Earth:Urban–rural political divide

From HandWiki
Short description: Phenomenon in political science
Top to bottom:
A Donald Trump campaign sign on a business billboard for Flint Gun Shop in Steuben County, Indiana; 2017 Women's March attendees in Brooklyn, New York

In political science, the urban–rural political divide is a phenomenon in which predominantly urban areas and predominantly rural areas within a country have sharply diverging political views. It is a form of political polarization. Typically, urban areas exhibit more liberal, left-wing, secular, progressive, cosmopolitan, and/or multiculturalist political attitudes, while rural areas exhibit more conservative, right-wing, religious, and/or nationalist/populist political attitudes, though India is a notable exception where the reverse happens.[lower-alpha 1]

An urban–rural political divide has been observed worldwide in many nations including Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Hungary, India, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Korea, the Netherlands, Poland, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Political divisions between urban and rural areas have been noted by political scientists and journalists to have intensified in the 21st century, and in particular since the Great Recession. In Europe, the increasing urban–rural polarisation has coincided with the decline of centre-left parties and concomitant rise of far-right and populist parties, a trend known as Pasokification.

History

Asia

In Asia, the urban–rural political divide has been observed in China, India, Malaysia,[1] Thailand,[1] and Turkey.[1][2]

China

The urban–rural conflict in China has been a complicated and long-standing problem, which results from the economic, social, and cultural disparities between these two areas. One of the major reasons for this conflict is the unequal distribution of wealth and resources between urban and rural regions, where urban areas experience rapid growth in population and wealth, while rural areas lose millions of migrants to the city. The rural economy lags behind, leading to a shortage of basic infrastructure such as water, electricity, and transportation. Additionally, rural–urban migration is another contributing factor that causes overcrowding, housing shortages, and increased job competition in urban areas. Furthermore, cultural and social differences between urban and rural communities can also lead to misunderstandings and conflicts. Having recognized the problem, the Chinese government has implemented several policies, such as promoting rural development, improving rural infrastructure, and increasing access to education and healthcare, to address the issue.[3]

India

The Bharatiya Janata Party-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) maintains strong hold over highly urbanized capital regions, while the opposition INDIA alliance has support in predominantly rural and agrarian constituencies. India operates under a robust multi-party system dominated at the federal level by two primary political alliances: the right-wing, Hindu nationalist National Democratic Alliance (NDA) led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and the centre-left, secular Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) led by the Indian National Congress (INC). While regional dynamics often dictate state-level assembly elections, a profound political divide between urban metropolitan centres and rural agrarian areas heavily influences national parliamentary outcomes. This geographic and structural friction shapes the distribution of the 543 seats in the Lok Sabha (the lower house of India's Parliament).There is an established pattern of political polarization where urban constituencies lean conservative and pro-business, while rural constituencies remain competitive battlegrounds driven by agrarian welfare economics. During the 2024 general elections, this spatial cleavage became highly pronounced. In purely urban electorates, the BJP-led NDA maintained clear dominance, leveraging its appeal among middle-class professionals, tech-corridor workers, and commercial hubs. Conversely, the opposition INDIA alliance experienced a massive resurgence across the country's rural farmlands, tapping into mounting distress surrounding inflation, stagnant agricultural wages, and underemployment.[4]

The starkest manifestation of this urban–rural split can be seen in direct seat tallies across different municipal boundaries. Of the 55 seats classified as purely urban, the NDA captured a lopsided 39 seats compared to the INDIA alliance's 15 seats. However, across the 488 constituencies classified as predominantly rural, the gap dramatically narrowed; the NDA won 254 seats while the INDIA alliance captured 219 seats, showcasing intense rural resistance against the ruling national party.[5] This structural divergence highlights a clear baseline: while the opposition blocks momentum when hitting major metropolitan tiers, the ruling party loses its absolute single-party dominance once campaigns cross into the rural interior. Diverging voter priorities heavily fuel this ongoing geographic bifurcation. Middle-class urban voters consistently prioritize national security, infrastructure modernization, digital governance platforms, and macroeconomic growth indicators.[6] In contrast, voting behavior in rural villages revolves fundamentally around localized survival metrics. These include minimum support prices (MSP) for crops, fertilizer subsidies, guaranteed public sector employment schemes like MGNREGA, and access to direct-benefit cash transfers or clean drinking water. While the urban electorate rewards global economic branding, the rural majority acts as a balancing mechanism, voting strictly on immediate agricultural realities and localized social caste dynamics.[7]

Europe

The urban–rural divide has been analyzed in Europe, particularly Western Europe.[8] Cited countries include Belgium,[9] France,[9] Hungary,[1] Italy,[9] the Netherlands,[10] Poland,[1][2] and the United Kingdom,[11][12] among others.[13] In France, the yellow vests movement argued that the policies of Emmanuel Macron favoured the wealthy in the cities at the expense of poorer rural people.[8] In the United Kingdom, people living in urban areas generally opposed Brexit and favoured closer ties to the European Union, while those living in small towns and rural areas supported Brexit and favoured leaving the European Union.[8] It is among those rural areas in Europe that right-wing populist parties are the strongest, appealing to those who feel they had been left behind by economic globalization and are opposed to the multiculturalism of the major European cities and capitals.[8]

Middle East

Turkey

See also: Religion:Political polarization in Turkey

North America

As in Western Europe, the urban–rural conflict is increasingly a geographic divide in North America, especially in Canada and the United States.[8]

Canada

Research published in 2021 indicates that, like in Europe, both the centre-left (Liberals) and left-wing (New Democratic Party, NDP) are over represented in urban constituencies. Unlike the Liberals, the NDP still maintains support in certain rural areas with a history of unionized extractive industries, such as mining and logging, which are much more important than urban manufacturing in the history of Canadian labour movement in many regions, particularly Northern Ontario and the British Columbia Interior where the NDP are still competitive. In primarily agricultural and petroleum-producing regions, such as the Prairie Provinces, which was the first heartland of the NDP, the Conservative Party of Canada has dominated since its re-formation in 2003, building on a trend that saw its predecessor parties skewing towards over representation in rural areas since the 1960s. During the 1990s, the Liberals lost some of the traditional support they once had in rural Quebec, and by the new millennium they were almost entirely limited to winning urban and suburban constituencies (outside of Atlantic Canada) while the Conservatives were nearly shut out of the largest cities, further accelerating the trend.[14] As of 2021, the Liberals held 86 seats in the three largest metropolitan areas compared to just eight for the Conservatives.[15]

Trends in provincial elections are broadly similar. After the 2023 Alberta general election, which saw the United Conservative Party win a majority government despite losing many urban seats, Professor Paul Kellogg called the urban–rural divide "one of the most important political questions of our generation".[16] Professor Jared Wesley argues that although the policy differences between the two main parties in Alberta are small, each one appeals to different cohort of people based primarily on a sense of identity, where many rural voters instinctively label themselves as conservative even if they have centrist or centre-left policy preferences. To a lesser extent, urban voters may also label themselves as progressive without regard to policy preferences but the conservative identity has a much older and more durable image in the Albertan cultural imagination.[17] After the 2022 Quebec general election, columnist Emile Nicolas described the province as being split in two, between a liberal Montreal as an island in an otherwise conservative and nationalist province.[18] In the 2024 Saskatchewan general election, the Saskatchewan Party similarly maintained its majority government by dominating rural areas, despite major losses of urban ridings to the Saskatchewan New Democratic Party; historian Ken Coates believed that neither party presented a platform that successfully appealed to both audiences.[19][20][21]

United States

2024 presidential election by county
Majority-Black Counties in the U.S. as of the 2020 United States Census
Top to bottom:
2024 U.S. presidential election by county; majority-Black counties as of the 2020 U.S. census

The United States is the most prominent example of the urban-rural divide, among other Western democracies,[22][23] with its history dating back to the 19th century, continuing well into the 21st century, and increasing under the presidency of Donald Trump during the 2010s and 2020s,[24][25] with the 2020 United States presidential election.[26] As of 2025, of the mayors of the 50 largest U.S. cities, 38 are Democrats (76%), 9 are Republicans (18%), and 3 are Independents (6%).[27] In 2016, the average Trump support in farm-heavy counties was 73%; it was 76% in 2020; it was 78% in 2024, when he won all but 11 of these 444 counties. [28]

According to a 2024 study in the American Political Science Review, the rise of rural conservatism in the U.S. can be linked to technological changes in agriculture in the period following World War II. These changes enabled the rise of capital-intensive agriculture and the growing power of agribusiness. Agribusiness favored conservative economic policies, such as limited government regulation and pro-business tax and spending policies.[29]

The urban-rural divide is not uniform across the United States, with some regions being strongly Democratic (i.e. New England) or strongly Republican (i.e. the Upland South) in both urban and rural areas.[30] Also, rural majority-Black counties vote Democratic, as seen by comparing the county maps of the 2020 United States presidential election and majority-Black counties.[31]

The urban-rural divide shrank slightly in the 2024 United States presidential election, due to urban areas typically having a higher cost of living. The Democratic Party's nominee, Kamala Harris, improved among White women with college degrees and maintained her support among African Americans, but collapsed among Hispanic Americans and other racial minorities most affected by the 2021-2023 inflation surge.[32]

Urban–rural conflict in the American South has a complicated and diverse history, with numerous factors contributing to tensions between the two populations.[33] One of the main causes of this tension is the economic divide that has arisen between urban and rural areas. While towns have focused on railways, banking, trade, and absentee land owners, the few cities in the South were river or ocean ports, or textile manufacturing centers. The rural South has been agriculturally oriented regarding cotton, tobacco, and other crops, resulting in economic and social disparities. Additionally, cultural and political differences have contributed to conflict, with rural areas often being more conservative and religious while urban areas tend to be more diverse and liberal. The legacy of racial inequality in the South has also played a significant role in this tension, with many rural areas still struggling with poverty and limited access to education and healthcare. In the 1880–1940 era, Southern demagogues appealed to a poor agrarian base that demanded respect from the much richer business-oriented small towns. In the 20th century rural America, both North and South, used gerrymandering to maintain more power in Congress and state legislatures.[34]

1896 Presidential Election

In the 1896 United States presidential election, there was a significant divide in voting patterns between urban and rural areas. The Republican candidate William McKinley was supported by urban areas, particularly in the northeast and Midwest, where the manufacturing industry was hurt by the economic recession underway. McKinley's message of high tariffs and a gold-backed currency resonated with urban voters, who saw these policies as essential for restoring industrial growth and stability. Factory workers voted for McKinley because he promised jobs. On the other hand, the Democratic candidate William Jennings Bryan was supported by rural areas, particularly in the South and West. Bryan demanded rapid inflation in the price of wheat, cotton, and other farm products through the use of free silver as money. His populist economic platform appealed to farmers, who were struggling with low crop prices and debt. Urban workers feared that free silver would raise prices but not wages. The Bryan campaign appealed first of all to farmers. It told urban workers that their return to prosperity was possible only if the farmers prospered first. Bryan made the point bluntly in the "Cross of Gold" speech, delivered in Chicago just 25 years after that city had burned down. He said: "Burn down your cities and leave our farms, and your cities will spring up again; but destroy our farms, and the grass will grow in the streets of every city in the country."[35]

Bryan's juxtaposing "our farms" and "your cities" did not go over well in cities; they voted 59% for McKinley. Among all the nation's industrial cities, Bryan carried only two (Troy, New York, and Fort Wayne, Indiana).[36] The main labor unions were reluctant to endorse Bryan because their members feared inflation.[37][38] Railroad workers especially worried that Bryan's silver programs would bankrupt the railroads, which were in a shaky financial condition in the depression and whose bonds were payable in gold. Factory workers saw no advantage in inflation to help miners and farmers because their urban cost of living would shoot up and they would be hurt. The McKinley campaign gave special attention to skilled workers, especially in the Midwest and adjacent states.[39] Secret polls show that large majorities of railroad and factory workers voted for McKinley.[40] Overall, McKinley won the election with 271 electoral votes to Bryan's 176, in large part due to his strong support in urban areas.[41]

Oceania

Australia

The 2024 Queensland state election. The Blue and the Brown are Conservative LNP-KAP seats in the rural areas. The red are Labor seats in urban Brisbane

Australia has two major political parties,[42] namely the centre-left Australian Labor Party and the centre-right Coalition. The Coalition is a political grouping and formal coalition between two centre-right parties: the Liberal Party (which is mostly present in urban areas) and the National Party (which is present in regional and rural areas). The Coalition is formal on the federal level and in two states (New South Wales and Victoria) but is informal in Western Australia and does not exist in South Australia (where the Nationals have limited activity), Tasmania (where the Nationals have limited activity and are unregistered), and the Australian Capital Territory (where the Nationals do not exist); the two parties have merged in Queensland (as the Liberal National Party) and the Northern Territory (as the Country Liberal Party).



The 2023 Australian Indigenous Voice referendum results demonstrated some evidence of an urban–rural political divide. The four electorates returning more than 70% of votes in favour were the namesake electorates centred on the CBDs of Melbourne, Sydney, and Canberra, as well as Albanese's inner Sydney electorate of Grayndler. By contrast, the only five electorates to return less than 20% of votes in favour— Maranoa, Flynn, Capricornia, Hinkler, and Dawson—were all rural electorates in southern and central Queensland.[43]

See also

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Rachman, Gideon (30 July 2018). "Urban-rural splits have become the great global divider". The Financial Times. ISSN 0307-1766. https://www.ft.com/content/e05cde76-93d6-11e8-b747-fb1e803ee64e. "The split between a metropolitan elite and a populist hinterland is clear in western politics. Less often noticed is that the same divide increasingly defines politics outside the west — spanning places with very different cultures and levels of development, such as Turkey, Thailand, Brazil, Egypt and Israel." 
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 Tharoor, Ishaan (9 August 2018). "Analysis | The growing urban-rural divide in global politics". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2018/08/09/growing-urban-rural-divide-global-politics/. 
  3. ↑ Yu, Ann T. W. et al. (October 2015). "The key causes of urban-rural conflict in China". Habitat International 49: 65–73. doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.05.009. ISSN 0197-3975. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Liping-Shan/publication/277478618_The_key_causes_of_urban-rural_conflict_in_China/links/5cf0a7b84585153c3da7aac0/The-key-causes-of-urban-rural-conflict-in-China.pdf. Retrieved 6 May 2024. 
  4. ↑ Yadav, Yogendra (13 June 2024). [theprint.in "The sociology of 2024 Lok Sabha elections in 10 charts"]. ThePrint. theprint.in. 
  5. ↑ Bansal, Sonal (15 June 2024). [thestatesman.com "Lok Sabha Poll Dissection: Decoding the Urban-Rural Divide"]. The Statesman. thestatesman.com. 
  6. ↑ Kumar, Sanjay (24 September 2024). [rjwave.org "National Election Studies: Understanding the Indian Voter"]. Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS). rjwave.org. 
  7. ↑ Sharma, Ramesh (27 March 2026). [vajiramandravi.com "Rural-Urban Divide: Meaning, Causes, and Economic Mobility in India"]. Vajiram & Ravi Current Affairs. vajiramandravi.com. 
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 Maxwell, Rahsaan (5 March 2019). "Analysis | Why are urban and rural areas so politically divided?". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/05/why-are-urban-rural-areas-so-politically-divided/. 
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 Zakaria, Fareed (18 December 2018). "Urban-rural chasm defines new political divide in the West". AP News. https://apnews.com/article/9fb75e419b374570a8e0744ee7a11753. 
  10. ↑ Huijsmans, Twan (10 November 2020). "The Urban-Rural Divide in Political Attitudes in the Netherlands". https://www.europenowjournal.org/2020/11/09/the-urban-rural-divide-in-political-attitudes-in-the-netherlands/. 
  11. ↑ Jennings, Will; Stoker, Gerry; Warren, Ian (1 February 2019). "Brexit and public opinion: cities and towns- the geography of discontent". https://ukandeu.ac.uk/brexit-and-public-opinion-cities-and-towns-the-geography-of-discontent/. 
  12. ↑ Swinney, Paul (25 November 2019). "General election 2019: The towns and cities least likely to vote". BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50417767. 
  13. ↑ Kenny, Michael; Luca, Davide (2021). "The urban-rural polarisation of political disenchantment: an investigation of social and political attitudes in 30 European countries". Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society 14 (3): 565–582. doi:10.1093/cjres/rsab012. https://academic.oup.com/cjres/article-abstract/14/3/565/6322445?redirectedFrom=fulltext. Retrieved 6 May 2024. 
  14. ↑ Lucas, Jack; Taylor, Zack (12 October 2021). "Canada's worrisome urban-rural political divide has never been greater". http://theconversation.com/canadas-worrisome-urban-rural-political-divide-has-never-been-greater-168994. 
  15. ↑ Wherry, Aaron (3 October 2021). "Two new solitudes — rural and urban — now define the Canadian political landscape". CBC News. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/2021-election-rural-urban-conservative-liberal-1.6197095. 
  16. ↑ Bruch, Timm (30 May 2023). "Orange islands in a blue sea: Why Alberta's urban-rural political divide still exists". CTV News Calgary. https://www.ctvnews.ca/calgary/article/orange-islands-in-a-blue-sea-why-albertas-urban-rural-political-divide-still-exists/. 
  17. ↑ Weber, Bob (5 June 2023). "Alberta political divide rooted in identity, not ideology, survey suggests". Global News. https://globalnews.ca/news/9746824/alberta-politics-polarization-common-ground/. 
  18. ↑ Nicolas, Emilie (6 October 2022). "Opinion: Legault's win reveals a Quebec split in two". The Globe and Mail. ISSN 0017-1212. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-legaults-win-reveals-a-quebec-split-in-two/. 
  19. ↑ "Sask. Party to form government for fifth consecutive time" (in en). 2024-10-23. https://regina.ctvnews.ca/sask-party-to-form-government-for-fifth-consecutive-time-1.7083699. 
  20. ↑ "Saskatchewan Party will form government, CBC projects". 2024-10-28. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/saskatchewan-2024-provincial-election-1.7364186. 
  21. ↑ "Saskatchewan Party projected to form majority government" (in en-US). https://globalnews.ca/news/10831409/saskatchewan-election-2024/. 
  22. ↑ Gimpel, James G.; Reeves, Andrew (2024). "The urban-rural divide and residential contentment as antecedents of political ideology". Cities 146. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2023.104720. 
  23. ↑ Luca, Davide; Terrero-Davila, Javier; Stein, Jonas; Lee, Neil (2023). "Progressive cities: Urban–rural polarisation of social values and economic development around the world". Urban Studies 60 (12): 2329–2350. doi:10.1177/00420980221148388. 
  24. ↑ Badger, Emily (21 May 2019). "How the Rural-Urban Divide Became America's Political Fault Line". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/21/upshot/america-political-divide-urban-rural.html. 
  25. ↑ Savat, Sara (18 February 2020). "The divide between us: Urban-rural political differences rooted in geography". https://source.wustl.edu/2020/02/the-divide-between-us-urban-rural-political-differences-rooted-in-geography/. 
  26. ↑ Siegler, Kirk (18 November 2020). "Biden's Win Shows Rural-Urban Divide Has Grown Since 2016". https://www.npr.org/2020/11/18/934631994/bidens-win-shows-rural-urban-divide-has-grown-since-2016. 
  27. ↑ "City and Town Population Totals: 2020-2022". United States Census Bureau, Population Division. https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/popest/2020s-total-cities-and-towns.html. 
  28. ↑ Ben Felder, "Trump support grew in America’s top farming counties despite first-term trade war; Farming-dependent counties rallied behind Trump with an average of nearly 78% support" Investigate Midwest (November 13, 2024) online
  29. ↑ Dasgupta, Aditya; Ramirez, Elena (2024). "Explaining Rural Conservatism: Political Consequences of Technological Change in the Great Plains". American Political Science Review 119: 277–299. doi:10.1017/S0003055424000200. ISSN 0003-0554. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/explaining-rural-conservatism-political-consequences-of-technological-change-in-the-great-plains/8F2DFFCAC301FDA0C49797ADAEBAC4A5. Retrieved 6 May 2024. 
  30. ↑ Woodard, Colin (November 10, 2017). "No, the great US political divide isn't rural vs urban. Here's the proof.". https://colinwoodard.com/no-the-great-us-political-divide-isnt-rural-vs-urban-heres-the-proof/. 
  31. ↑ Bositis, David. "Blacks and the 2012 Democratic National Convention; page 9, table 1: black votes in presidential elections, 1936 - 2008". https://jointcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Blacks-and-the-2012-Democratic-National-Convention.pdf. 
  32. ↑ Suss, Joel; Xiao, Eva; Burn-Murdoch, John; Murray, Clara; Vincent, Jonathan (2024-11-09). "Poorer voters flocked to Trump — and other data points from the election". Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/6de668c7-64e9-4196-b2c5-9ceca966fe3f. 
  33. ↑ Eagles, Charles W. (1989). "Congressional Voting in the 1920s: A Test of Urban-Rural Conflict". The Journal of American History 76 (2): 528–534. doi:10.2307/1907989. ISSN 0021-8723. 
  34. ↑ Eagles, Charles W. (1 June 2010). "The Historiographical Importance of Urban–Rural Conflict in the 1920s". Democracy Delayed: Congressional Reapportionment and Urban-rural Conflict in the 1920s. University of Georgia Press. ISBN 978-0-8203-3622-0. https://books.google.com/books?id=jbYJUHoJLkgC. Retrieved 6 May 2024. 
  35. ↑ Kleppner, Paul (1970). The Cross of Culture: A Social Analysis of Midwestern Politics, 1850–1900. Free Press. p. 304. https://archive.org/details/crossofcultureso0000klep. Retrieved 6 May 2024. 
  36. ↑ Diamond, William (1941). "Urban and Rural Voting in 1896". The American Historical Review 46 (2): 281–305. doi:10.2307/1838945. ISSN 0002-8762. At pp. 285, 297. 
  37. ↑ Sanders, Elizabeth (1999). Roots of Reform: Farmers, Workers, and the American State, 1877–1917. University of Chicago Press. p. 434. ISBN 978-0-2267-3477-4. https://books.google.com/books?id=_OG54CMBjAIC. Retrieved 6 May 2024. 
  38. ↑ Hild, Matthew (2007). Greenbackers, Knights of Labor, and Populists: Farmer-Labor Insurgency in the Late-Nineteenth-Century South. University of Georgia Press. pp. 191–192. ISBN 978-0-8203-2897-3. https://books.google.com/books?id=6pe7kaB1TcgC. Retrieved 6 May 2024. 
  39. ↑ Harpine, William D. (2006). From the Front Porch to the Front Page: McKinley and Bryan in the 1896 Presidential Campaign. Texas A&M University Press. p. 117. ISBN 978-1-5854-4559-2. https://books.google.com/books?id=0LANgsuVoBwC. Retrieved 6 May 2024. 
  40. ↑ Jensen, Richard J. (1971). The Winning of the Midwest: Social and Political Conflict, 1888–1896. University of Chicago Press. pp. 55–56. ISBN 978-0-2263-9825-9. https://books.google.com/books?id=XpCgCNZwpvoC. 
  41. ↑ Diamond, William (1941). "Urban and Rural Voting in 1896". The American Historical Review 46 (2): 281–305. doi:10.2307/1838945. ISSN 0002-8762. 
  42. ↑ Wilkinson, George; Haslam Mckenzie, Fiona; Bolleter, Julian (2022). "Federalism and urban primacy: political dimensions that influence the city–country divide in Australia". International Journal of Urban Sciences 26 (3): 438–462. doi:10.1080/12265934.2021.1997631. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/12265934.2021.1997631. Retrieved 6 May 2024. 
  43. ↑ Roe, Isobel (14 October 2023). "Voice result reveals more than just Australia's country-city divide". ABC News. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-15/nsw-votes-no-indigenous-voice-referendum-demographics-result/102976968. 

Notes

  1. ↑ In India the urban voters tend to vote more for right wing parties than Rural voters. For instance in 2024 Indian general election, the BJP won 40% of the votes in urban areas as compared to just 34% in rural areas.

Further reading

In United States

  • Buttel Frederick, and William Flinn. "Sources and consequences of agrarian values in American society" Rural Sociology 1975. 40 (2): 134–51.
  • Eagles, Charles W. "Congressional voting in the 1920s: A test of urban-rural conflict." Journal of American History 76.2 (1989): 528-534. online
  • Friedman, Robert S. (1961). "The Urban-Rural Conflict Revisited". The Western Political Quarterly 14 (2): 481–495. doi:10.2307/443602. ISSN 0043-4078. 
  • Gimpel, James G., et al. "The urban–rural gulf in American political behavior." Political Behavior 42 (2020): 1343-1368. online
  • Gimpel, James G., and Kimberly A. Karnes. "The rural side of the urban-rural gap." PS: Political Science & Politics 39.3 (2006): 467-472. online
  • Scala, Dante J., and Kenneth M. Johnson. "Political polarization along the rural-urban continuum? The geography of the presidential vote, 2000–2016." The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 672.1 (2017): 162-184. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716217712696
  • Shea, Daniel, and Nicholas F. Jacobs. The rural voter: The politics of place and the disuniting of America (Columbia UP, 2023). online



Retrieved from "https://handwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Earth:Urban–rural_political_divide&oldid=4575316"