We should take an historic peek at the "farmers versus ranchers" conflict in the US (and then visit Vermont). I have heard it argued by evolutionary psychologists (I am not in a position to fully explain or defend ..) that ranchers have an "all or none" culture. You either hit it rich or flopped, with little incentive to co-operate. In farming societies everyone can get ahead if rules and boundaries are established, hence communal values. I have not studied this issue in detail, but I suspect the key difference is that cattle roam; hence no boundaries, rules, or statehood. In contrast, farm equipment and crops stay put; hence boundaries and neighbors. The difference lead to actual conflict in the US West.
In New England, Vermont may be the most farm-like, and gave the US Senate its only socialist (Bernie). It is also home to Ben & Jerry ice cream which is known to donate heavily to liberal causes (before they sold out) and Cabot diary products which (the last I heard) is tied into a dairy co-operative. Now, what do we make of the fact that Bernie Sanders, Howard "scream" Dean (former governor) and Ben & Jerry are all transplanted New Yorkers (not from the Long Island potato farms)? And the fact that when I drive through I encounter "Take Back Vermont!" on barns? Not sure. There are obviously many other factors e.g. less law and order presence in the US West versus Canada ..the proximity of Vermont to Canada, and so forth. And we are stereotyping countries and states .. there is much variability within each. In sync with the other comments, there is also a self-reliance streak in VT. It is the only US State I know of that was its own country, with their own laws and mint, in the aftermath of the US revolution. Seriously, Vermont is a cool place if you don't putting up with the transplanted New Yorkers :-) ========================== John W. Kulig, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology Coordinator, Psychology Honors Plymouth State University Plymouth NH 03264 ========================== From: "don allen" <dap...@shaw.ca> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <tips@fsulist.frostburg.edu> Sent: Monday, January 12, 2015 1:12:58 PM Subject: Re: [tips] What Would Skinner Do? Hi Chris- I think that you've nailed this one nicely. When I had a farm in Ontario may years ago There was a strong culture of self-reliance. You were expected to be able to do all of the tasks by yourself. At the same time there was a strong sense of community support. If we head of a neighbour who needed help we all pitched in without hesitation. Of course, it's easier do do this in small communities where everyone knows everyone else. It's easier to ignore the needs of "Them" when you've never met them. -Don. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Green" <chri...@yorku.ca> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <tips@fsulist.frostburg.edu> Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2015 5:43:40 PM Subject: Re: [tips] What Would Skinner Do? > On Jan 11, 2015, at 4:33 PM, Joan Warmbold <jwarm...@oakton.edu> wrote: > > A more > unfortunate concern/question I have about the USA is why we fairly > consistently stand apart from other westernized nations in our > perspectives on taking care of the needy, whether it's in regard to caring > for the homeless, those in need of health care, etc. Is it simply a > result of the powerful corporate lobbies or is more reflective of our > strong cultural support of individualism and that we each 'make our own > bed to sleep in,' so to speak. I think individualism is a laudable cultural attitude (not only of the US, but of many successful countries) but that it has been skillfully exploited by propagandists (corporate and otherwise) into a rigid ideology that is socially harmful when practiced without exception. Canadians, who have historically had to make their way through comparatively harsh weather, have long had a strong tradition self-reliance, but that was never seen as a justification for failing to help others who required it. The Finns, also, have a strong ethic of *personal* preparation for the possibility of harsh conditions, but that has sat side by side comfortably with a strong socialist strain. Put simply (perhaps simplistically), the ethic of individualism is something that works best when applied to the self -- *I* will be self-reliant and prepared for any contingency -- but makes for a nasty, brutish society when cast upon others -- *They* should be self-reliant and prepared -- and too easily slides into a justification for an ethics of "uncaring." Chris ....... Christopher D Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 chri...@yorku.ca http://www.yorku.ca/christo --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: dap...@shaw.ca. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13157.966b795bc7f3ccb35e3da08aebe98f18&n=T&l=tips&o=41511 or send a blank email to leave-41511-13157.966b795bc7f3ccb35e3da08aebe98...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: ku...@mail.plymouth.edu. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13338.f659d005276678c0696b7f6beda66454&n=T&l=tips&o=41522 or send a blank email to leave-41522-13338.f659d005276678c0696b7f6beda66...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@mail-archive.com. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=41523 or send a blank email to leave-41523-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
