Quo Vadis, Democrats?

[Razgovory]

IMO a stronger claim would be to reverse the direction of causation: that big cities with high Ginis vote Democrat because the working class in the cities can see more closely and first-hand the shenanigans the super rich get up to.  You could call it say, the Mamdani Effect.  That gives you the exact same correlation . . .

Or alternatively they can see first hand all the nice things rich people can buy and envy them.

Or alternatively, the affluent professionals that make up a good portion of the population justify their wealth by voting left as a sort of Noblesse Oblige.  It wasn't he very poor who voted for Mamdani, it was the affluent professionals.  Perhaps envy played a part, but by the middle and the upper middle envying the very top.

[Josquius]

https://www.newsweek.com/how-blue-states-came-represent-inequality-red-states-middle-class-opinion-1703951 

https://www.axios.com/2018/06/05/income-inequality-blue-red-districts

Cause it is?

Try fitting a line through that Axios chart - can't get a good linear fit. Basically it's a flat line until you get all the way to the left, and then it curls up.

So what does that tell you?  What we already knew - big cities have higher Gini and big cities vote blue
High points on the chart are:  Philly (PA-2), Lower Manhattan+Brooklyn (NY-10), South Miami (FL-27), Chicago (Il-7). Highest red district: TX-07 (Houston)

Why do cities have high Ginis?  Because they don't residentially sort by class.  Very rich and very poor live near each other.  Compare say to a typical suburb where there can be effective class redlining.  Expensive school districts (with higher property tax) keep out the poor and even the regular middle classes, who get pushed out into less affluent burbs.

So if the claim is that big cities *create* inequality or that "Democrat policies" do so, a lot more evidence is going to required to support that claim.  The Axios chart doesn't cut it.

IMO a stronger claim would be to reverse the direction of causation: that big cities with high Ginis vote Democrat because the working class in the cities can see more closely and first-hand the shenanigans the super rich get up to.  You could call it say, the Mamdani Effect.  That gives you the exact same correlation . . .

As I said it's a pretty modern development that inequality is higher in a handful of cities than more rural areas.

It's not so modern that these cities tend to vote democrat.

I'd say the cause and causation is more democratic policies create conditions that attract tech business which by their very nature (winner takes most, employee numbers don't scale with size of  business, high salaries for a few) lead to high inequality numbers.

[Admiral Yi]

Another thing to consider Joan, is if your model of inequality distress is true, then it becomes a local issue, not a national one.

[Solmyr]

It will be longer than 20-30 years. Democracy is a fragile thing, a flash in the history of humankind.

Yeah, I don't think we have a benchmark to be honest. Has a proper Western democracy fallen to authoritarianism due to internal politics (as opposed to invasion)?

If there are any history nerds on this forum I'd be interested in hearing their takes. Obviously there are a whole bunch of no-true-Scotsman fallacy potential here, but even so I think it'd be instructive to compare the similarities and points of distinction.  I'd also be interested in looking at any democracies that slid into authoritarianism more or less on their own, and then turned back into liberal democracies.

Weimar Germany?

[Sheilbh]

Yeah, I don't think we have a benchmark to be honest. Has a proper Western democracy fallen to authoritarianism due to internal politics (as opposed to invasion)?

If there are any history nerds on this forum I'd be interested in hearing their takes. Obviously there are a whole bunch of no-true-Scotsman fallacy potential here, but even so I think it'd be instructive to compare the similarities and points of distinction.  I'd also be interested in looking at any democracies that slid into authoritarianism more or less on their own, and then turned back into liberal democracies.

I think it slightly depends what we mean by "Western democracy".

I think the ones that, to me, seem to echo the US are Latin America. I don't know if that's because of aspects of the American experience that are distinctive or that they also tend to be Presidential republics with divided institutions and checks and balances etc (often explicitly modeled on the US constitution). But to me those are the ones that echo - even some of the oligarchic angles of effective fusion of personal and public interests.

[Norgy]

Is there a Western democracy and world order anymore? 

I would say no. This is new. This is unknown to all of us.

The Democrats were also quite soft-handed on what became the oligarchs of America.

Get money out of politics.

The Democratic party of today is not something like Roosevelt's New Deal coalition, it is a shitty version of a big tent that probably leaks when rain comes.
Charles Schumer looks like he is surprised every time something goes wrong, and dons his reading glasses, and says something so inane, you would not think it possible.

[crazy canuck]

IMO a stronger claim would be to reverse the direction of causation: that big cities with high Ginis vote Democrat because the working class in the cities can see more closely and first-hand the shenanigans the super rich get up to.  You could call it say, the Mamdani Effect.  That gives you the exact same correlation . . .

Or alternatively they can see first hand all the nice things rich people can buy and envy them.

What a wonderful world

[crazy canuck]

Is there a Western democracy and world order anymore? 

I would say no. This is new. This is unknown to all of us.

The Democrats were also quite soft-handed on what became the oligarchs of America.

Get money out of politics.

The Democratic party of today is not something like Roosevelt's New Deal coalition, it is a shitty version of a big tent that probably leaks when rain comes.
Charles Schumer looks like he is surprised every time something goes wrong, and dons his reading glasses, and says something so inane, you would not think it possible.

No Western democracy?  What you talking about about Willis?

[grumbler]

Yeah, I don't think we have a benchmark to be honest. Has a proper Western democracy fallen to authoritarianism due to internal politics (as opposed to invasion)?

If there are any history nerds on this forum I'd be interested in hearing their takes. Obviously there are a whole bunch of no-true-Scotsman fallacy potential here, but even so I think it'd be instructive to compare the similarities and points of distinction.  I'd also be interested in looking at any democracies that slid into authoritarianism more or less on their own, and then turned back into liberal democracies.

Japan in the 1930s. Chile in 1973. I'd argue Weimar Germany was not yet a proper Western Democracy wen Hitler overthrew it.

[grumbler]

Maybe all the nice things will trickle down to them.

They would vote Republican then, because if taxes are cut enough, everyone will have a yacht.

[mongers]

If however, large numbers of Americans vote with their feet and protest against these power-grabs, both on a national and local level, there's a very good chance the 'authorities' and their willing foot-soldiers will start beating or killing them.

I"ve seen a clip of a cop beating a protestor who was fighting them.  A bunch more protestors punching cops and getting punched back is not going to do anything.

Not the normal rough tumble of street protest, I talking about something like the Maiden square or for that matter Jan6th levels of violence.

As you could well infer from the tenor of my post.

[mongers]

Yeah, I don't think we have a benchmark to be honest. Has a proper Western democracy fallen to authoritarianism due to internal politics (as opposed to invasion)?

If there are any history nerds on this forum I'd be interested in hearing their takes. Obviously there are a whole bunch of no-true-Scotsman fallacy potential here, but even so I think it'd be instructive to compare the similarities and points of distinction.  I'd also be interested in looking at any democracies that slid into authoritarianism more or less on their own, and then turned back into liberal democracies.

Japan in the 1930s. Chile in 1973. I'd argue Weimar Germany was not yet a proper Western Democracy wen Hitler overthrew it.

with trump as a less retiring, bad tempered mikado?

[Josquius]

Honestly you don't see any difference in London - that photo's Oxford Street (admittedly not a cornucopia of delights but still, central). But it's similar in Soho or Chelsea or anywhere else I've been.

I think it's outsourcing and our general lack of design codes while Europe tends to be quite strict on that I think. But I think it is all part of a wider process - which includes low level crime - of making the public sphere hostile for people, which, I think, forecloses any possibility of social politics.

Edit: On Europe I mainly disagree but it slightly depends where. I went to Germany 3 times last year to different areas and will be going back next month. I hadn't been in years and I was genuinely shocked at how rundown everything seemed. In terms of street furniture, trains, public transport in cities - but also just things like the number of people on the streets who seemed to be going through some sort of visible crisis. I would say where I was (mainly Frankfurt and Berlin) were worse than the areas of London or Liverpool that I know. It was really surprising because not how I remember Germany but also not what I expected in comparison with, say, Poland or France.

Surprised they'd let Oxford Street be like so. Thats meant to be a posh area right?
Here for sure you walk around in a neighbourhood which is ranked top 1,000/33,000 for poverty in the UK and you can tell the streets are a serious state whilst nicer areas (10% least deprived in the country) and they're a lot more put together. Feels like a different country almost.

For Europe being little better....yes Berlin sucks with this too. Berlin is even worse than the UK for accessibility. Its an absolute horror show trying to get a pushchair around.
Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland are the places I've been since covid so they're standing in for the better world here and the other two don't seem to have this problem- though Switzerland definitely has issues with graffiti all over and 'marginals'.

A friend of mine works for the city over there and he says apparently things have gotten drastically worse in the past few years (from what I felt was already a very low point). It used to be there was one public square (just a horrid giant expanse of concrete, one corner of which had a market sometimes. ) where they gathered with a special area set up just for them but now works are happening there (to try and make it nice I think) they've scattered everywhere.
Its a known thing in Lausanne if you want drugs you just speak to a  black guy at one of the major bus stops (which must suck for regular black guys catching a bus).

Dutch pavements have quite an online following these days. And they do buck my expectations that stones suck and tarmac is better. e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cq1kV6V_jvI

[grumbler]

with trump as a less retiring, bad tempered mikado?

More like the tech bros playing the role of the Japanese army leadership.

[garbon]

Surprised they'd let Oxford Street be like so. Thats meant to be a posh area right?

No.