Nice trailer -- very cool idea, and a provocative summary of your thesis. As I mentioned in our conversation, I think you have rural America pegged incorrectly, especially in statements like this: "And among the stigmatized I would also include poorly educated white people shut out of acceptance among the urban elite (even when they are wealthy)."
As you know, I am a native Montanan, and while there are large pockets of poverty and desperation there that might fit your characterization, there are also many viable communities. How diverse they are is perhaps another question, and some of that goes back to how Western states prohibited slavery from their inception, less for moral reasons and more to protect the plantation economy from colonizing the frontier. It's probably fair also to say that problematic attitudes about race persist in these places, too.
But the people I know in Montana who live in healthy community with one another are not all poorly educated. Many of them have built viable economic models for themselves in the void left by corporate timber and mining companies, and those models are now far more durable than the old boom/bust economies were. Individualism is baked into the core of Montana identity, and so there is a deep ethic of personal responsibility. But I don't think that the low tolerance for lifestyle difference is nearly as evident. I might be saying this with some rose-tinted lenses as a summer interloper who hasn't lived yearround in the community for more than twenty years. But I know that if I were to move back, I'd have a very different experience than the one I'm having now in central Pennsylvania, where the behaviors map quite accurately onto your framework.
Great piece James and a reminder to dive into your book you so graciously sent me. I agree with Josh on the one element that I’m currently experiencing a robust and engaged experience in my own local community—it’s part of why I remain here despite the weather and much of the political climate that I so freely disagree with.
Your essay brings together a lot of different threads of thought. It's thought provoking. That said, I find it challenging to assess what you're saying without relating it to my own circumstances and experiences.
You wrote, for example,
"Cycles of reciprocity sustain local communities, preferably face-to face ones. Unidirectional philanthropy and charity do nothing to keep them going. This “aid” separates people experiencing poverty from the well-off."
In NYC where I live there is a huge divide in wealth. But how else to be a responsible affluent citizen except to provide aid, which can come in many different forms: money, expertise, time. connections? (And the aid is most powerful when the different forms are combined)
As well, in the NYC I experience, I see wide acceptance of different lifestyles. Admittedly, an exception is politics. Wearing a MAGA cap will make you persona non grata with most people.
Beverly Hills is similar to Manhattan and this clip came to mind:
Anomie as a side effect of urbanization, industrialization, and economic growth has been vilified for decades if not centuries, as if communal village living was a bed of roses. I have yet to find an even-handed comparison of the pros and cons of individualistic versus communal lifestyles. Like most complex issues, my guess is that neither is better than the other, and it comes down to personal preferences. Some would rather be lonely than live enmeshed with judgmental neighbors. Others would rather belong, conform, and gossip.
Nice trailer -- very cool idea, and a provocative summary of your thesis. As I mentioned in our conversation, I think you have rural America pegged incorrectly, especially in statements like this: "And among the stigmatized I would also include poorly educated white people shut out of acceptance among the urban elite (even when they are wealthy)."
As you know, I am a native Montanan, and while there are large pockets of poverty and desperation there that might fit your characterization, there are also many viable communities. How diverse they are is perhaps another question, and some of that goes back to how Western states prohibited slavery from their inception, less for moral reasons and more to protect the plantation economy from colonizing the frontier. It's probably fair also to say that problematic attitudes about race persist in these places, too.
But the people I know in Montana who live in healthy community with one another are not all poorly educated. Many of them have built viable economic models for themselves in the void left by corporate timber and mining companies, and those models are now far more durable than the old boom/bust economies were. Individualism is baked into the core of Montana identity, and so there is a deep ethic of personal responsibility. But I don't think that the low tolerance for lifestyle difference is nearly as evident. I might be saying this with some rose-tinted lenses as a summer interloper who hasn't lived yearround in the community for more than twenty years. But I know that if I were to move back, I'd have a very different experience than the one I'm having now in central Pennsylvania, where the behaviors map quite accurately onto your framework.
Great piece James and a reminder to dive into your book you so graciously sent me. I agree with Josh on the one element that I’m currently experiencing a robust and engaged experience in my own local community—it’s part of why I remain here despite the weather and much of the political climate that I so freely disagree with.
Can’t wait to read more.
"becoming a Substack author instead of doing premed" omfg, that made laugh.
Cute little trailer as well. ^^ Hope all goes well ~
James,
Your essay brings together a lot of different threads of thought. It's thought provoking. That said, I find it challenging to assess what you're saying without relating it to my own circumstances and experiences.
You wrote, for example,
"Cycles of reciprocity sustain local communities, preferably face-to face ones. Unidirectional philanthropy and charity do nothing to keep them going. This “aid” separates people experiencing poverty from the well-off."
In NYC where I live there is a huge divide in wealth. But how else to be a responsible affluent citizen except to provide aid, which can come in many different forms: money, expertise, time. connections? (And the aid is most powerful when the different forms are combined)
As well, in the NYC I experience, I see wide acceptance of different lifestyles. Admittedly, an exception is politics. Wearing a MAGA cap will make you persona non grata with most people.
Beverly Hills is similar to Manhattan and this clip came to mind:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48UKTklgQ_E
This speaks deeply to me. Pre-ordered your book 🙏
These are thought-provoking topics I'm interested in exploring. Thank you for sharing. I requested the book on Netgalley and hope to read it soon.
Anomie as a side effect of urbanization, industrialization, and economic growth has been vilified for decades if not centuries, as if communal village living was a bed of roses. I have yet to find an even-handed comparison of the pros and cons of individualistic versus communal lifestyles. Like most complex issues, my guess is that neither is better than the other, and it comes down to personal preferences. Some would rather be lonely than live enmeshed with judgmental neighbors. Others would rather belong, conform, and gossip.