Quantcast

POTUS Election '24...you heard it here first!

  • Come enter the Ridemonkey Secret Santa!

    We're kicking off the 2024 Secret Santa! Exchange gifts with other monkeys - from beer and snacks, to bike gear, to custom machined holiday decorations and tools by our more talented members, there's something for everyone.

    Click here for details and to learn how to participate.

Toshi

butthole powerwashing evangelist
Oct 23, 2001
39,812
8,795
I can’t help but think the divide between urban and rural life is a huge part of the divide
 

mandown

Poopdeck Repost
Jun 1, 2004
21,882
9,176
Transylvania 90210
Well I’m not gonna deck it. I made my decision and I don’t need to see anymore monkey nipples.
 
I was listening to this podcast and thinking about issues being noted here that drive people’s voting habits. I can’t help but think the divide between urban and rural life is a huge part of the divide and the traditions and culture of the past as each evolved have shaped the mindsets of modern voters (consciously or by exposure). Not unlike the religious splits in the chart I posted previously

Let’s talk about the notion of scarcity a bit, but let’s bring it into at least the 19th and then 20th and 21st centuries. In chapter 12 of your book, which is called — it’s a good title, “Malady of Infinite Aspiration” — you write, “For as long as people have congregated in cities, their ambitions have been molded by a different kind of scarcity from that which shapes those of subsistence farmers, a form of scarcity articulated in the language of aspiration, jealousy, and desire rather than of absolute need. And for the most part,” you write, “this kind of relative scarcity is the spur to work long hours, to climb the social ladder, and to keep up with the Joneses.”

SUZMAN: I suppose the way to make sense of it is to get a sense of what came before it, or the difference between cities and countryside, first of all. Everybody in rural areas was involved in effectively creating, generating, and acquiring the energy we needed to live, grow, and reproduce. That was what they spent their working lives on. Within cities, by contrast, people spent their energy and time using that energy provided by people in the countryside. The move to cities was this massive act of liberation in a sense. People were suddenly no longer tied to the process of securing the energy they needed to feed themselves, to reproduce. And it resulted in this extraordinary proliferation of jobs. It also transformed the way people constituted value, and saw themselves in relation to other people.

View attachment 219633
Prior to cities, the "process of securing the energy they needed to feed themselves" tended to take less than four hours a day.
 

mykel

closer to Periwinkle
Apr 19, 2013
5,496
4,219
sw ontario canada
I don’t believe that a blanket statement can be made in that regard. It would have varied greatly due to seasonal weather, drought, health of any crops, or what they gathered. Just a counterpoint.
I remember looking this up for one of the kids projects. Medieval peasants worked sun up to sundown during planting and harvesting, but only 3-6 hours a day in the off season. FWIW.
 
I don’t believe that a blanket statement can be made in that regard. It would have varied greatly due to seasonal weather, drought, health of any crops, or what they gathered. Just a counterpoint.
I remember looking this up for one of the kids projects. Medieval peasants worked sun up to sundown during planting and harvesting, but only 3-6 hours a day in the off season. FWIW.
Read The Dawn of Everything by David Graeber and David Wengrow.

Caution: it's 600 pages.
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
56,048
22,077
Sleazattle
Read The Dawn of Everything by David Graeber and David Wengrow.

Caution: it's 600 pages.

The book "Work" similarly covers this subject. A chapter was also dedicated in the very interesting book "Sapiens".

Some scholars argue that the move towards agriculture was driven by the addiction to alcohol, as argues in the book "Drunk".


I may need to read less.

People were also healthier as they had more balanced diets not relying on a single staple, suffered less from single crop failures, and had fewer diseases as higher population density was required for labor. Agriculture also led to inequality through social strata. Women were turned into baby machines to produce labor and to recover the higher death rates.

Humans basically enslaved themselves.
 
Last edited:

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,759
2,741
Pōneke
The book "Work" similarly covers this subject. A chapter was also dedicated in the very interesting book "Sapiens".

Some scholars argue that the move towards agriculture was driven by the addiction to alcohol, as argues in the book "Drunk".


I may need to read less.

People were also healthier as they had more balanced diets not relying on a single staple, suffered less from single crop failures, and had fewer diseases as higher population density was required for labor. Agriculture also led to inequality through social strata. Women were turned into baby machines to produce labor and to recover the higher death rates.

Humans basically enslaved themselves.
Yes, this matches my understanding.
 

eric strt6

Resident Curmudgeon
Sep 8, 2001
24,437
15,214
directly above the center of the earth
from the right wing bleachers: (they are fucking nuts)

 

Avy

Turbo Monkey
Jan 24, 2006
1,414
467
rideit,have you seen the Harris speak on 60 min,chopped to all hell,the View? Even a simple softball question as to would she have done Anything different than Biden If She was President? No.

She has No Platform,or even a proper response,like Trump,to how she will Handle what she wants to implement? I could go on and on about her in CA,but I want to stay on track.

You must see my utter frustration,like you with Trump regarding this sad sad women. Obama,Shumer and Pelosi had the final say on her and they basically had no choice. She would have never been there otherwise. Like in CA,right place,right time. So here we are.

Last,I am speaking to rideit,so please refrain from acting like his Mother until he responds to me.

Avy
 

DaveW

Space Monkey
Jul 2, 2001
11,633
3,137
The bunker at parliament

Brian HCM#1

Don’t feed the troll
Sep 7, 2001
32,235
381
Bay Area, California
"Totally predictable" - anyone paying attention.
So why did Putin attack Ukraine under Biden and not Trump? Surely if Putin had Trump in his back pocket he would have done it between 2017-2020 right? Why did Putin attack Ukraine immediately after the Biden administration including Kamala met with him? You keep believing this and yet no proof. No new wars started under Trump, 2 under the current administration. Kinda says it all, don't it?
 

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
21,860
7,109
borcester rhymes
So why did Putin attack Ukraine under Biden and not Trump? Surely if Putin had Trump in his back pocket he would have done it between 2017-2020 right? Why did Putin attack Ukraine immediately after the Biden administration including Kamala met with him? You keep believing this and yet no proof. No new wars started under Trump, 2 under the current administration. Kinda says it all, don't it?
Bullshit!
 

Nick

My name is Nick
Sep 21, 2001
24,934
16,541
where the trails are
Putin invaded Ukraine under Obama, not Biden, via Crimea and Donbas. You don't even understand the fundamentals of what you're arguing.

2 wars? Because Trump, Putin and Netanyahu are all in league with each other. 100%.
Dictators like these guys sow unrest BECAUSE those who oppose them are in positions of power/leadership.

Removing the false sense of security is a way to manipulate people.
 

6thElement

Schrodinger's Immigrant
Jul 29, 2008
17,276
14,756
I thought senile Biden was president of Murica, why is it his fault what other countries do?
 

boostindoubles

Nacho Libre
Mar 16, 2004
8,432
6,998
Yakistan
Do you also think god is going to fix climate change and save humanity?

So why did Putin attack Ukraine under Biden and not Trump? Surely if Putin had Trump in his back pocket he would have done it between 2017-2020 right? Why did Putin attack Ukraine immediately after the Biden administration including Kamala met with him? You keep believing this and yet no proof. No new wars started under Trump, 2 under the current administration. Kinda says it all, don't it?
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
56,048
22,077
Sleazattle
So why did Putin attack Ukraine under Biden and not Trump? Surely if Putin had Trump in his back pocket he would have done it between 2017-2020 right? Why did Putin attack Ukraine immediately after the Biden administration including Kamala met with him? You keep believing this and yet no proof. No new wars started under Trump, 2 under the current administration. Kinda says it all, don't it?

It required Trump weakening NATO to set the pre conditions for the war and delaying the attack to later in the Biden administration would have Russia in a weaker position.
 
Last edited: