Viva la Micropolitan Revolucion!

Two of my favorite commentators, Rod Dreher at the Crunchy Conservative and much-cited urbanist Joel Kotkin have connected this week via their respective blogs. The subject: Kotkin's recent article in the latest American Interest magazine, called "Little Start-Up on the Prairie."
Kotkin says what many of us already know about small-but-rapidly-growing cities (50,000 - 500,000) in the Great Plains and Inter-Mountain West:

...we have seen the emergence of a certain subset of smaller cities and towns, including in the Great Plains and the inter-Mountain West, that are absorbing much of the expansion. These represent Heartland “growth nodes”, places that have enjoyed rapid growth even while more remote communities continue to shrink. Some of these rural communities are high amenity areas—for example, the Rapid City/Black Hills region of South Dakota, Wenatchee, Washington, Bozeman, Montana, and St. George, Utah—that have grown largely due to their peculiar appeal to migrants from urban areas. Many of these communities are evolving well beyond tourism and developing more sophisticated, technology-based economies.

and

"In many other areas, smaller firms, often individuals working from home, are clustering in pockets of what researcher Amy Zuckerman has called “hidden tech.” These dispersed networks of knowledge workers, many of them refugees from large coastal cities, are particularly evident in places like Bellingham, Washington, the Rapid City area of South Dakota and the Pioneer Valley region of western Massachussetts.But perhaps no city epitomizes the dynamic Brain Belt more than Fargo."

and

Another type of Heartland growth could be described as re-emerging rural hubs. These are usually small and midsized cities that grew up during the period of agricultural expansion in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and then began to decline or plateau as early as the 1920s. Prominent examples include Fargo, Sioux Falls, Des Moines and Boise. These communities are exploiting their lower costs, good public schools, universities and better quality of life for middle-class families to lure high-end professional service firms, information companies and diversified, often innovative small manufacturers.

Here are Dreher's comments on Kotkin's piece:

Micropolitans of the Heartland

More Wilberforce

The L.A. Times has a great editorial about William Wilberforce, British Abolitionist and subject of the recently released (and highly recommended) movie, Amazing Grace.

An excerpt:

"Wilberforce sought to change hearts and minds, not just laws. So he organized boycotts and petitions, staged demonstrations and commissioned artwork to mobilize public opinion on a national scale. Wilberforce suffered many setbacks — his abolition bills were repeatedly killed in committee or defeated in the House of Commons — but he kept on.Most important, he was unafraid to invoke the moral obligations of the Gospel to challenge the consciences of slavers and their supporters in Parliament. In his "Letter on the Abolition of the Slave Trade," published in January 1807, Wilberforce placed the brutish facts of human trafficking against the backdrop of Christian compassion and divine justice. "We must believe," he warned, "that a continued course of wickedness, oppression and cruelty, obstinately maintained in spite of the fullest knowledge and the loudest warnings, must infallibly bring down upon us the heaviest judgments of the Almighty." A month later, on Feb. 23, the House of Commons voted 283 to 16 to abolish the slave trade."

This should cause pro-life supporters to take hope. Wilberforce fought for 20 years to end British slavery. Abortion is often called the "slavery" of today - after all, African slaves were commonly believed to be sub-human - not unlike a "fetus." The movie Amazing Grace displays Wilberforce's strategy to ending slavery: relentless campaigning, introducing a sure-to-be-killed-in-committee bill every year, and tireless debate. Yet it was an indirect tactic (please see the movie) that led to British slavery's demise. This is perhaps a fascinating lesson for today's pro-life strategists. Senator Brock Greenfiled's (R-Clark, SD) recent comments on South Dakota's latest abortion bill remind me of Wilberforce's own lesson on tactics 200 years ago.

A recent bill in Colorado, consciously styled after South Dakota's proposed abortion ban last year, garnered much debate among pro-life legislators in Denver. The debate was over strategy. Pro-choice legislators by far outnumber pro-life legislators this session. The bill would be largely symbolic, sponsored by a passionate pro-life freshman Senator - but, as expected, the bill would be smothered in committee, never seeing the Senate or House floor, much less the Governor's desk.

I myself uttered the words "issue fatigue" in reference to the debate. How much abortion legislation can the people take? Wouldn't it be more effective strategically to re-visit the issue in a few years, when the pro-life movement has a chance to re-group for a counterattack, and the issue once again becomes fresh in the public mind?

After watching Amazing Grace, I think the combination of the two strategies defeated British slavery: 1) relentless, direct campaigning and bold, but sure to die, legislation, combined with 2) opportunistic, indirect legislation that capitalized on the opposition's complacency. I think #1 laid the groundwork for #2, which ultimately succeeded 20 years later.

I believe being "pro-life" is more than just opposing abortion. The L.A. Times editorialist indicates some other modern-day "pro-life" issues that may have resonated strongly with Wilberforce, and should with us as well:

"This year, Britain is honoring Wilberforce's legacy with lectures and conferences. In the United States, the biographical film "Amazing Grace" opens in theaters Friday. Some will chafe at all the attention. Yet we face our own assaults on human rights — including the sexual trafficking of women and girls, genocidal violence in Sudan and the prison camps of North Korea. Surely we need more of Wilberforce's brand of faith today, not less."

Amazing Grace tomorrow night

EC and I are looking forward to seeing Amazing Grace tomorrow night. As EVERYONE tells us: "Go to movies now, because once the baby comes, you won't see a movie in a theater for years."

Point well-taken. So off to the movies we go.

"The Old is Better"

I love reading the Bible. Much of the Bible's teachings, histories and stories make some sort of intuitive sense to me, including the more inaccesible stuff in the Old Testament. Even if (read: "when") I fail to live up to the divine standards of scripture, I mentally and spiritually "understand", at some level, what the Prophets were talking about.

Not so with Jesus Christ. His teaching is baffling. Any time I hear or see someone saying "Well, what would Jesus do?", I have to reply:

"I have no idea. He was completely unpredictable in his three years of ministry. How on earth do you know what Jesus would do?"

There are some portions of Jesus' teachings that just plain don't get preached. I don't believe it is because pastors and priests are hiding anything. I think they really don't know what Jesus was getting at in some sections of the Gospels.

I join them in their bafflement of our Lord and Savior.

Example: At a Bible study last night we studied Luke 5*, when Jesus refers to "old wineskins" and "new wineskins."

I am completely fascinated by this teaching. Yet I have no definitive conclusions about what Jesus is actually talking about here. A few ideas:

1) The "Old Wineskins" refer to Judaism, and the "New Wineskins" to Christianity, the "Old Wine" the old Mosaic Law and Covenant, the "New Wine" the Holy Spirit and the New Covenant brought by Jesus.

2) "Old Wineskins" refer to any religious tradition, with "New Wineskins" referring to any new work of God that is not accepted by established religious structures.

3) As an extension of #1, "New Wineskins" are Gentiles--Greeks, Macedonians, Romans, Ethiopians and later all non-Jews--are now partaking in the "New Wine" offered by Christ.

A final implication: is Jesus condemning the Old Wineskins and the Old Wine, or is he just saying the Old and the New have different functions at different times? I think I used to believe the former, now I believe the latter. After all, old wine is in fact, good wine, right? It is rich and full of subtle tastes. New wine can be bitter, and needs time to age. How then can we reject "The Old Wine?"

Any thoughts on the matter are appreciated...

*33And they said to him, "The disciples of John fast often and offer prayers, and so do the disciples of the Pharisees, but yours eat and drink." 34And Jesus said to them, "Can you make wedding guests fast while the bridegroom is with them? 35The days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast in those days." 36He also told them a parable: "No one tears a piece from a new garment and puts it on an old garment. If he does, he will tear the new, and the piece from the new will not match the old. 37And no one puts new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the new wine will burst the skins and it will be spilled, and the skins will be destroyed. 38But new wine must be put into fresh wineskins. 39And no one after drinking old wine desires new, for he says, 'The old is good.'"[d]

John Edwards...Feeling Pretty

This is probably mean-spirited, and I will probably pay for this someday. I know everyone who has ever been on TV has to do stuff like this.

But come on. This is funny.

BC

It's a girl!

Here comes a baby girl Carson....
Well, this is according to the ultrasound technician, anyway, who could decipher the wriggling grey matter on the tv-screen. After squinting at the movements for 30 minutes or so I gave up, but two technicians confirmed it: the feisty little puncher is a she.

We have our list of names, of course, but.... we're not telling. (sorry)

As a result of the silence, people are getting creative. So far the popular names in my office are, in order:

1. Kit
and 2. Scout

Apparently people are amused by the idea of a Kit Carson, and better yet, a Scout Kit Carson.

I had hoped that the announcement of a girl would dissolve the idea, but for those of you who read To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, you know that Scout is indeed the name of a the female protagonist, which my co-workers quickly pointed out.

The news of the baby girl has created a flurry of e-mailing and creative deliberations among all - even the more stoic -- of the faculty and staff in Mass Comm. I'm pretty sure that these professors are half-convinced that this baby is partially theirs. Since Bryce and I met in a MCOM class, were introduced by our professor, and had a rather high profile engagement since I work in the office, -- I'm sure that naming our child is the logical next step.

The latest piece of advice came today: "Go gender neutral," one female professor said in a very knowing way.

"You know, like Ryan."

Ryan?

"Or," my supervisor called out from her office. "Like Scout...."

Contrast this with our Minimalist blog

Be sure to check out Lalachan's* aesthetically pleasing blog, now under the Preferred Sites list.

*(Former co-worker, Sioux Fallsian and prolific knitter...)

Small, Rural and...Cosmopolitan??

I wrote a short editorial a year or so ago in the Aberdeen American News suggesting an economic development direction for the city based around Aberdeen's two universities: Northern State University and Presentation College.

This article from the New York Times caught my eye tonight, and reminded me of that idea:

"Rural Colleges Seek New Edge and Urbanize."

I'm not sure I'd call for more rurally located colleges to "urbanize", but I do think many of the ideas set forth in this article could, on some level, take in Aberdeen.

Let me know any thoughts, if you aren't afraid of the "Post Comment" tab.

BC

Equality: Everyone Reaching Minimum Goals

I recieved this forward recently via e-mail, but got such a kick out of it that I'll post it:

"NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND---THE FOOTBALL VERSION
1. All teams must make the state playoffs and all MUST win the championship. If a team does not win the championship, they will be on probation until they are the champions, and coaches will be held accountable. If, after two years, they have not won the championship their footballs and equipment will be taken away UNTIL they do win the championship.

2. All kids will be expected to have the same football skills at the same time even if they do not have the same conditions or opportunities to practice on their own. NO exceptions will be made for lack of interest in football, a desire to perform athletically, or genetic abilities or disabilities of themselves or their parents.

ALL KIDS WILL PLAY FOOTBALL AT A PROFICIENT LEVEL!

3. Talented players will be asked to workout on their own, without instruction. This is because the coaches will be using all their instructional time with the athletes who aren't interested in football, have limited athletic ability or whose parents don't like football.

4. Games will be played year round, but statistics will only be kept in the 4th, 8th, and 11th game. It will create a New Age of Sports where every school is expected to have the same level of talent and all teams will reach the same minimum goals. If no child gets ahead, then no child gets left behind."