person who goes 'outside of the mainstream' in their views, especially if they are outspoken, can quickly find themselves marginalized. This is much less likely to happen in an urban area where a 'support group' for most any kind of viewpoint can be found.

[ENIGMA]

I found this map online and got something of a kick out of it:



Funny how things change, and yet they remain the same.

[Easyrider]

This simple realization sheds light on another phenomena, one which has recently been of particular annoyance to me. Why is Europe so liberal compared to the US?

One good reason is their godless humanism. They've lost sight of godly moral values.

[The Persnickety Platypus]

1. I haven't done the research, but I would bet that urban areas are on average wealthier than rural ones. This is not to say that there is not great poverty in urban areas. Obviously economic conditions have great variation. However, I think the average and median incomes for urban areas would prove to be higher than that of rural areas.

But that would mean the political affiliations should be the other way around. The poor typically lean to the left.

[McCulloch]

But that would mean the political affiliations should be the other way around. The poor typically lean to the left.

Do you have any research to back that up? My unscientific biased sample of poor people shows that they tend to prefer simplistic solutions, which generally corresponds to the right. Does anyone know of any properly done surveys which corelate income with political leanings?

[The Persnickety Platypus]

Research? It's just a plainly observable phenomena.

When people hit rough times, they generally want the government to butt in and provide a helping hand. They want social programs, welfare, and equal opportunity; all of which are generally supported by liberals.

During the Great Depression, there was scarcely a single Republican to be seen in Washington. Democrats ruled, and numerous socialist movements went underway (Milwakee had a socialist mayor for, what was it, eight years?).

Look at history. What happens virtually every time a country is hit by severe poverty? What happens every time the government completely ignores the commonfolk? Communist revolutions. The ignored and downtrodden don't want simplistic solutions, they want radical change.

I'm not at all convinced that cities are wealthier than the country, as previously claimed. I percieve the opposite.

We need some actual statistics on this.

[McCulloch]

Your example is when poverty is widespread. My observation is with regard to relatively poor people within affluent societies.

[micatala]

Why is Europe so liberal compared to the US?

One good reason is their godless humanism. They've lost sight of godly moral values.

The statement not only equates godless with humanism, which is incorrect, it assumes Europeans by and large subscribe to godless humanism (whatever that is) and that this automatically precludes them from acting morally. It also implies an identification of 'liberal' with 'godless' without any justification.

That's a lot of fallacious thinking to pack into two sentences. Is there any evidence to back any of this up?

By many measures, Europeans act more morally than Americans. Lower murder rate. Lower abortion rates by far (for those who consider abortion immoral). I believe they also have lower teen pregnancy and lower unintended pregnancy rates. Lower rates of violent crime.