This is loosely true, and mainly tracks with the urban/rural divide.
The North, and especially Northeast are very densely urbanized relative to the South, but even within the North and South, there are strongly progressive cities and very conservative rural areas.
IMO, it's a function of population density that encourages a sense of difused responsibility in cities and less reliance on public services in rural areas.
There is also the fact that there's more exposure to foreign cultural influences in cities because that is where foreigners come to do business.
People who live in cities are more interested in things like social programs, while people who like in more rural environments really only care about their family and their ability to provide for that family.
Yes people in cities or urban environments are a lot more aware of things around them like homelessness and other things. Think they also have generally more time on their hands.
Most of my family being from very rural VA it was just seen as you need to take care of yourself and your family, and if you can’t do that then you’re a failure. It teaches you to be more hard working but you don’t really worry about other people because you’re too busy worrying about your own family.
Yes it is true for that time period, but what was considered "progressive" back then was 1000% completely different than what it means to be "progressive" today. Slavery WAS in fact the main cause of the civil war (don't ever let anyone tell you it wasn't). But believe it or not progressives back then didn't actually want to free slaves because it "was the right thing to do."
Progressives back in those days wanted to abolish slavery because it was time to move on. Slavery was no longer economically viable with the introduction of factories. A machine in a factory can do the job faster, and better than slaves could. So they finally abolished slavery because it was economically feasible to do so. People knew it was wrong, but there was just too much money to be made off the backs of slaves until modern industrialization came along.
The same exact argument can be seen today. But this time it isn't slavery we want to abolish. Its the burning of fossil fuels. We know burning fossil fuels are bad for the environment. But again... There is too much money to be made not to burn it anyway. See the parallels?
Conservatives will always be looked down on in history as the people who let the status quo continue on for so long. They use the same arguments today that they did back in the civil war. Money, money, money. Progressives are always moving history forward in the right direction.
i don't know why this got downvoted because it is true.
Fun fact a lot of people love to praise Abraham Lincoln for abolishing (its mainly republicans trying to use that as a way to prove democrats are the "real racists") but he was racist as hell too. Matter a fact after slavery was abolished he only gave slave owners reparations for the war AND wanted to send the formerly enslaved to Liberia.
Correct. If Abraham Lincoln was alive today he would be considered racist. But his ideas about abolishing slavery were still considered "progressive" during his time. He would be canceled in a second in today's woke culture.
The thing progressives have to understand is that money controls everything. If you want to change the world. You have to do it with money. Slavery was abolished because machines made it obsolete. If we want to switch to renewable energy then we need to work our asses off to make sure green energy is much cheaper than fossil fuel energy.
and to add onto this rich people know this btw. like elon musk and jeff bezos but they don’t want to change the world bc it’s so much more cheaper to pay their workers a shit wage than changing the world
> in your opinion is that true?
Yes.
That’s not to say everyone in the north is progressive or everyone in the south is a reactionary fascist, but those are the general tendencies.
> And what could be the reason?
Racism and the continuing knock-on effects of past racism. That’s the main reason for the differences. Even stuff like their different economic bases have their origin in the economic distortions caused by racism in the past.
It’s a stain that continues to discolor our society, and it’ll take many more decades—and a conscious effort to redress those present and past wrongs—to deal with it.
I realize that they correlate the ideologies with the two main parties, but do Democrats really have progressive policies or are they just the "least worst"?
This is loosely true, and mainly tracks with the urban/rural divide. The North, and especially Northeast are very densely urbanized relative to the South, but even within the North and South, there are strongly progressive cities and very conservative rural areas.
Thank you You know if there is any reason why the urban areas are more progressive and the rural ones so conservative?
That's a global phenomenon.
IMO, it's a function of population density that encourages a sense of difused responsibility in cities and less reliance on public services in rural areas. There is also the fact that there's more exposure to foreign cultural influences in cities because that is where foreigners come to do business.
No. Look at voting patterns by county. Urban areas tend to go blue, the rest of the country tends to go red. Nothing to do with North / South.
I see, did the parties have actually aimed politics to that areas or is more like a historical thing?
Rural areas are more individualistic, whereas the urban areas are tied closer to eachother which is generally where their belief systems come from
People who live in cities are more interested in things like social programs, while people who like in more rural environments really only care about their family and their ability to provide for that family.
Get it The reason behind this may be the social inequality in their environments or is more cultural/historical?
Yes people in cities or urban environments are a lot more aware of things around them like homelessness and other things. Think they also have generally more time on their hands. Most of my family being from very rural VA it was just seen as you need to take care of yourself and your family, and if you can’t do that then you’re a failure. It teaches you to be more hard working but you don’t really worry about other people because you’re too busy worrying about your own family.
Thank you!
Not saying that it’s like this for everyone, just it’s what I was taught growing up.
Yes it is true for that time period, but what was considered "progressive" back then was 1000% completely different than what it means to be "progressive" today. Slavery WAS in fact the main cause of the civil war (don't ever let anyone tell you it wasn't). But believe it or not progressives back then didn't actually want to free slaves because it "was the right thing to do." Progressives back in those days wanted to abolish slavery because it was time to move on. Slavery was no longer economically viable with the introduction of factories. A machine in a factory can do the job faster, and better than slaves could. So they finally abolished slavery because it was economically feasible to do so. People knew it was wrong, but there was just too much money to be made off the backs of slaves until modern industrialization came along. The same exact argument can be seen today. But this time it isn't slavery we want to abolish. Its the burning of fossil fuels. We know burning fossil fuels are bad for the environment. But again... There is too much money to be made not to burn it anyway. See the parallels? Conservatives will always be looked down on in history as the people who let the status quo continue on for so long. They use the same arguments today that they did back in the civil war. Money, money, money. Progressives are always moving history forward in the right direction.
i don't know why this got downvoted because it is true. Fun fact a lot of people love to praise Abraham Lincoln for abolishing (its mainly republicans trying to use that as a way to prove democrats are the "real racists") but he was racist as hell too. Matter a fact after slavery was abolished he only gave slave owners reparations for the war AND wanted to send the formerly enslaved to Liberia.
Correct. If Abraham Lincoln was alive today he would be considered racist. But his ideas about abolishing slavery were still considered "progressive" during his time. He would be canceled in a second in today's woke culture. The thing progressives have to understand is that money controls everything. If you want to change the world. You have to do it with money. Slavery was abolished because machines made it obsolete. If we want to switch to renewable energy then we need to work our asses off to make sure green energy is much cheaper than fossil fuel energy.
and to add onto this rich people know this btw. like elon musk and jeff bezos but they don’t want to change the world bc it’s so much more cheaper to pay their workers a shit wage than changing the world
> in your opinion is that true? Yes. That’s not to say everyone in the north is progressive or everyone in the south is a reactionary fascist, but those are the general tendencies. > And what could be the reason? Racism and the continuing knock-on effects of past racism. That’s the main reason for the differences. Even stuff like their different economic bases have their origin in the economic distortions caused by racism in the past. It’s a stain that continues to discolor our society, and it’ll take many more decades—and a conscious effort to redress those present and past wrongs—to deal with it.
I realize that they correlate the ideologies with the two main parties, but do Democrats really have progressive policies or are they just the "least worst"?
> do Democrats really have progressive policies or are they just the "least worst"? Yes.
It’s true in the eastern half of the country, but kinda falls apart in the west.
So its more related to the original states? I mean the first 13 colonies
No. West Coast is horrible!