Should Liberals move (reclaim) smaller towns/cities?

[artistforpeace]

I just wanted to get some input in to a notion I’ve been recently thinking about. I don't believe my views to be fact or even concreate which is why I want to see what other like minded people think about this.

A quick background/bio: I’m in my early thirties and I grew up in a more conservative then not very very small central New York town. Went to college in Columbus, OH (already a liberal but saw candidate Clinton OSU speech, changed my life forever about politics). Spent some time in Columbia South Carolina before moving to San Francisco for 6+ years. Now I have moved back to the east coast living in New York City.

First, this idea of mine is based on the notion that a majority of liberal/progressive people are pack in some key metropolitan areas of this country. I know there a many liberals living in small towns AND I know there are small towns that are progressive. But I feel the majority do not, which is why there is the idea of the coasts only being democrat. Well the point to this post is that I’m starting to think that liberals need to reclaim the smaller towns/cities. I know without a doubt that I lead a very sheltered wonderful life in San Francisco when I lived there, it just felt great living in a very beautiful progressive city. Now in New York, while I sort of feel it, the reality has come back to me about how things are. Visiting my home town every year really brings back the reality of “small town fear of change so no progress” conservative viewpoint. Well maybe it’s time that the majority of us who do live in very liberal places, moved to these towns/cities and incite change. I understand that it really could only be done possibly by a younger generation like mine (but maybe not, I’m still trying to formulate what this all means). I just think that I do value “small town” AND liberal beliefs. Most perceptions in the country is these should be in conflict. That the “wholesome” small town life where everyone knows your name sort of Americanized Ideal is overtly a conservative notion. But when I talk to many many people I know who share my liberal/progressive values, I find they grew up in small towns and were pushed out and now live in “safe” liberal cities. Well why don’t we change this? It will take a generation or so probably but maybe it’s time to retake the small towns. I know there are exceptions to this and there are many small liberal towns out there. And I don’t mean moving to suburbs outside progressive cities. I’m talking about going to where the nearest highway is 20+ minutes away and reclaiming these areas. Now I know this isn’t for everyone and I’ll admit I can’t really fathom the idea of really moving away from what I have now grown accustomed too. But maybe sacrifice is needed for the better good.

What do you all think about this idea?

PS – sort of a funny (but true) realization I’ve notice in my travels throughout the US (I’ve traveled quite a bit). The small towns that I’ve notice that tend to be progressive, always have a café/coffee shop (and not a starbucks/ dunken donuts) I mean a place with old couches, tables and chess boards, etc. Fuddy/conservative small towns, no café/coffee shops. Could there be a connection?

[RainDog]

1. You are cordially invited

to move to the small town where I live.

(we have both the independent coffee shop and the starbucks...and the box stores are giving the indies a beating)

we have a liberal city govt, but we need all the good-hearted liberals we can find to keep it that way.

[raysr]

2. That is exactly how

the wingers got where they are, school boards, city councils and so on.

[artistforpeace]

3. Exactly!

They have a 15-20 year head start on this too. It’s the small appointed positions that make a difference. Small town politics that really change the flow. Or am I crazy thinking this way? Micro-politics (is there such a theory)?

[calimary]

30. Absolutely correct, and it's what we should do.

Big takeovers start with little steps. From the bottom UP. Because more often than not, the lower-level elected people aspire, and move, upwards.

[misanthrope]

4. No...

...all it will do is dilute strength. What you're actually suggesting is for "liberals" to willingly give up the few spots where they have political clout. You empty the major metropolitan areas of their concentration of "liberals," and you can kiss the government goodbye.

People who remain in xenophobic areas do so for a reason. They either can't figure out a way to get out, or they don't want to. Most of the time, its the latter.

That's just a bad idea from a couple of different angles.

[artistforpeace]

6. well my thinking...

Does it do us any good to have areas that are 70%-80% democrat? Plus I do believe because of cultural institutions in liberal "strong-holds", they could never become conservative. Some would point out Arnold in CA but that was just state brain-fart (sorry for the description but what else can it be).

I understand your concerns and even agree with that possibility. I just don’t think it could happen. However (off the subject but…) my greatest fear is that conservatives are going to breed us out with the disproportionate family size. However, that in itself can backfire as well because a majority of my “liberal” friends when I was young lived in very conservative families. So…..

[misanthrope]

20. reply

"Plus I do believe because of cultural institutions in liberal 'strong-holds', they could never become conservative."

If that's so, then would the inverse not be true as well? Could you not the say the same of more conservative areas, that they have their own cultural institutions insuring the perpetuity of conservatism?

Yes, it does good to have areas that are overwhelmingly more progressive. Conservatives have always outnumbered progressives, and always will. The few areas of concentration assure that at least there will be some progressive representation in D.C. (or what passes for that in the United States, anyway).

[artistforpeace]

27. ahh....

But here’s where it gets interesting…..Population percentages. Think about 1 conservative moving to NYC and 1 liberal moving to a town with a population of 5,000. First, I believe the conservative (natural fear of change) would be terrified moving to a liberal city like San Francisco. However a liberal who grew up in a conservative town, knows the game. I know I’m generalizing here but think about it. Small towns usually are grouped together within giving areas and tend to have the same thought processes. A sort of "keeping up with the Jone's" but on a town scale. You influence one town, it spreads to other towns. I’m not saying this is do to sheep mentality or anything. It’s human nature. Reason small towns that are conservative stay conservative? The liberal mind with it’s less fear of change and exploration, moves out. But think if even a small number of liberals stayed and gave voice to others. Well once people who tend to be conservative see the world not ending and attitudes liberated but not necessarily lifestyles (except for just accepting people more and maybe paying a bit more taxes) boom! The town vib changes.

Plus a coffee shop opens up (you all know this was sort of a factual joke right and not meant to be an intellectual attack on small town people)…;)

(edited for spelling...getting late here...hehehe)

[Jane Austin]

7. Hey, wait!

I think the progressives are already there. They get Rush on the local radio and think everybody is like Rush and they're out there all alone.

If you have relatives in a small town, make sure they're registered and send them all the good URLs you can.

[stevedeshazer]

12. artistforpeace is right

With all due respect, I don't agree with you, misanthrope.

I have spent equal time in my life living in rural and urban areas. I've never lived in a suburb.

Concentrating the "liberal" vote (why do you put that word in quotation marks?) in urban areas just means more political division. It sounds like in your world, "liberals" only live in cities and "non-liberals" only live in rural areas or small towns.

You say that people live in what you call xenophobic areas for a reason. Does that mean that you consider all non- major metropolitan area citizens xenophobic? If so, that's a disservice to the millions of Americans who are "liberal" and don't live in a large city.

There's no reason to fear the spread of "liberal" ideas throughout the entire country. We all live here and are all connected in some way.

Political apartheid is not a solution.

Political integration is.

[misanthrope]

28. reply

I have lived in small cities, and large towns, and suburbs. Don't forget that the rural world we grew up with is no longer as isolated as it once was. Not at the present, at any rate. Living in small towns is more like living in suburbs than it used to be.

I put the word liberal in quotes because I think its meaning has become extraordinarily perverted in this country, not the least of all by many who assume that label and are not much in the way of that at all.

I don't think that all people of either political stripe are restricted to certain locales. I was going with the original poster's premise that established that pattern. I will say that there are indeed areas which have certain predilections for certain political beliefs and cultural outlooks. I can assure you, the average citizen in Alabama is not like the average citizen in San Francisco.

I used the word "xenophobic" because xenophobia (in a wide range of degrees) is the essence of conservatism. While humans have a great curiosity, we also have a somewhat innate suspicion of the new. It's a by-product of natural selection. Some of us grow beyond it and learn how to control or dismiss it. Some ignore it and never wrangle it in.

From my experience, areas that are overwhelmingly conservative are also reluctant to change and dubious of newcomers.

No, I don't think that all non-metropolitan areas are Neo-Nazi hotbeds. I, in fact, live in an abundantly conservative town of modest proportions. But, I feel firm in saying certain areas are more prone to certain mindsets and mores. Unless of course, you think Zell Miller and Roy Moore would feel comfortable (or have risen to power) in Eugene, Oregon or Greenwich Village.

I don't fear the spread of ideas, but the advent of modern communication facilitates the spread of those ideas without transplanting the concentration of bodies into areas that may not be receptive to strangers.

[Missy Vixen]

37. Here's our experience

>From my experience, areas that are overwhelmingly conservative are also reluctant to change and dubious of newcomers.<

We moved to our town (population 5400,) three and a half years ago. It's 20 minutes to the freeway and the valley has some minor flooding each winter, so it's possible to get twice the lot (and twice the square footage of house,) for $50-75,000 less. As a result, young families are flocking to the area. To say that our town is overwhelmingly Republican is an understatement.

The "true" old-timers (those who've lived here 30 years or more,) have been very welcoming and cordial to us. They don't like the changes, but they are willing to deal with most of them due to the goodies the additional tax base has bought, like a new bridge across the valley. Those who've lived here 20 years or less are antagonistic at best and downright nasty to anyone whom they don't recognize. The local merchants can't understand why "those on the hill" (those who are moving here live on a plateau that protects them from the flooding; most of the money in town is "up on the hill",) won't shop in their stores or eat in their restaurants. After one's been screamed at by a merchant who can't wait to tell you that the "yuppies are ruining everything here," one is a bit reluctant to spend one's filthy lucre in these establishments. As a result, our merchants' businesses are dying off, one by one.

Before we moved here and while our house was being built, we made a point of shopping in town. After we moved in, we kept it up, even though we got plenty of negative reinforcement from those who just can't seem to bring themselves to act in a businesslike manner. It took us over a year, but we finally got to the point where people would greet us and at least be polite when they saw us in the grocery store or at a local restaurant. We then started volunteering for things in town. I became a city councilperson, and even though I lost my reelection, the best part of running was being endorsed by multiple local Republicans -- and yes, they knew that I am a Democrat. We are still volunteering.

I agree with the poster that said that the only way any of us will make inroads for the Democratic Party in these towns is by being a part of the community. The natives all know who the workers are, and who sits on their ass and does nothing. There are also commissions and boards galore that need some helping hands, and those positions are currently being snapped up by organized right-wingers. Our planning commission has just been stacked with hand-picked buddies of our mayor, who makes Bush look like a liberal. These positions in other towns go empty, though.

I think the only way to make the difference in these small towns is to live in them. I also believe many of our future Dem leaders will come out of these small towns.

Julie

[RainDog]

15. well, in my small town, greens have won council seats

so I don't see how a bigger city necessarily means a more liberal city...look at Dallas, for instance.

smaller liberal cities, from what I've found, are connected to the larger world via universities and the people who take jobs with the Universities tend to be liberal.

Austin, Tx is a middle-sized city example.

Not everyone wants to live in a large city anymore (I've lived in large cities, and they are not liberal utopias either, from what I've known).

I don't know if artistsforpeace's idea is feasible, but I also know that larger cities are not the only places in this country to find progressive people and politics.

and in fact, with the coming problems with peak oil and global warming, smaller cities with liberal populations are the next wave.

[Jane Austin]

5. You may be on to something

I think little towns are full of progressive-minded people. They just aren't organized, and the no-nothings are louder and better organized - - often through the Chamber of Commerce or civic clubs.

I think if they were registered to vote and were organized a little better, they'd win plenty of elections.

After all, they are the ones who live near where pesticides are ove-used, where family farms go bust, and where big box stores run the Mom and Pops out of business.

How do they get organized? As broad band spreads to more and more localities, look for all these people to find DU, Buzzflash, meetups and more.

They can get organized with just a little help from their progressive friends.

[arewethereyet]

8. its was foolish to leave them behind

they did represent our traditional base

[cmayer]

9. I hate to rain on your parade...

but perhaps you have noticed that most people aren't as interested in politics as we who congregate on these boards. Perhaps people will move to where jobs are, but not for politics. Why don't we wait to see how the Libertarians do on their takeover of New Hampshire?

If progressives are put off by a conservative culture they tend to move out of those communities.

I live in a conservative community. I am doing what I can to change it. (local chair, recruiting candidates, party visibility, etc.) It is the outrageous agenda of the far right that will eventually change things. But my wife keeps saying that we should move to Humboldt County.

[artistforpeace]

14. I totally agree....

I totally agree most people do not move because of politics. My partner's job is why we moved from San Francisco to New York City.

I guess I'm getting home sick for small town life even though the majority of my life I have now lived in urban areas. But what keeps me from moving to a small town besides my partner's job IS the loss of progressive ideology I find in larger urban areas. I know the idea of “Northern Exposure” -esque (remember that show) lifestyle isn’t a reality in most small towns in the country.

I guess what brought this post on was a post I read the other day. I can’t search and I can’t remember the poster but I was horrified how she and her husband were being harassed in their dominated conservative area and needed to get out. That is what got me thinking (and missing the idea of owning a house with land for under $100,000) about why it is that like minded people are “putting up” with being isolated to urban areas. Don’t get me wrong, I love living in a city as well. But more and more I realize that what I would miss in a city, I could make up with frequent visits. And I would never considered living in suburbia. It’s the countries mass inoculation of valium, suburbia.

[Jane Austin]

32. Hmmmm . . . .

There are just wonderful reasons to live in smaller SMSA's: Knowing your neighbors; parades; civic choruses; only one high school; everybody has a garden; slower pace; cheaper housing; and on and on.

If you do find yourself in a lower-population area, enjoy it; and see if you can't get on a few commissions and boards.

You'd be surprised at how welcome your help might be.

[Cleita]

10. I prefer areas that are not population packed, but I also find

people are more conservative in small communities. I think it's because Church becomes a social center in small towns. There aren't many other social outlets in rural communities. They tend to be organized by clubs and churches rather than clubs opened for business like in large cities.

I think liberals could be cultivated if the right social and cultural opportunities are presented. I once lived in a very small town (a few hundred people) that was really way into the wilderness and far from hospitals or other city ammenities. The locals had organzied a volunteer fire department and paramedic unit (who incidentally saved my husband's life). They communicated over police scanners (too far in the woods for cell phones) so everbody in town knew everyone's business and subsequently ours.

There were five churches and five bars in adjoining towns. I once asked a local whom we had befriended, why the churches tolerated the bars? His answer was that when everyone went to church on Sunday, they needed someplace to go after. I never asked why. I think if knowledgable liberals reached out to these people without letting them know that they think they are backwards, things could work.

There is something I do notice at DU. The educated and well informed tend to tear down someone not as brilliant as them. I know I have been attacked unmercifully with huge page like posts of psuedo intellectual word posturing just because I said something they didn't like without reading what I actually said. This attitude makes the more conservative rural people back off from these attacks because they feel they are being put down. It prepares the soil for the conservative snake-oil salesmen to come in and tell them anything because, "Well howdy, I'm just like you."

Sometimes liberals are elitist and then they don't know why they were called that.

[stevedeshazer]

13. Your last two paragraphs are spot on.

I'm probably too dumb to be an elitist, but slap me if I sound like one. Here. Ever. :)

[DemoTex]

11. Fight where you are.

I'm in the wilds of NC. My address is Brevard. I'm closer to Rosman. I'm fighting the fight here, in the mountains.

[TanMeKangaroo]

16. Yes, start small with tiny socialist villages

Then go bigtime and take over the White house.

[rumguy]

22. You're hung up on the word "socialist"

aren't ya?

[kodi]

17. one should actively participate in local politics, big city or not

its at the local level you get the most affects from your efforts invested.

[ButterflyBlood]

18. i actually live in a liberal fairly small city, but i disagree

i say keep the strongholds which have a lot more clout anyway. i plan on moving to a major city once i'm out of college.

you're right about the coffee shop thing, that applies here too. i think it's mainly because intuectual types tend to hang out at such places, so they pop up in towns full of them, that's the effect rather than the cause.

[artistforpeace]

24. Why would it be one or the other?

I’m not advocating all liberals up and pack to move to small towns. Why does it have to be one or the other? I believe that due to the very nature of large urban areas, they could never become conservative. If that wasn't true NYC would have swung after 9/11. No, I think the opposite happened in NYC. I’m speaking more about people that maybe want the lifestyle of a small town that are liberal, but are weary of moving because of entering (or returning) to conservative strongholds. Why do republicans get to hold the moral and “values” of the small town lifestyle as theirs? It’s used to be ours (democrats).

It doesn’t have to be this way.

[waldenx]

19. yeah, we could eat chicken shit for dinner every night

and pat ourselves on the back saying "Anything but cow shit"
and pretend it is progress.

[rumguy]

21. Yes - we need to tap into the populist FarmAid type of mindset

I come from a series of small towns in the rocky mountain West. It's sick how our party has just almost given up fighting for the heart and soul of these people. But I see that changing...there are dem govs. in New Mexico and Arizona and hopefully soon in Montana.

Dems have been tarred and feathered as gun-grabbin', anti-hunting, PETA-loving wimps...I know that I am not like that at all.

I like to hunt, fish, backpack...there is an environmental ethic that runs deep in small towns in the rocky mountain West that we need to tap in to...the repukes are no friends of small towns!

FarmAid forever!

[rumguy]

23. wanderingbear?

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[scottxyz]

26. Regarding the cafes with the couches and chessboards...

When people have a chance to network privately, face-to-face or on the web, they naturally turn liberal.

When people get their news from a centralized, hierarchical system (broadcast media) and not from small, informal, networked encounters, a small, rich minority can convince those people to become conservative.

It won't be enough to just move to small towns. You've got to change the landscape and architecture of small towns so people can have conversations with each other again, and not just with their television sets.

[cmayer]

29. I just finished reading "The Emerging Dem. Majority"

Just finished yesterday. It's an entire book about just this thread. I recommend it to anyone who hasn't read it already.

It's a little optimistic. It puts Virginia in the "hopeful" column, which I think is still aways away.

[SoCalDem]

31. People are social animals and like to cluster where their "kind" are..

Also, bear in mind that financial concerns figure in heavily too.. There are some professions that do not translate well in some communities....

Since the interstate highways were built in the 50's, people have always been "on the move".. There was a time when young people ended up living with their parents even after they married, or they lived down the street.. That is no longer the norm, and people go where their job takes them.. Not many people have the luxury of moving where they want to live..

Small towns do not always welcome "outsiders" , because they know that their way of life will change if they get too many..

My town is a prime example.. When we moved here in 1981, it had about 30,000 people.. One traffic light and a few 4-way stop signs..

We are approaching 200,000 now and it is CROWDED..traffic is a nightmare..(It took me 45 minutes to go about 15 miles a while back)

We have tons of new houses, but at 4AM the people leave and they come back at 6PM.. The actual "city" has no "cohesiveness".. Some people commute for 2 hours each way to work..

Suburban life pretty much sucks now..

[sweetheart]

33. To each her own

This small town is organized around about 60 holdings to the common
grazing land. The grazing land, bounded by rivers is many thousands
of acres. The common grazing committee, is the focus of the town.
The villiage hall is as well; and the pub.

Pub (short for "public house") is a family place with 2 children
and some of the local community who float in liquor hang out there.
The pub knows everything about everything in the villiage. A rock
moves and its a rumor in the pub.

Politics is openly discussed in the pub.. though scottish countryside
politics is about abbotoir locations and EU tagging of sheep, nothing
particularly global. :-)

The villiage hall has recitals for the villiage kids on bagpipes and
other instruments, singing as well... with all the old folks and stuff. They serve alcohol at all events, so old folks can enjoy
a tipple with the grandchilren about. I avoid the villiage hall
unless i'm feeling like being covered with children vibes.

The grazings committee forms the real relationship between neighbors
as it is very socialist in function. Everyone has limited unilateral
rights in the common, like cutting peet for your winter fire.
Parking your tractor on the common grazing near your house is not
considered out of line.

Some of the holdings (small farm) graze stock on the common. Anyone
who's tended animals knows that you and your neighbors get chummy
by wandering beasts and animals getting through fences. There is
the reciprocal ettiquette of keeping watch over each others stock
as the houses are located in different parts of the massive common,
and no single one can monitor the whole place. This informal
relationship of tending and assisting in animal care, creates
a culture of common parenthood. It is stuffy and not very liberal,
but in a limited way, provides the hub of constant interconnection
that makes the local villiage very politically healthy.

[IrateCitizen]

34. I don't necessarily think you're asking the right QUESTIONS here

First off, as I noticed in the thread, you have acknowledged that you grew up in a "small town" type of environment. As someone who grew up in a rather rural/farmland environment (even though it has since changed considerably toward suburbia), I can most certainly sympathize with your longing for a return to your roots.

However, as someone who has had experience living in a smaller community, you should also be fully aware that you cannot go into this kind of an area and expect to "change" it.

People who live in small towns and rural areas do so not because they want great change, but because they want a rather settled lifestyle. They don't want to be in the rat race. They want to maintain close ties with friends and family, and keep a strong sense of community.

There are positive and negative sides to this. The trick is to tap into the positive aspects of the small town / rural persona, while not aggravating the negative aspects of it.

If you move back into such an area and begin loudly advocating in favor of gay marriage and calling for implementation of socialism, you should not expect to be received too warmly. However, if you move in and get involved in the civic life of the community, whether it be town government or just local clubs (Rotary, Kiwanis, Lions Club, Elks, etc.), you will then be able to gain the most important thing from your neighbors that is involved in living in such an area -- their TRUST. And in such communities, trust is a very important thing, because people still believe that a person's word is pretty damned important -- as it should be.

Additionally, there is a broad populist streak waiting for capture in such areas. Prior to the 1960's, the Midwest -- rather than the East and West Coasts -- was the hotbed of socialism in this country. Hell, Eugene Debs was from Terre Haute, IN rather than San Francisco! We seem to forget this. Now, there is the distinct problem of overcoming the "family values" populism that has been exploited by the RW in order to divide the electorate against itself, but it can be done. And the way to do it is not from the safe havens of the coastal cities, but by people originally from those areas moving back to their roots.

And now, perhaps the most important thing -- in doing so, we might just learn a great deal from the people living in those areas, perhaps many times more than anything wisdom we might have to impart on them.

[Ysabel]

35. should we take over...?

sorry - belated post...

YES...!

we've already pretty much taken over madison and are spreading throughout dane county...

whee heeee...!

editing to add - i probably shouldn't try to cook and read and post all at the same time. upon re-reading - i'm not quite sure what you mean and / or what you are proposing...

[Jane Eyre]

36. Story of a rural Southern county

I grew up in a fairly rural area of North Carolina. My family's roots in the are go back to before the Revolutionary War on one side and before the Civil War on the other.

The county has always been fairly well divided between conservatives in the southern part where the Germans settled and the northern part where the Scots-Irish settled. Slaveowners and landowners lived in the southern part, tradesmen and small farmers in the north. Baptists in the south, Presbyterians in the north. In the 20th century, the KKK had a stronghold in the rural southern part of the county while the northern areas saw the growth of two small private colleges, one historically black, and minority populations.

There were seperate school systems for blacks and whites until the 70's when the two black high schools were turned into elementary schools and the black students integrated with the white schools. The schools with the highest minority populations are in the northern part of the county. Over the past 30 years or so, minorities have become an increasingly larger part of the population in the northern part of the county as a result of "white flight" to the southern sections. Latinos are now immigrating to the northern part of the county and settling into rural areas that have been the province of generations of all-white families.

What I am saying is that rural areas and small towns have histories that help to explain why people vote the way they do. In southern area, race is a big part of that history. Race was perhaps the major issue used in Nixon's "Southern Strategy." Getting people in a small town to become more liberal will take more than just moving there, though it could be a good start. It will take working with the history of the place and, if it is a Southern town, it will take a broad understanding and willingness to work with the racial issues of that area. Minority populations need to be brought into the process and white voters who describe themselves as conservatives will need to see that the issues which affect them most, such as jobs and expanding deficits, are not "us vs. them" issues. It won't be an easy task. Moving to a small town or rural area is not an answer in itself, but it could be the first step in a long process for those willing to commit themselves to the task.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.