Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You sure about that? I know many Germans settled in the Hill Country back in the 19th century, but did they outnumber the Hispanics and the native English speakers?
yep. Texas was sparcely populated back then. It was a spanish territory but not a largely used one. There was uproar even a little stir in things when someone suggested that German should be the major language in Texas.
I think the second most widely spoken language was not even English it was Czech
Why do you say NY is becoming a "Western" state because Mexicans are moving there? Mexicans are a small fraction of the people migrating to NY. Most Mexican immigrants settle in states far to the west of NY.
one of the excuses they give for Texas not being a southern state is that the largest minority group here is hispanic.
They say Texas is more western or south western because of that.
New York is 27% hispanic, its on its way to becoming a south western state too by that definition
Only if you think Mexicans are the Latino's of this country. Most of NY's 27% Latino residents are from the islands. Not Mexico and if the Latino population increases to around say 40% in New York, the majority will still come from the Islands and most Latino's from the Islands stay east of the Mississippi anyway.
Texas is not southern because of it's geographic location. It's Southern because of who settled there and how they shaped the culture. If we're going to just use just it's geographic location, then why don't we argue for Arizona and New Mexico as being Southern states? If people from say Massachusetts, Ohio, New York, and Pennsylvania settled and shaped the culture of Texas before the people of Tennessee, Virginia, and Alabama did, what would we call Texas today? I will go out on a limb and say that it would be very very different from the South. Heck, it's cities would look incredibly different as well.
Only if you think Mexicans are the Latino's of this country. Most of NY's 27% Latino residents are from the islands. Not Mexico and if the Latino population increases to around say 40% in New York, the majority will still come from the Islands and most Latino's from the Islands stay east of the Mississippi anyway.
Texas is not southern because of it's geographic location. It's Southern because of who settled there and how they shaped the culture. If we're going to just use just it's geographic location, then why don't we argue for Arizona and New Mexico as being Southern states? If people from say Massachusetts, Ohio, New York, and Pennsylvania settled and shaped the culture of Texas before the people of Tennessee, Virginia, and Alabama did, what would we call Texas today? I will go out on a limb and say that it would be very very different from the South. Heck, it's cities would look incredibly different as well.
I am not talking about culture, I am talking about location. Why is it wrong to say that Texas is in the south geographically? why when someone mentions something about a city geographically, why do people bring in culture. Like the example I gave with DFW, why is it wrong to say that it is the biggest metro in the south?
I am not talking about culture, I am talking about location. Why is it wrong to say that Texas is in the south geographically? why when someone mentions something about a city geographically, why do people bring in culture. Like the example I gave with DFW, why is it wrong to say that it is the biggest metro in the south?
Because, like TexasReb says, in this country for some reason, just using geography is not the be all when determining where a place is at regionally. There's nothing wrong with saying DFW is the largest metro in the South and it most definitely is in the South. But let's continue to go down that list.
2. Houston
3. Atlanta
4. Miami
5. Phoenix......gasp
Can we not argue for Phoenix since it's also in the Southern portion of the US geographically? That's why culture takes more precedence over geography.
when someone says that DFW is the largest metro in the south, why are they wrong?
Well, you'd have to convince your audience that Dallas is in the geographic "south" to begin with. Many people feel that this ends somewhere around the Arkansas/Louisiana western line.
Well, you'd have to convince your audience that Dallas is in the geographic "south" to begin with. Many people feel that this ends somewhere around the Arkansas/Louisiana western line.
would the US Government be convincing enough for you, or would the word of many people be more accurate:
Keep in mind the average american can name more of Snow White's Dwarfs than the Justices on the Supreme Court.
Sometimes I feel like the Queen of England, but darn it, what I feel doesn't matter, what is actual is what matters
would the US Government be convincing enough for you
Well, no. That's just a division they use for their own statistical purposes. Which is fine for them, but it doesn't really capture the full picture. For example, by that diagram, El Paso would be a "southern" city, which most people would find ridiculous. Colorado would border "the south." And so on.
I am not talking about culture, I am talking about location. Why is it wrong to say that Texas is in the south geographically?
You can say that, but as mentioned by geography alone Arizona and New Mexico are also Southern. For that matter so is Hawaii I suppose.
If you want to say "I mean Southeastern" than much/most of Texas doesn't work. Much of Texas is straight South of the US's geographical center and not Southeast of it. So Texas is South-Central not Southeastern.
You can dislike it all you want, but "The South" is more a cultural and historical term rather than a geographic one. Still as Texas was a slave-holding state and part of the Confederacy it can be deemed "Southern." I just think some factors also make it Southwestern or just "it's own thing."
You can say that, but as mentioned by geography alone Arizona and New Mexico are also Southern. For that matter so is Hawaii I suppose.
If you want to say "I mean Southeastern" than much/most of Texas doesn't work. Much of Texas is straight South of the US's geographical center and not Southeast of it. So Texas is South-Central not Southeastern.
You can dislike it all you want, but "The South" is more a cultural and historical term rather than a geographic one. Still as Texas was a slave-holding state and part of the Confederacy it can be deemed "Southern." I just think some factors also make it Southwestern or just "it's own thing."
I never denied that it shares sw culture. What I am saying is whys do people always jump on people who state things like Dfw is the biggest metro in the south when in fact it is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know many Germans settled in the Hill Country back in the 19th century, but did they outnumber the Hispanics and the native English speakers?
