The Real Problem Is The American Dream
I’ve been tuning in to the conversation going on around Jeremy Rifkin‘s latest book, The Empathic Civilization. In it Rifkin argues that technology is ushering in a new, empathic, model of society. The modern age is coming to an end; the future belongs to the connected, empathic, global citizen.
In a recent interview with Moira Gunn, Rifkin says that for America to retain its global position in this fast-changing world, it must “rethink the narrative.” He goes on:
The real problem, and I’m going to step on some toes here, the real problem is the American dream. It really is. It’s an 18th–19th century dream based on the idea from the enlightenment that we’re all little autonomous agents, we each seek to pursue our own self-interest, and our utilitarian desires and that’s it. Now that may have worked in a colonizing period in the frontier era and I certainly grew up on that. But you can’t have 6.8 billion cowboys out there and think about bringing the species together in a global economy and a global biosphere.
This hardly captures all that Rifkin is saying, but the quote was too provocative for the blogger in me to pass up.
18 Responses to “The Real Problem Is The American Dream”
What nonsense of a thesis. The world is going to those who organize along ethnic, racial, and local lines. Look at Asians in California can survive the insanity created by the government, unlimited immigration, and economic chaos. Being a global citizen does nothing for educating your children, maintain a home, or survival. As the fight for resources gets worse, only the wealthy elite will be able to be connected, empathic, global citizens. The rest of us will not have the resources to survive with such a mind set.
I agree with much of the above quote and have ordered this book. For me problem is not the American Dream but that America needs to bring forth a new dream.
Joe i have added a rather long piece. If too long please remove but it correlates with the above thesis. Somewhere along the line, if our planet is to be sustainable we must move from ego based consciousness to relational consciousness. And there is a huge ground movement that is coming forth that are in the process of embracing this evolutionary of consciousness.
IMAGINAL CELLS AND THE BODY POLITIC
A Story for Our Times
When a caterpillar nears its transformation time, it begins to eat ravenously, consuming everything in sight. (It is interesting to note that individuals are often called “consumers” and one of the largest manufacturers of heavy construction machinery is called “Caterpillar,” Inc.) The caterpillar body then becomes heavy, outgrowing its own skin many times, until it is too bloated to move. Attaching to a branch (upside down, we might add, where everything is turned on its head) it forms a chrysalis—an enclosing shell that limits the caterpillar’s freedom for the duration of the transformation.
Within the chrysalis a miracle occurs. Tiny cells, that biologists actually call “imaginal cells,” begin to appear. These cells are wholly different from caterpillar cells, carrying different information, vibrating to a different frequency–the frequency of the emerging butterfly. At first, the caterpillar’s immune system perceives these new cells as enemies, and attacks them, much as new ideas in science, medicine, politics, and social behavior are viciously denounced by the powers now considered mainstream. But the imaginal cells are not deterred. They continue to appear, in even greater numbers, recognizing each other, bonding together, until the new cells are numerous enough to organize into clumps. When enough cells have formed to make structures along the new organizational lines, the caterpillar’s immune system is overwhelmed. The caterpillar body then become a nutritious soup for the growth of the butterfly.
When the butterfly is ready to hatch, the chrysalis becomes transparent (much as the Internet is making many hidden actions transparent). The need for restriction has been outgrown. Yet the struggle toward freedom has an organic timing. Were the chrysalis opened too soon, the butterfly would die. As the butterfly emerges, it opens its “right wing” and its “left wing,” and then flies away to dance among the flowers.
The awakening of the global heart results from transforming the body politic from the unconscious, over-consuming bloat of the caterpillar into a creature of exquisite beauty, grace, and freedom. This coming of age process takes us to a new mythic reality, a larger story, ripe with meaning and direction. It takes us from the naïve egocentricity of childhood into a larger reality of interdependent reciprocity. It is not a passage that ends in the gray grimness of adult responsibility, denying the colorful spirituality of childhood innocence. Rather, it is a reclaiming of wholeness that denies little, and embraces all.
Catalysts for the Coalescence of Consciousness
The awakening of consciousness happens first in individuals. It is a shift from ego-based consciousness to relational consciousness, a shift from I to We. It is a realization that we are in this together, that we are interdependent, integral agents, part of a larger unity that needs each of us as individual agents. This awakening could result from spiritual practices such as yoga or meditation, psychotherapy, workshop experiences, disenchantment from one’s “normal” life, or any manner of doorways through which we awaken from the trance of consumption and exploitation to a higher vision of perpetual reciprocity, compassion, and unity. At first such individuals might feel alone or isolated; they might be misunderstood or even attacked by others for their strange ideas.
When these individuals find others of like mind, they are strengthened and reinforced. They feel less alone, more empowered, and inspired. They literally “vibrate” at a higher frequency. They catalyze each other. This is how the imaginal cells come together, organize amongst themselves and become centers of awakening in the new body politic.
We call these imaginal cells “co-hearts,” people who are simultaneously called by something in their own hearts to share with others, to serve and to save what they love. Co-hearts can be of any kind: healing co-hearts, artistic co-hearts, democratic co-hearts, yoga co-hearts, gardening co-hearts, parenting co-hearts. They can be lovers or friends, business associates or volunteers in an organization. Co-hearts share a kin-dom – not a kingdom ruled by a king but a kin-dom where everyone is kin. Co-hearts are like the cells, and kin-doms are the organs of the body politic. We recognize that at all levels we are part of a larger whole.
Our workshops focus on awakening the imaginal cells, through personal healing and transformation, and teaching spiritual practices. Our Sacred Centers hubs act as kin-doms for the awakening of global heart consciousness, by bringing together the imaginal cells so that they are strengthened and can survive the onslaughts of the collapsing cultural values. They then become like life-boats: islands of sanity, celebration, and joy in the emerging transformation, agents in the dawning age of the heart. ” Adyashanti
I think, if anything, the notion of “enlightened self interest”, a staple of American politics, has been damaged by the current financial crisis and subsequent governance crisis. The longer we remain short-sighted (in duration, scope, breadth and depth), the farther we'll fall from the heights this nation once enjoyed.
If America is to survive the challenges of this global economy, we must stop thinking only about ourselves and start thinking and acting as a society. I know this sounds “communistic” to some, but it's a simple reality.
Do you really think that a country that passes 1000's of earmarks a year and gives contracts, college admission, scholarships, and perks based upon race, gender, or ethnicity and really pull together to survive in the global economy. Do you really think that the Congressional Black Caucus cares whether any non-blacks survive in the world economy?
Get real. The U.S. is more involved in slef interest than it has in the past. And the government promotes the idea that self interest is the most important thing.
Ok have to admit that the title of that book makes me wanna barf, the arguments are interesting however, although I don't agree with many of them. I'm more for a “mind your own business” civilization model where people are free to live as they choose (within certain reasonable limits such that Hitler's and justice rapes are opposed) and everyone respects that right even if they don't agree with everything about the other culture.
I believe that this “global empathy” used to be called morality: the individual acting in a way that best benefits the society as well as the person. If you want to bring that back, I'm game.
Right now the world is giving charity to the EU and the US – letting them get away with polluting and harming the climate without paying for it.
That's right – all those rugged individualists and entrepreneurs inhale socialism every day and needs subsidies to keep the current systems up.
The US wants to enjoy the boons of a globalized system but refuses to do its own part – that's socialism right there.
I think that is proof that with our current level of technology, selfishness isn't possible and it isn't a virtue. The US is *based* on socialism as much as the EU – we are consuming and producing without a care of the effects of pollution and we don't pay for the privilege – that means we are all subsidized, coddled and rely on the charity of others. So the libertarian paragon that is the US is itself devoid of the philosophical purity they demand. For the randians and the neo-liberals, not even America is a successful example of their ideal country.
Leonidas actually the book is much broader then just environmental.
Here is the Table of Contents.
T
I The Hidden Paradox of Human History
HOMO EMPATHICUS
2 The New View of Human Nature
3 A Sentient Interpretation of Biological Evolution
4 Becoming Human
5 Rethinking the Meaning of the Human Journey
EMPATHY AND CIVILIZATION
6 The Ancient Theological Brain and Patriarchal Economy
7 Cosmopolitan Rome and the Rise of Urban Christianity
8 The Soft Industrial Revolution of the Late Medieval era and the Birth of Humanism
9 Ideological Thinking in a Modern Market Economy
10 Psychological Consciousness in a postmodern Existential world
THE AGE OF EMPATHY
11 The Climb to Global Peak Empathy
12 The Planetary Entropic Abyss
13 The Emerging Era of Distributed Capitalism
14 The Theatrical Self in an Improvisational Society
15 Biosphere Consciousness in a Climax Economy
The Strata Sphere:
The U.S. maintains our low carbon footprint even though …. from Wikipedia:
That is a terrific excerpt, ordinarysparrow! Thanks. The comment thread on this post is rich and fascinating. Thanks to all. For that, I have another post on Rifkin's book to point to. Robert D. Stolorow's 'Empathic Civilization' in an Age of Trauma. It's hard to excerpt, but I'll give it a shot:
One more connection this comment string brings up for me, this one from WNYC's Radio Lab. In Killing Babies, Saving the World, Harvard professor Josh Greene suggests that we may be able to grow the tiny part of our brain that handles abstract thinking and become a more moral species that makes better choices. He says our modern “common sense” is really still “hunter-gatherer common sense” and that doesn't always serve us well in the modern world. The hopeful part is the learning part. He suggests we can learn and change. I'm going too long here, but if you're still with me, one more…
In New Baboon, Radio Lab looks at “Will humans ever stop fighting wars?” via a population of baboons that let go of its violent behavior.
This has been an interesting thread. Thanks for bringing this post.
Quote from Robert D. Stolorow's 'Empathic Civilization' in an Age of Trauma you referenced above.
” A good example of the way resurrective ideology works was how, after 9/11, Americans readily fell under the spell of the rhetoric of George W. Bush, who declared war on global terrorism and drew America into a grandiose, holy crusade that enabled Americans to feel delivered from trauma, chosen by God to rid the world of evil. Another example, in the wake of the economic crisis, was the attribution of messianic powers to President Obama–expectations of being saved that have led, as they inevitably do, to bitter feelings of disappointment. Resurrective ideology always ends up being destructive.”
This brings light not only the high expectations for Obama but also the present Tea Party and Palin.
This afternoon watched the Nova series, ' Becoming Human ' as a companion with these views. Like our ancestors how could we not be part of the ongoing evolution of consciousness? The egoic based evolutionary stage of 'me', 'my', 'mine' will be transformed or it will be the demise of the present sustainable life on this planet.
After years of political disillusionment surely most of us can agree politics is not going to turn us a round. I readily can embrace emphatic citizenship.
Thanks Joe for the discussion.
Joe, I'm a critic of that but will go easy on you and post some items you can pursue as you see fit.
Basically, this guy (similar to Lester Brown and a lot of lefties) is just releasing one more US-bashing book and advocating the typical future that has been sought since the later 1960s with the “population explosion” scare and the radicalization of liberalism in this country. Same story, new book.
“It’s an 18th–19th century dream based on the idea from the enlightenment that we’re all little autonomous agents, we each seek to pursue our own self-interest”
This is a critique of libertarianism and a defense of collectivism, by criticizing the atomistic excess of libertarianism. This is nothing new. Laissez-faire is decried as late 19th century at the latest (at the time the word “liberal” was seized by the Left and changed to something different than, even routinely inimical or antithetical libertarianism — with an authoritarian as well as collectivist nature).
This also is a criticism of what Roger Bootle, in his latest book calls “homo economicus” of textbook economics and the textbook (ideal) free market in theory (as beloved by the Chicago school of economics).
“Biosphere Consciousness in a Climax Economy”
I suspect you'll find similarities there to both “The Genesis Strategy” by Stephen Schneider and parts of “Earth At Omega: Passage to Planetization” (with a heavier bias toward what Schneider has written).
I should add another book, Joe, that is by a lefty talk radio show host that's doing well, Thom Hartmann.
Some years ago, when he lived in (the People's Republic of) Vermont, before he moved to Portland (OR), Hartmann wrote a book lamenting the wrongful ways we took beyond true community, that of the tribe.
“While everything appears to be collapsing around us — ecodamage, genetic engineering, virulent diseases, the end of cheap oil, water shortages, global famine, wars — we can still do something about it and create a world that will work for us and for our children’s children.”
http://www.amazon.com/Last-Hours-Ancient-Sunlig…
More good links and thought-provoking argument. I'm interested in both sides as represented by ordinarysparrow and DLS. Both make sense to me (though I don't see Rifkin “US bashing”). And both could be right. While these ideas may echo historical critiques of libertarianism and defenses of collectivism, it's possible that now is the historical time when collectivism prevails.
I am inclined to believe there are and will be impacts from global population growth. It took all of history for the planet to get to 1.6 billion people in 1900, then one century to more than quadruple that to 7 billion people. On a planet with 7+ billion people, collectivism may have some real advantages it did not at 1.6 billion.
Here's more from PRB. (BRIEF posting this time)
*** US in the World — comparing places here to places elsewhere in the world (educational!) ***
http://www.prb.org/Educators/Resources/USInTheW…
Population losses in the rural USA
“For several decades, families have migrated from rural areas to cities and suburbs in search of better jobs and improved educational opportunities.”
http://www.prb.org/Articles/2004/SlowGoingforth…
Note again that I'm actually not worried about development elsewhere that much, any more than I am about future growth here in the USA. By the time we get electric vehicles here and in Europe, for example, China and maybe India and other nations (much more crowded and dirty) will get them, too. (Nobody realistic expects automobility, a wonderful thing like electricity, to be rejected by others any more than they expect them to be rejected here. An urban versus suburban-exurban or rural choice for location or lifestyle is shared by everyone and there's nothing wrong with it; in developing countries few worry about the luxury of choosing lifestyle; they'll keep flooding from the countryside into cities.)
Suburban-exurban problem many lefties are upset about (with reason — but there's no escaping that land ideal for farming is ideal for people to live on). I know this well from growring up in California.
http://www.farmland.org/…/PavingParadise_AmericanFar...
http://www.farmlandinfo.org/documents/…/Why_Save_Far...
http://www.farmlandinfo.org/
Water and the Middle East and North Africa (Arabs plus Iran, basically — other arid Asia excepted)
http://www.prb.org/Publications/PolicyBriefs/Fi…
Youth Bulges, Urbanization, and Conflict
http://www.prb.org/Journalists/Webcasts/2009/yo…
Swamping the coasts (okay, worry about this in the USA as well as elsewhere)
http://www.prb.org/Publications/PolicyBriefs/Ri…
Asia,
http://www.prb.org/Articles/2001/UrbanizationTa…
but China (with an extremist anti-natal program) faces substantial future aging.
http://www.prb.org/Articles/2006/ChinasConcernO…
This is a, and maybe the most notable, problem the world faces (not just the West) in the future: aging.
CSIS: Aging not only a problem in the Western nations, but world-wide.
(I've posted to one publication here frequently when describing Europe's future problems.)
http://csis.org/program/global-aging-initiative
There will be a desire by some to boost population of working-age immigrants greatly here and even more in Europe in order to be able to pay for retirement social programs of governments in the West. Is it feasible? (another site I've posted links to frequently)
http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/R…
My previous long posting (referenced in the posting I made with numerous links that you can already see — a much more brief posting) is not here, may not have been deleted by you, but kept out of Disqus or off this site. There is (now) a 25,000 character limit and my earlier posting exceeds this.
Related topics for this thread were a labor of love for me to day and I'm not giving up on providing it.
Here is my earlier material in two parts. Contains links to more reading. Enjoy.
(to follow in two parts)
Part 1 of 2
…
“I don't see Rifkin 'US bashing'”
Whether you're an environmentalist, or an idealist like Keys (“Earth at Omega” — a higher-minded, almost New Agey view of world government and ending destructive self-centered nationalism and the conflicts and strife associated with it — “roving packs of dogs” — than maintream UN-style future world government idealism) there are probably positive things you can find from Rifkin (or peers like Lester Brown) as well as legitimate criticism of the status quo.
I can think of a relevent example, more relevent later, at the risk of straying or emphasizing an interest of mine that may be excessive to “push” on here (like, say, someone who relocates to Eugene, OR from California in recent years rather than in the early 1970s, and, now, makes a big deal of discovering the story of Steve Prefontaine) to make a point in favor of leftist critics of the status quo, I'll say that related to the “status quo,” and from having recently lived for the past ten years back in the humid, enough-rain East, I've been stricken from the start at the alien (to an Easternized guy) arid West (I'm in the Southwest now), the West that will continue to boom (from California “spinoff” as well as relocating Easterners in later retirement years), and what on earth is it going to do about sufficient water supplies and avoiding or reducing future conflicts? Where and how will the water needs be met?
biodiversity.ca.gov/Meetings/archive/water03/water2025.pdf
You don't have to be a flaming lefty (the flare from the light of true progress, augmenting evolution, I can hear you say already) to be aware of our environment (moving back East to the world's greatest deciduous forest made a naturalist in earnest out of me in addition to Easternizing me in other ways), and to the water problem in the West (a region that wants to be independent but in fact has been in large part a true, great experiment of the federal government from around the Civil War to around World War II, and even afterward), and wondering where the water is going to be had to be made available to the people making the Southwest population swell enormously, and how will we pay for it?
The California ideal, being in a mainly dry, sunny Mediterranean or even desert climate, with all the needed water miles away up in the mountains, and the snow and up and away there with it, is great, but there is still a gross maldistribution of water making it necessary for government to be a redistributionist “water Marxist” and it is even more the case in the rest of the West. The assurance of California's future is by taking water from the Klamath, and to a lesser extent the other northern rivers [Eel and Van Duzen] which also happen to lie within California's arbitrary northern boundary; the overall long-term salvation for the West as whole, meaning all the people living in the sun and clear skies and little rain of the Southwest, is by taking water from the enormous Columbia — few today realize how much water that river system ending in the rainy Northwest coastal area really is. But how do we move Columbia water 1,000 miles or more? And isn't that going to make even conservative non-environmentalists ask how we can do it or pay for it, or even if is so impractical, expensive, or otherwise undesired we shouldn't do it? (We can't and shouldn't force people to go where the rain and snow is, in the West. They like their weather clear and dry and sunny, thanks. If we owned Baja California, it would attract people and we would already be transferring northern river water there.)
http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/pcpn/ca.gif
http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/pcpn/westus_precip.gif
You're even seeing the start of “water wars” in the South[east], the recent Chattahoochee conflict. Just wait until the hordes that aren't going Southwest, go Southeast (Easterners from both the Northeast and the Midwest, Joe W, who like the Southeast; blacks “returning home” in the reverse pattern of their grandparents after World War I who fled the primitive and vicious South of that time for the North for safety and for jobs).
Along with water needs will be continued growth of need for power (electricity), to run air conditioners as well as more computers, and one day, recharging an enormous number of electric vehicles (and the faster the recharging, the more power that is going to be needed — don't neglect that detail!).
* * *
“I am inclined to believe there are and will be impacts from global population growth.”
Oh, without a doubt. It's going to be tough, and I'm happy to “admit” that and even wonder how these challenges will be met. It is not the “population explosion” nightmare many wrongly believe (or even worse, say is true about the Western nations rather than where the growth mainly will be). As you have been familiar with the rural and small-town Eastern USA especially since choosing to live near Milledgeville, Joe, you don't have to be one of those I admonish for being ignorant of the nature of so much of our country; you live and know how things already are there. (On another thread I began to dispel myths about our future and this kind of threat, and was subjected to a surprisingly as well as annoyingly rude and stupid response from someone from whom I expected better. My mistake, I guess. At least in other circumstances this site can be intellectually stimulating rather than merely a left-wing political and celebrity gossip site.) Even the Northeast Corridor (and parts of major metros elsewhere) is not as dense as so much of Europe, let alone eastern Asia. There's plenty of room for growth (even almost from scratch, in neglected places, like the Monterey area in California, as well as in other parts of that state that pinpoint in turn the logical pattern for additional growth). There will be problems with the environment and with scarcity of resources, either inherently or when scarcity is created where there is growth in popular places (don't forget, some parts of our country are losing population; the entire nation is far from booming). Even in the South were you reside, it is far from being the “Third World problem within the USA” that it was after World War II, but there are still places you may see if you travel, that you know can be helped, as Bill Clinton wanted to do in the 1990s. Some of these are places with a largely black population, and the relocation South of retirees from the northern part of the Eastern USA, the Snowbelt cities, is an example where growth may be not only welcome but some measure of salvation, Joe. Growth would be a welcome relief here, even transformative. And that's a GOOD thing. To need more water and power? That's a GOOD sign.
Here is what the future population growth in the world is expected to be like. The real resource scarcity and “resource wars” (such as the Middle East, a rapidly-growing “urbanized desert”) will be outside the USA and the rest of the West. (Europe, with its aging, faces population and economic shrinkage, not growth, as a likely future problem.)
Future growth looks like this (see rest of page as well as the diagram of future growth itself):
http://www.prb.org/Articles/2008/globalaging.aspx
http://www.prb.org/Articles/2008/pewprojections…
(NOTE: The best sources for projections include IIASA, an institution I suggested for systems-fan Mikkel who posts on this site, who hosts Flohn's 1980 work that is still the best on future possible man-made global warming. UN, Census, IIASA, and the World Bank — the heavies you can trust!)
http://www.prb.org/Publications/PolicyBriefs/Un…
and you can see that the real problem is not in the USA or the rest of the West, but elsewhere. Our own growth will be like our population distribution, varying and concentrated and troublesome in some places, but not in the rest of the country, some parts of which are declining and dying and would welcome the problems of overgrowth as well as the growth itself. Much population growth will be in the more desireable and already established places (metro areas and adjacent rural locations, handy for travel to metros when desired or needed) and as you have been in rural America you know there is plenty of room for future growth, even though regrettably it won't be uniform throughout the nation so as to avoid many of the growth (and decline) problems.
I don't even waste time worrying about what lefties worry about (often wrongly; development and progress are good, not bad, things), like China wanting billions of new automobiles, followed someday if it ever gets on an intelligent development course, India, and then what about the rest of the world and its right to advance, too? I want to see Africa become modern, as well as Latin America, eastern Europe, and all the lesser developed places (just name one example — should Burma have to be primitive forever? Somalia? Chad? Why?)
Yes, even here in the USA, there will be continued growth problems (in the Sunbelt) but as with the growth of metro areas, in rural America it is going to vary from place to place because some urban locations are more desireable than others. (As with metro growth, we have a “maldistribution” or lack of uniform distribution of population and of population growth.)
However, while the USA will age like Europe but won't have the overall decline problems Europe will have (and worse labor shortages and retirement-program problems than we will also have), we will continue to experience what we have already been experiencing — deline in older eastern places and actual population losses, and continued related poverty in rural as well as some metropolitan areas. These are places where growth is not a bad thing, but would be most gratefully welcomed, instead.
From my years in Upstate New York (and in a place that qualifies as Appalachia by government program criteria as well as by being in Appalachia physically) and my travels in the Rust Belt I know very well of places that are losing population and would badly want some of the overgrowth that is happening in the Sun Belt.
Look at Figure 5 in this report. This is what I reviewed before I moved from St. Louis to Upstate New York in 2004 to spend a short time there. It says it all. This is Blue Nation sclerosing Rust Belt. It needs help! Growth would be welcome, not anything bad to be refused. They need growth there!
http://www.ppinys.org/reports/2003/censusbook.pdf
(This report is about New York, the preeminent Northeastern-Midwestern Blue Nation state, which not only shows Blue Nation or Rust Belt losses, but shows the disparity among parts of that state, as well as noting that population growth in NYC metro involves a good deal of immigration.)
(Side note: West Virginia, identified as a big loser in the previous report, has idyllic Appalachian and deciduous forest terrain, a perfect retirement location and good future metro-area development area, potentially, at least in theory, if all else went well. If you have also been there, you've seen, you know.)
Appalachia (and those in the know will immediately say, related Ozarkia), the Delta, and the Black Belt are the best-known persistent poverty areas in the South, where growth would be a good thing, in addition to other parts of the country that are losing people like older Northeastern and Midwestern sclerosing swathes as well as, for example, the Great Plains, particularly the northern Great Plains. (Consider where it is known that there is not only poor economics but, for example, poor health care.)
These are places that remain neglected, also illustrating (another) problems with our recent stimulus as well as being of much earlier origin and longer duration. Note also that there is plenty of room for growth of population and (welcome) growth of economy in so much of rural America as well as in older, ailing metros.
When I was living in DC in 1999-2001 there were people who went to Appalachia to help people who still had no running water or electricity. There are truly depressed places in this country (see both above and below). There is so much that real stimulus measures could have done (I don't believe any new ones will do, either) to help impoverished rural America as well as declining Blue Nation metros.
http://www.financeproject.org/irc_pubs.cfm?id=2…
[paper and discussion]
“Appalachia, the Mississippi Delta, and the Black Belt. The poor quality of life in rural Appalachia and along the Mississippi Delta has been publically acknowledged by programs and commissions for improving conditions. However, the more comprehensive Black Belt subregion that links parts of Southern Appalachia and the Southern Delta has not received such regional policy attention. While the South as a whole is more rural and impoverished than other U.S. regions, this is largely due to the poor conditions in the Black Belt.”
“The southern Black Belt counties more specifically experienced important out-migration for African-Americans between 1880 and 1990″
… but in the future to be returned to by the descendents, more affluent, from the North, as well as by affluent whites
– DLS
ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/15499/1/32020319.pdf
ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/15494/1/32020357.pdf
The Black Belt
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ruralamerica/ra15...
Blacks in the USA (and the Black Belt)
1880 vs. 1980
http://www.umich.edu/~lawrace/votetour1.htm
http://www.umich.edu/~lawrace/votetour11.htm
Appalachia (as an area of distress, still today)
http://www.arc.gov/appalachian_region/MapofAppa…
http://www.arc.gov/maps
Related: nationwide poverty (food-related) information
http://depts.washington.edu/wcpc/node/221
Part 2 of 2
…
(Regarding both poverty problems and future growth locations and possible environmental strains.)
Just as with different levels of growth from varying amenities and attractions of different metro areas and regions and locations from which metro area dwellers choose (the “bi-coastal” nation of the 1980s into the 1990s), the same is true of the rural areas.
You know this from living in the rural and small-town South, Joe W., but for others who aren't, or who haven't traveled as well as lived throughout the whole country as I have, here is good reading.
[understanding rural America better]
“Once, the vast majority of rural counties depended on farming as their primary source of income. Today, fewer than a quarter do, and these farming-dependent counties are home to only 9 percent of the rural population.
Concentrated in the Great Plains, these 556 counties derive 20 percent or more of their earned income from farming; for one county the figure was 89 percent. Even in these counties, however, nonfarm sectors are a major source of employment and income, providing nearly 80 percent of the jobs in farming-dependent counties. Those jobs are held by farmers and nonfarmers alike. Many farmers and farm families depend on nonfarm jobs and incomes to make ends meet.”
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib710/cfa…
“Of the county types based on economic specialization, manufacturing-dependent counties are second in number only to farming counties. These 506 counties are home to 31 percent of the rural population. Concentrated in the eastern half of the Nation–particularly the Southeast–these counties receive 30 percent or more of their earnings from manufacturing.”
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib710/cmf…
“Growth in the services sector has been the dominant force in nonmetro (as well as national) industrial trends over the past two decades, giving rise to the popular term “service economy.” The services sector includes transportation and public utilities, wholesale and retail trade, finance, insurance, real estate, agricultural services, and other services. From 1979 to 1989, over 3 million nonmetro services jobs were created, accounting for 83 percent of new nonmetro jobs.
The 323 services-dependent counties, as defined here, derived 50 percent or more of their earned income from services jobs over the 3-year period 1987-89. Unlike farming and manufacturing counties, there is no regional pattern to the location of services counties. Rather, they are scattered across the Nation fairly evenly.
Seventy services counties (22 percent) were also retirement counties and 60 (19 percent) were also Federal lands counties. This is not surprising given the dominant role that services play in the economies of those county types.”
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib710/cse…
“The presence (or absence) of natural amenities is becoming increasingly important to the economic well-being of rural areas. With such amenities as a mild climate, mountains, coastlines, and lakes, a rural area can attract retirees, tourists, and recreationists, as well as some firms and self-employed professionals who place a high value on the quality of living offered by these amenities. In turn, the economic activities–particularly services–that these people and firms generate are becoming increasingly important sources of employment and income.
Examined here are “retirement-destination counties,” counties mainly in the South and West that experienced 15 percent or more inmigration of people age 60 and older in the 1980s. These counties are generally more rural than other nonmetro counties. In addition to being located near amenities, these counties also tend to be near military bases, reflecting the desire of military retirees to be near medical and shopping facilities located on the bases.
Along with natural amenities, several other factors have contributed to the increased migration to these areas: improved health of older people, earlier retirement ages, higher retirement incomes, some preference for smaller communities, and improvements in transportation and communications.”
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib710/cre…
“Land use, property rights, and protection and use of natural resources are issues of great importance to the Federal lands counties–counties in which 30 percent or more of the land is owned by the Federal Government. In 1987, there were 270 such counties, located primarily in the West. The amount of federally owned acreage in these counties ranged from 30 to 99 percent.
Because the Federal Government owns much of the land, these counties are significantly affected by Federal policies and regulations dealing with land, the environment, tourism, and recreational activities.
The debate on such policies and regulations is often couched in terms of economic development versus environmental protection. In reality, the debate is primarily about who has the right to use and benefit from Federal lands, how those lands can be used, and who pays for those benefits. A wide range of people and activities compete for that right. Ranchers, miners, loggers, recreational users, and those concerned with the preservation of wilderness all have a stake in the governance of Federal lands. And as the West grows, its population changes, and the demand on its natural resources increases, the level of debate will likely rise, often pitting recent urban emigres against long-time local residents.”
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib710/cfe…
“The number of counties with high concentrations of poverty has decreased dramatically over the last 30 years. In 1960, a total of 2,083 rural counties had 20 percent or more of their population living below the poverty level. By 1990, the number had shrunk to 765, a decline of nearly two-thirds and an indication of the remarkable reduction of poverty across rural America.
For 535 of those counties, however, poverty continues to be a long-term problem. The persistent poverty counties discussed here are those in which 20 percent or more of the population were below the poverty level in each of the years 1960, 1970, 1980, and 1990. Actual 1990 poverty rates in these counties ranged from 20 to 63 percent with an average of 29 percent, compared with the nonmetro average rate of 18.3 percent. For many of these counties, there has been some reduction in poverty, although their poverty rate is still high enough to keep them in the persistently poor category.
These counties are heavily concentrated in the Southeast, Appalachia, and the Southwest, with others scattered on Native-American reservations in the North and West. The persistent poverty counties (24 percent of all nonmetro counties) contain 19 percent of the nonmetro population and 32 percent (2.7 million) of the nonmetro poor.”
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib710/cpo…
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib710/ind…
Why are people migrating? Other than jobs and growth in the Sunbelt, climatic disadvantages in the Snow Belt, “legacy cost” obsolete liberal tax and economic policy, sun and clear skies in the Southwest, what about natural amenities, especially for retirees? (Anticipate “environental impacts.”)
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/NaturalAmenities/M…
Natural Amenities Drive Population Change in Rural America
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aer781/
“Landscape and climate have shaped the geography of rural growth and decline over the past 35 years. The rural population is not fixed in place. … Young adults tend to leave all rural areas to further their education, to enter the armed forces, or simply to see the world. People moving into rural areas tend to be parents with children, midlife career changers, and retirees. Some are returning home, but many move at least in part to enjoy the rural outdoors, migrating to scenic areas with pleasant climates.”
The studies note that growth and interest is directed in or toward rural areas near metro areas. The more isolated the location, the worse the prospects for growth; the fewer natural amenities, the worse the prospects. Those with the most isolation and the least in amenties are at highest risk of population loss instead of growth.
Oh, so true:
**** Urban sprawl is to some extent the product of people attempting to have access to urban services and employment opportunities while maintaining residential access to natural amenities. ****
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/RuralAmenities…
Why are some places losing population? (Rural isolation and a lack of natural amenities.)
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Amberwaves/Feb03/Findin…
Understanding Rural Population Loss
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ruralamerica/ra17...
Missouri, one place where I used to live, offers its own assessment of natural amenities. Missouri not only has a mild climate (it borders on and is part of the Midwest as well as the South — the general boundary of the two is along the Missouri River, the limit of ancient glaciation and the Midwest's natural southern boundary). It also has the Ozarks, an age-old, worn-down mountain chain like the Appalachians, and featuring a similar Southern Highland “kin” culture to that of Appalachia.
(All of you affluent liberals who “vote the right way” on things should invade Ozarkland proper, storming into fabulous places on the undammed rivers, like beautiful Eminence or anywhere else there are mills beside the rivers, or better, invade Springfield Moe or the other places there that are part of the Bible Belt region encompassing next-door eastern Oklahoma cities including Tulsa and OKC.)
http://www.missourieconomy.org/researchandplann…
(don't neglect “See the Full Report”)
http://www.missourieconomy.org/community/misc/a…
Oak-hickory forest land extraordinaire!
http://ozarks.cr.usgs.gov/ozark_maps_data.htm
(The Ozarks are part of the South. North of the Missouri River (limit of ancient glaciation) is the Midwest. Missouri's portion was uncovered earlier than Iowa's and less intensively farmed as well as being less well-known.)
ftp://ftp.epa.gov/wed/ecoregions/mo_ia/moia_front.pdf
Changes in recent time:
http://landcovertrends.usgs.gov/gp/eco40Report….
For those who like our forests: (fortunately, future growth won't threaten them all)
http://www.sustainableforests.net/docs/…/Presentatio...
and
(note also you can see where the South begins physically in another way besides limit of Ice Age glaciation along the Missouri and Ohio rivers. Look for the cypress swamp and bottomland forest areas going up the Missippi toward and on the Ohio, as well as all the way up toward Cape Hatteras; though Virginia is southern, physically the Northeast includes all the Cheasapeake Bay watershed, not just that north of the Potomac.)
http://www.woodweb.com/knowledge_base/fpl_pdfs/CHvolum...
el.erdc.usace.army.mil/elpubs/pdf/si21.pdf
and
http://www.nationalatlas.gov/articles/biology/a…
Bottom line — Joe, you live in or near Milledgeville, and you know what the rural (and metro) eastern USA is like. Assuming the future model is not coastal Florida, or all infill and limited expansion of the metros only, you know there is plenty of open space and plenty of land for population growth there. (It's also true on the West Coast and in the rest of the West if the water problem can be solved; most people will want to live in the clear and dry and sunny Southwest, not the rainy Northwest coast area.)
The East in particular (which needs water work but nothing like the West!) is already better populated, while also having plenty of room for growth. With enough growth, future high-speed rail system, which are regional on the scale we have here in North America, could justify becoming interconnected — a true population “network” for the entire Midwest, South[east], and Northeast — i.e., the entire East.
Most people on the West Coast (who never contemplate moving, especially in California) and the Western natives don't think about the East, but I've lived and traveled there and know not only about the movement of many to Florida but the coming relocation of many from northern parts (both black and white) not all to the Southwest, but instead to Florida and other parts of the Southeast! (It will likely extend beyond what I call the “blister belt,” the part of northern Florida and Gulf Coast states and South Carolina on the Atlantic coastal plan where cooling-degree days exceed heating-degree days — I suspect these will be prime retirement spots, though, especially for those wanting fairly mild winters.) The East could become even more densely populated as well as more-populated than now, just like the West Coast (Bay Area, Monterey, maybe, Southern California, Willamette-Puget Sound — as well as other already-developed and growing metro-replaces-farm areas like the Central Valley).
So much future growth is going to continue to be where original (earlier) growth happened, because of superior climate and terrain advantages. And to a great extent, this is perfectly natural[ist]. The East and the West Coast (Pacific Slope) are better for people as well as for farming; they were settled early for good reasons. Their climates are better for agriculture; the Southwest climate is preferred by people and is better for agriculture (the most solar power, and the best growing seasons at the lower altitudes of the West — warmer is better, as is true with the tropics versus the temperate latitudes). But the East still offers great potential for future growth (it's not a catastrophe even if growth is more in some places than others) and the West Coast has the additional advantage of the west coast climate (moderated greatly by maritime influence and westerlies at our latitudes, as well as the Pacific High).
(Trees, and good farming = good for people, too.)
http://www.census.gov/history/www/programs/geog…
http://etc.usf.edu/maps/pages/4300/4398/4398z.htm
http://www.emersonkent.com/map_archive/us_popul…
http://www.emersonkent.com/map_archive/us_explo…
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/imagere…
http://www.census.gov/geo/www/mapGallery/images…
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/po…
http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/pcpn/us_precip.gif
http://artsci.wustl.edu/~landc/html/webb/webb4.jpg
http://artsci.wustl.edu/~landc/html/webb/webb9.jpg
Postscript: Here is relative density of USA vs. Europe and East Asia. No need for excess US-worry!
Gridded maps (you can select by settlements of 5,000 and 500,000 as one of so many options here — other than New York we don't have to worry about any future “megacities” the way other parts of the world do, but it's of interest to see where the population is now, because future growth will be there.)
Gridded Population of the World, version 3 (GPWv3), and the Global Rural-Urban Mapping Project (GRUMP)
http://sedac.ciesin.org/gpw/country.jsp?iso=USA
http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/gpw/
North America
http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/gpw/continent….
Europe
http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/gpw/continent….
Asia
http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/gpw/continent….
(Look at Japan, land of the earliest modern high-speed trains.)
http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/gpw/country.js…
the world
http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/gpw/global.jsp
** Gridded density map that shows places of population growth and population decline (shrinkage).
http://www.populationaction.org/Publications/Re…
others
http://earthtrends.wri.org/text/map_lg.php?mid=192
https://qed.princeton.edu/main/Image:World_Popu…
Nighttime lighting and gridded population — FYI
http://www.isprs.org/proceedings/XXXIV/part1/paper/000...
Future — megacities (making something of value of the old 60s Scientific American population book)
http://www.prb.org/Articles/2000/TheUrbanDemogr…
http://www.prb.org/Articles/2004/UrbanizationAn…
“Contrary to popular belief, the bulk of urban population growth is likely to occur in smaller cities and towns of less than 500,000. Globally, all future population growth will take place in cities, especially in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. In Asia and Africa, this growth will signal a shift from rural to urban growth, changing a millennia-long trend.”
http://www.prb.org/Articles/2007/623Urbanizatio…
Our future, from decades in the past
http://www.prb.org/Articles/2005/BacktotheFutur…