David Horsey has some thoughts on what constitutes the "heartland" of America. Sadly, they are what one would expect from an urban liberal.
On one hand, Horsey makes an excellent point:
The fact is, most Americans don't live in small towns, most don't work on farms or in manufacturing plants and most do not live in the so-called heartland. Most Americans live in cities and suburbs close to one coast or the other. A big share of Americans have been to college, work in office buildings, drive foreign cars, drink wine once in awhile and haven't gone bowling since high school.
Utterly true. American has become steadily more modern, cosmopolitan, and diverse in recent decades. That steady demographic shift is one reason why Barack Obama has found the success he has this election season. There are an increasing number of people who identify more with the new economy and major population centers than with the old economy and smaller-town America.
That fact, however, does not detract from the fact there is still a bigger chunk of America than Horsey seems to recognize who either identify with that older background or still have deep respect for it. Moreover, just because one fits Horsey's demographic description above doesn't make one an enlightened liberal.
A huge part of the reason for the "heartland" issue is that islands of urban liberalism, particularly on the coast, have long made public policy and social issue choices the rest of the country simply doesn't embrace. That's why Bill Clinton was able to have his Sister Souljah moment. It's why we have a state with the nickname "Taxachusetts." It's why Rudy Giuliani's mayorship was necessary in New York. It's why this map came to be in 2004.
Horsey is generally correct in stating this:
We're a polyglot nation and should be proud of it. It has made us generally more tolerant and eager to embrace change than people in more homogeneous, traditional societies. Strangely, the heartland caricature that gets shoved at us during every election campaign gives the false impression that those folks who are often the least tolerant and least willing to embrace change are the most typically American. That's simply wrong. Year by year, we are all becoming less like Indiana (the place I was born, I should note) and more like California.
Yet, his conclusion that the "real American heartland...is a lot closer to San Francisco than the pundits and spin doctors would have us believe" just reveals how far the urban liberal community has to go to reconnect with flyover country**. As integrated as our country has become, we remain in a sense very far apart.
**For more on why, see this excellent David Brooks column on how the more diverse America Horsey rightly recognizes has simultaneously become more divided demographically.
Posted by Eric Earling at May 21, 2008 07:41 PM | Email ThisWhat an incredibly scary thought... that any of us would actually WANT to become like the train wreck that is California.
put horsey on a real horsey in eastern WA in the rolling landscape;
1 week on a farm or ranch or whatever; no special treatment;
mix with the locals the best you can; listen to their experiences; then, write THAT story up if you dare;
i might even go along at my own expense just to see if i'm half the city boy i am;
Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on May 21, 2008 10:35 PM
Welcome to the United States of America. You say that year by year, we are becoming less like Indiana, and more like California. You add that you were born in Indiana. So this analogy has a special meaning for you.
Indiana, that mid-West icon of heartland American, white folks, working hard, getting better off each year.
California; too many illegal immigrants, too much social progressive reform, wacko liberals, Hollywood, TV, and Ronald Reagan. What? Ronald Reagan??
I am a citizen who was born in California and grew up on the Great Plains. So I can claim a foot in both worlds. I can look back at the influence of my father's wacko fundamentalist roots from California, which he soundly rejected, and my mother's staunch Conservative Methodist upbringing in the MidWest, which she soundly rejected, and come to the careful skepticism that is my political outlook.
Horsey's comments are real, and they are sound. Most Americans don't live in the small, rural communities that resonate with the fond memories of our youth. They live in a very different and competitive world that defines winners and losers. Unfortunately for all of us, the Loser category is by far the largest.
Why do I say "unfortunately"? Because it implies a very deep and bitter divide in our national psyche. It means we can find fewer and fewer issues on which we all agree. In short, it means we become the two nations John Edwards spoke of, those of the haves, you and me, and those of the have-nots,
Many of us realize that a under-class of have-nots can be destabilizing to our culture. We look for ways to include them in the economy, somehow, make them shareholders in political stability.
Others say, they have not because they deserve it, they don't work hard enough, have babies they can't afford, make bad choices, use drugs, on and on and on.
The bottom line is we need to find a way to resolve this nations underclass issues. Lord knows we resolved the upper class issues. Short of that, we risk and permanent and violent class divide, that will cost us all dearly.
Sorry if I bore you.
I'll give them both about four hours.
So what does that prove???
NAFT.
America's heartland used to be that place betwixt the Great Rocky Mountains and what West Virginia call mountains. Nowadays its the place between WA DC and Hollywood and is called fly over country.
To Horsey you are just another hick, a useful idiot to be used and abused before and after elections.
Horsey wrote~ "If there is a real American heartland, it is a lot closer to San Francisco than the pundits and spin doctors would have us believe."
...and if there is a real American heartland, the founding fathers that formed this great country would empahtically agree that it is alot closer to Middle America than the talented, but vacuous cartoonist from the local fishwrap and his 'groupthink' readers would have us believe.
Posted by: Rick D. on May 22, 2008 05:36 AMWhy do leftists like Horsey speak in code? Why not just spill it out? In his above quote, Horsey is stating that it is more American to stand on an urban street corner cheering a parade of naked bicyclists, sodomite exhibitionists and transgendered fruitcakes than to attend a Sunday afternoon baseball game or church picnic in a small town.
And the left wonders why conservatives won't embrace "diversity" and liberal "values".....
Posted by: Saltherring on May 22, 2008 06:05 AMIt seems Horsey was describing me. However, he is also correct. The good paying jobs are in the service sector- white collar jobs, the lawyers, the insurance agents, the new car dealers- all white collar.
But, what I realize is that the USA needs to manufacture more of its own products, it needs to create an environment so the owners want to manufacture here instead of there. So, that is why my vote is usually for the Republican. My votes and wishes actually help get better jobs.
But, the urban areas think and vote to 'feel good', instead of looking at the big picture. Except during election time when their 'feel good' candidates say they will bring back jobs. The only party that has a shot is if the Rs have a supermajority, which ain't going to happen soon.
Posted by: swatter on May 22, 2008 08:17 AMThere is no more geography. There are only grids. A web designer can buy a farmhouse in Indiana, and work for a petro company in Dubai.
The people are are behind the curve think in terms of "cities".
My "city" is a forum on the web.
My "town" is a blog.
Posted by: John Bailo on May 22, 2008 08:41 AMThis is a big difference with cityfolk and us country folks. We live in a world where we are hellbent to provide our kids with every opportunity to be successful and we don't consider anyone a 'loser'. Cityfolk seem to look at the world in winner vs. loser attitude and some of them think it's imperative to force the 'winners' to pay more to help the 'losers'.
Posted by: Doug on May 22, 2008 09:31 AMWhat that means though is that more from the 'lower class' are not making movement upwards (economically). But the reason for that is the liberal policies enable them to be lower class and in fact they want them that way...they need the "peasants" to help them live like the Polit-bureau.
Posted by: Dengle on May 22, 2008 10:37 AM60 years ago those supposed great values of the South involved pointing a firehose at people in the streets who were standing up and saying they we're equal to the people holding the hose. That sort of thing never happened in SF, wonder why?
More irrelevant strawmen. You're invoking the 1960s for what reason? Oh you don't have any real points to make, so keep rehashing the racist South of the past.
Posted by: FreedomLover on May 22, 2008 11:17 AMIt's entirely relevant...not my fault you want to live in denial. Liberal values made things like interracial marriages legal and schools desegregated. These were pretty progressive attitudes at the time. If you want to continue to live in your shallow bigoted ways thats fine by me.
If the "transgendered sodomites" want to walk down the street and celebrate one day a year they should be free to do so much like the Promise Keepers would be should they choose to do so. No is forcing you or anyone else in America to go to either parade.
There was a time when those who chose to engage in shameful and perverted acts did so in privacy. Now such behavior is "tolerated" and even celebrated on city streets.
There was also a time when Seattle's streets and schools teemed with children and parents considered the city a great place to raise a family.
Now the schools are emptying as most families have moved to the suburbs. One of the major reasons this has happened is that Seattle does not provide a healthy environment for children. And shame on the city's leaders and citizens for allowing that to happen.
Posted by: Saltherring on May 22, 2008 01:43 PMi might last only 1 hour horsey-bound; point is your 2 Americas and division is (to me) caused by socialistic and liberal thought pervading everything these days; like Horsey's tilt; he as a right to an opinion; i like his art, but not the content; more like glorified leftie graffitti;
the content i speak of is general guilt and disdain for our country and all it has done for the world & its inventions shared with all; schools afraid to teach 3 R's & disclipline kids; parents too tolerant; "rights" given to all, even illegal aliens; lawyers like Edwards suing anything that moves, causing police, doctors, soldiers and schools to look over shoulder and 2nd guess; ideas like yours about the "underclass" automatically "deserving" my money in place of my voluntary charitable donations or their own personal responsibilities and work;
just my opins; & thanks for yours;
Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on May 24, 2008 06:25 AM