The BBC news has just been reporting on the election and pretty much defined it as this.
I think it might be a simplification and the people they interviewed were obviously chosen to underline theit point.
I do think that there might be a case to make for Trump on the grounds of the economy. Although how much he is responsible is debateable.
But apart from that it is hard to give trump credit for anything. He lies,he cheats, he is vain. He is a racist, he doesnt represent the whole country and he is a laughing stock around the world.
Is America split between educated and uneducated ? The Uk is split on these lines. Is civiisation under threat from the march of the Calibans ?
The rural/urban thing is very real. If happens in Canada too. I grew up in small towns and villages in prosperous south-western Ontario, moved to Toronto where I lived all of my adult life, and retired to an even smaller town than the one I grew up in, abount 5 years ago.
What it comes down to is that it's hard to be poor in the country. You have to at least own a car to have any sort of life at all, so people in rural communities don't see the kind of poverty that is seen in cities. They see poverty that exists because of substance abuse or laziness and they sincerely believe that their tax dollars are coddling a lazy, abuser bunch of city dwellers who are living in luxury off their tax dollars.
Here's the reality: There are fewer resources for the poor in the country, and even fewer opportunities. If you don't own a car, or have any job prospects, well there's public transit and more jobs openings in the city than in the country. When I was young and starting out, I moved to the City because there were more jobs and I didn't need a car. There are also a lot more resources to help people who are trying to improve their situations. It's possible to get subsidized child care, and easy access to post-secondary education, both in full-time day classes and part time night classes too, although this is less of an issue now with online courses available, than it was before the turn of the century.
In the country, there are large extended families to help: church congregations, family members, and neighbours who all pitch in. In the city, people are often on their own, and church communities are struggling. My Toronto congregation's big annual Christmas Bazaar raised $2500 in their best year. We weren't taking in enough revenue to pay the costs of maintaining the building, much less charitable works in the community. My city congregation did help out with Christmas baskets, donations to the food bank, and knitting for the babies, but mostly, the congregation was mostly low income and elderly. The only reason the church was still open was a massive trust fund which was enhanced one of our elderly passed and left a chunk of money to the Congregation. When I left, they had enough to last 10 years, and about 100 parishioners left.
My small town Congregation raised $8000 in their annual Snowflake Tea and Bazaar this past weekend. They are involved in community dinners, outreach, and charity throughout the town, providing low cost meals to the elderly (their turkey pie sales are always sell outs), Scouting for the kids, and a whole range of community programs.
City people are simply not as well connected nor are those connections in as good of a position to know who to help or how to help them. City churches don't have the funds or the resources to do the kind of work that small town churches do. Nor do they have that community grape vine working for them. I go to the local deli for lunch and by the time I leave I know who's sick, who I need to call, visit or check in with. That doesn't happen in the city. So when something happens, my network springs into action, to provide support and assistance.
The rural folk base their opinions of poor people, or people receiving government assistance based on their small town view of the kinds of people who need social programs, and on the resources that their communities provide. Republican politicians exploit this view of the world as "free shit" because they fail to understand the need for "free shit" in the first place, and that is that people in the cities aren't being paid enough money to keep a roof over their heads and eat. Their children are also receiving such a substandard level of education that they will never be able to achieve a better chance in life.
And all of this benefits the big corporations, who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. So they lie to the rural folks about free shit, and welfare queens so they can keep them voting against their own best interests in ensuring that every American who works 40 hours a week receives a certain basic standard of pay, like those of us in the rest of the world have done for years.
