Redneck Communism: Big banks continue draining the rural south for urban profit

In today’s modern capitalist society, the influence of big banks extends far beyond financial transactions. Unfortunately, the rural South often finds itself at a disadvantage when it comes to the workings of these institutions. This essay aims to shed light on how big banks, driven by profit-seeking motives, extract wealth from the rural South and channel it into overdeveloped urban centers, benefiting the bourgeoisie while neglecting the needs of the rural Southerner. By examining various examples, we can understand the mechanisms through which this exploitation occurs.

Big banks have been known to discriminate against rural communities in lending practices, favoring urban areas with higher population densities and established economic infrastructure. This bias leaves rural Southerners at a disadvantage when seeking loans for housing, or education.

The discriminatory lending practices of big banks disproportionately impact rural communities in the South, creating significant hurdles for residents in obtaining loans for housing. These institutions often favor urban areas with higher population densities and established economic infrastructure, neglecting the needs of rural Southerners. For instance, studies have shown that big banks have historically engaged in redlining practices, systematically denying loans or charging higher interest rates to individuals residing in predominantly rural and low-income areas. This discrimination perpetuates housing inequality and restricts the ability of rural Southerners to access safe and affordable housing options. Moreover, the lack of lending support for rural housing development further exacerbates the housing crisis in these communities.

In rural areas of the South, aspiring homeowners face substantial challenges in securing mortgage loans from big banks. These lenders deem rural properties as higher-risk investments due to lower property values or perceived economic instability. Consequently, rural Southerners encounter difficulties in achieving homeownership, limiting their ability to build wealth and stabilize their communities.

When it comes to education financing, big banks often fail to address the unique needs of rural students and families. Higher education is essential for socioeconomic mobility, yet rural Southerners face significant barriers in accessing affordable student loans and other financial resources. Big banks tend to focus their resources and marketing efforts on urban areas with large universities and established student populations, leaving rural students at a disadvantage.

Rural students in the South rely on federal student loans to finance their education. However, big banks, while involved in the federal student loan program, lack the necessary infrastructure and presence in rural communities to effectively serve student borrowers. This results in limited access to loan information, repayment assistance, and financial guidance. As a result, rural students may struggle to navigate the complex landscape of student loans, hindering their educational aspirations.

In addition to discriminatory lending practices, big banks’ policies and investment strategies often overlook the economic potential of rural areas in the South. These institutions prioritize urban centers for capital investment, further exacerbating the urban-rural divide and limiting economic opportunities for rural Southerners. The lack of targeted investments in rural infrastructure, small businesses, and industries stifles economic growth and perpetuates the cycle of rural poverty.

Major banks allocate all of their lending and investment portfolios to urban development projects, such as commercial real estate ventures, large-scale construction, or technology startups primarily located in urban centers. These investments often bypass rural communities with untapped economic potential. As a result, rural areas struggle to access the resources needed to grow and innovate, perpetuating the economic disparities between the urban bourgeoisie and the rural south.

The underdevelopment of the rural South is evident through major banks’ allocation of their lending and investment portfolios primarily to urban development projects, neglecting rural communities with untapped economic potential. This biased approach perpetuates economic disparities between the urban bourgeoisie and the rural South.

Major banks prioritize funding for urban infrastructure projects, such as transportation networks and modern utilities, while rural areas face inadequate infrastructure, including outdated roads and limited broadband access. This lack of investment hampers economic growth and limits job opportunities in rural regions.

Rural development heavily rely on small businesses and agriculture, yet major banks prioritize investments in large corporations and urban-centered industries. This neglect leaves rural entrepreneurs and small businesses struggling to access capital for growth and innovation.

The concentration of banks in urban areas and the closure of rural bank branches limit access to financial services in rural communities. This hampers financial inclusion, impedes business growth, and restricts investment opportunities in rural regions.

Overall, the disproportionate allocation of lending and investment portfolios by major banks toward urban development projects reinforces the underdevelopment of the rural South. It hinders infrastructure development, neglects small businesses and agriculture, and limits access to financial services. These factors contribute to the perpetuation of economic disparities, leaving the rural South struggling to tap into its untapped economic potential.

The solution lies in implementing radical economic and social reforms that empower the rural population, redistribute wealth, and dismantle the capitalist structures that perpetuate inequality. Here are some key components of such a solution:

• Land Reform and Agrarian Revolution: A crucial step is to initiate land reform that ensures equitable distribution of land among rural peasants. The emphasis should be on collectivization and communal ownership, allowing for cooperative farming and the elimination of feudalistic practices. This will not only empower rural communities but also promote sustainable agriculture and rural self-sufficiency.
• Rural Industrialization: By investing in rural industries and infrastructure, the rural South can be transformed into self-reliant and thriving economic centers. This includes establishing small-scale industries, cooperatives, and agricultural processing units that provide employment opportunities and value addition to local resources. The focus should be on decentralized industrialization, enabling the rural population to benefit from their own labor and resources.
• Access to Education and Healthcare: A revolutionary solution entails ensuring universal access to quality education and healthcare in the rural South. This can be achieved through the establishment of community-based schools and health centers, with an emphasis on eradicating illiteracy, providing vocational training, and delivering comprehensive healthcare services. Education and healthcare must be seen as fundamental rights and integral to the development of rural communities.
• Participatory Democracy and People’s Empowerment: True transformation requires the active involvement and empowerment of the rural population. This can be achieved through the establishment of grassroots democratic structures, such as People’s Communes, where decision-making power is decentralized and shared among the masses. People’s assemblies, community organizations, and revolutionary committees should be fostered to ensure that the rural South has a direct say in shaping its own future.
• Cultural Revolution and Ideological Transformation: A revolutionary solution necessitates a profound cultural revolution, aimed at challenging and transforming the prevailing capitalist ideologies and cultural norms that perpetuate exploitation and inequality. Emphasizing proletarian values, promoting collective consciousness, and engaging in ideological struggle against bourgeois influences will help cultivate a revolutionary spirit and foster a sense of class solidarity among rural Southerners.

This article was written by Max Jones, this article was published by Common Revolution Disrupts Monopoly, to see more brilliant work like this, follow our publication as well as giving 50 claps to this article.

Max Jones is a Marxist and Materialist writer.

• The author has a particular ideological perspective that they bring to their writing. Marxism is a political and economic theory that focuses on the struggle between the ruling class and the working class, while materialism is a philosophical perspective that emphasizes the importance of material conditions and physical reality in shaping human experience.
• By identifying themselves as a Marxist and Materialist writer, Max X is signaling to readers that their analysis of the topic at hand will be informed by these perspectives. This can help readers understand the underlying assumptions and values that shape the author’s viewpoint.
• By encouraging readers to follow, comment, and clap for the article, the author is seeking to increase the visibility and impact of their work. This engagement can help to attract new readers and build a sense of community around the author’s ideas.
• However, it’s important to note that readers should engage with the content on its own merits, rather than simply showing support for the author’s ideological perspective. Critical engagement with ideas and arguments is essential for advancing knowledge and understanding, and can help to foster constructive dialogue and debate.

Completed on 6/28/2023