Why a liberal stays in the South

[MBS]

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/why-i-m-staying-put

Thought-provoking read.

Nonetheless, in a lot of what I hear from my fellow liberals, there's a certain degree of turning out the lights and cursing the darkness, and it's annoying. Everyone is shocked and appalled at how wingnutty the red states are, but when the liberals continually congregate for generations in a fairly small number of places that already are liberal and are, for the most part, geographically concentrated at the edges of the country, what do we expect the places they won't live in to be like?
For several years, I've been mentally short-handing this phenomenon as "gated community liberalism." It's the kind that sits in a safe, comfortable place, surrounded by allies, and snipes at those outside the gates. It's the kind that talks about how much America needs to do for "the Global South" (I agree), but has nothing but venom left for the original. The kind that stresses how important it is that, contra conservative hawks, we remain constructively engaged with countries we disagree with, like Iran (a view I share), but can only crinkle its nose at half its own country.
. . .

But if my fellow liberals really want red America to stop being so infuriatingly red, then, sooner or later, they have to do what JR is doing: get out of blue America and invest their time and energy and money and talents and votes and lives in the rest of the country. For generations. That's what it took to build the places liberals concentrate in; it's not going to just magically happen in "flyover" country.

[Nay]

1. I'm still living in the South, but if my child and grandchild moved out of

our town I'd be out of here like a shot. I grew up in the South and have never really gotten the appeal, except for the mild winter weather. The ignorance is enough to make you weep, but even worse is the desire to remain ignorant despite any efforts to enlighten. Joe Bageant's book, Deer Hunting with Jesus, encapsulates the South perfectly. He, a Southerner, explained the place pretty well, and loved and hated it at the same time. He also spent a great deal of his time in his later years elsewhere, where he could get rested up from the nonsense that assailed him every day in his home state.

Certainly, if enough liberals moved South, the place would change, but you have to wonder if there are enough liberals to effect that change. Any liberal would have to be prepared to sacrifice their children, even if they decided to send them to private school to escape the horrible schools in most of the South. The whole ignorant/militant/guntoting/yahoo vibe can catch your kids up whether they go to public or private school; that vibe infects most of the people your children make friends with, marry, and work with. Your grandchildren, most likely, will be 'southern' in some unpleasant (to you) ways. It's quite a commitment, especially when there are plenty of non-southern states that need help beating back their own yahoo contingents.

[Fumesucker]

40. Bless your heart

[redstatebluegirl]

2. While I agree with most of this op

I have some sense of what is like to move to the South and not be a native. What makes it harder is the distrust of anyone raised north of the Mason Dixon line. Even some Democrats will challenge your motives "we do not want ths to become Chicago" comments made even when I tell them I was raised in a republican county downstate. Those comments were made by Democrats when I tried to volunteer. I continue to volunteer, biting my tongue daily at the conservative comments made by people who claim to be good libral democrats. My husband and I say a liberal Democrat here is a moderate Republican back home.

We are here and my husband's career is here so I have tried to do my best to move people I come in contact with a little to the left of center but I do not hold out much hope. I think the hardest part is the work environment. I took early retirement due to my health a year ago so thankfully I do not have to listen to it 24/7 but now I am healthy and looking again, I am terrified of where I may end up.

There are lots of good people here, and the closed community liberal idea is a valid one, but Lord I ould like to be in one of those for a week or so right now. A vacation if you will...

[Nay]

3. I totally get the wish to vacation in a liberal area....we go straight to

Canada, frankly. We cross the border and sigh with relief. I also moved here years ago because of Mr Nay's career, and we're fairly sorry we did that even though it has been financially rewarding. We sincerely did not think, over the years, that it would get this bad. We foolishly thought that there was a limit to the damage that could be done to this country by the nuts, but we were wrong. We stayed too long.

[redstatebluegirl]

4. My husband was offered a position there a few years ago.

He did not think about it then, now we wish we had, they pay their professors much better than the US and no BS....

[Paladin]

5. "Gated Community Liberalism"

Jeez, that's perfect. Way too much of that sort of thinking, here at DU.

[frog64]

6. this Texan

Absolutely. I was born in Texas and will die here. I am not naive about its flaws. Like Molly Ivins I consider the love of my home state a harmless perversion. I will stand and fight for my historic party and its values as long as I have breath. My great g. uncle was at San Jacinto, and both g. g. grandfathers wore the gray in the CW. Were they on wrong side? yes, of course, but they were tragically wrong. I have sought to atone for them and their tragedy. I stood with Sen. Ralph Yarborough all the way. I consider him the greatest man that ever lived aside from Jesus Christ.

[RainDog]

7. On the other hand

if you stay in a place with regressive social, intellectual, artistic and, most especially, religious values, you enable those in power to continue the same old system while you deny the opportunity to allow other places to be "laboratories of democracy" that enact more liberal laws and take on more progressive attitudes about how to be in this world.

when I was married, the one stipulation I had was that I didn't want my children to grow up, as I had, in the south.

the main reason is because of the religious bullshit and the social pressure to kowtow to that bullshit.

I wouldn't do that to my children.

And, instead, my kids got to grow up in a multicultural community, go to public school with kids from 39 other nations... where the kids got along and celebrated and learned about one another's diversity without some flaming asshole religious idiot screaming about gawd and satan and... harry potter. and muslims.

my sons were supporting gblt rights in high school, tho they're not gbl or t, a decade ago. Their friends have different levels of melatonin and different shapes for their facial features and bfd.

oh, but that was also in the middle of a red state - but it was within a strong community that told the red state their values weren't acceptable here. the place, in fact, is considered an oasis in a desert of stupidity.

And the reason it is such a place is that people from all over the world live there, the state funds a large portion of the business done there (the business is education), and people stay because they feel protected from many of the assaults from the conservatives in the state (who, of course, view the city as "the people's republic." - yet the state depends upon the reputation of the place to make it not look like a laughing stock in the nation.

so, it's a little ironic that the jewel of a conservative state is its most liberal city that exists because of socialized education.

people make decisions about what they can and can't put up with. I couldn't put up with the religiosity of the south. it makes my teeth hurt. I'm not in the south, but I'm doing my part in a red state.

at this time, if I could move, tho, I would - to a liberal state where I can take part in changing laws that cannot be changed at the federal level because of the rural voters in this nation (mostly in the south and midwest) who have hindered progress in this nation since its inception.

there's an argument to be made for using your vote to change the world and let the south catch up after fighting against that change... as the south has done for more than a hundred years.

you may make more of a difference by participating in a "laboratory of democracy" rather than trying to change centuries of proud backwardness.

[Uncle Joe]

8. I stay in the South because it's my home and I'm not damn sure not going to let someone else run

me out because of their conservative or religious beliefs.

My grandfather was a deacon in the Baptist Church and my mother rebelled against him, she told my brothers and me that if we wanted to go to church that was our decision but she wasn't taking us.

I have went to church sporadically throughout my life, I did it in Parris Island S.C. just to get away from the drill instructors for a short period of time.

I went to a Methodist Church when I was married because my wife did.

I have went a handful of times since then mostly at the urging of a friend wanting me to go with her.

As for politics I've had many heated debates with co-workers in my company at least since the early 90s and I'm usually outnumbered, most of them being Republicans, but it makes no difference.

To a large extent I enjoy the Adrenalin rush, the key is in remaining civil, keeping my emotions in check and presenting the facts in a logical basis.

I see my role as awakening them little by little and I have seen results, not over night but as rain wears a stone smooth.

Thanks for the thread, MBS.

[Paladin]

9. Well said.

I'm not buying into any guilt trips about being a 5th-generation Texan, any more than I'd ever apologize for being a liberal and a Democrat.

[MBS]

15. "awakening them little by little "

Last edited Sat Nov 9, 2013, 09:27 AM - Edit history (1)

yeah, that's it. Wonderful attitude, and well said. Thanks! A friend of mine also points out that his vote counts more in his deeply red Southern state.

[SCantiGOP]

10. I was moved to SC when I was 9 months old

and I've been here more than 60 years. I have served as a local government manager, have attended several state Democratic conventions, my wife and I are very active Democrats in a county that votes 70% Republican and......................I have raised three children who are all strong Democrats and the two that are married have spouses who also vote Democratic.
This was the first state to secede and the last to rejoin the Union, so I expect it to be one of the last to abandon the Teanderathal bullshit, but I am proud that people sometimes refer to me as "And did you know he's a Democrat?" Besides, it's fun to interrupt people when they are complaining about Obama by telling them to relax because Hillary will fix all of that when she starts her 8 years in the White House.

[Missn-Hitch]

11. Good reads.

I am impressed with the calm and collected nature of some responses. I come from the "dominionist" mind set. I grew up around it and I am finished with it. Gated liberal community? Damn straight. I have lived half of my life surrounded by numbskullery. I have lost relationships with so-called friends and family members. I don't have the patience to discuss politics with tea bagger types. I feel exactly like John Doe's journal entry - I just want to throw up on them and laugh. Sorry but that is how I am feeling today. To those liberals living in the south, my hat is off to you as I bow. Have a great day!

[Brigid]

12. I've lived in the South before, for brief periods.

I just didn't like it. Beneath the thin veneer of "Southern charm" is often a certain nastiness that isn't hard to detect if you're paying attention and know what to look for (I do know, being from Indiana, sometimes known as the South Lite). The food is bad for my heart -- and my waistline. Football and NASCAR bore me. If I had kids, I would want them to get an education. I don't even like the climate. I can barely stand Indiana; I don't see myself living in the South.

[Missn-Hitch]

13. Ex-Hoosier as well. South Lite indeed.

[LiberalElite]

14. it's also kind of a

self-imposed gerrymandering on their part, no?

[MBS]

16. Thanks, everyone, for these thoughtful comments.

I've never lived in the deep south, but I have lived in red states, or in red areas of ostensibly "blue" states for much of my life. And it's because of that experience that I related to the talking-point-memo piece, and especially to the comment about "gated community liberalism". I've found that folks living in liberal bubbles can be really naive about what Dem politicians are up against when they run in "purple" or "red" states or districts, or when they run for national office. I've lived in those bubbles, too; it's comfortable living there, but you forget about the need for the kind conversation and (quoting the TPM piece) "constructive engagement" that nudges change forward.

[RainDog]

17. If African-Americans had stayed in the south

instead of immigrating to Chicago, New York, etc. during the 1st half of the 20th c, an entire cultural moment would not exist in our society - and that moment was the cultural emergence of African-Americans in literature and music and other arts - and the birth of 20th century American arts.

They had to leave in order to find jobs that paid enough to get out from under sharecropper peonage. Should they have stayed, as well?

Seems to me they did a good thing by leaving the south.

So, I guess I find it sort of... I dunno... straw person bashing to talk about liberal bubbles, etc. when people choose not to live among others whose values are abhorrent to them and, instead, choose to create another version of what's possible in this nation.

People move for jobs and opportunities. Many jobs and opportunities exist in cities, not in rural areas...in the south as well as anywhere else, but you really can't blame people for moving for job opportunities... unless you want to create straw people to knock down for being all uppity liberal and all.

And there's nothing "gated community liberalism" about choosing to live in places where there's more racial diversity, for instance, that is culturally enforced in a hundred different ways. When my next-door-neighbor is an African-American woman married to a white man, and my other neighbor is from Thailand, and another is a gay man living with his husband - in a not fancy middle-class community - I guess I don't get what's so "gated liberal" about that - it's the opposite, in fact.

That's living your liberal values.

People can vote with their feet, too, when they have options that create the life they want, as far as living their values are concerned.

[MBS]

18. I agree!

Last edited Sat Nov 9, 2013, 12:56 PM - Edit history (1)

But this article struck a chord with me because of years of hearing from friends or family the implied (but nevertheless strong) message that to be Cool one has to live in, say, San Francisco or Boston or New York, and that somehow one is deficient in ability or taste or intelligence or liberal values if you live anywhere else; and that the only worthwhile thinking comes from people who live in these places.
As if one always has the professional option to live where one wants.
As if there were no other place in the country that's nice to live. As if no one living anywhere else had anything important to say. As if there were no other place in the country where one could live a happy, full and worthy (and, yes, even Cool) life and find meaningful friendships, including political kindred spirits.

As someone who has lived in several of the Centers of Coolness, I'm also aware of the downside of living in some of those places.

I should also clarify that I don't consider "constructive engagement" to be a synonym for either compromise or surrender, but as an important tool to help us win the war. And I fully understand the near-impossibilityof any sort of "constructive engagement" with the Far Right in our country right now, at least in legislatures and Congress. "Constructive engagement" only works if both sides are truly willing to learn and to listen. And , to state the obvious, the Far Right is interested mainly in bullying, not in listening. The TPM writer mentioned the paradox that we seem to be putting more effort into engaging Iran than right-wing politicians in the South. Well, one reason that that's the case is that it's surely easier managing even the most delicate of international negotiations than dealing with our own far-right bullies !

Which makes me admire the patient educational efforts of Uncle Joe even more.

[RainDog]

19. The tea baggers don't want to compromise

...by this I mean those who are leading this movement. They want confrontation and disruption, which they achieve by constant lying. they use religion as the way to give their lies the sheen of respectability - because they appeal to people who have been taught lies about their religion.

I've been watching a series of documentaries about American history - and, honestly, it's amazing how pervasive this reactionary thinking has been in this nation. And it's always based upon (mostly) rural whites' fears of change and their religious beliefs.

This happens generation after generation. The topic of change may change, but the reactions are constant - it doesn't matter what the issue is, what matters is a fear that something changes.

the plutocrats in this nation keep people in constant fear through economic insecurity.

so, imo, the best way to deal with the reactionary right is to deal with issues that strengthen the social safety net and create a less fearful national climate, economically.

this is something, however, that never gets addressed because of politicians' fears that someone will accuse them of caring about the poor, etc...

politics suffers from the same problem as professional football, if you've followed the Incognito/Martin issue. esp. in the negative responses to Martin's view that he should not have to live with the shit the bullies think is just a part of life.

...so I'm a little cynical about the whole political thing, considering that both parties are more concerned with culture war issues than economic ones, too often, if those economic issues negatively impact the campaign financier class or show the least bit of compassion toward those less fortunate.

[Novel style]

20. it's hard to relocate

Its hard to move out when one's possessiins and relatives live in that place.

[Behind the Aegis]

21. This was a very good piece.

He brings up some great points. There a number of liberals (and those on the cusp just waiting to encounter a real liberal) who can and do affect change. It isn't always easy, to be sure. I find it disheartening that so-called liberals and progressives engage in "regionalism". How is a person responsible for their skin color? sexual orientation? sex? but we are responsible for our place of birth? Also, in another thread someone pondered why we have let Germany back into the fold. They did, after all, start TWO world wars and eliminate almost 90% of the Jews in Europe, yet... It isn't as if they don't have their issues with bigotry (ask anyone who is Turkish), yet when it comes to the South, it is always about the Civil War. Of course, I also can't believe there are people so stupid as to think the CW was fought over slavery.

[RainDog]

22. No one is blaming someone for their place of birth

What people are talking about are cultures. This nation has many cultural subsets.

Again, I am from the south. My family has been in this nation since they traveled down the rivers from Quebec - to settle in the south generations ago. The south has a specific culture. Some parts of it are great. Some are not. Different parts of the south have different cultures.

The reason the south is viewed through the prism of civil war is because the civil war wasn't over in the 1800s.

It was continued into the 20th century and beyond. The original and second iteration of the KKK came from the south, though by the 20th c., the klan spread to the midwest and west because of anti-immigration and prohibition support, as well as rejection of evolution as ungodly...

Anyway, the civil rights movement was part of the civil war - just in the cold war phase...well, one side wasn't shooting but the other was from the beginning. Shooting, firebombing, beating to death... Within the lifetime of John Lewis, who now serves in Congress and led the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, and took part in the Freedom Rides, and, thankfully, survived.

The voting record for the white south in particular indicates a general trend to attempt to side, politically, with the party that does not side with African-Americans... whichever party it may be.

I'm not sure what you were saying in your last remark. Are you repeating the right wing line that the civil war was not about slavery?

I would assume you are not - but it's not clear.

[Behind the Aegis]

23. I suggest you read more posts on DU in regards to the South.

I am from the South so I am quite aware of our wonderful parts and our warts. I also suggest you research racism throughout the US, the South doesn't corner the market nor is it the only one to use it to its own advantage.

The South will change when those with courage and integrity change it; it will not be changed by bigots who "tut-tut" it and do nothing but look down on it and cluck their tongues.

The Civil War was not solely about slavery and anyone who claims that is poorly educated on the CW.

[RainDog]

24. You are saying two different things

Initially you made an exclusive claim about the cause of the civil war, and then you modified it in this post to allow that, yes, slavery was the number one issue regarding the civil war for this nation.

It was important enough that the war was not ended until the Union made an amendment to the Constitution to stop slavery.

So, anyone who tries to diminish slavery as the issue of the civil war is engaging in revisionist history.

I am well aware of racism and the reality of political alignments for the south is the entire reason the Republican Party is ascendant there now.

To pretend otherwise is to lie to yourself.

edit to add... LOL. And to simply admit the Republican's Southern Strategy was and is a reality is engaging in "passive-aggressive" something or other and race baiting...oh the poor put-upon. No wonder you deleted that garbage.

What's interesting, and what gets ignored, is the reality that economic issues, not race ones, are, imo, the way to a better nation. But... no one on this thread wants to talk about that. It's all about putting uppity liberals in their place who dare to criticize conservatives.

[Behind the Aegis]

28. "What's interesting, and what gets ignored, is the reality that economic issues"

And there is the primary reason for the CW.

"It's all about putting uppity liberals in their place who dare to criticize conservatives. "

Regionalism...look it up.

[RainDog]

32. Ah. Slavery wasn't an economic issue

in some alternate universe.

I was referring to current problems, which I mention earlier on this thread, but, again, you will respond as you see fit.

and not realize how ridiculous your argument is.

so, nothing more to say, really.

best wishes to you.

[Behind the Aegis]

33. It was but ONE economic issue, not even the PRIMARY one.

But don't let history get in the way of your "facts."

You don't see how absurd your regionalistic nonsense is, so it is pointless as you have made it clear you are superior.

[RainDog]

34. LOL.

Last edited Sun Nov 10, 2013, 02:31 PM - Edit history (1)

If you think I'm stating I am superior in some way - again, that's just you misunderstanding and taking offense with anyone who talks about reality.

I shouldn't even bother to respond because your attacks are childish, but this article is especially worthwhile considering your misconceptions

http://www.salon.com/2013/03/16/the_south_still_lies_about_the_civil_war/

The South still lies about the Civil War

We pause here to note that wars are complex events whose causes can never be adequately summed up in a phrase, that they can start out as one thing and evolve into another, and that what people think they are fighting for isn’t always the cause history will record. Yet, as Lincoln noted in his second inaugural address, there was never any doubt that the billions of dollars in property represented by the South’s roughly four million slaves was somehow at the root of everything, and on this point scholars who don’t agree about much of anything else have long found common ground. “No respected historian has argued for decades that the Civil War was fought over tariffs, that abolitionists were mere hypocrites, or that only constitutional concerns drove secessionists,” writes University of Virginia historian Edward Ayers. Yet there’s a vast chasm between this long-established scholarly consensus and the views of millions of presumably educated Americans, who hold to a theory that relegates slavery to, at best, incidental status. How did this happen?

One reason boils down to simple convenience—for white people, that is. In his 2002 book “Race and Reunion,” Yale historian David Blight describes a national fervor for “reconciliation” that began in the 1880s and lasted through the end of World War I, fueled in large part by the South’s desire to attract industry, Northern investors’ desire to make money, and the desire of white people everywhere to push “the Negro question” aside. In the process, the real causes of the war were swept under the rug, the better to facilitate economic partnerships and sentimental reunions of Civil War veterans.

But an equally important reason was a vigorous, sustained effort by Southerners to literally rewrite history—and among the most ardent revisionists were a group of respectable white Southern matrons known as the United Daughters of the Confederacy.

...Former New York Times correspondent John Herbers is an old man now, living in retirement in Bethesda, Maryland, with his wife, Betty. but when he was growing up in Mississippi in the 1930s and 1940s, “the lost cause was one of the main themes my grandmother used to talk about: ‘slavery was nothing to do with the Civil War—we had a cotton economy and [the North] wanted to dominate us.’ It was an undisputed topic.” At the time, he accepted this version, as children do; today, he is struck by the vigilance with which adults in his world implanted this story in the minds of their children. “They pushed themselves to believe that,” he said. “If [the war] had anything to do with slavery, they had no ground to stand on.”

etc.

Seems that the leading historians of the civil war disagree with you, but they're just trying to act superior too, I guess... or uppity, by pretending slavery wasn't the issue whites defended and then denied the consequence of, and continue to do so to this day.

[Behind the Aegis]

35. LOL! Speaking of childish personal attacks...

If you think I'm stating I am superior in some way - again, that's just you misunderstanding and taking offense with anyone who talks about reality.

Yeah, just as I said.

Your little clip doesn't disprove a thing, except in your mind. Regionalism.

[RainDog]

36. Wow

So noting that no respectable scholar agrees with you is a childish personal attack.

Yeah. I've had enough of this nonsense.

[Behind the Aegis]

37. Wow you missed the point. Shocker!

Regionalism.

[Hoyt]

38. Articles of Secession from various states indicate CW was about slavery, hatred, human property.

[Arugula Latte]

26. Life's too short. Sorry, I'm staying on the left coast.

I've lived in landlocked places. Never again!

[Lobo27]

27. I know Texas is a mess, but it is a home I love dearly.

From birth to 18 I lived Mesquite, a suburb of Dallas, I really loved it there. College years were in Austin, and now I'm back in Dallas raising a family.

I suppose many stay because its home, and thats pretty much it. I don't support any of the GoP's policies here in the state and it pisses me off. I want change to come of course.

Then there are the Dallas Cowboys, Dallas Mavericks, Dallas Stars, Texas Rangers, ahhhh the love of sports. Yeah, I could support them from another state, but nothing like going to a home game.

[dem in texas]

31. Born in Texas, will Die Texas

I don't want to live up north where they talk funny!

[jsr]

39. Recommend

[alarimer]

42. The problem is no gerrymandering and voter suppression

In many cases, the voters want better representation, but they just can't get it.

It doesn't matter how many liberals move south as long as the R's hold the reins of power. They will retain that power indefinitely by cramming Democrats and minorities into as few districts as they can get away with.

I hate living in a red state. It is demoralizing being around people who wish I didn't exist, who HATE everything I stand for and consider me the devil because I am an atheist. Fuck that noise.

[struggle4progress]

43. I'm a Yankee by birth and temperament but have lived in more than a handful of states

and much of my life has been spent below the Mason-Dixon line

At one point, as a young liberal, I fled from Texas to the West Coast

Over a decade later, I finally ended up in North Carolina, where I have stayed many years

Exactly what one can accomplish depends on location, but how much one can accomplish may not depend much on location: almost anywhere, we only win our fights by doing the hard nuts-and-bolts work of organizing around concrete issues with concrete goals; and there's just no substitute for jingling phones and wearing out shoe leather on the streets

[MBS]

44. YES to that last paragraph! n/t

[treestar]

46. +1

Good on you and those who do that rather than demanding a revolution from some Messiah. This country can change peacefully, one vote at a time.

[treestar]

45. It is about rural vs. city

The liberals in red states tend to be in the cities. Even Boise Idaho. So I'd say all the South needs is more people and more cities, and with its weather, is likely to draw that. Florida and NC and VA already are getting bluer.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

47. I won't feel guilty about being a Texan.

Third generation Democrat, I and the parental units were active in the Harris County Democrats, led by Billie Carr and Frankie Carter Randolph. I've been a delegate to the State Democratic Convention more than once, so I've put in my time.

Then I moved to rural east Texas because I inherited the family historic home on two acres. The house has character and a very peaceful vibe because it's been here for about 130 years. Unfortunately I can't get any of my friends to come see me. They're busy working, or they can't afford gas, or their cars aren't reliable or whatever.

I got tired of the nutty drivers in Houston. But the Democrats have given up in this part of the state.

There are no county Dem organizations because the Democrats have been crushed. And has been pointed out in this thread, RWNJs are willfully ignorant. Even the college graduates.
Being different is bad. So I mind my own business and occasionally go to Houston when I need some culture and can't stand it anymore. Hotels & gas are expensive but I have to do it so I won't go completely nuts.

[tabbycat31]

48. I would revive the local Democrats

As a Democratic campaign staffer, I've given many people advice on how to get involved locally.

I'm sure there's at least 5 other people who have similar views to you and I would start a local coffee meetup about once a month. Goo luck and PM me if you need any tips