“Are Blue State People Elitist?,” by Jason

Of course, I’m speaking in generalities.


From an economic and social development standpoint, these widening cleavages have long been evident. People in blue-state America live longer than their red-state counterparts. They are less likely to live in poverty, more likely to have access to health care, less likely to die from gun violence, more likely to be members of a union, and more likely to be vaccinated against Covid-19. In red-state America, family income is lower, and so too is economic productivity.

Then why is everyone leaving blue states? Blue states also include urban enclaves like Chicago where surely everything isn’t going so great. The trend has been toward moving toward the Sunbelt for as long as I can remember, lol.

Blue metro areas that are the engines of economic growth for their states are increasingly at odds with the poorer, more culturally conservative red counties that surround them.

Hmmm. This is funny.

It’s worth asking: How much longer will economically vibrant and culturally diverse blue-state America be willing to subsidize its red-state brethren, particularly as the latter try to impose their extremist views on guns and religion to women’s rights?

You just can’t get MORE SNOBBY than this, lol. O.K., we don’t want to SUBSIDIZE those darn poor Blacks, White trash, rednecks, ha ha. What is this? THE JERRY SPRINGER SHOW? 😆

It’s in the recent abortion decision that we can best see the outlines of a true national crack-up. There are many ways to think about the Supreme Court’s reckless and legally dubious decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, but at its core, the Dobbs case and abortion in general is an issue of human rights.

It’s about bodily autonomy and whether women have the right to make their own decisions about when or whether they have children. Women who have the misfortune of living in red-state America are now in effect second-class citizens stripped of their most basic reproductive freedoms.

The freedom to be HOES and then make offspring pay by KILLING THEM? How much is REALLY stuff threatening the mom’s life?

How many pro-choice blue-state parents will decide against sending their daughters to universities in red-state America? Parents of trans or LGBTQ children are already asking these questions.

And how much of the population are they a percentage of even in just the blue states? Is it wrong to say this stuff is freakish? That’s the core problem.

I won’t deny the rightwing can be full of shit also. I grew up in the South. You’re telling me there was no Jim Crow and slavery, or at least it wasn’t that bad? Come on? You gotta be kidding me!

As unimaginable as it might have seemed then, on this Fourth of July, America is in even worse shape: more divided and more polarized, and there is little reason to expect that we will come together any time soon.

And if the South leaves, will the North try to STOP THEM AGAIN? Nah, JUST KIDDING, 😆

Please follow and like us:

20 thoughts on ““Are Blue State People Elitist?,” by Jason”

  1. I certainly WOULDN’T “try to stop them”. This would be an infinitely more politically, socially, and culturally advanced country – far more equitable and democratic – if the Confederacy were finally removed from it. And no, it’s not “snobby” to note that more productive and advanced blue states (e.g. California, Massachusetts, New York etc.) DO subsidize such backwater shitholes as Kentucky, Mississippi, Alabama etc. – it’s actual well-documented empirical REALITY!

    1. Hey Tom, I agree with you completely! I’m a blue stater myself. You’re from New York, right?

      1. Yes I’m on the Upper West Side of Manhattan living with cultural workers, arts professionals, academics and medical workers, far preferable to the “White trash and rednecks” celebrated above. None of my neighbors view abortion as the “freedom to be HOES who make offspring pay by KILLING THEM.” Just disgusting how many people “think” like this.

        1. Thanks. I’m coming from the same place, actually.

          You’re Jewish, right? That’s ok. We are Jew-friendly here. My longest relationship was with a Jewish woman. I was even going to convert! Good Lord, what got into me?

          On the other hand, as we are a Left blog, we are pretty dubious of Zionism. I have been talking to a hard Left Jewish professor from Tel Aviv lately and he has some reasonable views about how to possibly solve this. He also blames Hamas for a lot of the deterioration.

          I told him that the Palestinian resistance sees him as a “settler” and therefore a target to be killed and that although I didn’t know him, I liked him enough after my brief exposure to NOT support him being killed for being a “settler.” For God’s sake!

          That said, the Israeli side is acting awful these days too and for ages prior. But the Palestinians have been full-blown terrorists from Day One. And quite a few Palestinians ARE antisemites, not that Jews don’t make that accusation too promiscuously. But maybe some folks have reasons to be paranoid. I was in with some PFLP people (Palestinian Marxists) and even they were damned anti-Semitic. It was really discouraging. On the other hand, the Jews hate Arabs. Well, I guess if someone was trying to kill me, I might hate them too.

          I almost wish they had better weapons so they could target military targets and fight a cleaner war. But I’m not sure they even want to do that.

          Really, it all seems so hopeless on both sides.

          I founded a Left movement called the Alternative Left. We addressed the Jewish Question. “Cultural critique is fine for any group, but obsessive and conspiratorial antisemitism is not a Left value.”

          That is still my position. In addition to being bad for the Jews, a lot of antisemites are flat out raving nutballs. Sometimes I think that kind of antisemitism should be in the DSM. Not that I don’t mind a little “watercooler antisemitism,” but Hell, everyone does that, even Jews and Judeophiles: “Jews are aggressive, rude, obnoxious, materialistic, etc.” Anyway most other ethnic groups are stereotyped too. Most of the time, it’s pretty harmless.

  2. I’ve even read about Atlanta snobbery towards surrounding areas on City Data.

    Been watching a show on states for the 4th.

    Cali is cool but uses way to much water. More than enough to put New Jersey in a foot of water each year. They are Mexican food snobs. A chick from Compton didn’t like any Mexican food in town.

    Places like Detroit are exceptions; Michigan itself is very White.

    MN is blue but very similar to red WI. Their bars had less covid restrictions.

    A Southern man is quite different, I’ve met a lot of liberal Southerners who moved to MN. One’s even a hippie! I loathe the prevalent White drug use of the South. I care about Southerners though. Southern belles are so beautiful. I hate seeing their beauty destroyed but it’s all to common. When a Southern angel falls, she seems to fall the furthest and hardest. The most beautiful angels are closest to the path to Hell.

      1. Wait. You don’t want to allow any fire arm ownership whatsoever? Not even for hunting or sport?

        1. Yes, I will allow the possession of a hunting rifle of course. Also you can keep either a hunting rifle or a shotgun in your home to protect yourself. But I would pretty much ban handguns. You can own a handgun for sport, but you need to keep it locked up at a shooting range. You can only use it at the range – nowhere else.

          Otherwise handguns would all be banned, and of course those semi-autos would be banned. Nobody needs those. Concealed carry would be banned unless you have a very good reason. Shopowners in high crime areas could have a handgun, but they would need to keep it locked at the store when they are not there. When they are at the store, they may have ready access to it.

          1. “Concealed carry would be banned unless you have a very good reason.” That’s nuts though. I would ban the opposite, open carry unless you have a permit for a parade, rally or demonstration. Open carry is the one that scares people. Banning concealed carry is pointless because criminals will obviously not care.

            I would still allow automatic weapons including hand guns and assault rifles (e.g AR-15s) for self defense. Though I would make the licensing and training expensive and require insurance effectively barring poor idiots from getting them an giving police probable cause to stop and search a suspicious person transporting a firearm to check if they have a license and insurance just like they do with automobiles.

            In fact, the easiest license would be for a hand gun for home defense. You wanna carry it outside the home and extra license and insurance rider for that. Obviously, the training requirements for an assaults riffle would be longer.

            As for convicted criminals, depending on the case I would ban weapons for a limited time during the rehab and probation period or indefinitely if the crime warrants it.

            All in all I would encourage mass firearm ownership among the middle and upper classes. I’m an elitist cunt. Our current world without firearms would be a hell of a lot safer. But a world without low IQ humans and mass gun ownership would extremely safe.

          2. Most sane countries don’t allow concealed carry at all, frankly. There’s literally no reason for it.

          3. Well the reason is so that people don’t walk around with a pistol strapped to their waist in broad daylight and scare passerbys. We’re not in the Wild West anymore. Though I agree that you would need a special license for concealed carry (or any carry outside your home) I wouldn’t be so restrictive about it.

            To this day, automobiles kill a bit more people than guns and that is with all the licensing and insurance requirements for cars. If car ownership where a free for all like gun ownership is in some states we’d probably have way more automobile fatalities.

            So there is no reason for this mass anti-gun hysteria I hear from liberals. What we need are “common sense” gun control laws like the Democrats keep touting. I just don’t trust them to do that. They want to outright ban guns altogether. If we treated guns with the same strict and expensive insurance requirements for cars you’d see a drastic drop in gun homicides.

            Mind you, two-thirds of gun fatalities are suicides, usually white males. I don’t think there’s any real way to significantly lower that number other than outright gun ban. You can just as easily kill yourself with a hunting rifle as with a handgun. I don’t know what drives male suicide but I imagine it’s a lack of pussy and feeling less-than in this modern gynocracy of ours. So maybe ban feminism too lol.

          4. I’ve heard Japanese also commit suicide a lot.

            The Swiss basically respect the gun, military that uses it, what it’s for, etc. You could give them all automatics, missile launchers, etc., it wouldn’t matter. If the people are fine, having or not having guns doesn’t matter.

            In Montana, Alaska, etc. one might need one to fend of a Grizzly Bear. From what I’ve seen with Polar Bears you can usually scare them off without a non-lethal weapon. But you obviously don’t want to be eaten alive by a bear or any animal. I’ve listened to someone get eaten by a bear, and it was not a quick death.

            People are water-sucking parasites too with all their farms and urban decay. A White man will find a way to plow deeper, but I don’t think that’s a good thing. A good invention might be a sprinkler that spreads water more efficiently. I’d like to see more playa lakes and fewer people. Many Americans believe the loss of the American buffalo (actually bison) is a tragedy. As someone said, playas are the great American buffalo of today.

          5. I would support the right to carry a gun in grizzly country if you are out in the woods. Maybe even a handgun!

          6. Hey did you delete my comment about Japanese declining birthrates or did it just disappear?

          7. Looks like it disappeared. I don’t care about this. Japan is way too overcrowded as it is.

  3. Lastly, I would scrap the 2nd amendment and create a new one with clear unambiguous languages detail the right to own fire arms with the necessary qualifications. Id make it a states right issue too. Kind of like recent abortion ruling. Let the states decide on the limitations. But I would keep the current constitutional right to prevent the federal government from creating any laws regarding fire arm ownership outside of federal jurisdiction (D.C., fed buildings and bases, etc.).

    The 2A is just fucking garbage. it’s written in such a way that has becoming meaningless in our modern times since the weaponry between civilians and militaries has diverged so much. Even Ar-15s and Ak-14s aren’t sufficient to form a militia. A literal interpretation would allow for civilians to owns tanks and attack helicopters and bazookas too.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)