212 years later and coastal Cities still the same. Very strange!

An observation caught my eye in Jon Meacham's book, Thomas Jefferson The Art of Power.

Anfre Pichon a French diplomat observed in 1801 as Jefferson took office as the first Republican president.

He noted, "the expansion of the western populations would only add to Jefferson's power since such people would be invariable opposed to the cities of the coast"

Now in this day the Cities on the Left coast and the East coast are ideologically in lock step, just as much Federalist as they were 200 plus years ago, The mistery is why?



If you note that Jefferson was the first Democrat/Republican and Lincoln was the First Republican, you are correct and I could explain why I hold another view, but I won't, perhaps another day.

 

Population density?

 

My guess is that is another effect not a cause.

 

Okay, to go a level deeper, mild temperatures with the associated fertile land and built-in fishing economy draws similar personalities and as they get more dense have the same genres of life experience.

 

Nope, I contend it's about shipping and immigrants. The coastal towns are vital ports for shipping. It's also simpler to move to a new country and not go deep into the heart of it.

 

Good call; hadn't thought of that.

 

I say it's swimming. The brave, slim liberals willing to swim naked gravitate to the coasts. The porky conservatives who lack the self-control to hold their breaths are forced inland, much as the Neanderthals went extinct in Europe.

There can be no doubt. It's swimming.

 

We didn't go extinct, we interbred with the homo sapiens.

 

The interior of the country is also where the people who wished to be left alone migrated. It's not much different than farmers and ranchers today. They like their space, and they like to live their lives with minimal interference.

 

This is true all over the world. Places that are less homogenous are more liberal. When you are exposed to different cultures, colors and languages on the regular, you tend to have a more inclusive world view.

 

I wholeheartedly disagree with your thesis that being exposed to different cultures, colors and languages equates to being liberal.

The liberal mindset as it exists in the North America and Western Europe has some of the most closed-minded, racist outlooks and people I've ever seen. They are open and welcoming of all cultures as long as they aren't family-oriented, self-sufficient and religious. Far from being color blind, the Liberal mind must segment and categorize.

 

While "liberal" has several definitions, the seed definition is "tolerant." If some liberals like me are pushy, it comes from years of battling conservatives. At heart, we want a variety of all kinds of people to exist, the opposite of conformity.

But conservatives are fighters, and liberals have to descend to their level to win at any issue. So we lose some liberalism and become progressives.

 

I'm liberal and I'm welcoming of cultures that are family-oriented and religious. I've never seen a culture that is against self sufficiency, some cultures value harmony or individuality but that's different.

 

Oh come now! Put your ears on!
What could be more homogeneous than a City full of liberals all singing the same tune.

Health Care! It's a Right!
Gun control! It's my right to be safe!
More Police! (same as above)
Protect my Water!
Control my food supply!
Help me feed my Children!
Better Schools!
Beware of those that hang on to their Gun and Bible!


It is really an eye opener for a young conservative ( unknown Probably) guy to go to Boot Camp to learn to do your job for the Nation. My own experience with this was damn near unbelievable to me. Most of the Company was from NYC or Chicago and a couple others that were from the Louisiana country side. All of them were hip as hell, very intimidating for a little while, but most could not swim and had to learn before they could pass. The worst thing was they were completely unfamiliar with guns, many actually afraid to fire one. Most never did over come that fear. My reaction was Damn, I hope I never have to see combat with this lot.

All pretty understandable now though.

 

Socially liberal. We need different words to differentiate between social beliefs and practices vs. political ones. I would use the word "tolerant," but I'm afraid that would just set you off.

I can't see how you could argue that social liberals don't accept family-oriented (as opposed to what?), self-sufficient or religious people. I don't get it.

As far as the "liberal mind" segmenting and categorizing, I could see that. In order to understand the diversity around you, you have to sort things out. These people look like this and they do this. These other people look differently and they are such and such. It's not an ideal system by any means, but it's better than the social conservative, who thinks "They look different and talk funny. Fuck 'em!"

 

There isn't a "social conservative" I know that would be that dismissive of someone who looked and spoke differently.

 

And there isn't a "liberal mind" that I know who is prejudiced against people who are family-oriented, self-sufficient or religious.

 

Who was that guy that disparaged the folks who "cling to their guns and Bible"?

 

pointing out a general trend (which happens to be true) is hardly being prejudiced

 

...and there's the prejudice. Jesus, you don't even see it, it's become so ingrained in the leftist mindset.