"Rural" in NYTimes opinion pages on three consecutive days

It's been striking to see three opinion-page pieces prominently mentioning rural issues in the past few days.  I'm just going to briefly mention the three here, though I don't have much time for analysis. 

The first piece was by the novelist Robert Gipe, which ran in the print version on Saturday.  The headline is, "Appalachia is More Diverse Than you Think."  An excerpt follows: 

Appalachia has been going through rapid, often painful changes for the past hundred years, and our communities have been working hard to rebuild our economies. Over the past decade, many of us have put aside partisan politics to work together to do what’s best for the places we live in, the places we love. But the 2016 election has strained the bonds we’ve forged — and has led to deep reflection and conversation within the region.

He talks economics, coal, poverty, infrastructure, politics, racism, sexism and hope, ending with this:

We all crave honorable work at a living wage. We want success tied to the success of the community. We want to be safe. We are weary of fear. We are exhausted by hate. We in Appalachia join our fellow Americans in asking: Who will encourage our best selves? Who will enable our joy? Who will release the energy hiding in our hearts?

Gipe has an essay in the collection Appalchian Reckoning: A Region Responds to Hillbilly Elegy, to which I am also a contributor.  I had the pleasure of hearing him read from that essay in Asheville, North Carolina, on Saturday night, at an event coinciding with the Appalachian Studies Association meeting.  I was delighted by, among other things, his remembrances of the 1974 film, "Where the Lilies Bloom," and I promptly came home and ordered it, though it cost $75 on amazon.com.

On Sunday, the New York Times ran Robert Leonard and Matt Russell's piece, "What Democrats Need to Do to Win in Rural America."  Here's an excerpt:

The Iowa caucus offers Democrats an opportunity to hone their pitch to rural America. 

Some of the biggest problems around here are in agriculture and trade — yet in those areas, several candidates seem clueless. One appears to know so little it would make a sixth grader in 4-H roll her eyes. Another was smart enough to speak to a small gathering of progressive farmers but not thoughtful enough to take questions or engage. Bernie Sanders came pretty close last week by going after multinationals’ near-monopolies.
A strong Democratic platform with realistic plans for rural America would focus on four themes: demography, infrastructure, farm sustainability and environmental practices that can help combat climate change. 

Up to about 30 percent of Iowa’s economy is tied directly to agriculture and related industries. The lucky farmer is in limbo; the unlucky one is itemizing inventory for the farm auction. Years of low commodity prices were a nightmare, and President Trump’s tariffs made a bad situation worse. Farmers — particularly young ones — are losing their land, and older ones are simply hanging it up. As one farmer here told us, “It’s too much work to lose money at it.”

And on Monday, columnist Paul Krugman's column, "Getting Real About Rural America" ran.  Like so many urban and coastal elites, he marvels at the power of agglomeration (think Brookings Institute's "Miracle Mets" from a few years ago: 

Things clump together; the periphery cannot hold. 

As you read this, Democratic presidential hopefuls are crisscrossing Iowa, trying to assure farmers that they share their concerns. Commentators are publishing opinion pieces about how Democrats can win back rural voters. Think tanks are issuing manifestoes about reviving heartland economies. 

There’s nothing wrong with discussing these issues. Rural lives matter — we’re all Americans, and deserve to share in the nation’s wealth. Rural votes matter even more; like it or not, our political system gives hugely disproportionate weight to less populous states, which are also generally states with relatively rural populations.