Zubalove, in a post about NY State politics, references one of the state’s archetypes: the perennial rivalry for money and political power between New York City and “Upstate.”

(Upstate, for anyone who has never been here, is about as different from NY City as you could imagine: a patchwork of New Englandish, rural communities, woodlands [some quite extensive], dairy farms, and small-to-medium cities, most of which are a bit tattered around the edges.)

Zuba writes:

The increasing chasm between the economy of a world-class metropolitan area and the milder and volatile rust belt characteristics of upstate becomes more and more difficult to negotiate every year. This regional problem transcends political party, because neither group seems incredibly willing to stand up and make the necessary changes to the financial barriers of this state. As long as downstate hums along, it doesn’t faze any of the leaders in Albany that the cost of doing business in this state is astronomical and the tax rate is oppressive.

It’s the tyranny of the majority: Upstate is more sparsely populated than our state’s famous namesake city, therefore, our priorities tend to be backburnered. Sure, the politicians pass through to garner swing votes during election season (in 1999, the Clintons famously chose Skaneatales for a summer vacation, in large part to help soften the Upstate turf for Hillary’s upcoming Senate run). But we live in a very large shadow, and short of breaking the state in two, we always will.

Zuba suggests that we can adjust the balance of power by breaking up the status quo of our state government, and mentions a new book by Jay Gallagher, Gannett News Service’s Albany bureau chief, cheerfully titled “The Politics of Decline.”

It will be interesting to see what Gallagher prescribes — and whether anybody pays any attention.