CITIES. HOW ARE THEY CHANGING AND WHAT MIGHT IT MEAN?
Before I get started, I fully realize many of you are going to read this and say to yourself," so what? Cities have been different from the countryside since day one". For the sake of argument, I will state I agree with you. What has changed is time, size and awareness, and so I am going to press on with my opinion and see if I can't make you understand the issue from a different light.
For the past several US Presidential Elections, I've seen a map some organization has complied that depicts the voting status of the nation by county. In each case the overwhelming percentage, like 85 percent or better, of the US landmass has shown to be "Red" or Republican / Conservative. Each one of these maps has depicted the same results for the "Blue" or Democratic areas, with only slight variances in percentage. The major cities in the US are "Blue", about 15 percent of the landmass, don't hold my percentages to an exact standard but I know they are really close. What does that mean? Is that phenomenon new? Is it worth paying attention to? Does most of the nation say, " so what"? Well, it's the 21st century and yes, yes it does mean something and let me tell you why.
Back Then:
Throughout time, cites have been their own entity. Yes the people outside the cites new they were there and some were close enough to travel to them if they needed or wanted to, but day to day life didn't revolve around such locations. I can remember driving down the road in Southern Missouri with my Grandfather who was in his 90s, listening to him talk about how the trip we were on that took 90 min use to take him a full day. that was in the early 70s so you do the math. The Big City was St Louis and people went there for excitement or to purchase things that you simply could not find out in the country. By the way, in my opinion, the area outside the cities is referred to as, "the country" for a reason. Back then, cities were hardworking industrial centers where people went to make their fortune, or so they thought. In the industrial age, cities worked around the clock. There was not rolling up the sidewalks, look it up if you don't know what that means, at 6pm. Back in those days, cities were large, but the majority of the population still lived far enough away they had little in common with "city folk". Elections were won by "stumping" the countryside and not just winning the city vote and here is where my opinion starts to take hold.
What they have become:
Are cities modern day, technological wonders? Most would say yes, to some degree. Mass transit, huge sports complexes, high rises. Yes, some are amazing to gaze upon. Zoos....did I mention Zoos? St. Louis Zoo.....it's the best in the world....really. Large Cities became modern day marvels and just about everyone wanted to live in one, but then the inevitable happened. Political parties began to realize the major cities were growing so big, they didn't have to " Stump" the countryside nearly as extensively as in the past. The major cites had grown to the point, enough votes could be won just by winning the majority of the votes in the cities. Short answer, the trend of the countryside becoming less relevant had begun. With the onset of unions, they swing to one political party was set into motion, a motion that would last for decades. Promises were made for the sake of votes, nothing new there, and the color of the major cities was nearly cast in stone. Then, the worse thing, for that party that is, began to happen. The jobs began to go away and with that, the fear of the votes leaving the concentrated areas of the large cities became a reality. One party had only one choice, they had to make the large cities the center piece of a voting block that would be too dependent on that party to ever leave the city. Okay. I know this is where some will think I am getting on a soapbox, but if you can prove me wrong, then do so. Large cities became "safe voting blocks" and all that was needed was to continue to provide as many "entitlements" as possible. Now, here comes the really tough love part. Not only did one party come up with a strategy to keep a voting block in the cities, they had to frighten that block into believing someone wanted to take those "entitlements" away from them. "Vote for us or you will be tossed out with the trash"! Yes, fear tactics set in and they were reinforced by just about everyone involved in this particular political party. Well, before too long, large cities were not just economic engines for the nation, they were guaranteed votes...dependent on one party for just about every need the "city folk" may need. Sound outrageous? Again, prove me wrong.
Look, I could talk all day about the status of large cities in the US, but here is the down and dirty. The rest of the nation began to live with the nickname of, "flyover Country" for a reason. There is a reason this same political party in question has now openly called for doing away with the Electoral College. Why? Because the large cities have a majority of the population now, for now that is, and with that, the political party in question simply doesn't need the "flyover Folks".....but....only if they can get rid of the Electoral Collage. Once again, those pesky Founding Fathers are in the way of power and control.
A Nation Divided:
Here is what I have been driving towards. History is a great cornerstone of knowledge, but times do change and complex societies, ones that have over 3 BILLION people able to communicate 24/7/365 without filters, are going to encounter issues that history has not set examples for. What holds a nation together? If you said a common good.... a common goal, then you are on the right track. In the past few years, even decades, how often have you heard, " I don't give a hoot what LA or New York does are thinks. How many times have you heard the major news networks, focus on the coastlines? If you googled CNN or MSNBC for the term, "flyover Country" what would that number be? Folks, the US population is growing apart.
When I was 30 yrs younger, would I have believed I would look the news and listen to major cities openly tell the federal government, federal law doesn't apply in "their city"? Sanctuary Cities...I'm talking about Sanctuary Cities! What if George Wallace would have tried that approach? Oh...that's right...............he did. what happened? His National Guard was federalized and used against him, that's what happened. When I was a Cop in Ft. Worth and St. Louis, would I have witnessed, other than the city of Dallas and that is a story for another day, national leaders from one party, to include the President accusing Law Enforcement in general of being discriminatory or racist? Yes, we witnessed this in the 60s, but it wasn't coming from the federal government. It wasn't coming from the President of the United States.
If large cities are going to be allowed to ignore federal laws, make up their own rules regardless of what the federal government states, where does it stop? One party is in favor of allowing illegal entry to the US in massive numbers and again, those cities that agree simply ignore federal law. Where is that heading? What happens when "Flyover Country" says, " If it's okay for the large cities to make up their own rules, then it's okay for us to make up our own as well". Then what? What happens when "flyover Country" doesn't want to be be affiliated with large cities? Think it can't happen? Come to Texas and ask anyone who lives outside the cities of Dallas, Houston, Austin....good grief....Austin, San Antonio what they think of what goes on in those cities. Just how much more division can the US withstand? Does it even begin to worry you? it should. The major cities in the US are growing more and more distant from the rest of the nation and nobody on either side seems to mind. In reality, most are even glad it's taking place. Where does that leave the US? People in the US often hear talk of 'division", but are they taking that worn out phrase for granted? Do they really see what the future might hold? Can cities produce energy? No, at least not most of them. Can they produce food? Nope. Can they manufacture the luxury items they are addicted to? That capability is dwindling away. The fact of the matter is, big cities live off of life support from the areas outside the city. Don't believe me? Watch the next time a Hurricane or Earthquake hits one. Look at New Orleans in Katrina.
The real Danger:
What do nation state's real enemies constantly look for? yep. weaknesses from within. Was the 60s just an issue of the war and civil rights? Yes, but to an extent. Did our enemy, the Soviet Union, leverage the 60s? You bet they did. Has that concept changed? Absolutely not! It's an old saying and it's one the US has used to it's advantage in the past. " A house divided cannot stand"! The US large cities continue to morph into something the rest of the country is not comfortable with. Morals, Ethics and social norms are growing apart at an alarming rate. Is that a danger to the survival of the nation? Truly, I cannot think of a more dangerous topic. A crazy strong economy is the glue that keeps it together.......for now! If that glue melts, then what? Worse. Who is out there trying to make that glue melt? " Nations without borders". Who supports the concept and why? Who supports the idea of taking the world economy off the dollar standard? Is the US living on a razor's edge? That my friends is up to you to decide.
PS. I said this story was applicable to other nations and I can assure you I am correct in that assumption.
