
Possibly the least American thing about me, the one thing that acculturation can touch, is that most people not just born and raised in, but immigrating to America, seem to long for the untouched spaces, the miles and miles from the nearest neighbor.
Me? I am a creature of cities. I feel safer — in normal times — in a large city. I like to know there is someone within reach of my cries.More importantly, since my body seems to need walking and since it refuses to walk nowhere, I like to be within reach of places where I can go and have a coffee and people watch, or alternately walk to a store, a church, a farmer’s market.
I haven’t had that for 7 years, and my weight shows it. As do the deep depressive bouts.
I can’t really explain why I feel both safer and happier in large cities, except, perhaps some deep-set evolutionay things. After all, except for smaller contributions, my ancestry reaches to Greece and Rome, long-builders of massive, cosmopolite cities. There is the contributing fact, as well, that I’m an introvert who needs people. I need to SEE people. I don’t in any way need to interact with them, you see? Just see a lot of people, different from myself.
And I know a lot of you are going to bring up all the reasons cities are yucky. And I’m going to shrug and say “whatever.” Because city or deep rural area is all a matter of taste. Both are yucky in the way that humans aren’t ethereal angels, and we must deal with the realities of life, including other people. It’s all on how you prefer to live. My awareness of my surroundings and preparedness to defend myself is no different on a city street than say, my brother in soul Dave Freer, when he goes foraging in deepest wilderness. There isn’t a difference in degree or in skills. Only in favored environment. (No, city people aren’t more dependent on others. Not unless they are in the welfare class, and even then. I was born in the second half to the twentieth century. No sane person then would be dependent on others for their safety and well-being. And if you read enough, you’ll find that goes back to Rome. There might have been a time of greater trust, maybe, but if there was it was small communities and special circumstances. Other than that humans who trust others excessively left no descendants.)
At any rate, I come not to praise cities but — against my own preferences — to bury them. Or at least to sing their funeral dirge. Which is both surprising and weird, to the point that few other people seem to be wrapping their heads around it.
So, let’s talk about cities. Their origins, at least as far as we know, came with the invention of agriculture. Maybe. Gobekli Tepe casts some doubt on that.
The history I was taught was that with agriculture, humans stopped being nomadic, and banded together for agriculture and commerce, and then cities grew.
Maybe.
It makes more sense to me that cities are older than that, older even probably than most people being settled. It makes sense to me for cities to be cross roads trading posts, places where various nomad tribes met to trade and exchange wives and sell slaves and what not. And some people would stay behind, and become …. hosts to these gatherings, merchants, people who kept things that the next people might want. (And some would be dad’s ancestors, probably.) If you want, you can even see agriculture coming from that, not the other way around. Sure, humans probably had figured out seeds and seeding, and the growing of things, but staying in one area would make that painfully obvious. Probably aid in animal domestication too.
No, I don’t know. Neither do they. But it is a possibility.
What we do know is that humans congregate, and that humans tend to congregate in certain places that become/acquire physical structures for the gatherings.
Most of these “cities” even those praised as rich and affluent and admired had maybe 1000 people. 5000? 10,000 was a large city in pre-history, or at least we think so, it’s hard to tell.
However, any modern urban dweller would think Thebes at its height — 80k people — or certainly Rome at its height — estimated at four or 5 million (?) — were cities. Now their living arrangements might strike us as icky and weird beyond belief, but cities they were.
The point I’m trying to make is that cities are very ancient things for humans, a result of our tendency to congregate and trade and gather for all purposes, from religion to finding a mate we’re not related to, to you know, that nice little tavern on the corner that serves some beer to die for.
In the nineteenth and twentieth century (though reaching back to the 16th) we grew megalopolises. If you were a lover of science and knowledge, cities were where you learned. If you wanted to make money trading, you headed to the city. If you were an artist, the cities was where there was money and interest enough to make you famous, or at least to allow you to not starve. If you “just” wanted work in the growing manufactories, you headed to the city. You wanted to exert your craft and learn and excel? Go to the city young man.
Even in the US, and never mind the people who moved ever west when they could see the smoke of other cabins, cities in the newly settled territories expanded rapidly and became the centers of commerce and culture. They also became the subject of f*ck-f*ck games, but that’s something we’ll get into in a minute here.
Now the games go on, but things are changing. Despite the fact that in the late 20th century we were all taught — or imbibed through entertainment — that the future was the megalopolis, and that in the future everyone lived in cities, the future has taken a sharp u-turn, and what we’re looking at is quite different.
We are standing, staring in awed horror, as cities take themselves apart. It seems Detroit was the foretelling of destiny for the American cities, the inescapable future. But in the end it’s not even Detroit. It’s the way of those enigmatic ruins found in the middle of nowhere, where you look at them and say “Who were they? Why did they build this? And why did they leave it?”
Why did they leave it in the first half of the 21st century is readily answerable: crime, malfeasance, bureaucrat hatred of those they govern, making the cities unlivable. Who will stay to be abused when they could live anywhere?
And that’s the second part, the sting in the tail of what’s happening: the seekers of knowledge, the setters of culture, those who make and break things do not need to live in the city anymore.
To the extent we need to congregate, we can do it online. And we do. My work friends range all over the US, with a few more far-flung tendrils, like Dave Freer. I can talk to them, share knowledge, coordinate projects, and I don’t need to see them in the morning for coffee. (Though I’ll grant you, it would be nice.) Both husband and younger son work from home offices for out-of-state companies, while living in places where they probably couldn’t find work, if they looked.
I’ve seen this coming — insert Foul Ol’ Ron screams of “I tol’ ’em, I tol’ ’em, Millenium hand in shrimp.” — for years. FOR DECADES.
Yeah, yeah, I’ll grant you that only about 30 to 35% of the people CAN work remote (and only that many because many clerks and administrative assistants CAN in fact work remote.)
There is a vast number of people who CAN’T: factory workers, and factory supervisors, truckers, and everyone in the hospitality industry.
But the point on this is that the push towards the cities and what made them centers of abundance and interest and magnets for the young were the people who can work remotely.
The other point that some of you might miss — if you haven’t driven around this great country of ours recently — is how much factories are automated now. No, seriously. I first became aware of this in the eighties. We knew someone who lived in the middle of nowhere and worked in a factory. It was him and another guy. Two 12 hour shifts. (I don’t know what they did for weekends.) The factory was that automated. Someone just needed to be there to deal if anything went wrong. The factory made the sorts of things later outsourced to China (I guess it was cheaper. Who knows. Slaves are maybe cheaper than machines.) — plastic buckets and basins, plastic container of all sorts, the kind you found at the dollar store.
More recently, in the last five years, driving criss-cross America for cons and just because we wouldn’t be locked down, we saw many of these. In the middle of nowhere, there will be a factory, and it’s plain there is no great population nearby. They make…. well, a lot of the things that are starting to come back from China (because even five years ago, the problems were obvious.)
No, this doesn’t mean that these professions can be remote. But it means that they can be located in nowhere’s ville — except for one thing. Notice I said that we saw these while traveling around. My friend Jeff Greason says we’re limited by ability to ship stuff. He’s not exactly wrong. But he’s not exactly right either.
Sure, for a certain size of product, you need…. seaports, or airports or at the very least railway confluences. (And if your ears just perked up on that, more in a minute.) For the small crap? All you need is a highway and trucks. (Did your ears perk up again? Yeah.) And America has plenty of those…
Now the conditions for this abandonment of the largest cities, this slow emptying, were there all along. Since… the mid nineties and reliable net access at least.
Militating against them was …. habit. Inertia. Even now, the managerial class is fighting light living hell to have everyone go back to offices. For one, because, you know, they have those expensive buildings. But also because most of them are raging extroverts. But a broad class of mind-workers are fighting back just as hard.
Because…. well, you know? Those people moved. And found they like living some place smaller (in some case the suburbs, but–) and raise their own kids, and spend time with their spouse.
The catalyst was the lockdowns. MOST people found they could work just as well away from the big centers. And they intend to do so. For one, in the midst of economic f*ckery it’s a lot cheaper.
The bureaucratic classes, never having realized what they were bringing about (their minds are slow to see new things) are fighting this as hard as they can. There is a strong attack on transportation, a wish to make trains “unsafe” (which is new, since lefties love choo choos) and a fight against trucking, in the name of their insane enviro illusions. Because if they can stop transport of goods across great distances they can — they think — pen us all back in the cities.
And they need to.
You see, for many years — at least 100 and possibly more — there’s been this weird game going on with cities at least in America. Make the city hard to live in, chase the productive away. Bring in huddled masses (that way you can accuse the productive of being racist or perhaps just rich and uncaring.) Devalue the real estate. Then start a clean up and sell the real estate (which weirdly you or your friends own) to the newcomers. Heck, if you can put restrictions on building, you can sell it to the huddled masses coming in to work on the rebuilding, with every little closet turned into an apartment. (We call that NYC.)
And I think a lot of importing homeless and the destruction that went on, particularly during lockdowns, had this in mind. Recall the NYC mayor, likeanidiot saying that he’d replace the people fleeing with illegal immigrants. He meant it, because, well, that has been the history of NYC since the civil war. And when the factories were IN THE CITY and therefore illiterate immigrants could — being used more or less as slave labor — become immediate sources of wealth, this made perfect sense.
They’re just starting — slowly — to get a feeling this time might be different. I’ve read articles lamenting “What are we going to do with all these expensive office complexes” with the usual berks calling for it to be turned into welfare housing, an expensive endeavor that will only accelerate the destruction.
I understand Denver is one of those seeking to restore the idea that it’s clean and safe for tourists. Good for them. But at least one of the people who visited there recently reported an eerie feeling of “where are all the people?” And judging by the “please send money” from all the cultural institutions (including our church) we used to patronize, I see no reason to doubt it.
Note too, that smaller cities aren’t facing this kind of come apart. At least not yet, perhaps never. Because they remain regional trading spots. And they probably always had a lower percentage of what we’ll call “mind workers” (Only because laptop-class is a weird term that lumps people like me and bureaucrats together.) They might bleed a little but not crazy amounts.
Is there a way for the great cities to avoid death? Well, h*ll yeah.
No, they will never be great industrial centers again. Most of them already weren’t that. And the daily worker grind and commute is or can be a thing of the past.
But most great cities in America have history. And a lot of them are in scenic places.
Besides, they have something mid size cities, towns, and little towns and villages throughout the US can’t get: a variety of cultures, cuisines, shows, etc.
If the weasels in charge of the largest cities — most of them socialists, which can be defined as followers of a 19th century prophet who seek to take us back to the 1930s — had half a brain, they’d set out cleaning up: not just the physical landscape, but crime. (They should all be supporters of a tight immigration policy, but they live in the past) They should make cities as welcoming and safe as possible. Attract interesting ethnic communities, with their cuisine, sure, but they too must be safe for tourists. And make a big deal of the city’s history and culture.
In fact, make each vast city a sort of amusement park, where people in the far flung parts of the country can go. I bet there are enough internal (not to mention external) tourists, to make these cities, centering on the hospitality industry, very wealthy indeed. Glimmering centers of pride for locals and people of the world. Magnets for tourism. You can even slide a little debauchery and bohemian life in there, if you don’t wave it in the face of those who don’t want to see it. The outre has always been an attraction of large cities.
If you’ve noticed, they’re going EXACTLY the other way.
That’s because the ironically self-named progressives really live, mentally, in the early twentieth century. Their philosophy is not suited for any other era.
So they’re going to try to drag us kicking and screaming to the past. And do a lot of damage, trying.
But this type of movement can’t be countered, short of shutting down all of civilization, and I’m going to bet they can’t.
Insert pithy saying about sliding through tightening fingers.
In the end, we win, they lose. Because their entire movement is an attempt to force toothpaste back into the tube.
And meanwhile the rest of us who prefer large cities must learn to live in smaller ones. And do the best we can.

















![The Other Princess by [Mary Catelli]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41J5CnXXAGL.jpg)







