Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

FarCenter

(19,429 posts)
12. It limits the number of people you know well, wherever you are
Sun Dec 4, 2016, 12:25 PM
Dec 2016

In rural areas, the 150 people you know well and who influence you a lot are likely to live nearby. And you are likely to know more vaguely a fair proportion of people who live nearby.

In the city, the 150 people you know well and who influence you a lot are likely to live nearby as well, but they will be interspersed with a lot of people who you do not know at all. You may or may not know the people in adjacent apartments on the same floor, you likely don't know most of the people in the building, you probably don't know anyone in the building next on the street.

In both cases, you exist in a bubble of relationships with a limited number of people who influence your views.

Ultimately, who you are depends on your parents, schoolmates, teachers, co-workers, friends, etc. that you have close relationships with.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Not just social activity. It's the insane laws states are passing. LisaM Dec 2016 #1
yes, part of it is how strongly religion has a hold in rural areas Fast Walker 52 Dec 2016 #4
We're all constrained by Dunbar's number FarCenter Dec 2016 #2
I'm not sure I follow... are you saying that's more relevant to rural areas? Fast Walker 52 Dec 2016 #5
It limits the number of people you know well, wherever you are FarCenter Dec 2016 #12
ah yes, thanks Fast Walker 52 Dec 2016 #14
That's an important point SubjectiveLife78 Dec 2016 #7
Damn right. And I live *in* their bubble. dawg Dec 2016 #3
I certainly tend to agree with that... the problem is right now, with gerrymandering Fast Walker 52 Dec 2016 #6
The "system" if definitely rigged in the "their favor" but the other issue Cosmocat Dec 2016 #9
very true... it's hard to know what we can possibly even do to change that Fast Walker 52 Dec 2016 #15
yep Cosmocat Dec 2016 #8
I live in their bubble too Horse with no Name Dec 2016 #10
sounds about right.. Fast Walker 52 Dec 2016 #16
I wonder how many are on food stamps or other govt assistance. LenaBaby61 Dec 2016 #27
About 99% around here are on WIC (but that is a "benefit") Horse with no Name Dec 2016 #33
of course if the GOP cuts those benefits, will it change any of their minds about voting for Repubs? Fast Walker 52 Dec 2016 #35
They're not racists and homophobes, they're economically disenfranchised. NightWatcher Dec 2016 #11
um Skittles Dec 2016 #20
Geez, I thought the sarcasm thingee wasn't needed NightWatcher Dec 2016 #22
well I think a lot of them are indeed economically disadavantaged Skittles Dec 2016 #26
most rural people are just plain ignorant assholes gopiscrap Dec 2016 #13
My, my. Skidmore Dec 2016 #17
the point is Skittles Dec 2016 #19
Perhaps people Skidmore Dec 2016 #24
I think the subject here is repuke voters Skittles Dec 2016 #25
they don't visit big city solid blue areas either and they still vote democrat over an openly racist JI7 Dec 2016 #34
I'd rather be on my bubble than a racist bubble Skittles Dec 2016 #18
Of course. nt Quixote1818 Dec 2016 #21
Really is true. A lot of rural people have never been exposed to any minorities. hollowdweller Dec 2016 #23
IMO liberal guilt is being used against us renate Dec 2016 #28
"Conservatives don't feel guilty at all about failing to understand our point of view." Fast Walker 52 Dec 2016 #30
Interesting comments Lars39 Dec 2016 #29
Good transportation like that could change so much! Fast Walker 52 Dec 2016 #31
Sure could! Lars39 Dec 2016 #32
Well, LWolf Dec 2016 #36
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Rural voters live in thei...»Reply #12