This essay explains why urban density produces urban politicians and media that are so, er, dense.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at December 21, 2005 03:56 PM | Email ThisFurthermore, his "proof" that newspapers would be liberal because their audiences are liberal is dubious. Most newspaper revenue comes not from readers, but advertisers. As the biggest advertisers are the owners of the largest means of production, they would tend to be vastly more conservative.
Neither "proof" is solid; without hard data, such extrapolation is dubious at best.
Posted by: Travis Thomas on December 22, 2005 10:57 AMSprawl=Suburbia. People who want their own private 1/4 acre "Estates" Who want the comfort of living in a "neighborhood" where everything, and everyone looks identical. Where nothing is within walking distance, and you need a car to go to the grocery store. Where little, to no consideration is made for the environment.
Rural=Rugged individualist wannabees (and a FEW of the real deal). People who have decided to withdraw from society, who want to live alone by themselves, or in tiny, insular communities.
More power to them..
Problem is, there isn't that much "rural" land left. Liberals in cities have learned that with increased density, comes increased responsibility. Your property rights are fine, as long as they don't affect MINE. If you live in rural areas, they need to be KEPT rural. If you buy a farm, don't try and turn it into a huge, sprawling mess of a 'burbclave
Most civilizied societies have urban, and protected rural areas, with not much in between. Suburban sprawl is pretty much a uniquely American invention...one of our worst.
Posted by: Proteus on December 24, 2005 11:17 AMWhat nonsense.
Density doesn’t equal culture, art, science, and other things nor do they come from large diverse populations. Yours is a pure post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. The fact that both may occur along side each other to some degree certainly doesn't mean one causes the other.
Culture, art, science, and other things are very prevalent in rural areas. Travel to any of the San Juan Islands or visit ocean Beach towns or other small rural communities all across the country and you will find culture, art, and science in more profuse quantities than urban centers. Most movies are made in rural areas, most artists live in remote communities outside of cities, most successful musicians, actors, rabid enviro-nut politicians like Al Gore own huge tracts of land in the country and some (like Al Gore) guard them with private armies of their own.
The average farmer must know more about science than any city dweller ever thought of just to keep their farms running. Many of them have advanced degrees in the hard sciences. Most of the technology centers in the world are located in suburban and semi-rural centers like Redmond Washington, Simi Valley California, Redstone Arsenal Alabama, Vienna Virginia Technology Center etc., and on and on.
Large cities pollute the air and water far more per capita than rural areas, and they contribute more to the destruction of culture and science than they help either in any way. The only possible exception to this are the contributions made by urban hospitals to medical science. Unless you consider graffiti art, tattoo parlors and hip-hop music culture, rabid hysterical environmental extremism and hypocracy science, and other things like disease, crime, violence, racism, moral degeneracy, communist liberal socialism, corrupt governments, pollution of all types, and incivility virtuous, your baseless claims fail miserably.
Population density was not associated in any appreciable way nor contribute to the developments and inventions of Jonas Salk, Orville and Wilbur Wright, Benjamin Franklin, Albert Einstein, Bill Gates to name only a few across time. Have you ever been to the Redmond Microsoft campus? Pure sprawl if there ever was any. MS's property rights were fine, and they affected others rights like yours to the extent that they were free to do pretty much what they wanted (aside from zoning laws) including build a campus that takes up huge open spaces to make their untra leftist enviro-wacko employees feeeel close to the environment. Your claims are self serving nonsense.
None of this really matters anyway because it is beside the point. The point is that you have no regard for property ownership rights because they imply that others might do something with their property that you think is improper, and you believe that it is your business to dictate to others what they can and cannot do. Fascism comes from the left through ignorant collectivist rhetoric like the garbage you are spewing paired up with reckless power. Your right to overpower my inherent rights begins with hiding behind bull$hit nonsensical rhetoric to perpetrate liberal socialist takings like the CAO, and it will end badly for you.
Go drink more of the the tap water in your condo genius.
How you can even COMPARE real cities like New York, Chicago, San Franciso, or Vancouver to the San Juans is beyond me. Of course, lets not forget that the people running those nice arts and crafts stores are mostly Urbanites who have gone there to retire!
Yes..for the record, Seattle is a SMALL city, by modern standards, and not an effectively run one at that. New York by comparison is a real city, with an effective, moderate city government lead by a reasonable, moderate Republican (who got 70% of the democrat vote).
Large cities CONFINE pollution to a small area, and smart cities have mostly done away with it. I feel far safer drinking tap water in Seattle, than water in Yakima that has been polluted by farm waste, pesticides and heavy metals. Cancer in the US is also significantly higher per capita in rural than in urban areas. "Liberal" cities like Amsterdam and Vancouver have some of THE highest standards of living in the world. Try saying that about a red state wasteland like Houston.
If you think that "graffiti art, tattoo parlors and hip-hop music culture, rabid hysterical environmental extremism and hypocracy science, and other things like disease, crime, violence, racism, moral degeneracy, communist liberal socialism, corrupt governments, pollution of all types, and incivility virtuous" are a central part of modern cities, you're obviously an ignorant fool who hasn't visited a major city in 20 years.
The best universities in the world are ALL in major cities, where most people you mentioned studied, lived, or worked. With the exception of the Wright Brothers (lucky mechanics), they all lived and worked in or near urban centers.
Finally, you are utterly, totally, and completely wrong about most peoples views on property rights.
As far as I'm concerned, you have the right to do whatever you want with your property, as long as it doesn't affect MY rights, or the greater good.
If you pave over your land, you better NOT be flooding MY land as a result. If you want to sell your farm to a developer for cash, that will greatly affect traffic in the area, pollution, and will require government resources that I have to pay for. Hell no. SO..what exactly do you want to DO with your precious rural land, other than make it less rural? What is it that we are forbidding you from doing?
Oh...and thanks for illustrating your ignorance. Facism is the diametrical opposite of Communism, and thus a far RIGHT wing philisophy.
From Websters:
"Facism: a system of government characterized by rigid one-party dictatorship, forcible suppression of the opposition (unions, other, especially leftist, parties, minority groups, etc), the retention of private ownership of the means of production under centralized governmental control, belligerent nationalism and racism, glorification of war, etc"
Hmmmm....wait..this sounds really familiar. Almost like I've been living under this political system since, oh..say 2001?
For the record, I'm a registered Republican, horrified by what has happened to my party since the facists took it over, When McCain was butched by the Christian right in South Carolina, hope died for us.
Now we can all goosestep to our own Joseph
Goebbels..Karl Rove.
You start with a perfect example to prove that are full of crap. I drink purified water moron. There is nothing clean or safe about tap water anywhere (rural, suburban, or urban) and there never will be again. It is not possible, and it hasn’t been for well over 40 years. Biologists (rational conservationists) all know this. You say, ”I feel far safer drinking tap water in Seattle, than water in Yakima that has been polluted by farm waste, pesticides and heavy metals.” You know nothing about water purity (processing), or you would never say such a stupid thing, but I heartily suggest you continue to feeeel safe by staying that way.
Dim wit says, ”Large cities CONFINE pollution to a small area, and smart cities have mostly done away with it.” Confine it? Smart cities? Done away with pollution? You are further out of your ding-bat mind than was immediately obvious. ALL large cities pave over nearly all of their land, spew massive amounts of air pollution, produce huge quantities of waste (far more per capita than rural areas) and ship their waste to rural areas to dispose of (confine?) it. No city will ever do away with pollution. Your claims are utter bull$hit.
You are bluffing again when you say, ”Cancer in the US is also significantly higher per capita in rural than in urban areas.”and ” "Liberal" cities like Amsterdam and Vancouver have some of THE highest standards of living in the world.” Sorry moron, both pretences are fallacies. National Center for Disease Control Statistics show that quite the opposite is overwhelmingly true, but you miss the whole point. Nothing has ever established support for a conclusion that living in a rural environment alone causes cancer, or that density promotes culture, art, science, and other things. Your claim pairs up one thought with the other as if they are causally linked and they are not. Example:
The Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle home of the world's largest and most well-established research program is surrounded by thousands of resident out-patient cancer victims. Does this mean Seattle causes cancer? You are one dumb son-of–a-bitch.All standards are subjective. Citing Amsterdam and Vancouver as examples of high standards by assuming unspoken particulars (specific criteria) to prove generalities (qualitative standards) is both foolish and meaningless. Nevertheless, Amsterdam’s quietly exploding Muslim problems (murder of Van Gogh with impunity) and Vancouver’s heroin addiction problems are not my ideas of high quality life.
Again you say, ”If you think that "graffiti art, tattoo parlors and hip-hop music culture, rabid hysterical environmental extremism and hypocracy[sic] science, and other things like disease, crime, violence, racism, moral degeneracy, communist liberal socialism, corrupt governments, pollution of all types, and incivility virtuous" are a central part of modern cities, you're obviously an ignorant fool who hasn't visited a major city in 20 years.”
Who is the ignorant fool? I am quite pleased to repeat your statement and let it stand for itself in all of it’s grammatical, syntactic, rational, and logical glory.
The tone of your idiotic diatribe tells me that you are a belligerent fascist as well as a very stupid one. You say, ”what exactly do you want to DO with your precious rural land, other than make it less rural?” None of your friggin’ dumb-a$$ business you communist moron. Property ownership for the purpose of developing land is totally legitimate and without it you would have no place to live. You obviously have neither an idea what is going on nor how difficult it is to develop land. Strict regulations already prevent the types of problems you rant about unless you are a liberal crony with a fist full of payola. The greater good will never be achieved by seizing property ownership. Stay in the city, drink your tap water, paint your neighbors’ walls and call it art, and mind your own moronic degenerate liberal business.
AND THEN the DROOLING LIBERAL MORON’S coup de grace.
PROTEUS says,”Oh...and thanks for illustrating your ignorance. Facism is the diametrical [sic] opposite of Communism, and thus a far RIGHT wing philisophy [sic].”
-
Whose ignorance? Your Webster’s citation doesn’t prove your point. It supports the objective parallels between Fascism, Nazism, Communism, and Socialism and absolutely none with conservatism. Your attribution is empty expediency in substitution for fact.
Fascism developed in Italy out of fascio, a form of radical socialism. It started with Benito Mussolini’s “The Doctrine of Fascism,” (1932) as a method to unify the Italians under a dictatorship of cooperative socialism. Read it sometime stupid.
Mussolini symbolized Fascism as the opposite of Capitalism and Marxist Communism, to overcome perceptions about laissez-faire economics and fears about international Bolshevism, but fascism amounted to a dictatorship of cooperative socialism. As a doctrine fascism, was formalized by Adolph Hitler and used to create Nazism or National Socialism—a socialist ideology of the political left.
Your very small undeveloped brain is filled with liberal hate, prejudice, stupidity, and ignorance. You are no Republican, and barely a rational human, but your rank lack of knowledge and baseless arrogance is quite amusing.
Thanks for the Christmas guffaws.
Posted by: Amused by liberals on December 25, 2005 02:01 PMFor the record, you are a phony and a complete idiot. Most of the usual assemblage of trolls manage to avoid making such a spectacle of themselves.
You may feeeeeeel that you're a Republican, but no (sane) republican would spew crap with the same sort of reckless abandon that you have.
Next......
Posted by: alphabet soup on December 26, 2005 12:20 AMI can't speak for anyone else, but I "learned" everything I know about being combative and confrontational from leftists trolls who come here not to discuss, but to disrupt. Tough toenails if that offends your delicate "sensibilities". Taking offense is irrelevant.
I noticed that you don't practice what you preach (see: http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/005471.html)
Thanks for illustrating what "setting the tone" is all about ;'}
Posted by: alphabet soup on December 26, 2005 09:21 PMYou mean the part where Alan Scott preaches,
"Hey naa, hey naaa, . . . since when do you know anything about me? Where was myyyy whining? You said something that wasn't true. If you had been over there mr "patriotic", then you might know more about it. Who is it that wants to torture people? "paaaa-tri-ots" like you? Don't talk to me about the military. I grew up in a military family. Everyone in my family has been in the military. My wizard was a military commander, and my lizard was a military salamander, and my duck was a martial bird, you turd."
All of the vets beat scotty up until he escaped to nursing school. What a turd.
Posted by: Amused by liberals on December 27, 2005 12:08 AMIs it even possible for you to stay on topic? And even if "how you and the others actually treat vets" was an element of this thread, in what way is my conduct (or anyone else's who has posted to this thread) towards vets anything less than respectful and admiring?
Are you claiming to be one?
I did see your post on another thread where you claimed "I grew up in a military family. Everyone in my family has been in the military."
So what?
So did I. I claim no special privilege or advantage from it (apart from the joy of association). If your father served, then I honor his service (I just wish he had been a bit more circumspect about the use of birth control).
If you claim to be a vet, then my inclination is to say "Barbara Streisand", because no vet that I've ever known has been as much a drama queen as you display.
As to the "liberties with the quoting" I rather thought is was a considerable improvement on your lame contribution.
Posted by: alphabet soup on December 27, 2005 10:18 AMYou say:
”Why is it that eveyone who disagrees with you guys is referred to as a troll?”
I don’t use the term, but since it offends you maybe I should.
”Would you prefer to have your discussions in ideological isolation?”
No. That is why we appreciate it when ding-dongs (trolls) like you come here to show us how shallow and insipid your ideological isolation has made you. Do you always carp from the sidelines like a magpie and exaggerate like an adolescent school girl?
”Does it make you that uncomfortable to discuss things with people who don't share your point of view?”
It doesn’t make anyone here uncomfortable. The first requirement of a discussion is to have a relevant point of view. Aside from presuming to indignantly preach manners to those who don't share your point of view, what is yours?
”For a group of people with such a combative and confrontational tone to everything you say, you sure are easily offended.”
You are projecting. Since we seem to you to have a combative and confrontational tone to everything we say . . . I'd say you are awfully easily offended.
”It's interesting to see how you and the others actually treat vets.”
Golly whiz, we treat non-vets who behave like twits in the same manner—no discrimination here.
”Interesting liberties with the quoting.”
Who cares, fair game. Make an argument about population density or take your self righteous, wheedling, cry baby crap and shove it.
Come around some day when you have something mature and responsible to say.
Otherwise, thanks for the childish nonsense and laughs.
If you had been following the comments, you might have noticed what I was responding to. I have noticed that everyone here responds not only to the articles, but to the other comments as well. You seem to have been awfully offended yourself at my casual queries regarding your hostility to other points of view. Maybe you should calm down too.
OK, I can play too.
Why is it that the only thing you can offer is to take exception or offense at the postings of others? Are you so insecure in your own opinions that you are reduced to being a contentious and contradicting turd in the punchbowl?
Do you even have an opinion on the topic? Do you even remember what the topic is? Did you bother to actually read the essay that Stefan referred to?
Is the best you can offer some sanctimonious holier~than~thou crap that has nothing to do with anything?
Now work yourself up into a little tizzy and show us what you got.......
Posted by: alphabet soup on December 30, 2005 08:21 AM