Arkansas R.F.D.

No.

At least, not if things continue on the same path, and here's my reasoning:

1.) NW Arkansas and Little Rock are in a pissing match to be the top dog in our small state. And in a state as small as Arkansas, two metro areas won't work unless we see a significant surge in population and the associated infrastructure. We don't have the money for the latter, so the former won't follow. The two are going to have to work together, or one is going to have to settle for being second banana.

2.) The article talks about some cities w/out established identites being successful (like Charolette); Does Little Rock have an identity, besides being a state capital and part of Bill Clinton's backstory? Maybe the problem is that Little Rock hasn't properly "identified" its identity.

Some other factors. If Atlanta can attract a large segment of the young, educated African-American population, why not Little Rock? Well, Little Rock still suffers from a segregation stigma, possibly because the Central High crisis is so highly touted. The event, whle important, perpetuates an idea that Little Rock was/is not open to equality.

Little Rock doesn't sport the international or alternative population. With huge monoliths like the mega churches (from any direction you enter Little Rock, you pass one) it gives the alternative population pause to enter. And couldn't the international flavor be touted outside of food festivals and ethnic restaurants? What is being done to invite either group?

All this being said, I still think Little Rock has enormous potential, it just needs to be packaged. The city should be looking at places like Austin and Atlanta (state capital/cutlural centers) as "big brother" examples.

Atlanta and Austin don't suffer from the same kind of intra-state influences that Little Rock gets from the rest of Arkansas. LR is going to have to become more independent.