De-urbanisation - is it time to go back to the country?

[Unstoppable Empire of Doom]

Country living requires you work locally or have a job you can do remotely. Industrial jobs and the trades require larger volumes of people. Same with stores, the military, and universities. I tried the hour commute btw and after 2 years I can say it isn't worth it. The population is exploding anyways so in a few hundred years it will all be urbanised.

[Ifreann]

So let's picture this. Densely populated urban areas start emptying out because city-dwellers want to live in rural areas. But there's so many of them that everyone having 20 acres and living far apart in the countryside becomes impossible. So eventually the rural area becomes a suburb. And then everyone starves because there's no farmland, which means no food.

Fact: with arable land you can feed a family of four with two acres. Meat, eggs, dairy, fruits and vegetables. Two acres to eat better than most people in their tenements, stuffing themselves with preservatives and shelf stabilizers. Yummy yummy microwave meals.

You literally need one acre and decent soil to feed your family. No one is asking for 20 acres for every individual. Stop being dramatic because you got embarrassed. Literally every single family could have that, but even if it were a 60:40 or 80:20 split there is even more arable land. But thats not good for the consumerist machine and GDP so >>>:(

How long will the soil stay decent when you need to plant it all to grow enough food to avoid starvation?

[San Lumen]

So let's picture this. Densely populated urban areas start emptying out because city-dwellers want to live in rural areas. But there's so many of them that everyone having 20 acres and living far apart in the countryside becomes impossible. So eventually the rural area becomes a suburb. And then everyone starves because there's no farmland, which means no food.

Fact: with arable land you can feed a family of four with two acres. Meat, eggs, dairy, fruits and vegetables. Two acres to eat better than most people in their tenements, stuffing themselves with preservatives and shelf stabilizers. Yummy yummy microwave meals.

You literally need one acre and decent soil to feed your family. No one is asking for 20 acres for every individual. Stop being dramatic because you got embarrassed. Literally every single family could have that, but even if it were a 60:40 or 80:20 split there is even more arable land. But thats not good for the consumerist machine and GDP so >>>:(

Prove it because its simply not practical. Plus many people in urban areas don;t know how to farm.

Also I gave you the answer you wanted earlier so what is your basis for hating cities so much and making sweeping generalizations?

[Rezmaeristan]

The literal Roman Empire had an age expectancy similar to ours adjusted for infant mortality and war. Holy **** you guys.

Now that I think about it, it could work. We'd still have to have different people making different kinds of food, right? It would look something like the immediate pre-industrial era with huge cash crop farms driving the economy and the average family making a modest living off of the surplus from their farms. Doesn't sound so bad now I think about it. Then again, there's still population growth to consider.

[Outer Sparta]

The literal Roman Empire had an age expectancy similar to ours adjusted for infant mortality and war. Holy **** you guys.

I would actually love to see the whole life expectancy stats for rural Rome vs. urban Rome, poor vs. rich, etc.

[Novus America]

Not all of it, the Wyoming Valley is a mix of suburban areas with small urban-like cities, I.E. Wilkes-Barre and Scranton.

State College is in the middle of the state.

But south of I-80.

[Kowani]

The literal Roman Empire had an age expectancy similar to ours adjusted for infant mortality and war. Holy **** you guys.

Citation needed.

[Orostan]

Rezmaeristan is right though. Anything that is economically even slightly viable and is spread out enough to make it 'not a city' is going to end up looking like a suburb on sterioids.

Any kind of urbanization is inevitable. I mean, look at the rise of the Sumerians and their cities thousands of years ago.

Of course, but I was making a theoretical argument.

The literal Roman Empire had an age expectancy similar to ours adjusted for infant mortality and war. Holy **** you guys.

Do you have even one single fact to back up your claim?

[Novus America]

The literal Roman Empire had an age expectancy similar to ours adjusted for infant mortality and war. Holy **** you guys.

Citation needed.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra ... man_Empire
Seems that even adjusted for the high infant mortality (which is a bad thing) the life expectancy was late 50s. Which is still very poor by modern standards.

Meanwhile industrialization did improve life expectancy,
https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy

[Prydania]

How about we just let people live where they want? I don't know if I'd personally like living in a city, but that doesn't mean I want everyone else to come live out here with me.

Unacceptable. The ideologues who fetishize rural living won't be satisfied until they've screamed loud enough that everyone is forced to listen.

The whole anti-urban movement is fuelled by far right fear of any concentration of "liberalism." Simple as that.

[Sagarmatha]

Look at the abject lunacy that urbanites are taken over by. Against corporate welfare, wage slavery, and the supercapitalist machine? Must be a right-wing but job :^)

What level of Neoliberal corporate boot licking are you on, mate.

Citation needed.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra ... man_Empire
Seems that even adjusted for the high infant mortality (which is a bad thing) the life expectancy was late 50s. Which is still very poor by modern standards.

Meanwhile industrialization did improve life expectancy,
https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy

Late-50s to early-60s, yes, which is when you reach a what is known in modern medical science as a "death platuea" but that's neither here nor there, and rural folk can be expected to live comparable amounts of time to their urban counterparts.

Also, again, overpopulation is a conspiracy theory at best.

[Novus America]

Look at the abject lunacy that urbanites are taken over by. Against corporate welfare, wage slavery, and the supercapitalist machine? Must be a right-wing but job :^)

What level of Neoliberal corporate boot licking are you on, mate.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra ... man_Empire
Seems that even adjusted for the high infant mortality (which is a bad thing) the life expectancy was late 50s. Which is still very poor by modern standards.

Meanwhile industrialization did improve life expectancy,
https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy

Late-50s to early-60s, yes, which is when you reach a what is known in modern medical science as a "death platuea" but that's neither here nor there, and rural folk can be expected to live comparable amounts of time to their urban counterparts.

Also, again, overpopulation is a conspiracy theory at best.

Well sure the US has a low population density so is not at risk of overpopulation and rural areas can have good life expectancy.

If we are making and argument that rural areas are not inherently bad I am all for it.
But if we are making a more “back to the land” argument I am not in favor of that, except for those that wish to do so.

[Prydania]

Look at the abject lunacy that urbanites are taken over by. Against corporate welfare, wage slavery, and the supercapitalist machine? Must be a right-wing but job :^)

What level of Neoliberal corporate boot licking are you on, mate.

The right wing can be anti-capitalist, mate. Co-opting the left's economic initiatives and marrying it with intense nationalism and a fetishization of rural life and the "farmer" archetype is common among far right movements. Blood and soil as one example.

And I'm not keen on licking anyone's boots. I'm just big on the idea of personal liberty. That anyone should be able to live where and however they like. And for as many people as you can find who like to wax poetically about moving to "a small town"? There are plenty of others who enjoy the conveniences that come with living in an urban environment.
I grew up in a small town. I've lived that life. I've also lived in one small city and two big cities. Guess what? There are advantages to a rural environment. Maybe you don't care for them, and that's fine. I very much appreciate them, however, given how I didn't have access to many of them growing up in rural Ontario.

You want to live out in the country on an acre of land and be a subsistence farmer? You do you. I'm not going to tell you that you can't. Just don't try to tell me how I have to live, because guess what. You don't have the right. So get off your soapbox and focus on bettering your life rather than obsessing about everyone else's.

[Sagarmatha]

No one here is talking about forcing people into the wilderness or onto farms at gun point. I am however against the very anti-rural policies that exist. Again, the vey economic system of America makes it very difficult to just live without having to depend on corporations and urban environments. Corporate welfare, artificially inflated currency, intentional globalization. Neoliberals have been working for decades and decades to solidify the power of corporations and corporate interest and it had worked.

I want policies that make it easier to just pick up and go provide for myself and my family by my own hand, and also a cultural shift away from the socially ingrained prejudices people have against rural people.

[Orostan]

Look at the abject lunacy that urbanites are taken over by. Against corporate welfare, wage slavery, and the supercapitalist machine? Must be a right-wing but job :^)

What level of Neoliberal corporate boot licking are you on, mate.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra ... man_Empire
Seems that even adjusted for the high infant mortality (which is a bad thing) the life expectancy was late 50s. Which is still very poor by modern standards.

Meanwhile industrialization did improve life expectancy,
https://ourworldindata.org/life-expectancy

Late-50s to early-60s, yes, which is when you reach a what is known in modern medical science as a "death platuea" but that's neither here nor there, and rural folk can be expected to live comparable amounts of time to their urban counterparts.

Also, again, overpopulation is a conspiracy theory at best.

You are, at most, a particularly left wing reactionary. A completely de-urbanized and de-industrialized world, if it existed (it can't), would undeniably shorten life expectancy enormously, increase infant mortality by an incredible amount, and make quality of life nonexistent. Rural people can live as long as people who live in urban areas only because of the medicine and medical skill produced in urban areas and by industrial society.

[Orostan]

No one here is talking about forcing people into the wilderness or onto farms at gun point. I am however against the very anti-rural policies that exist. Again, the vey economic system of America makes it very difficult to just live without having to depend on corporations and urban environments. Corporate welfare, artificially inflated currency, intentional globalization. Neoliberals have been working for decades and decades to solidify the power of corporations and corporate interest and it had worked.

I want policies that make it easier to just pick up and go provide for myself and my family by my own hand, and also a cultural shift away from the socially ingrained prejudices people have against rural people.

In the socialist society I support you could go out into a random midwestern plain or whatever and do exactly that. Of course, you'd probably move back with everyone else once you almost die after getting a splinter.

[San Lumen]

No one here is talking about forcing people into the wilderness or onto farms at gun point. I am however against the very anti-rural policies that exist. Again, the vey economic system of America makes it very difficult to just live without having to depend on corporations and urban environments. Corporate welfare, artificially inflated currency, intentional globalization. Neoliberals have been working for decades and decades to solidify the power of corporations and corporate interest and it had worked.

I want policies that make it easier to just pick up and go provide for myself and my family by my own hand, and also a cultural shift away from the socially ingrained prejudices people have against rural people.

Define anti rural policy.

There is prejudice in rural areas towards urban like what your doing in this thread by generalizing all urban areas

[Sagarmatha]

AN you still need to go back and address my earlier posts before I'll deal with you.

Look at the abject lunacy that urbanites are taken over by. Against corporate welfare, wage slavery, and the supercapitalist machine? Must be a right-wing but job :^)

What level of Neoliberal corporate boot licking are you on, mate.



Late-50s to early-60s, yes, which is when you reach a what is known in modern medical science as a "death platuea" but that's neither here nor there, and rural folk can be expected to live comparable amounts of time to their urban counterparts.

Also, again, overpopulation is a conspiracy theory at best.

You are, at most, a particularly left wing reactionary. A completely de-urbanized and de-industrialized world, if it existed (it can't), would undeniably shorten life expectancy enormously, increase infant mortality by an incredible amount, and make quality of life nonexistent. Rural people can live as long as people who live in urban areas only because of the medicine and medical skill produced in urban areas and by industrial society.

I wasn't aware that lowering corporate welfarism and helping out rural folk meant we had to collectively mass murder doctors and scientists and memory-hole all our knowledge.

This is the prejudice I'm talking about. The equation of rural living with ignorance and backwardness.

[San Lumen]

AN you still need to go back and address my earlier posts before I'll deal with you.

You are, at most, a particularly left wing reactionary. A completely de-urbanized and de-industrialized world, if it existed (it can't), would undeniably shorten life expectancy enormously, increase infant mortality by an incredible amount, and make quality of life nonexistent. Rural people can live as long as people who live in urban areas only because of the medicine and medical skill produced in urban areas and by industrial society.

I wasn't aware that lowering corporate welfarism and helping out rural folk meant we had to collectively mass murder doctors and scientists and memory-hole all our knowledge.

This is the prejudice I'm talking about. The equation of rural living with ignorance and backwardness.

I did address it. This was my answer

There is less opportunity in small towns and rural communities. What do you want to do decentralize business and have Ralph Lauren for example have branch offices in every region of every state? Thats simply not practical.

Plus there is also economics of retail. Its not going to be profitable for Torneau to open a store in a small town in Missouri.

Is that what you call hyper capitalism

[Orostan]

You are, at most, a particularly left wing reactionary. A completely de-urbanized and de-industrialized world, if it existed (it can't), would undeniably shorten life expectancy enormously, increase infant mortality by an incredible amount, and make quality of life nonexistent. Rural people can live as long as people who live in urban areas only because of the medicine and medical skill produced in urban areas and by industrial society.

I wasn't aware that lowering corporate welfarism and helping out rural folk meant we had to collectively mass murder doctors and scientists and memory-hole all our knowledge.

This is the prejudice I'm talking about. The equation of rural living with ignorance and backwardness.

I said that with complete de-urbanization and de-industrialization you'd destroy quality of life by any measurement. Even if everyone just voluntarily chooses to destroy industrial society like that, how would a surgeon conduct surgery without tools or proper equipment? How would an astronomer do anything without a telescope? Knowledge like this is only useful if you can apply it to the real world.

[Prydania]

No one here is talking about forcing people into the wilderness or onto farms at gun point. I am however against the very anti-rural policies that exist. Again, the vey economic system of America makes it very difficult to just live without having to depend on corporations and urban environments. Corporate welfare, artificially inflated currency, intentional globalization. Neoliberals have been working for decades and decades to solidify the power of corporations and corporate interest and it had worked.

I want policies that make it easier to just pick up and go provide for myself and my family by my own hand, and also a cultural shift away from the socially ingrained prejudices people have against rural people.

Again, I grew up in a rural, small town environment. The "prejudices against rural people" thing doesn't really exist.
One of my friends in uni asked me if I had a tractor back home and that was it, really. And guess what? As undergrad uni students? We all shittalked each other. FFS that was hardly the most offensive thing a friend of mine has ever said to me

I can agree that I would like more support for rural communities, but "more support for rural communities" does not mean de-urbanization has to, or should, happen. Given how old the first cities are? Urbanization seems like a natural trend among human beings. People congregate in areas that are central to trade and commerce.

In short I'm perfectly willing to agree that we need more of a focus on helping our revitalize our rural communities but you know what? I'm not willing to go from that point to "we need to de-urbanize."

[Internationalist Bastard]

It’s really a matter of opinion
I like both city and country life

[Risottia]

Belgium has lots of rural communities.

1 out of 8 homes in Flanders isn't connect to a sewage system.

Spreading people out would take a hefty infrastructure investment, and I doubt people are willing foot part of the bill for that - especially in the United States.

Dear Lord --- where do the Flemings shit?

Into toilets connected to pipes that drain directly into the ground.
Talk about water table pollution.


Anyway, living in the countryside makes sense only for people who work in field and forests. Cities are much more efficient, especially about heating, transportation, and territory use.

[Sagarmatha]

I wasn't aware that lowering corporate welfarism and helping out rural folk meant we had to collectively mass murder doctors and scientists and memory-hole all our knowledge.

This is the prejudice I'm talking about. The equation of rural living with ignorance and backwardness.

I said that with complete de-urbanization and de-industrialization you'd destroy quality of life by any measurement. Even if everyone just voluntarily chooses to destroy industrial society like that, how would a surgeon conduct surgery without tools or proper equipment? How would an astronomer do anything without a telescope? Knowledge like this is only useful if you can apply it to the real world.

Who in here has at all brought up total de-urbanization and de-industrialization as a feasible or desirable policy or outcome? Put the strawman away and address the issues at hand, that there is an intense negative prejudice against rural people ingrained into our society, that urbanization has decidedly led to a reduction self-reliance, and that corporate lobbyists push the government to incentivize urban living because they want more workers.

[Prydania]

This is the prejudice I'm talking about. The equation of rural living with ignorance and backwardness.

And you know what? You've been spewing anti-urban prejudices this entire thread. Claiming cities are dens of drug use, that there are needles sticking out of gutters, that they're nothing but crime-ridden "hellworlds," and that urban people are wage-slaves and zombies.

You're self-righteously demanding everyone stop adhering to unfair stereotypes about rural people but you're more than willing to deal in unfair stereotypes about urban people. The parts of what you're advocating that I agree with (more of a focus on helping our rural communities) depend on mutual trust and understanding between urban and rural communities. Your hypocritical approach is a turnoff to anyone on the other side of the fence who might otherwise agree with you.

Sincerely,
Someone who grew up in a small town who enjoys the amenities of a big city