[lbo-talk] Re: new york

MICHAEL YATES mikedjyates at msn.com
Fri Apr 23 13:12:20 PDT 2004


This might not have gone through properly.

MY

----- Original Message ----- From: "MICHAEL YATES" <mikedjyates at msn.com> To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org> Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 11:04 AM Subject: Re: new york

I lived in Manhattan for a year, right after 9/11. I found the people there to be the most sophisticated in the nation by far. The average person there does seem to have a much better grasp of what is going on in the world than anywhere else I have been. It is a hard city, no doubt, and brutally expensive if you have to pay market rents, though the people are on average as friendly there as anywhere else I have lived. Inequality is indeed glaring, but no worse than in Portland where I have lived for the last year, and from which I am thankfully leaving next week. Portland has been called, correctly I think, the last bastion of Caucasian culture in the US; compared to the great diversity of NYC, it is pathetically homogeneous.

As far as small towns, in the "heartland" and elsewhere, I grew up in one. I only go back now to see my family. As others have said, opinions are more diverse than might be imagined in such places. But in my opinion, in the absence of a vibrant labor movement, a lot of backward ideas inevitably take root as people, in their social isolation, have little of any progressive traditions to draw upon. As factories close and life gets tougher, people are as likely to turn to drugs and alcohol and religion as to anything progressive. Look at how Bush's support is rising in states like Pennsylvania, despite tremendous economic hardship. Of course, this happens in NYC too, but there, there are always vibrant movements in various stages of development.

One problem I did have with some New Yorkers is their mistaken belief that what they think is common elsewhere, or if it isn't it doesn't matter. In the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, some of my friends seemed really to believe that the massive urban demonstrations meant that the government wouldn't dare invade. I would point out the flags and declarations of support for war out in the "heartland," but they didn't seem to understand me.

Michael Yates



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list