Where does Northern California end and Southern California begin? (San Jose: rating, metro)

[tstieber]

Originally Posted by Baby Sister

I'm in Oregon and I wear Birks - oh yeah, I bought them in NoCa

Birkenstocks were big about 15 years ago in NorCal -- have seen maybe one person all month wearing birks, and like 1000 people wearing flip-flops. Birks are dead. Flip flops took over NorCal and the rest of America about 5 to 10 years ago!

[mateo45]

Originally Posted by BlackShoe

California is much too complex to simply divide it into North and South.About twenty years ago a book was written that divided the state into about ten or twelve regions that the author called,I believe,nations,or a similar name.Each region had a distinct geo-political characteristic as well as economic features.Am unable to recall the books title or the authors name at this time.At the very least,California should be divided into three parts.Draw a line from San Luis Obispo to Las Vegas.Below this line is SoCal.Draw a line from Santa Rosa to Reno.Below this line to the first line is CenCal.Above the line is NoCal.These are my opinions,but they are based as much on politics,attitudes,and econonics as geography.

Originally Posted by Baby Sister

I don't consider anything south of Woodland to be in Northern California, and I prefer it without abbreviations And I was born and raised in SoCal

They'll have to pry my abbreviations from my cold dead fingers... it's still called NorCal (and BTW, sometimes I even say "Cali" too)! But I like the idea of the dividing line drawn from Santa Rosa to Reno for Northern California, and actually if you did that, Woodland would be just south of there.

But more than anything else, I think "NorCal" is really a state of mind... that's essentially "non-urban" and basically libertarian in attitude (regardless whether liberal or conservative). So even though NorCal includes everything from Palin-supporters and conservative ranchers in the Valley, to the Humboldt hippies and pot growers, they probably all have more in common, philosophically-speaking, than their "cultural equivalents" in SoCal.

[Winston Smith]

Originally Posted by mateo45

But I like the idea of the dividing line drawn from Santa Rosa to Reno for Northern California ... .

But more than anything else, I think "NorCal" is ... basically libertarian in attitude (regardless whether liberal or conservative).

I still say the dividing line should be north-south instead of east-west. But anyway.

Inland northern CA I can see to be libertarian, but what about coastal northern CA? My impression has been that Mendocino and Humboldt counties are pretty liberal in a way that's decidedly not libertarian, at least not in the sense of smaller government and privatization. They might be libertarian in that they want government out of personal decisions about social choices, but not libertarian in that they want to do away with public institutions. In Siskiyou and Modoc, perhaps, but not on the coast. Maybe my impression is wrong.

[mateo45]

Originally Posted by Winston Smith

I still say the dividing line should be north-south instead of east-west. But anyway.

Inland northern CA I can see to be libertarian, but what about coastal northern CA? My impression has been that Mendocino and Humboldt counties are pretty liberal in a way that's decidedly not libertarian, at least not in the sense of smaller government and privatization. They might be libertarian in that they want government out of personal decisions about social choices, but not libertarian in that they want to do away with public institutions. In Siskiyou and Modoc, perhaps, but not on the coast. Maybe my impression is wrong.

Sorry, couldn't locate your "north-south" argument, but I understand re: your definition of "libertarian". Although judging from the number of folks on welfare and other social services in the otherwise "conservative" Valley, the "reality" of various ideologies, probably seldom holds up for either side.

I'm mostly thinking of "Libertarian" as a unifying feature that, for lack of a better description, it's still essentially the same, basically rural "leave me alone" sensibility throughout NorCal, whether it's the hippies, pot growers, blue-collar conservatives and "Utopian" seekers of the north coast, the fiercely independent ranchers and farmers in the Central Valley, the Oakies, "hillbillies" and (sub)urban refugees in the foothills, or those feisty folks in the "Free State of Jefferson".

[Winston Smith]

Originally Posted by mateo45

Sorry, couldn't locate your "north-south" argument, but I understand re: your definition of "libertarian". Although judging from the number of folks on welfare and other social services in the otherwise "conservative" Valley, the "reality" of various ideologies, probably seldom holds up for either side.

Had to search a little myself. Post #59: http://www.city-data.com/forum/8083410-post59.html Should clarify: east-west divide along a north-south dividing line.

Originally Posted by mateo45

I'm mostly thinking of "Libertarian" as a unifying feature that, for lack of a better description, it's still essentially the same, basically rural "leave me alone" sensibility throughout NorCal, whether it's the hippies, pot growers, blue-collar conservatives and "Utopian" seekers of the north coast, the fiercely independent ranchers and farmers in the Central Valley, the Oakies, "hillbillies" and (sub)urban refugees in the foothills, or those feisty folks in the "Free State of Jefferson".

Thanks for the explanation. Sounds reasonable to me. I also mentioned the State of Jefferson earlier.

[mateo45]

Originally Posted by Winston Smith

Had to search a little myself. Post #59: http://www.city-data.com/forum/8083410-post59.html Should clarify: east-west divide along a north-south dividing line.

Thanks for the explanation. Sounds reasonable to me. I also mentioned the State of Jefferson earlier.

You're right, the Central Valley really is the Great Divider, politically, culturally, and geographically! BTW, have read that during the 16th century, so much of the Valley was still covered by water, that the Spaniards pictured California on maps as an island!

[Burg-Justice]

hold on i think you're kinda missing something do you but hey its simple listen go to google.com and type in the search box for example if you stay in vista, type in is vista in southern or northern California? and see whats the answer, see what I mean? simple isn't it

[KC6ZLV]

Originally Posted by mateo45

You're right, the Central Valley really is the Great Divider, politically, culturally, and geographically! BTW, have read that during the 16th century, so much of the Valley was still covered by water, that the Spaniards pictured California on maps as an island!

You're wrong!

California was thought of as an island due to a Spanish novel written about 150 years prior to that map you posted. When the Spanish explorers encountered the peninsula making up Baja California they thought it was an island, then named it California.

And that is the origin of California's name.

[Clarks]

However, the Central Valley was indeed largely covered by water, vast swamps that were home to Elk and Griz.

In the 16th century no Spaniard had seen the Central Valley.

The Capital of California was Loreto.

[Voyageur]

Originally Posted by Clarks

However, the Central Valley was indeed largely covered by water, vast swamps that were home to Elk and Griz.

In the 16th century no Spaniard had seen the Central Valley.

The Capital of California was Loreto.

Yeah, the notion of "California as an island" seems to have come from the exploration of southern Baja California (or, rather, what would eventually come to be called 'Baja California') and the assumption that it was part of an island, not part of a peninsula.

Thus it was named 'California' after the fictional island of Spanish literature.

As wet as the Central Valley once was, no one should ever have confused freshwater lakes and marshes for an extension of the ocean.