5 ms·

I grew up on a farm. Farmers as a class are not stupid, at least no more so than any other group of people I've dealt with. They do have different interests and

I grew up on a farm. Farmers as a class are not stupid, at least no more so than any other group of people I've dealt with. They do have different interests and priorities than city dwelling people which tend to be better represented by traditionally conservative parties, but that is not an absolute. In Canada, historically, farmers were also responsible for the social credit movement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_credit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_credit). It's not a question of being educated/uneducated. It is a question of who is doing a better job of talking to them. "Urban elites" are just as ignorant when dealing with rural issues as farmers are when dealing with urban issues. It would be nice if more people were able to bridge the gap.

fifilura 2y ago
Yeah, I see farmers here in Europe as one of the most educated groups. They need to be educated in politics and economy in order to navigate all regulations and subsidies.
Ragnarork 2y ago
Thank you for saying that. I see this divide all the time, and I can't bear seeing this used time and time again to make the rural vs. the urban populations angry at each other, which in the end only detracts from trying to see how to make everything work together. I wish we'd be smarter and stopped just being condescending towards the other group. The only ones actively benefitting from this divide are not well-intentioned people in my mind.
- DFHippie 2y ago
  One elaboration on your point: the rural and urban populations aren't mirrors of each other. The urban population generally ignores the rural population. The rural population pays attention to (a select subset of) what is happening in the city. I think this is an inevitable consequence of population size and density. People are interested in people. The people who generate new culture -- who attract the interest of other people -- thrive in the cities. They have a bigger audience and a bigger community of fellow creatives. They find more variety. They have more to work with. So in both the city and the country people pay attention to what's happening in the city and ignore what's happening in the country. More is happening in the city and it is more interesting. This isn't everything that makes cities tend to differ in their values and politics from the country, but it's the hotbed malign demagogues exploit to empower themselves. They tell the country, "Hey, the city people don't respect you. They have contempt for your values. Their politics are the reason for your suffering. You are the real people. They are parasites. Be mad!" The country is primed to rise up. The city isn't. So the demagogues make the country hurt the city. Then the city is mad as well, at people who have genuinely hurt them, whereas the country was fooled into being mad at the city and striking the first blow. It isn't necessarily the case that the people in the country are dumber. They're just the ones primed for a fight. But the con artists are working over the country people, so from the city's perspective the country people are fools.
  - dcow 2y ago
    I appreciate your insight but this explanation seems overly simplified (or needlessly complicated). It’s very possible that the demagogues are seen for what they are irrespective of city vs country and people across the board don’t like having demagogues in power. You also can’t wash the city people clean for all the frankly hate and vitriol they spew at country folks. It’s not just demagogues.
- mschuster91 2y ago
  > I see this divide all the time, and I can't bear seeing this used time and time again to make the rural vs. the urban populations angry at each other, which in the end only detracts from trying to see how to make everything work together. Personally, I'd love to see more investment into rural and semi-rural areas to stop rural flight (because letting run that one unchecked is the cause for the housing prices in urban areas skyrocketing). The problem is, it's getting increasingly hard to justify spending money on these areas morally. In Germany, even over ten years ago when I worked in construction primarily in rural areas, outright nazism (like entering a bar and witnessing the bar shout the heil-salute including raising the arm) was already a thing, listening to the "Stammtisch" idiocy outright painful, and today it's even worse because this kind of opinion isn't just utter fringe any more, it's gotten political mainstream. When we're deciding to send money to rural areas, we're effectively rewarding "going fascist". Just behave deranged enough and you'll get everyone bending over.
epolanski 2y ago
> Farmers as a class are not stupid Yet in my lifetime I have seen them consistently go or vote against their own interests (see Brexit which absolutely gutted British farmers which overwhelmingly voted against "evil EU rules").
- defrost 2y ago
  The difference between UK farmers voting numbers for Brexit and the general UK population voting numbers for Brexit was ~ 1% .. within the margin of error and shows that farmers overall voted much as the general UK population did. Given the smaller absolute number of farmers, their vote carried less significant weight than many other blocs. ~ https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fvxefahzanu1e1.jpeg https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fv... ~ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S074301671930436X https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S074301671... Face it, the UK population as a whole voted against their own interests, there's no justification to single out UK farmers as being somehow different to the UK population and more deserving of blame.
  - epolanski 2y ago
    > and shows that farmers overall voted much as the general UK population did. Against their own interest.
    - rfrey 2y ago
      Sure, but your parent's point is that they did so no more or less than the general population. This is in response to the assertion that farmers are especially stupid.
    - phpnode 2y ago
      yes, just like almost every other group that voted for it. It's wrong to single out farmers for this.
  - tsimionescu 2y ago
    That only matters if Brexit was about as bad for the direct personal interests of farmers as it was for the average Brit. If farmers had it far worse after Brexit than the average Brit, then it means farmers were especially dumb for voting against their own interests.
fuzzy_biscuit 2y ago
I know I'm being pedantic, but the parent comment said 'uneducated', not stupid, and while it's certainly true that some use those interchangeably, I do not see them as such.
- dcow 2y ago
  In any event, the GP’s comment still holds. The narrative that Trump is just a populist for the uneducated masses is really really… toxic.
  - flowerlad 2y ago
    Toxic? Let’s review: US withdrawal from Climate Agreement, vaccine sceptic being made secretary of health, US alienating Europe, proposed ethnic cleansing of Gaza, lying about who started the Ukraine war. Cutting funds to USAID. Threatening to take Greenland by force. Threatening to annex Canada. Proclaiming himself to be King. Constantly "joking" about third term. Does any of this seem toxic to you? Would educated people support these actions?

fifilura 2y ago

Yeah, I see farmers here in Europe as one of the most educated groups. They need to be educated in politics and economy in order to navigate all regulations and subsidies.

Ragnarork 2y ago

Thank you for saying that. I see this divide all the time, and I can't bear seeing this used time and time again to make the rural vs. the urban populations angry at each other, which in the end only detracts from trying to see how to make everything work together. I wish we'd be smarter and stopped just being condescending towards the other group. The only ones actively benefitting from this divide are not well-intentioned people in my mind.

DFHippie 2y ago
One elaboration on your point: the rural and urban populations aren't mirrors of each other. The urban population generally ignores the rural population. The rural population pays attention to (a select subset of) what is happening in the city. I think this is an inevitable consequence of population size and density. People are interested in people. The people who generate new culture -- who attract the interest of other people -- thrive in the cities. They have a bigger audience and a bigger community of fellow creatives. They find more variety. They have more to work with. So in both the city and the country people pay attention to what's happening in the city and ignore what's happening in the country. More is happening in the city and it is more interesting. This isn't everything that makes cities tend to differ in their values and politics from the country, but it's the hotbed malign demagogues exploit to empower themselves. They tell the country, "Hey, the city people don't respect you. They have contempt for your values. Their politics are the reason for your suffering. You are the real people. They are parasites. Be mad!" The country is primed to rise up. The city isn't. So the demagogues make the country hurt the city. Then the city is mad as well, at people who have genuinely hurt them, whereas the country was fooled into being mad at the city and striking the first blow. It isn't necessarily the case that the people in the country are dumber. They're just the ones primed for a fight. But the con artists are working over the country people, so from the city's perspective the country people are fools.
- dcow 2y ago
  I appreciate your insight but this explanation seems overly simplified (or needlessly complicated). It’s very possible that the demagogues are seen for what they are irrespective of city vs country and people across the board don’t like having demagogues in power. You also can’t wash the city people clean for all the frankly hate and vitriol they spew at country folks. It’s not just demagogues.
mschuster91 2y ago
> I see this divide all the time, and I can't bear seeing this used time and time again to make the rural vs. the urban populations angry at each other, which in the end only detracts from trying to see how to make everything work together. Personally, I'd love to see more investment into rural and semi-rural areas to stop rural flight (because letting run that one unchecked is the cause for the housing prices in urban areas skyrocketing). The problem is, it's getting increasingly hard to justify spending money on these areas morally. In Germany, even over ten years ago when I worked in construction primarily in rural areas, outright nazism (like entering a bar and witnessing the bar shout the heil-salute including raising the arm) was already a thing, listening to the "Stammtisch" idiocy outright painful, and today it's even worse because this kind of opinion isn't just utter fringe any more, it's gotten political mainstream. When we're deciding to send money to rural areas, we're effectively rewarding "going fascist". Just behave deranged enough and you'll get everyone bending over.

epolanski 2y ago

> Farmers as a class are not stupid Yet in my lifetime I have seen them consistently go or vote against their own interests (see Brexit which absolutely gutted British farmers which overwhelmingly voted against "evil EU rules").

defrost 2y ago
The difference between UK farmers voting numbers for Brexit and the general UK population voting numbers for Brexit was ~ 1% .. within the margin of error and shows that farmers overall voted much as the general UK population did. Given the smaller absolute number of farmers, their vote carried less significant weight than many other blocs. ~ https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fvxefahzanu1e1.jpeg https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fv... ~ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S074301671930436X https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S074301671... Face it, the UK population as a whole voted against their own interests, there's no justification to single out UK farmers as being somehow different to the UK population and more deserving of blame.
- epolanski 2y ago
  > and shows that farmers overall voted much as the general UK population did. Against their own interest.
  - rfrey 2y ago
    Sure, but your parent's point is that they did so no more or less than the general population. This is in response to the assertion that farmers are especially stupid.
  - phpnode 2y ago
    yes, just like almost every other group that voted for it. It's wrong to single out farmers for this.
- tsimionescu 2y ago
  That only matters if Brexit was about as bad for the direct personal interests of farmers as it was for the average Brit. If farmers had it far worse after Brexit than the average Brit, then it means farmers were especially dumb for voting against their own interests.

fuzzy_biscuit 2y ago

I know I'm being pedantic, but the parent comment said 'uneducated', not stupid, and while it's certainly true that some use those interchangeably, I do not see them as such.

dcow 2y ago
In any event, the GP’s comment still holds. The narrative that Trump is just a populist for the uneducated masses is really really… toxic.
- flowerlad 2y ago
  Toxic? Let’s review: US withdrawal from Climate Agreement, vaccine sceptic being made secretary of health, US alienating Europe, proposed ethnic cleansing of Gaza, lying about who started the Ukraine war. Cutting funds to USAID. Threatening to take Greenland by force. Threatening to annex Canada. Proclaiming himself to be King. Constantly "joking" about third term. Does any of this seem toxic to you? Would educated people support these actions?