1) A thread on the geographic imbalance of cultural power in the United States.

First, a few words on cultural power, in the interest of avoiding misunderstandings about what I'm saying.

2) The American perception of cultural power is a lot like the American perception of social class. Some of us tend to scarcely believe that such a thing exists, or greatly minimize the extent to which it matters. Many others misapprehend what cultural power means.

3) Class and cultural power are closely linked, so this is worth discussing. When it comes to social class, many people have a vague apprehension that it has to do with money. Money is certainly an important component of social class, but class is about far more than money.

4) Social class is not just about annual income. It is also about net worth (and about the insulation from sudden financial disaster that comes along with it.)

It is about occupation and profession (do your back or knees hurt at the end of the workday?)

5) It is about educational attainment (did you graduate from college; and if so, what was your degree in, and where did you go to school?

Occupation and education are arguably more important drivers of social class than income or net worth are. But all are important.

6) And when it comes to cultural power, occupation and education are particularly important, because occupation and education tend to shape and alter deeply-embedded ideas, values, and beliefs in profound and significant ways that income and net worth do not.

7) Money gives you financial power, and with it certainly comes some degree of cultural power, but you probably wouldn't disagree that the millionaire owner of a plumbing business often has far less cultural power than many less well-paid college professors or journalists.

8) So what is cultural power? It is not primarily about being popular or well-known in the culture. That certainly helps, but there are many well-known celebrities who have little-to-no cultural power in the sense that I'm discussing.

9) Cultural power isn't about appearing on the People magazine list of celebrities. It is the power to actively shape what people believe, how they feel, what they esteem, what they despise, and how they live their lives. It is the power to define morality and value.

10) Cultural power is the power to define reality - to use images and words to influence people; to shape or alter their perceptions and values; to change their behavior; to change how they think; what they think; and to judge which beliefs are acceptable and which are not.

11) Cultural power is self-replicating and self-reinforcing. It is about who sets the national agenda, who decides what will be discussed (and on which terms), which thoughts and ideas are publicly thinkable, and which thoughts are not.

12) It is the type of power that is wielded by insiders in both political parties, by those who run major for-profit, public, and non-profit institutions, media corporations, institutions of higher-learning, and the upper-middle class functionaries who serve these organizations.

13) In short, it is type of power that is wielded by those who are in what @Chris_arnade describes as "The Front Row" in his book "Dignity". You should read it: https://thestile1972.tumblr.com/post/190112850475/book-review-chris-arnades-dignity

14) Cultural power is about control of the ideas that have the power to shape reality.

Ideas are heavily grounded in social conditions and circumstances.

Ideas are generated within networks, and they are transmitted most effectively by those with the most cultural power.

15) Cultural power in the United States is not evenly distributed. It resides exclusively in what Arnade describes as "Front Row" places. Much of the cultural power in the nation resides in just a few places: New York, Washington, Los Angeles, and the Bay Area.

16) Now, to be sure, there are pockets of cultural power scattered elsewhere in the nation - in cities that are home to major universities, or other significant clusters of influential for-profit, non-profit, and public institutions, which tend to agglomerate.

17) But the *really* influential networks of culture creators and transmitters are clustered in just a handful of Front Row places. And, to be sure, even in the Front Row centers of Power, there are plenty of Back Row places - the Bronx, Anacostia, South Central LA, etc.

18) But there are vast stretches of America where every single place, and the vast majority of the people, are in the cultural Back Row.

Arnade writes about these types of places - Portsmouth, Ohio; Cairo, Illinois; Selma, Alabama; Bakersfield, California; Gary, Indiana, etc.

19) 57% of the U.S. population lives in the Midwest or the South (excluding metro D.C.) If it were possible to identify the 100 most culturally powerful people in the sense that I've been discussing (it's not, but if it were), what % of them would live in these two regions?

20) The answer, under any conceivable scenario, is "far less than 57%".

Now, of course, *many* of these people undoubtedly grew up in the Midwest or the South. It's possible that even more than 57% of them did. But they don't live there anymore, which is the point.

21) I know that I'm going to get tons of replies that say "It's always been that way", or "Who cares?", or "What about Warren Buffet?", or "Coca-Cola is headquartered in Atlanta", or "Wal-Mart is headquartered in Bentonville, Arkansas".

22) Yes, cultural power, by its very nature, is likely to be clustered in relatively few places. But I would argue that in the United States, it has never been clustered in so few places, in the hands of so few people, with so much ill-effect on our national civic health.

23) If your answer is "Who cares?", then my reply is simply "be well", for we have nothing more to discuss.

24) If you answer is "What about Warren Buffet or Coca-Cola?", my reply is "Did you read the first part of the thread?" Have Warren Buffet or Coca-Cola really shaped what you believe, what you esteem, what you despise, and how you live your life in any non-trivial way?

25) Why do I care? Because I think that it is extremely dangerous and profoundly unhealthy to have so much power in so few places and in the hands of so few people. I am suspicious of concentrated power, and you should be, too. Traditionally, we have at least *tried* to limit it.

26) I don't like what I'm seeing in terms of the degree to which more and more powerful people are using their influence to stifle expression and marginalize people who dissent. I don't like like groupthink, even when it furthers causes that I strongly believe in.

27) And, most importantly, I don't like the geographic disparities in wealth, prestige, and influence, which are becoming greater and more profound by the day.

Sure, disparities have always existed. But they are getting worse. It is extremely unhealthy for our nation.

28) And, finally, I don't like hearing people beginning to talk cavalierly about things like the break-up of the country, or civil war, or armed revolution, like they are things that might just be for the best.

I can assure you, they would bring misery and ruin to us all. [end]

Coda:

I jumbled a lot of tangentially-related topics together here. Hopefully I articulated this more coherently than in my earlier thread. I'm not seeking agreement (it's always nice, of course) but if it made you think, even just to push back, I accomplished my mission.