Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The War Room' started by alanb, Feb 8, 2018.
To be fair suicide shortens everyone’s life expectancy.
Oh my God. Get the fuck over yourself. I serve on nonprofit boards aiding rural whites, but let's not pretend that they weren't voting for the most odious of candidates and supporting hateful, self-serving policies during the absolute hay day of rural wealth distribution. Trump wasn't some new avatar for rural disenchantment: they've been voting in morons like this for ages, regardless of their place within the economic hierarchy.
And I agree with your larger point about bourgeois liberals being out of touch with middle American poverty, but of course you had to go about bringing up the point in the most identity political, white victim way possible. Liberals, coastal or otherwise, are the ones pursuing policies that will help these schmucks like universal healthcare and broader financial regulation and regulation of expropriation of rural capital by displacement of local business by multinational corporations.
Also, re "pay for stuff they want like affirmative action programs and global warming initiatives," you can go fuck yourself.
Rural white communities are subsidized to a degree outmatched only by post-industrial urban blacks, who face much more dire living conditions, have considerably worse health outlooks, and have a much better fucking excuse other than "wahhhh, you're saying that climate science and racial stratification exist! Wahhh, you want to allocate money that we are not generating to save the planet we leave on instead of giving tax breaks to corporations, wasting more money on the military, or drug testing black people WAHHHHH!" and yet haven't gotten together to elect a reality tv star moron in response to centuries to being bent over.
I don't like it one damn bit. Nor do I like his pandering to SJW's. But you gotta pick your fights.
So maybe shelve the horseshit about it being part of some shadowy corporate machine designed to divide us. The very same hucksters who sling that swill are doing it themselves.
What does that tell you?
It tells you they're full of shit, and that's not why it's really happening.
Yeah, poor white Americans are often overlooked when it comes to the discussion of poverty. There are places in Appalachia that are like third world countries.
The only thing I will say for them is that despite the staggering poverty, they manage not to shoot each other, dispelling the myth that poverty+lack of education=violence. That is a purely urban issue, and can be narrowed down even further if you want.
Access to affordable healthcare/phyciactric care probably plays a pretty big part
You saved me a lot of typing.
Usually lack of space. Cram any animals together and they become violent.
If that’s all it takes then fuck em. Pull yourself up by the bootstraps and take some goddamn responsibility for your actions.
Poverty + lack of education + population density + reasons to shoot people over.
The poorest Mexican state is also the one with the lowest homicide rate for the simple reason that there isnt much to shoot people over in those states.
No major industrial ports or highways (less important for the drug trade), no major tourism centers (no need to sell drug to gringos), no large cities (little population density, which means less gangs and more tight communities).
Yes, this is known. If they would stop trying bring back dead industries and dead jobs then we might be able to do something about it. Let me explain:
Low skill manufacturing is a dead job prospect. Everyone knows it, even China knows it. But parts of America are still holding out for the return of factory jobs like the ones their grandparents had. Even worse, politicians keep insisting that they, the politicians, will bring those jobs back to those communities.
Yet everyone knows it's not going to happen. And it's definitely not going to happen at the scale that will matter. So, when you tell these communities to pack up and move on, they say "No. Bring back our non-existent job opportunities." And with each passing year that the demand and/or the promises don't result in those jobs, they slip into deeper and deeper financial and psychological sorrow.
The world has changed and they need to change with it. What they don't need is people continuing to sell them a false dream. Move out of the rural town that relied on a long defunct factory economy. Get job retraining. Just move on.
They're just "culturally" inferior.
Religion can be great-- when it effectively promotes an orderly, virtuous life.
But oftentimes in America it is used as an ineffective substitute for things like education and social services. That's why I said "religiosity" instead of "religion."
I'm thinking of those heartbreaking stories of parents who try to "pray the disease away" instead of getting their kids medical help.
Or the "God, Guns, and Trump" crowd-- many of whom aren't actually regular church goers and know next to about the social teachings of their religion.
Or the "Gospel of prosperity" crowd who use religion as a pretext to justify policies that hurt the great majority of Americans and be totally callous to those in need.
Definitely. Any ideology, good or bad in nature, can be perverted to justify all sorts of insane shit. And we definitely have a fair mix of that in the population of US Christians. But I believe if you were to do some sort of sociological audit on every Christian in the western world, Christianity is an overall positive. But even on an individual basis there is a mix of positive and negative influence from Christianity. A kid may be born to a christian family, have a stable home and family life, his parents have a healthy relationship, there is stability and discipline in the house and the kid is successful in school and/or sports. Turns out as the kid hits puberty, he is attracted to men. His family doesn't have a positive reaction to this and their reaction stunts his growth as a human being. Just a common example of how Christianity can be both positive and negative on an individual basis as well as the over arching macro situation.
Liberals take big cities and ruin them instead of little ones. Let's take a look at the top US cities by murder rate (ordered from top to bottom) and the political party of the mayors that have run the city:
St. Louis: democrat since 1953
Baltimore: democrat since 1971
Detroit: democrat since 1970
New Orleans: democrat since 1874
Newark: democrat since 1962
Milwaukee: democrat since 1960
Washington DC: democrat since 1967
Chicago: democrat since 1933
Kansas City: independent since 2007 (democrats from 1991-2007, 1 republican squeezed in from 1930-1999)
Cincinnati: democrat since 1971
Memphis: democrat since before 1900's
Oakland: democrat since 1977
Atlanta: democrat since before 1900's
Could go on and on really. And when a republican was in a city like New York, they reduced crime rates drastically and cleaned up the city.
The problem with rural communities is that they lack jobs. Since most high skill jobs are in urban areas, high skilled labour tends to move away from rural areas, meaning less entrepreneurs will start businesses in rural areas. Most rural jobs take the form of farming or some sort of resource gathering (mining, foresting, etc.). Automation and machinery have replaced a lot of those jobs.
Rural communities on average should be poorer and have less job opportunities simply due to the urban hierarchy. They will tend to support anyone or any policy that promises to provide them more jobs, which happens to be republicans.
Do you not see the double standard in attributing urban problems to Democratic leadership, but explaining away rural problems in terms of socio-economic factors?
If the Dems own urban problems, then the GOP owns rural problems; what's good for the goose is good for the gander, know what I mean?
And per the OP, not having a job doesn't make someone become a booze hound or an opioid addict anymore than being born in a rough city makes someone join a gang-- less so, in fact.
What the fuck kind of mentality is that? Are you waiting for a handout?
The entire argument can be boiled down to, "People in rural America do drugs and support Trump because liberals."
It's easily the silliest argument I've ever seen in this sub, which is saying a lot.
But rural communities are fucked either way, democrat or republican doesn't matter. Jobs are always going to leave them, causing various economic and social problems.
Urban communities are more politically malleable. There are fewer excuses for an urban city to be more violent than rural cities, as they have a lot of things (both economically and socially) stacked in their favour vs. rural communities.