Attention: TDR Forum Junkies 
In a byegone era, it used to be a classic tale of conflicting interests and divisions. It was the rich people who lived on the hill in the good neighborhood... vs the laborer who lived simply in a row house and walked to work every day. In a farther byegone era, it was the landed gentry vs the sharecropper who formed the classic struggle that illuminated the "classes" into which people formed themselves.
It is no longer.
Even in those days, the struggle was for the lower stratum people to seek to move up in the food chain. And there was no vice in that. Moving up meant you had used your assets well, had become educated or productive, or had used your skills and smarts to better your own life.
It is no longer.
Even the "poor" these days own thier own car, tv, homes, take vacations, and have considerable leisure time.
Sure, we hear about the "rich stealing from the poor" and other such political rhetoric, but it is mostly a rhetorical device to divert our attention from the new struggle that defines who we are.
It is now the rural vs the metropolitan. Think Martha's Vineyard or perhaps Sun Valley, Idaho. In both cases the wealthy, the rich, the influential and powerful, all live within a closed community. Not by gates or laws or even checkpoints, but by prices and other monetary tarriffs. In both cases referred to above, all the practical work to be done in both places is done by the "common" class. The police, the clerks, the cooks and waiters and mechanics and shopkeepers and box boys are all unable to afford the prices and expense of living within the rarified air of the metropolitan areas. Nobody who works for a living lives there. You can't rent a house in Sun Valley for less than 1,200 a month. Good luck in finding one for less than 3,000. Who can afford that on a cops pay, or a minister's salary, or even your average small business owner? They don't.
And so, the less affluent have gone. They have left the city and headed for the refuge of the suburbs or even the rural life. They drive in every day, and go home at night.
In thier rarified air of influence and wealth, the wealthy have disconnected from the everyday lives of those who actually make thier world work. They never witness, nor even think of, the people who make thier gas fireplaces work, or fix thier cars, or mow thier lawns. They have no concept of the life of the farmer that raises that steak they eat at thier favorite night spot. Thier knowledge of the situation of fisherman that caught thier Salmon or shrimp prepared by thier favorite chef is non-existent. And with it, thier realization of dependence upon them to do what they do, for the small pay they get to do it.
In the last election, we saw a most stark realization of this phenomenon in the graph of who voted for whom. Rural and urban america voted in droves for young buck Texan who spoke thier language and related to thier lives. Inner city and metropolitan voters flocked to the government-centric Gore.
The isolation of the metropolitan and inner city residents has led to an unhealthy ignorance of thier own situation. Locked in the concrete jungle, or in the ratrace world of high finance or pursuit of the fickle stardom of the public life world, has led to a distortion of thier perception. They see where we, the rural dwellers, live as the medicine or therapy they need in those few moments they spare outside thier world. They see it as the "purity" and meaning lacking in the materialistic and petty concerns which dominate thier lives. Seeing a crying need to improve thier world, they look out across the landscape and see that the "purity" they look for is lacking. Farms, roads, towns, parks, and other evidence of human activity spoils their dream of pursuit of the pure and innocent. These things remind them of the problems in thier world, and so they object.
Unable, unwilling, or perhaps not even considering the idea of, reforming the hedonistic and narcisistic universe they inhabit, they seek - to borrow a biblical phrase - to "white the sepulchre". Instead of seeking to right thier own lives, to purge the wrong from the world they live in... the materialsm, faithlessness, drug use, immorality, and overall depravity in their world, because to do so would place them in contention with thier social circles, they seek to burnish thier images and find personal virtue in their "causes" like "saving the land", "saving the rivers", "taking away the violence of guns", and the list goes on.
Seeking a kind of salvation from a life seemingly void of virtue, they invent virtue for themselves in desperate dedication to thier causes. And so we find the elites, the rich, the indolent wealthy, and those who either seek to be them, or who aspire to be them, or who in other ways are unable to find any meaningful purpose for thier lives seizing upon the causes of the moment - environmentalism, "acceptance" of alternative lifestyles, pseudo liberties like legalizing drugs, even trying to invoke government's forceful hand in "correcting" the lives of the unfortunate with all sorts of social programs and interference in the daily lives of individuals to bring about "virtuous" ends.
ON the other end of the scale, those in the ghetto or slums or are stuck in the inner cities don't view life as a investment - work and effort and wise decisions invested sums up to success. They see it as a chess match... one in which tehy are a pawn for the elites and wealthy they see a few miles away in their limos and fancy restaurants. Having now been several generations removed from the influence of entrepreneurial life, and away from the environment most people live in where work and wise decisions will control or at least influence your destiny, they see the promise of incremental improvements by the only apparently successful enterprise in thier neighborhood as the solution - Government.
Not seeing any connection between thier decisions, attitudes and the outcome or condition of thier lives, they cast thier eyes upon the only instrument they see as having the power to "fix" thier world... An activist government.
While the two poles are entirely opposite, they share one striking correlation - both view government as the means of thier salvation. Government "saving" endangered species, for instance, at thier behest bestows them with virtue. While the inner city dweller sees free health care, a jobs program, and subsidized rent as thier means of achieving an easier or more assured life.
So now we are caught in the crossfire. While in a life of little or less responsibility and abundant wealth, the elites view our opposition as an arrogant and selfish stubbornness. Unable to comprehend why we would oppose those things that would make our lives impossible to live, they make loud and impassioned moral condemnation of us, for obstructing thier means of obtaining moral qualities for themselves. The lower classes merely assume we're selfish and want to keep our great and undeserved wealth for selfish reasons (as if we had great and undeserved wealth... but they see our self-sufficient lives as proof of our excess prosperity), and then denying them thier only hope.
In this struggle, those seeking moral virtuosity in thier lives simply do not relate to the views we take. "Our property is our property... And get the hell off if you're going to bother me!" is foriegn to them. Sure, they squabble with each other over contracts and ownership and the like, but none of it means losing thier means of existence. To us, it does. Our view of government as the tool of defense against thier encroachment is a puzzle. They are in the process of creating virtue... how on earth could we oppose???
As alluded to above, previous era's classifications stratified us in permeable layers. Our own actions or decisions could easily move us from the bottom to the top. Today's divisions are intrinsic to the core of our view of morality and life. Compromise is ineffective, since it's like taking one step towards the door when the host wants you out. There is no point before the point where you are GONE that the host will cease to press you to move.
There is no point before the point where the Klamath Basin has no farmers and is run and exists solely for the purposes they seek, where the environmentalists will "give up" and declare the victory won. And there is no place in the country where they will abandon thier ideas and not bother those who live on and in and earn thier living from the land. Compromise is nothing more than taking a step closer to the point where you are ruined. To negotiate, is like telling some guy who's determined to make you fall off a roof "Hey, I'll stand right near the edge, if you'll just stop pushing". Of course, he'll let you move, but as soon as you do, he'll be back and pushing harder, because you are that much closer.
I don't see this being settled by negotiation or compromise. Instead, it has to be ended by taking our government back, and restoring it's purpose... the protection of the individual and his rights against all interests, foreign and domestic, who would promote actions or policies injurious to the welfare of the individual.
===========
This from the discussion board at www.klamathbasincrisis.org
It is no longer.
Even in those days, the struggle was for the lower stratum people to seek to move up in the food chain. And there was no vice in that. Moving up meant you had used your assets well, had become educated or productive, or had used your skills and smarts to better your own life.
It is no longer.
Even the "poor" these days own thier own car, tv, homes, take vacations, and have considerable leisure time.
Sure, we hear about the "rich stealing from the poor" and other such political rhetoric, but it is mostly a rhetorical device to divert our attention from the new struggle that defines who we are.
It is now the rural vs the metropolitan. Think Martha's Vineyard or perhaps Sun Valley, Idaho. In both cases the wealthy, the rich, the influential and powerful, all live within a closed community. Not by gates or laws or even checkpoints, but by prices and other monetary tarriffs. In both cases referred to above, all the practical work to be done in both places is done by the "common" class. The police, the clerks, the cooks and waiters and mechanics and shopkeepers and box boys are all unable to afford the prices and expense of living within the rarified air of the metropolitan areas. Nobody who works for a living lives there. You can't rent a house in Sun Valley for less than 1,200 a month. Good luck in finding one for less than 3,000. Who can afford that on a cops pay, or a minister's salary, or even your average small business owner? They don't.
And so, the less affluent have gone. They have left the city and headed for the refuge of the suburbs or even the rural life. They drive in every day, and go home at night.
In thier rarified air of influence and wealth, the wealthy have disconnected from the everyday lives of those who actually make thier world work. They never witness, nor even think of, the people who make thier gas fireplaces work, or fix thier cars, or mow thier lawns. They have no concept of the life of the farmer that raises that steak they eat at thier favorite night spot. Thier knowledge of the situation of fisherman that caught thier Salmon or shrimp prepared by thier favorite chef is non-existent. And with it, thier realization of dependence upon them to do what they do, for the small pay they get to do it.
In the last election, we saw a most stark realization of this phenomenon in the graph of who voted for whom. Rural and urban america voted in droves for young buck Texan who spoke thier language and related to thier lives. Inner city and metropolitan voters flocked to the government-centric Gore.
The isolation of the metropolitan and inner city residents has led to an unhealthy ignorance of thier own situation. Locked in the concrete jungle, or in the ratrace world of high finance or pursuit of the fickle stardom of the public life world, has led to a distortion of thier perception. They see where we, the rural dwellers, live as the medicine or therapy they need in those few moments they spare outside thier world. They see it as the "purity" and meaning lacking in the materialistic and petty concerns which dominate thier lives. Seeing a crying need to improve thier world, they look out across the landscape and see that the "purity" they look for is lacking. Farms, roads, towns, parks, and other evidence of human activity spoils their dream of pursuit of the pure and innocent. These things remind them of the problems in thier world, and so they object.
Unable, unwilling, or perhaps not even considering the idea of, reforming the hedonistic and narcisistic universe they inhabit, they seek - to borrow a biblical phrase - to "white the sepulchre". Instead of seeking to right thier own lives, to purge the wrong from the world they live in... the materialsm, faithlessness, drug use, immorality, and overall depravity in their world, because to do so would place them in contention with thier social circles, they seek to burnish thier images and find personal virtue in their "causes" like "saving the land", "saving the rivers", "taking away the violence of guns", and the list goes on.
Seeking a kind of salvation from a life seemingly void of virtue, they invent virtue for themselves in desperate dedication to thier causes. And so we find the elites, the rich, the indolent wealthy, and those who either seek to be them, or who aspire to be them, or who in other ways are unable to find any meaningful purpose for thier lives seizing upon the causes of the moment - environmentalism, "acceptance" of alternative lifestyles, pseudo liberties like legalizing drugs, even trying to invoke government's forceful hand in "correcting" the lives of the unfortunate with all sorts of social programs and interference in the daily lives of individuals to bring about "virtuous" ends.
ON the other end of the scale, those in the ghetto or slums or are stuck in the inner cities don't view life as a investment - work and effort and wise decisions invested sums up to success. They see it as a chess match... one in which tehy are a pawn for the elites and wealthy they see a few miles away in their limos and fancy restaurants. Having now been several generations removed from the influence of entrepreneurial life, and away from the environment most people live in where work and wise decisions will control or at least influence your destiny, they see the promise of incremental improvements by the only apparently successful enterprise in thier neighborhood as the solution - Government.
Not seeing any connection between thier decisions, attitudes and the outcome or condition of thier lives, they cast thier eyes upon the only instrument they see as having the power to "fix" thier world... An activist government.
While the two poles are entirely opposite, they share one striking correlation - both view government as the means of thier salvation. Government "saving" endangered species, for instance, at thier behest bestows them with virtue. While the inner city dweller sees free health care, a jobs program, and subsidized rent as thier means of achieving an easier or more assured life.
So now we are caught in the crossfire. While in a life of little or less responsibility and abundant wealth, the elites view our opposition as an arrogant and selfish stubbornness. Unable to comprehend why we would oppose those things that would make our lives impossible to live, they make loud and impassioned moral condemnation of us, for obstructing thier means of obtaining moral qualities for themselves. The lower classes merely assume we're selfish and want to keep our great and undeserved wealth for selfish reasons (as if we had great and undeserved wealth... but they see our self-sufficient lives as proof of our excess prosperity), and then denying them thier only hope.
In this struggle, those seeking moral virtuosity in thier lives simply do not relate to the views we take. "Our property is our property... And get the hell off if you're going to bother me!" is foriegn to them. Sure, they squabble with each other over contracts and ownership and the like, but none of it means losing thier means of existence. To us, it does. Our view of government as the tool of defense against thier encroachment is a puzzle. They are in the process of creating virtue... how on earth could we oppose???
As alluded to above, previous era's classifications stratified us in permeable layers. Our own actions or decisions could easily move us from the bottom to the top. Today's divisions are intrinsic to the core of our view of morality and life. Compromise is ineffective, since it's like taking one step towards the door when the host wants you out. There is no point before the point where you are GONE that the host will cease to press you to move.
There is no point before the point where the Klamath Basin has no farmers and is run and exists solely for the purposes they seek, where the environmentalists will "give up" and declare the victory won. And there is no place in the country where they will abandon thier ideas and not bother those who live on and in and earn thier living from the land. Compromise is nothing more than taking a step closer to the point where you are ruined. To negotiate, is like telling some guy who's determined to make you fall off a roof "Hey, I'll stand right near the edge, if you'll just stop pushing". Of course, he'll let you move, but as soon as you do, he'll be back and pushing harder, because you are that much closer.
I don't see this being settled by negotiation or compromise. Instead, it has to be ended by taking our government back, and restoring it's purpose... the protection of the individual and his rights against all interests, foreign and domestic, who would promote actions or policies injurious to the welfare of the individual.
===========
This from the discussion board at www.klamathbasincrisis.org
