The Continental Divide

Hatin' on the South, now there's a good old Yankee trait.

Too bad Trump's not from the South; but then, most of his appointees are.

Cherry-picking images and events to re-ify your foregone conclusions is never a good look, for anyone.


The North's disdain for the South could just as easily be described as urban/mass culture's critique of rural/community-based culture.

a reply to: desert

Your link is broken.

It sounds to me like just another hater looking to excuse his hatred of Southern culture, to be honest. I really should be used to them by now. The attitude he proclaims to be ours is only accurate at the upper echelon of society. Most Southerners simply want to be left alone to live their lives the way they want. That conflicts quite often with those who hold the world view the author claims.

Community is strong here, but so also is the belief that everyone should contribute. We tend to hold with private charity more than welfare. If someone is down on their luck, others pitch in to help. I don't think it is possible for someone in a wheelchair to not have a free ramp put on their house by volunteers. Churches regularly give to various local charities and run food distribution networks. Pretty much every large company has employee-run charities to help disadvantaged children. The difference is that no one is expected to do so; they do it of their own free will. And recipients are chosen based not on a form, but on the word of charitable individuals. Someone who wants to lie around and drink all day instead of trying to work will be lucky to get the time of day, while others who suddenly face hard times can typically get help immediately. We prefer this to government dictates on who deserves what.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck
Perfect description of my little backwoods.

The only people that criticize us country folk, are those that don't live in the country.

a reply to: TheRedneck

Thanks for the heads up re link. I usually check those things, but this one slipped by.

Conservative Southern Values Revived: How a Brutal Strain of American Aristocrats Have Come to Rule America

The subtitle is
America didn't used to be run like an old Southern slave plantation, but we're headed that way now. How did that happen?

You are correct in that the article describes aristocracy, the different economic systems, and the cultures that develop around those systems. It's best to be read in full, with aristocracy in mind. The term "slave wages" is not confined to any one area.

It's been said that the rich are different than you and me. What most Americans don't know is that they're also quite different from each other, and that which faction is currently running the show ultimately makes a vast difference in the kind of country we are.

Right now, a lot of our problems stem directly from the fact that the wrong sort has finally gotten the upper hand; a particularly brutal and anti-democratic strain of American aristocrat that the other elites have mostly managed to keep away from the levers of power since the Revolution. Worse: this bunch has set a very ugly tone that's corrupted how people with power and money behave in every corner of our culture. Here's what happened, and how it happened, and what it means for America now.

The elite going into power in 2017 have an agenda to dismantle the federal govt.... strip it the bare bones of military, policing and courts. Whatever was not in the Constitution 200 years ago should not be in America now. Every other function that we think of today should be privatized, left in the hands of corporate elite.

And it doesn't stop with the federal govt, as these elites believe that state functions should be stripped down also. "Rights" citizens talk about nowadays are about restricting govt power, not corporate power. In an oligarchy, there are no "rights" against corporate power; you don't like what a corporate power does, take them to court.

While we became "divided" over social issues, the elites have had their fight, and the Koch side won. ..... one might say, "Wait! Aren't the Kochs in Wisconsin? That's a "northern state"!" Yep. The Southern elites finally won.

a reply to: desert
The elite have always been in the war for ultimate control and dominatiomn. Most simple folks were too busy just trying to make it from season to season.

They have been attacking the independent land owners everywhere, with bogus BS rules and regulations that code enforcement and HOAs develop overnight, forcing people out of their homes. Rezoning of properties, changing the value of homes, forcing people to pay more in taxes than they even paid for the home in the first place, chasing people away from the land.

They succeeded in the North unnoticed, because they picked home owners off one by one. It is more obvious this late in the game, because the amount of land the independent land owners have in the South cover larges swaths of acreage.

I don't believe there is a divide between the North and the South, it is just that one is more noticeable and more resented.

a reply to: desert

The thing is, as I read it, the author started off by correctly generalizing the wealthy plantation owners of pre-War of Northern Aggression times, but then slowly moved his definition to include all successful Southerners from any time period. Don't feel bad; it's one of the oldest and most respected propaganda methods (incidentally, also the one that causes me to be so adamantly anti-labelling).

The truth is, while the majority of the pre-war plantation owners were as he describes, not all were even at that time. You might be interested to know that the infamous Ku Klux Klan... today one of the most intolerant, hateful organizations known... actually predates the war and was formed in direct response to the corruption under the plantation-era South. Originally, it was little different than the Guardian Angels of New York City fame. Loosely organized groups of Christian fundamentalists, realizing that the political system was corrupt and not responsive to the people, banded together to take on the system. Their white robes, necessary to protect anonymity, were chosen as a symbol of purity and incorruptibility, and the cross symbolized their Christian faith and principles.

If a political official was discovered to be corrupt, a lit cross would appear in his yard at night. The flames were there to illuminate the cross, as there were no electric lights back then. No one would be there waiting by the cross. It was a warning: get your crap together... we know what you've been up to. If the warning didn't work, the next encounter would be a severe beating. If that didn't work... well, let's just say things were harsher back then.

They took on everyone, from the bum who beat his wife to the plantation owners who used the law to rob common folk.

They organized after the war, and the anti-black sentiment so prevalent to a tortured population infiltrated the Klan. I believe that sentiment was itself responsible for the stronger organization. Pretty much everyone back then hated the Yankees for their war crimes, but the Yankees weren't there... the freed slaves were. Hostility was transferred to that more available target. So the KKK changed, from a loose vigilante group protecting people from the elite, to a racist, hate-filled organization obsessed with white supremacy.

But I digress...

The base condition that led to the wide social gap in the South was money, primarily from slavery. Those who purchased slaves early had great advantage in agriculture over other growers, and used that advantage to continually broaden the gap. Political power was bought and sold like cotton bales. They began to lose that advantage as industry began to grow and there was money to be made in other areas. Today, while we still do struggle with remnants from those days, the South has matured into a more balanced society. In many ways, we have become more empowered in the lower classes and have taken much of the political power back. And racism, while there will always be some undesirables in any large group, is becoming a distant memory. I have seen more institutionalized racism in New England than in the South.

Yet, we are still seen through the lens of history... a pretty opaque lens to be sure, similar to the joke eyeglasses with open eyes painted on the lenses. All others see is that painted, lying picture, while the truth is hidden and quite different.

I really wouldn't trust that article. I have personally researched my family history to the mid-1700s, and in the process have read thousands of letters and diaries from average Southerners throughout our history. I know the Southern story well, and I will be happy to answer any questions you have concerning it.

And I will not lie to you. There's good and bad in all of it, and I accept both.

TheRedneck

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

They succeeded in the North unnoticed, because they picked home owners off one by one. It is more obvious this late in the game, because the amount of land the independent land owners have in the South cover larges swaths of acreage.

There is also a tighter connection to the land in the South. For most of our history, farming was king. A man could survive with land and little else, but was at the mercy of others if he had all the wealth in the world but no land. Family land is a common concept here, and it carries with it the idea that no amount of money can buy it.

That's why our land taxes are so low... the idea of taxing something do vital, so precious to life itself, is abhorrent to us. My yearly land tax is $25.

Compare that to Northern areas, where one essentially pays for their land over and over without end through taxes. That's not ownership; it's a lease.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Compare that to Northern areas, where one essentially pays for their land over and over without end through taxes. That's not ownership; it's a lease.

I agree, and they are fleecing people right out of their land here in Florida.

I have had several neighbors that built their homes from scratch over 40 years ago, to lose their homes because the taxes rose so high that they couldn't afford to pay them. Of course they were forced to sell, or lose everything when the county sent their property to auction to be bought off by certificate of deed.

It sickens me what they have been able to get away with, but our numbers are small and dwindling. No one understands or has an interest in what is happening, if it is not happening to them. When I tried to get some legal help, I was told, "Why don't you just sell?" "It is too much for you to have to deal with anyway." "You will make a nice profit and you can move somewhere where you and your mother won't have to worry about the upkeep of the place." I can't begin to tell you just how corrupt the system is here in Florida.

No family willing to take on the battle. They have all become city lovers and while they enjoy the yearly nostalgic visit over the river and through the woods to grandma's house; it is just a nice place to vacation, no one wants to actually live there. In the meantime, every acre surrounding me, over 30,000 acres, has been bought up and construction is in the works for over 80,000 housing units. While 22 of us are locked in a tiny nook in the woods. We see what is coming.

Tallahassee has made power plays and end runs, to circumvent rules, ordinances, and zoning to allow this criminal enterprise to take take place. What does one do when you are out numbered, out financed, and out gunned?

People don't realized that they are not coming out of the mess unscathed. Sooner or later it will spill over into their own front yards. When it does it will be too damn late, and though I wish no ill will on anyone, I do hope that they remember when we tried to warn them and they did nothing. That they remember they didn't care because they were not the ones being hurt. That they remember there was a time when they could have done something, a time when they could have made a difference.

I hope they remember, and I hope they teach their children about how we stood by and let the legacy of the land and liberties be taken from us without so much as a whispered, “no”. The legacy that thousands of our ancestors died to provide for us and how we gave it away. That we now present our children with a legacy of poverty, strife, and bleak futures. All because we were duped, we fell for the BS, and we chased all the wrong dreams straight into a hell of our own making.

/Rant Off/

a reply to: TheRedneck

I do value your insight and history. What you wrote about personally seems to back up points in the article. Federal dollars helped boost the economy (space program, ex), and both Northerners and Southerners have migrated to other areas. Let me ask you this, how did the working class in the South get torn away from the Democratic Party? When I grew up, the Democratic Party helped the working class.

I think one of the problems we (collective "we") have is that we want to attribute a major event or turn in history to one thing, one cause. Maybe that is how we simply come to understand something. Heck, in my own family, my mother created myths about each of her kids in order to make sense of the individuality of each of us!

What I do believe, though, is that there are people who take advantage of situations that happen, and then what they create helps move history in a direction. It's not that things are necessarily planned to go a certain way, but that people take advantage of situations for their advantage.

Here is something I have heard before

Contrary to today’s liberals, Stein argues that it wasn’t the racism of white workers that forced the Democratic Party to the right on economics. It was powerful political and business elites, who chose to abandon organized labor and turn the Party of Roosevelt into the Party of Clinton.

source
It's an interesting read, one that looks to class differences rather than racism for an answer how economic and political elites shape the country.

This seems to align with what I have said about the people aren't as divided as the politicians are. America has been on a rightward slide economically and politically since the 1980s. As much as people want to talk about the left and even far left, politically Washington (and now states) has been a deliberate shifting to the right ever since Bill Clinton. That drove the GOP (starting with Newt Gingrich ad his RINOing) even further to the right.

And the private Koch Party (with money to spread their propaganda) forced the GOP even further to the right, to the point where the GOP now IS the Koch ideology with this past election. There has been a monumental shift ending in fringe right extremism that Americans will just now be waking up to.

Oh, BTW, you are correct re racism in the North and East. But, I think we have to distinguish between "white supremacy" and racism. Not all racists are supremacists. But supremacy has a foundation in racism. The plantation economy could not exist without supremacy. .... story to share, there were honest to God KKK in white hoods and robes having a march in my town when I moved here, and my ex was asked in secret if he wanted to join the KKK, and I live in CA!!

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

I think you have hit the nail on the head. The common enemy is not each other. The common enemy is who would take advantage of us. And the average American has been taken advantage of by those who want us to put our trust in the wealthy and corporations to do what is right. I call BS on that!

If town officials get their way, however, a great swath of rural Carver will be designated an “urban renewal area,” and turned over to a private entrepreneur with plans to build a giant complex of warehouse and industrial-distribution facilities.

source
Carver is in Massachusetts!

I don't believe there is a divide between the North and the South,

a reply to: redempsh

I don't know...I was always both a Neil Young and Leonard Skynyrd fan...Like to think most of the country feels the same way at heart.

a reply to: desert

I do value your insight and history. What you wrote about personally seems to back up points in the article. Federal dollars helped boost the economy (space program, ex), and both Northerners and Southerners have migrated to other areas. Let me ask you this, how did the working class in the South get torn away from the Democratic Party? When I grew up, the Democratic Party helped the working class.

That, ma'am, is a damn good question!

I remember growing up there really wasn't a Republican party. Democrats not only dominated the polls, it was common knowledge that Jesus was a card-carrying Democrat. Today, the Democrats have lost everything but a few local races (where no one cares what party they belong to) and Republicans rule the political arena.

The reason the Democrats ruled went all the way back to Lincoln, the Republican President who destroyed the South. After the War of Northern Aggression, no one around here wanted anything to do with Yankees, and certainly not Republican Yankees.

I believe the shift started with the Carter years. Jimmy Carter is a good man who I admire greatly; his work with Habitat for Humanity is alone enough to well-warrant his Nobel Prize. But... he made a lousy President. His actions in the Middle East led to the Iranian Hostage Crisis and high fuel costs (for the time). The Hostage situation embarrassed most people in the South, and the gas prices hurt us. My closest neighbor is 1/2 mile away... the nearest store of any kind (closed at the moment due to family illness) is 2 miles away... the closest store where you can buy anything for a reasonable cost, more like 10 miles. Gasoline... transportation... is a necessity for life here! I commute 50 miles each way to work/school. And that is common, unlike some of the larger Northern cities.

Even in large Southern cities like Atlanta, driving is a necessity for most things. Few live within walking/biking distance of their work or stores. New York (as an example) builds upward, using skyscrapers to pack more into a smaller space; their land is limited. We have practically unlimited land, so even our cities are sprawling expanses.

Then Reagan was elected.

The day he was sworn in, the hostages were released. Looking back, it is easy to see how that might have been a ploy, at least in part, but right then in the moment it was a much-needed victory. His policies led to stabilized gas prices and wages began to rise again. It was essentially a combination of prosperity and pride, and it caused the South to look again at the Republican party. Many liked what they saw: conservative values and plain talking. Reagan did not come across as elitist, and elitism is hated down here. We call it "putting on airs" or "too big for your britches," and I guess it reminds people of the corruption in politics we have been fighting since the days of the plantations.

Southern people have a long memory. We value our history. There's one pre-war house left standing around here (all the rest were destroyed in the war) and the owners spent a small fortune to have the brick cleaned and restored instead of replaced when they renovated it last. Why? To preserve the musket-ball marks in the brick, put there by Union soldiers.

Bill Clinton was actually popular here, for similar reasons. He was not perceived as elitist, talked plain, and promised prosperity. Hillary never had that kind of popularity down here, because unlike Bill, she seemed aloof. As true as that was during Bill's administration, it came across worse this last cycle.

Li'l George Bush clenched the South when AL Gore made the mistake of approaching him in what looked to be a threatening manner. Bush never flinched. And the same mis-speaks that were the brunt of so many jokes (including around here) also endeared him to the people. Plain-talking.

Obama came across as elitist, and the concerns about his religion or birthplace, tying him back to the despised Ayatollah Khomeini, may well have been propaganda by the Republicans, but it also worked. And even after that concern died down, he presided over rising gas prices, calls for more gun control (always a touchy subject down here) and more community-based programs like Obamacare. These went against the whole concept of individualism and strength we hold so dear.

So to summarize, it has actually been a slow deliberate process, started by weakness in a Democratic President.

This seems to align with what I have said about the people aren't as divided as the politicians are. America has been on a rightward slide economically and politically since the 1980s.

That is the opposite view people here have. We would say the country has been moving leftward.

I think the reason is that all the states are seeing increasing Federal control over areas that used to be their sole responsibility. The more liberal states, like California, see this move toward the national mean as rightward, while Southern conservative states see it as leftward. In actuality, we are being drawn together. It might be surprising to you to hear this, but California should be left alone to be 'progressive' just as Alabama should be left alone to be 'conservative.'

...story to share, there were honest to God KKK in white hoods and robes having a march in my town when I moved here, and my ex was asked in secret if he wanted to join the KKK, and I live in CA!!

There will always be troublemakers in every culture. The hatred of the KKK destroyed the goals of a once-noble movement, but it also caused it to grow beyond the borders of the Old South. Hatred feeds on hate. That applies globally.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I haven't conversed much in this conversation but have enjoyed reading.

We would say the country has been moving leftward.

That no doubt is correct in regard to social conventions, but in re to political parties, no.

Even though both parties used to have liberals, conservatives and centrists, the Republican Party was known as the "party of big business" when we were growing up. After years of shedding their liberals and moderates (who became RINOs) and picking up conservatives from the Democratic Party, the party continued in recent years to shift further to the fringe edge, where resides the Koch Bros economic ideology and the John Birch Society conspiracy ideology. (Hence, John McCain being labeled "liberal", quite an insult for poor McCain!) As the Ornstein-Mann book points out, the Republican Party has become a faction.

The Democratic Party likewise turned to their corporate wing with Bill Clinton and Obama.

Alabama should be left alone to be 'conservative.'

What does that mean in this day and age?

What are five things you would say is "Federal govt interference" in your state?

a reply to: desert

That no doubt is correct in regard to social conventions, but in re to political parties, no.

That's another cultural difference. Political parties mean very little down here right now. We do have some people who are staunchly Democrat (a shrinking number) and some who are staunchly Republican (a growing number), but most people are independent at heart. We tend to look at the man, not the party. That's probably because we don't agree with either party. Even the registered party voters are pretty easy to change their affiliation if things start to look wrong to them.

On December 31st, the NCAA College Football Championship will be held. During that game, there is no black-and-white: you're either a Crimson Tide fan or hiding out until the furor is over. Every year, the most intense grudge match in the nation is played between Alabama and Auburn. There is no middle ground during that game; you either yell "Roll Tide!" or "War Chicken Eagle!" or hide in someone's basement until it's over.

But this ain't (as important as) college football. It's politics, and nobody has our back completely. There are quite a few grey areas.

Here's a few pros and cons from the recent election cycle, from a Southern point of view:

• Strength: Trump showed no panic when he was rushed on stage by violent protesters. Hillary collapsed at the 911 anniversary event.
  
• Success: Trump built a billion-dollar empire from a million dollar loan. Hillary has shown success by marrying Bill and using his name to achieve her goals.
  
• Honesty: Trump made some statements that were in line with our personal beliefs. Hillary tried to twist those statements into a negative. (Some Mexicans are rapists and murderers ---> All Mexicans are rapists and murderers)
  
• Fairness: Hillary declared that "half of all Trump supporters are deplorables." She never said which half, because her clarification just mentioned other labels that we down here have all been called before. "Racist" down here now means "I don't like you and I don't want to say why." Trump made allegations too, but always aimed at specific individuals and acts.
  
• Economy: Trump promised a new approach. HIllary offered offered to put more coal miners out of work, with a promise to find them new jobs. These people have coal miner skills; they don't want to have to learn new skills and start a new career, especially if they are a few years from retirement (as many are).
  
• Bluster: Trump said in an address to a Detroit church in the inner city, "I don't have the answers. I'm here to learn what you need." Hillary always acted as though she had all the answers... putting on airs.

Those examples show what we value. We value actions more than words, and we want results from those actions or different actions taken. The job of the President is to run the day-to-day affairs of the Government within the guidelines set by the Constitution, Congress, and the Courts. Like a CEO, he is responsible for the good and the bad that happens under his watch. If his actions are not leading to the desired goals, he needs to change those actions.

What are five things you would say is "Federal govt interference" in your state?

• Obamacare tried to increase Medicaid funding through the states, but not all states went along with it. We here have the detriments of Obamacare without the safety net.
  
• The local school systems are heavily restricted by the Federal government because we are one of the states once designated as being in need of racial restrictions.
  
• A recent Alabama Constitutional amendment, passed by the voters in an open election, was struck down by Federal courts. Now, I (and most here from talking to people) have no problems with gay marriage in itself, but when one judge overrules the wishes of the voters... that's not something we take lightly. Political change should come via convincing the voters that such change is needed and desirable, not by force.
  
• The recent decision by Obama to demand that states accept refugees when the vetting process is still questionable. As of now, Alabama has officially refused them entry (along with several other states) but that is still an ongoing issue.
  
• I personally know several farmers who had to fight for the right to use their land to farm, all because of a pond they dug that was then designated a 'wetland' by the EPA. So far as I know, no one actually lost their land, but they all lost thousands of dollars in legal fees.

Now I know you will disagree with me on some of those issues (primarily number 3), but the bottom line is that we don't see ourselves as children that need to be protected from ourselves. Culturally, acting as though we are is a major, major insult.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Thanks for the input.

Strength: Trump showed no panic when he was rushed on stage by violent protesters. Hillary collapsed at the 911 anniversary event.

Now, I sure saw things differently lol. I saw Trump as someone who didn't know what was going on, hence no panic. Bernie got "rushed", too, but knew what was going on.

And Hillary.... I know when a lot of women heard about it, they said, "BFD. Women are used to taking care of kids when they themselves are sick/injured. Women take care of others, do housework, work outside the home when sick/injured. Why would people be surprised she campaigns when sick??" They just felt it was one more thing that said, she is up to do the job of POTUS.

We here have the detriments of Obamacare without the safety net.

That was a state choice.

continuing on..... and getting back to the OP (started before the election)

I think when the dust settles, the younger generation either will have to fight or succumb. Our generation, TheRedneck, will be gone. Some of us did fight and didn't succumb, and made it better for all people (and corporations are NOT people). But we did it under better conditions economically and politically. The younger generation doesn't have that luxury. Their fight, their movement, must be stronger. The fight is not with each other but against the economy and politics rigged against us. And the fight against those in power who play the game that is rigged against us. For ex, who controls even a state govt, the people or the industry that runs the state economy?


Although the following deals with the idea of income insurance, I thought it had a lot to say about the new economy that you and I didn't grow up in.

Robert Reich: In the New Economy, Workers Take on All the Risk

a reply to: desert

Now, I sure saw things differently lol.

I guess that gets back to the "experience versus judgement" dynamic. Hillary has all kinds of experience in government, but most folk here saw it as poor performance getting that experience. Kinda like a plumber who has managed to stay in the business for 30 years, but can't seem to join two pipes without it leaking. I certainly wouldn't want that plumber fixing my pipes, experience be damned!

I don't think anyone who seriously supported Trump really cared about his lack of experience. They were supporting him based on his judgement. Of course he had no idea what running the country really entailed; he had never done it. But he did have the good judgement to build a very successful business, and he did seem to be thinking along the same lines many of us have been thinking along for 20 years: build the economy, deal honestly and openly with other countries, and keep the military strong in case talking issues out isn't enough.

Trump may be a hothead at times (especially at 2:00 AM when there's a Twitter account open), but it worked for him in business... maybe it will work for us too.

That was a state choice.

Actually, it was a state MANDATE.

I'm torn on whether or not Bentley should have taken the positions he did on that. I do admire him for holding fast to his principles, but doing so hurt a lot of people (including me). In any case, there's enough other BS going on in Montgomery for me to despise him for. I'm actually hoping we have a Democratic governor next term, just to get rid of his power abuses. I'll vote for one if the Democrats can find someone halfway decent.

Our generation, TheRedneck, will be gone.

Speak for yourself. I was put on this earth to accomplish certain things, and at the rate I'm going, I'll live forever.

Some of us did fight and didn't succumb, and made it better for all people (and corporations are NOT people). But we did it under better conditions economically and politically.

Yes, we did. And I could die today knowing that I have helped a lot of people in my lifetime.

Corporations never were people; that's a false narrative. Corporations have similar legal abilities (such as being able sign a contract) necessary to do business. They are held to a different set of laws than people are because they are not people.

I am both dismayed and impressed with the younger generation. My son and daughter have turned out better than I deserve for them to have. My younger classmates are impressive in the extreme. I predict great things technologically in the future, probably things we can't imagine right now. I'm blessed to be in a position to witness them.

But I also see turmoil. You see, when I was young myself, I remember looking at a corrupt, inefficient, uncaring world and thinking there was a better way. Like most young people, I tried to explain to my elders how it would be so simple to fix the problems I saw around me. They just chuckled and shook their heads, which I took as dismissive at the time. But as I grew and matured, I began to see flaws in my reasoning, and reading history showed me that my brilliant ideas were not new. They had been tried before, most several times, and always had poor outcomes. I realized that those chuckles and shakes of the head weren't dismissive... they were nostalgic. Those old men playing checkers in the local country store had seen the same thing in their youth, from the other side of their eyeballs. Like me they had learned why it didn't work, a few times by experience, more by history and understanding. They saw their youth in me.

Today I watch the news and I hear some of the same ideas I had, and I remember back when, while chuckling and shaking my head at the lost exuberance of youth. But unlike my youth, when wisdom and maturity were held in high esteem, today wisdom and maturity are held in disdain. And in truth, that may be the single largest cause of the Continental Divide: we have lost the ability (or maybe the desire) to learn from those who have gone before us.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

You'll just have to imagine the sound of two hands clapping.

Corporations never were people; that's a false narrative.

And, yet, we have Citizens United, based on a Supreme Court interpretation of corporate personhood.

I am both dismayed and impressed with the younger generation.

Me, too.
I remember 25 years ago my older son (8yr old at the time) was talking to my Mom about cells, what his class at school (public school, regular not gifted class) had just studied. She was visibly shaken, exclaiming that he was telling her things that were only taught in college when she attended a college in the 1930s.
I think they have not done as good a job with personal boundaries, witness use of social media.

My son and daughter have turned out better than I deserve for them to have.

From what I gather just here, I think you've no doubt guided them well and deserve the credit. .... more clapping....

we have lost the ability (or maybe the desire) to learn from those who have gone before us.

I think that's important, but we have to remember that their world operates at a faster pace and on a global scale personally. And, honestly, way back when, I can remember adults (parents!) were looked at as dinosaurs.... what was that about "not trusting anyone over 30" and adults being "out of touch". lol And, hey, this past election was nothing but a choice among old geezers, and, yet, young people voted.

America from its very beginning was about experimenting. America IS one gigantic experiment. It still is. Some things we get right, some things we don't. We are about to embark on another grand experiment. More like a gigantic clustersnafu IMO.

But, yeah, the young are idealistic. And for a good reason. Idealism drives us forward. I think of Jesus having to contend with the idealism of some of his followers, and he having to break it to them, that the poor will be with us always. IOW humans have a tendency to make poor people. Yet, we as individuals and "nations" have an obligation to help.

Well, maybe in the coming experiment they will force us to impart some wisdom to them. Oh, and, really, TheRedneck, we kinda did it to ourselves, believing that we would be youthful forever, dying hair and having facelifts, being "ageless". Nah, maybe if we are to get some respect, we need to at least look mature lol

a reply to: desert

Thanks for the applause.

And, yet, we have Citizens United, based on a Supreme Court interpretation of corporate personhood.

You'll have to educate me on that somewhat, I'm afraid. I have owned and ran a C-Corp before, for ten years. I am quite familiar with how they operate. So whenever I start seeing claims that are obviously based on a misunderstanding of the basic principles of Corporate law, at high decibels, I tend to tune it all out.

I remember 25 years ago my older son (8yr old at the time) was talking to my Mom about cells, what his class at school (public school, regular not gifted class) had just studied. She was visibly shaken, exclaiming that he was telling her things that were only taught in college when she attended a college in the 1930s.
I think they have not done as good a job with personal boundaries, witness use of social media.

Ah, yes, the age-old battle between knowledge and wisdom. Youth today have more knowledge at their fingertips than we could have dreamed of back in the day. But they lack wisdom, just as we did, and just as every new generation does at first.

That lack of wisdom is why social media has become problematic in so many ways.

From what I gather just here, I think you've no doubt guided them well and deserve the credit.

Credit will be given out by history. Whoever history decides deserves it will get it. And it doesn't bother me that this is true; I am more interested in results... and I have those.

I think that's important, but we have to remember that their world operates at a faster pace and on a global scale personally. And, honestly, way back when, I can remember adults (parents!) were looked at as dinosaurs.... what was that about "not trusting anyone over 30" and adults being "out of touch". lol And, hey, this past election was nothing but a choice among old geezers, and, yet, young people voted.

The world has always moved faster for youth than for the elders. That dynamic has not changed. My grandparents used to tell their kids (my parents) about the good old days when they didn't have as many things and the world turned slower. My parents used to tell me the same things. Now I catch myself telling my kids the same, yet again. Hopefully I'll live long enough to listen to them tell their kids how spartan things used to be when you had to use physical buttons on remote controls to choose between channels and had to watch whatever those 500 channels had on, instead of thinking about a movie and having it appear in front of your face. Oh, the horror! lol

I plan on laughing my happy little redneck butt off...

America from its very beginning was about experimenting. America IS one gigantic experiment. It still is. Some things we get right, some things we don't. We are about to embark on another grand experiment.

Absolutely! Every move we take is another phase of a marvelous experiment. And we've done some pretty awesome things so far. Other countries adopt our general form of government now, technology we created is spreading across the globe, and even in the recession-fueled disaster we now find ourselves, we are fabulously wealthy compared to many other countries.

Just think what we could accomplish if we really do "make America great again."

But, yeah, the young are idealistic. And for a good reason. Idealism drives us forward.

I cannot argue with that analogy. But I can add to it: if idealism is the accelerator, conservatism and maturity are the brake. You need that gas pedal, but when the car starts heading toward something you really don't want to be wrapped around, you're thankful for the brakes.

Oh, and, really, TheRedneck, we kinda did it to ourselves, believing that we would be youthful forever, dying hair and having facelifts, being "ageless". Nah, maybe if we are to get some respect, we need to at least look mature lol

Worrying about my looks was never much of my strong suit.



TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Well, since it's the evening of the day before New Year's Eve, I'll have to put off any reply about corporations and whatnot. Maybe not until 2017. But I will say, Alabama seems to have the best looking Rednecks. New Year's wishes to you and your family!

a reply to: desert

But I will say, Alabama seems to have the best looking Rednecks.

Flattery will get you everywhere.

I hope you and yours have the best year ever! And please hurry back; this has been a most enjoyable and enlightening conversation.

TheRedneck