General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why do Democrats do so poorly with rural voters? [View all]wickerwoman
(5,662 posts)They don't use roads or bridges or levies or dams designed by "urban parasite" engineers? They don't buy pesticides or GM crops or use new techniques and hybrids designed through agricultural research at "big city" universities?
None of them have or want internet access or cell phones? None of them watch movies or TVs shows or listen to music produced in urban areas? None of them wear clothes or drive cars or have refrigerators made in factories in urban areas? None of them enjoy military protection? None of them benefit from disaster relief paid for mostly by taxes from city dwellers? Urban areas in the US pay significantly more in taxes than they get back in benefits. The opposite is true for rural areas.
Your take is *waaaay* too simplistic. People have been moving to urban areas for the past 300 years because that's where the jobs are and because it's more efficient to provide infrastructure for a compact area than it is when everyone is spread out. The vast majority of those "City Masters" are the younger brothers and sisters of the rural peasants who would have starved if they had stayed on the farm.
And you lose the moral high ground calling them "citygreens", "vegan types" and "hippies". That's just as condescending and intolerant in its own way as "stupid redneck hillbilles".
It's a symbiotic relationship, not a one way dependency. And the problem is rural defensiveness at least as much as it is big city condescension. Nobody likes having it pointed out to them when they are wrong. And many conservative ideas are simply wrong. But if you're well-educated, you're better able to accept challenges to your ideas as part of a constructive dialogue. If you're less well educated, you just shut down because the other person is "bashing" you or being "condescending".