Village Idiocy

As a resident of Metro Detroit, I can only hope this "Idiocy" finds its way into Detroit.
Take a minute and read the 10th Amendment.

“The real America isn't found in cities or suburbs or small towns, but in the metropolitan areas or ‘metros’ . . . " --The part about the “metros” is exactly true. It’s the metropolitan areas that the American population has been herded into over the course of the past 41 years, especially in littoral regions of the country. The cities and towns are either dying (bypassed by the new interstate highway system) being transformed into poor men’s ‘Sun
City retirement communities,’ or government agency (especially law enforcement) hubs, or, if adjacent to, and absorbed by, metropolitan areas, then, like the suburbs, they’re being transformed into “bedroom communities” (another way that towns and cities are
dying).

" ‘honesty, sincerity, and dignity’ " and ‘do some of the hardest work in America.’ " -----These towns are dying. They’ve also changed again in the past 20-23 years. Circa 1985, after about 20 years of cultural revolutions, and 16 years since the ramping up of the ‘cultural revolutions,’ a friend made a comparison and contrast comment, racialist and classist, but not merely a stereotype, and with much
justice, that these towns were full of “losers:” “The only difference between them and the inner cities is that their skin is white.” --1985 was just a few years after the welfare reform of 1981 (a reform of the 1967 welform which was a reform of the New Deal era policies, adjusted to the 1966 Great Society programs. It was just a few years prior to the first big wave of ‘prodigals’ returning to (by then reformed) American religions due to fouling and ruining their lives via living lives of dissipation and severing their roots, no small manner due to following the bad popular psychology of 1961-79 and 1979-91. . . The consequences: explosion in Promiscuity (A.K.A. “sex”), facilitated by contraception, drugs, Rock N Roll, Hollywood, new post-1972 porn flicks, first waves of Baby Boomer’s No-Fault Divorces, following the first wave of divorces led by the “Greatest Generation”(circa 1969-79), continued explosion in teen drug use (and Nancy's 'sage,' "Just Say No"), explosion in teen pregnancy, circa 1979 onward, . . . explosion in bastard children, abortions, wife beating, “domestic violence,” and popularization of the term “Single Parent” (most commonly heard ad nauseum from females). And the institutionalization of Americans transformed into ‘dogs at the dish at dinnertime’ dole recipients: Aid To Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) (mostly "Single Parent" females), Supplemental Security Income (SSI), General Assistance (GA), Food Stamps, Medicaid, HUD programs, and state GA programs. . . --"honesty” and “sincerity” were replaced by lying and “Under The Table.” --“Dignity" would have been a bad joke 25 years ago. ----”do some of the hardest work in America” ????! Package liquor store, Shop N Stop
clerks, Walmart, and gas station clerks? (which with the exploding crime rate, and dangerous predator type criminals, was a dangerous job in the 1980s). Or the continuous feed of jobless teenagers into, and return of jobless Vietnam era veterans to, the military, post-1979 onward? ----Millions have returned to religion, but these people haven’t reformed themselves, much. The bad hillbilly stereotype is still strongly ingraind in these people. They're reduced to having Hillary Clinton pose as a populist, lick their behinds, and babble about their "deep faith" and 'ingrained values.' --The towns and cities are either dying a steady death or being reformed as “bedroom communities” in metropolitan areas.

“America's small-town romance has a long, distinguished history, which perhaps explains why it has outlived its accuracy by at least 100 years.” ----This is rubbish. More like by about 43 years. Slow start about 73 years ago. Begun in earnest about 75 years ago. Accelerated 1939-1946-1965 (suburbanization), rapid acceleration about 43-41 years ago, and continued since. Which is why so many small towns across the country, while dying, are NOT DEAD YET. Destruction of American small towns began with the Great World Wide Depression and is primarily a post-World War II phenomenon (The reform of American infrastructure, population and society). It was accelerated by the reform of the distribution and production systems, development of information communications system (Advanced electronics and digital electronics revolutions) and reform of American population (“Human Resources”). Distribution communications: New interstate highway
system (circa 1956-79-onward), reform of the railway system, reform and development of ports, development of the air transport system. Production: Reform of agriculture, conservation of minerals and energy (i.e. shutting in metallic ores and energy minerals),
circa 1979-2008, restructuring of American manufacturing (shutdowns and relocations). American population (increased reading comprehension skills), the scattering of large numbers of baby boomers, via work, throughout the country (relocation), cultural and religious desensitization and resensitization (“re-education”). All coincided with the ‘Cultural Revolutions” (the various ‘liberation’ movements) of 1965-91. The reform has largely coincided with the reforms of the government and military ('military revolution') ---The 100 year mark won’t hit until 2045-65 (at which time countless small towns will be dead, or completely redefined). ---Again, this “by at least 100 years” is rubbish. Orwell’s “He who
controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.”

"and especially to go to work"

‘dogs at the dish at dinnertime’ dole recipients: Now it’s so-called “entitlements” (i.e. ‘carrots’) to a population of individuals fully conditioned to apply for whatever money the government says that they’re “eligible” for. Here in southeast Texas, Hurricane Ike was the latest opportunity (and the subsequent loss of power due to it is the reason for my silence since at least 12 September). For those who obey the evacuation orders, then they’re entitled to money from FEMA. During Hurricane Rita, some I know received up to $3,200 from FEMA (including a general $2,000 for evacuation expenses), not counting the tax-free motel and hotel rooms (meals weren’t included, but weren’t much possible during Rita either). For Ike, it seems there will be reimbursement for some motel and hotel expenses (which will probably be conditioned so as to be much less than the $2,000 doled out in 2005). I don’t think anyone around here is eligible for anything for Gustav a few weeks ago (but I wouldn’t be surprised). Of course, the “Mandatory Evacuation” order is our personal “choice.” So far I haven’t cost the American taxpayer ‘one red cent.’ Personal evacuation expenses for Gustav and Ike were zilch (I stayed for both, and slept through Ike’s making landfall as the 98 mph sustained winds ripped my fences down). Rita cost me less than $100.00: Half a tank of gas, two nights in a motel (lucky to get, and
unexpected), and no unusual food expenses since all food joints were CLOSED, and because I spent the night before leaving cooking and freezing about 3 days’ worth of food after realizing that the municipal and state government officials, with the zealous aid of the popular mass-communications media, were panicking he entire region (The government’s equivalent to shouting FIRE in the proverbial crowded theater). After Ike, another neighbor, with a generator, who stayed and I were barbecuing all week (yeah, real “rough,” but ya gotta eat :) ). So far I’ve taken one bag of ice from FEMA (a week after RITA hit). 2-and-a-half weeks without power after Rita and a-little-over-a week after IKE were uncomfortable but manageable, even with no generator. FEMA and the National Guard were no help during either. FEMA, and this crooked-as-a-dog’s-hind-leg government that it’s a part of, can shove their sticking “entitlements.” I didn’t/don’t need them and won’t take them. THAT was the principles of the ‘Party of Roosevelt” that bolstered, rather than destroyed, American families, and allowed men, women and children to live with dignity, whether they grew up on farms, in small towns or in cities. This garbage debauched and demoralized society, and American political parties are neo-British Georgian (debauching of human beings in implementation of so-called “Rule By Law”). The Great Society programs that led to this stage, were merely a new veriant of the post-WWI British Dole system. Americans are a beaten and debased population (via methods ‘tested in Britain and exported to America’--Perfidious Albions’ “Bad Seed”).

A fine economic and demographic argument of why small towns shouldn't be the center of the American political zeitgeist, but I think this misses the main point: the myth of the small town is about values not demographics or economics.

And here, the small town fixation is just as off base. There are true gems of the sturdy, self-reliant yeomanry, and others of the dignified and generous humanity we want to ascribe to small town values out here, to be sure. But they live side by side with selfish, dependent, narrow-minded bigotry, and with a self-absorption about the unique character of small town people that would make any 14 year old blush. We do raise good people out here, but we also raise scoundrels and idiots, and it's often not obvious who is winning the demographic war.

In other words, we're pretty much like anywhere else, when it comes to the mix of humanity we manage to nurture.

My favorite example of this, repeated everywhere I've been in the small town midwest, is the Walmartization of our commerce. In town after town, people who declaim daily how they value their neighbors and the friendliness and helpfulness of small town shopkeepers, have outsourced their local economies by encouraging (someimes fighting for) Walmarts, Dollar Generals, and other chain stores - sometimes bending zoning laws past the breaking point to do so. They then flock to these stores, and penury their beloved neighbor shopkeepers, to save a few percent on goods. They buy their gas from chain convenience stores, to save $.03/gallon (if you burn 500 gallons a year, that's $15.00 folks), while the local garage and gas station that used to fuel and repair their car, goes out of business for lack of patronage.

So, yeah, we're the salt of the earth out here, all right. Send a tornado through to damage our neighbor's home and we'll clean up, feed and house them, and donate to the red cross. Next day, we'll bypass their hardware store to go get the new chain we need for our chainsaw after breaking one sawing up their wreckage at ... Walmart.

Very insightful article.

Typical liberal dribble. Ignoring the REAL American values of God, Country, Families and Values by casting that only in blighted Urban areas do Americans have a chance. Factualy a liberal lie, most REAL Americans are fleeing the urban myth, the high crime, the horrid schools, the blighted neighborhoods. Rural areas are exploding while mass centers of crime and violence are dying. Your article just continue the garbage that comes from the far left in America.

The critical role of cities in American history doesn't begin in 1910, but much earlier-- that's where the American Revolution began. All of the agitation over the Stamp Act. Townsend Duties, Tea Act, and other imperial measures happened in the cities: Boston, NY, Philadelphia, Charlestown. Rural villages followed; for example, Concord, Mass. didn't really get upset and organized until 1774 and then largely followed suggestions from Boston's committee of correspondence.

There is no such thing as "small town values." People living in small towns vary in their values and opinions as much as those in big cities. The differences seem even more pronounced, in fact, because of the smaller numbers of people on either side of any particular issue. The claim that the "real America" lies in either metropolitan areas or small towns is ridiculous. The "real America," or the United States as it is more accurately named, is everything from metro areas to small towns to areas uninhabited by any humans at all.

In the age of the internet, small town denizens can be as connected to people around the globe as are residents of metro areas. Small towns are also tied together by highways, though not usually by rail lines, and people cross local boundaries and state lines every day to shop, go to a doctor's office or a museum, and especially to go to work or college, just as in metro areas. The implied idea that small town residents never stray outside their own city limits is wrong.

It is true that the U.S. economy is driven more and more by the metro areas. This is due to the outsourcing of many types of jobs, to the increase of information-based jobs which are concentrated right now in metro areas, and to small farms and family-owned businesses being taken over or pushed out of business by large corporations. And I would agree that "larger markets (like those currently found in metros) enable workers to specialize and work more efficiently." The authors of this article contradict themselves, however, when they first call self-contained small towns "mythical" and later write that self-sufficient small towns have no need for mass transit or high-speed rail networks. Are self-sufficient towns a myth which no longer exist in reality or are they real places with real needs?

I would argue that self-sufficiency, itself, is largely a myth. Most small towns have many ties, economic and otherwise, to the towns and cities nearby and they have needs just as the metros do. Mass transit, for example, would actually be very helpful in most small towns because people living there often have longer distance commutes to the cities where they work. Such a transit system would require different planning than the systems within metro areas. Commuters would probably have to drive a short distance to a hub where they could catch a train into the nearest metro area. Once established, mass transit would be more economical, safer and better for the environment than so many individuals driving solo, benefits which would be good for the entire state, including both metros and small towns. Like it or not, we are all connected by our economy, no matter where we live or work. Recent events demonstrate this very clearly.

If small towns and metro areas are connected and self-sufficiency is a myth, then how would Bradley and Katz justify the claim that the needs of metro areas supersede the needs of small towns? If, however, they are correct and small towns are indeed irrelevant to the U.S. economy, can small town taxpayers stop paying federal income tax now?

Very insightful article, but unfortunately it appears the authors did extensive demographic and economic research without interviewing a single person. As some other posters have noted, perceived values and mores often trump demographic realities. Ask people in the small towns of Chester County, PA if they have any real connection to Philadelphia beyond the sports teams and some museum attractions, and for some employment. Despite relative physical proximity, the cultural disconnect is palpable. Even the people who work in the city (law firms, insurance companies, banks, advertising etc) jump on the highway or regional trains and hightail it out of there pretty quickly. In recent years there has been talk of "regionalism" in which local governments recognize their interconnectedness and seek regional solutions to public policy problems. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that one, though allegedly folks in "Chicagoland" have made progress. To those who promote "regionalism", I offer you the encouraging words of Spongebob Squarepants: "good luck with that!!" The authors of this article have a bag of microwave popcorn that was removed a minute too soon - a bunch of important kernels rest at the bottom waiting to be explored.

Awesome comment, Steve.

Dear TNR
I've spent most of my life in small towns. Believe me, they are not the pure and unsullied edens that Sarah Palin talks about. Either she is wilfully blind or she needs new glasses.

I moved to a small town from a large metro area 15 years ago. I had a highly idealized view of small town life, and thought by moving to the sleepy little town north of Cincinnati with the dazzling horse-drawn carriage parade and the Apple Festival that I would have an "old-fashioned" life. I lived in a house that was 110 years old and was only four blocks from the Golden Lamb ( a favorite photo-op stop for Bush-ites--you'd think they owned it -heck, maybe they do...) And while it was a singular pleasure to go into shops and the shopkeepers knew my name, I also got an education about life in a small town. It came during my first visit to a City Council meeting. Sitting there and obseriving the procedings, I was picking up on a vibe. I didn't trust my intuition, so I started asking some questions. I then learned of the good-ol' boy club that dominated the town and it's dealings, run in truth, by real estate interests. Then, when an old project to widen Main Street(my street) came up, my neighbors and I wanted to make sure it was done according to EPA regulations. My neighbors got threatening mail indicating "you don't know who you're dealing with--back off" and eventually false embezzlement charges were drummed up against the woman (she had just left her job to take on the Main Street Project full-time). They were run out of "Our Town" That is how they operate in this "Charming Little Town".
Further south, in another small town near Cincinnati, I was to manage a coffee shop in an old building. It was gorgeous and was better equipped than most coffee shops I had worked in over the years. The man who owned it was blocked from opening at every turn by his ex-wife, who had some things to hide in regard to her indisretions with other council members. The council even fought for years to seize the property "by right of imminent domain". I think the house served as a constant reminder of her infidelity so they had to make it "go away". The cafe and beautiful gardens would have been a boon to a small village whose only claim to fame is two factories that spew acrid fumes. It would have hosted art shows and concerts, theatre and dance, and invested in the community. Talk about abuse of power. Situations such as these go on because they are done under the cover of darkness, despite sunshine laws.
Small towns are just microcosms of big cities. Until we teach ethics in schools (people obviously aren't learning them at home) starting at an early age (it used to be called "Citizenship", I think) we will go on to have more Wall Street Debacles, and "Keating Five Scandals" where the perpetrators slink off to hide with their millions or even run for President. (Look it up, by the way, in case you forgot about that late 80's scandal. Keating and four senators were indicted in the Home State Savings Scandal, one senator plea bargained and squealed on the others. You guessed it... John McCain.)

Now its the rural areas to host mass centers of crime and violence as they become part of the Metro areas. People have long ago fled the Urban areas for the burbs and the rural areas that have become the new Metros

Unless you've actually lived in both a small town and a large city, you are probably going to romanticize/idealize the one you know the best. It's just common sense to know that good people and "bad people" live anywhere/everywhere and willful ignorance to believe that "only in small towns" will you find hardworking, moral people. Although I guess meth is made and consumed mostly in rural areas. When I stop in "small towns" along my travel routes, I try to find whatever it is that their local shops specialize in. It's fun and you'll get things you can't readily find anywhere else (mostly because you wouldn't think to look). But I also think "my G-d I could never live here" (again). And I often here "I don't think I could live in Chicago". When questioned, their perception of daily life "in the City" revolves around their real or perceived experiences from "Down Town". Bottom line--this is just a political manipulation to create more drama and material for political ads.

Small towns are also frequently places where meth production labs flourish, child abuse (sexualized or otherwise), and domestic abuse flourish because the police force is inadequate or crooked.