So apparently rural America (modern hunter gatherers) think city folk look down on them

The title of the OP answers the question pretty well.

In my liberal bubble there a lot of lamenting that if only rural people could visit a city they would be enlightened. Pretty arrogant thinking if you ask me

I still like, erm, appreciate this cracked article about the country vs city perspective.
We may have come a ways since Beverly Hillbillies, but we still do jokes like
Going to the country? If you hear banjos - RUN

I really can’t tell how much of this thread is satire vs serious

I live in the city–walking distance to downtown. In the country’s fourth largest city. I’m lucky enough to rent a little house–don’t know about my long-term luck. Raised in the country, I definitely prefer cities.

But I look down on** Salvor**. Because of this & other threads.

Is this some sort of urbanite virtue signaling, or establishing a pecking order perhaps?

But…but…we have OPERA here!

(Old Dave Barry joke)

There’s no need to disparage rural people. After all they’re just a simple folk.

“It’s not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.” -President Obama.

FOURTH largest city? Pfui. Rubes.

Let me explain it more simply. I live in a large city. I enjoy living in a large city. But I do not think it a good idea to force people to move to large cities.

Some people prefer suburbs, small towns & the country. That does not mean that they are all Republican idiots.

The stereotypes go in both directions. City folk might speak dismissively of the boonies and flyover country, but it’s not like rural people don’t make cities out to be scary, loud, crime-infested hell holes.

This is the truth right here, my title calling rurals modern hunter gatherers was dismissive, but honestly, I never much thought about rural vs city until its become increasingly clear their attitudes are effing with my political preferences. I liken it to my attitudes towards middle eastern governance and issues before 911, I had no attitudes because they were not on my radar to be concerned with. But the reverse does not seem true, rural populations seem to have been seething about city attitudes and centers of power for some time.

It was a bit of a parody, yes. I wanted to be a bit of the caricature they seemed to have of city folk attitudes, but upon further inspection, some of the negative attitudes towards them are being copied from my attitudes towards conservatives since this election whereas before I never thought about a city vs rural population divide much at all.

Yes, the whole concept of “urban people looking down on those who live in ‘flyover states’ is an entirely new thing.” :rolleyes:

Hell, as loathe as I am to use it as a cite, look at “Green Acres.”

Someone who is not going to lie to people like Trump needs to engage with those people (not me!) and point out what was pointed out in the article. Having a small town that survives or withers based on the might of a single industry is NOT a stable foundation to build a prospering community on. This is why cities and denser urban environments are inherently more economically resilient. This is why nation is even more resilient because we can redirect resources to those more in need at a given time.

But therein lies part of the problem, conservatism has put up a psychological firewall where the very project of using tax funds to assist others is seen as something to be disdained. There is a kind of nobility to the attitude of wanting to survive completely under your own power and not take from others, not to be like those minority welfare queens that sit on their ass all day without working, if WE take assistance we’ll be on THEIR LEVEL !!!

On the same level as a BLACK !!! (left unsaid, but I suspect it’s in the back of many peoples minds about not wanting to be that low on the social pecking order)

This sentiment is poison. ALL people can find themselves in hard times. But this attitude that is partly noble and decent can create a destructive pride that hurts peoples own interests.

Instead, they bought into the con man, who told them he’d make America Great Again… that is not going to boost up a thousand small towns that lost their main industry in a changing landscape, buying into universal healthcare and a universal basic income would help, deciding to leave depressed areas would help people. If an industry collapses, then if you can, move. If people need help moving to where the jobs are, then as a Liberal I want to help. But no, this libertarian cancer cripples the souls of these people, they have to do everything on their own, and if they can’t, they would rather wither in a dying town than vote for people that would be OPEN to granting assistance, because there is just too much pride for that.

Have you considered the possibility that your attitudes are effing with their political preferences?

But unlike the unwashed rubes, **Salvor **is enlightened!

He just wants to show them the error of their inbred, backwater ways!

I grew up in a neighborhood that was mostly trees. I’m as rural as they come.

I don’t disrespect somebody for being rural. But I will disrespect anybody who voted for Donald Trump.

If you’re a racist or a sexist, I don’t respect you but at least I can see why you voted for Trump.

If you voted for Trump to “send a message” then you screwed up. You didn’t win; Donald Trump won. He’s a con man and you fell for it. Stop bragging because you’re just embarrassing yourself.

The welfare has to be one step removed. Giving money to people is bad. Giving money to companies so they stay in town when economic forces say they should leave because 80% of the town works at “the plant” is OK.

Also, farm subsidies are good and are NOT government handouts.

The city slicker being outwitted and made a fool of by the country yokel has been a staple of American (and British) humor for many centuries, as witness the English publication Joe Miller’s Jest Book, 1739, which abounds with city dweller v country bumpkin gags. There is a natural antipathy between the two types and that is very evident today.