3 ms·

The internet isn't driving polarization to any meaningful degree. The polarization we see in the US is entirely a result of rural/urban polarization--rural area

The internet isn't driving polarization to any meaningful degree. The polarization we see in the US is entirely a result of rural/urban polarization--rural areas vote conservative, urban areas vote liberal. For a while these political differences shook out differently, but now there's a near-total overlap between political alignment and geography.

bilbo0s 10y ago
I see. But to the point of the article, what about the polarization that existed before the rural/urban divide? I mean we can go all the way back to slavery, and we still see great divisions recorded in our history. I think people naturally segregate themselves into, "tribes", for lack of a better word. The internet is just one, in a long line, of technologies being used to manifest these divisions. Long before the internet, we had the printing press. Even though we had the printing press and access to many, many books... the Bible was a good deal more popular in London than the Koran. And Uncle Tom's Cabin was far more popular in the Upper MidWest than in the South. My own opinion is that every technology can be used to make the world a little bit more personalized. The internet is just another one of those technologies. People are always segregating along multiple axes and dimensions. Urban/rural is only one. And not even the main one. For instance, the religious/non-religious axis is an important one right now. Add to that the fact that all of the different races are always segregating. Additionally, there is STARK segregation along the rich/poor axis. All of our technologies are being used to serve these divisions, but they are not CREATING the divisions in and of themselves. At least, that's my two cents.
- maldusiecle 10y ago
  Oh, sure. I don't believe the internet is doing nothing. It can accelerate certain tendencies. But it really does go both ways. I read a number of bloggers who I strenuously disagree with, for example. I read web forums for my hobbies that aren't as segregated politically as, for example, my neighborhood. As with most things, largescale demographic and economic changes matter more than "soft" cultural shifts. Or that's how I see it, anyway.

bilbo0s 10y ago

I see. But to the point of the article, what about the polarization that existed before the rural/urban divide? I mean we can go all the way back to slavery, and we still see great divisions recorded in our history. I think people naturally segregate themselves into, "tribes", for lack of a better word. The internet is just one, in a long line, of technologies being used to manifest these divisions. Long before the internet, we had the printing press. Even though we had the printing press and access to many, many books... the Bible was a good deal more popular in London than the Koran. And Uncle Tom's Cabin was far more popular in the Upper MidWest than in the South. My own opinion is that every technology can be used to make the world a little bit more personalized. The internet is just another one of those technologies. People are always segregating along multiple axes and dimensions. Urban/rural is only one. And not even the main one. For instance, the religious/non-religious axis is an important one right now. Add to that the fact that all of the different races are always segregating. Additionally, there is STARK segregation along the rich/poor axis. All of our technologies are being used to serve these divisions, but they are not CREATING the divisions in and of themselves. At least, that's my two cents.

maldusiecle 10y ago
Oh, sure. I don't believe the internet is doing nothing. It can accelerate certain tendencies. But it really does go both ways. I read a number of bloggers who I strenuously disagree with, for example. I read web forums for my hobbies that aren't as segregated politically as, for example, my neighborhood. As with most things, largescale demographic and economic changes matter more than "soft" cultural shifts. Or that's how I see it, anyway.