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.
Ok I stand corrected on the confederacy part, but "force"? Really? How, exactly, am I "forcing" anything here? Please explain. I'm fairly certain I was sharing an opinion... just like your apparent opinion that Kentucky is a Midwestern state.
By the way, have you ever been to Kentucky? Outside of Louisville or the Cincy suburbs, that is? I have. It seemed a hell of a LOT more Southern to me than Midwestern... but let me be clear, that's just my opinion. Not trying to "force" it on you.
You know, I could have included Kentucky, but then the case may be made for me to include Missouri, West Virginia, and even Maryland since it's south of the Mason-Dixon line. Then you have southern Ohio, southern Indiana, and southern Illinois which all have characteristics of the south. I had to draw the line somewhere, and I decided to draw it below Kentucky, mostly in line with the old Confederate states.
You know, I could have included Kentucky, but then the case may be made for me to include Missouri, West Virginia, and even Maryland since it's south of the Mason-Dixon line. Then you have southern Ohio, southern Indiana, and southern Illinois which all have characteristics of the south. I had to draw the line somewhere, and I decided to draw it below Kentucky, mostly in line with the old Confederate states.
Fair enough, and I totally understand... except for Kentucky. Confederacy or not 150 years ago, it just strikes me as a very Southern state in the present era. Much more so than Florida or Texas, but it's your thread, and I respect that.
Fair enough, and I totally understand... except for Kentucky. Confederacy or not 150 years ago, it just strikes me as a very Southern state in the present era. Much more so than Florida or Texas, but it's your thread, and I respect that.
In retrospect, I think I would have liked to have added Kentucky, even though I'm sure very few people think of it as the, "the most southern state". It may have helped identify how it compares against the deep south states to you. The Florida panhandle is undoubtedly southern, as is much of eastern Texas. Not saying Kentucky isn't, but it just didn't seem like a state that would garner much attention or votes. This is the best mention Kentucky has had throughout the whole thread! Trust me, I wish I had included it now, even if it did have 0 votes at this point.
In retrospect, I think I would have liked to have added Kentucky, even though I'm sure very few people think of it as the, "the most southern state". It may have helped identify how it compares against the deep south states to you. The Florida panhandle is undoubtedly southern, as is much of eastern Texas. Not saying Kentucky isn't, but it just didn't seem like a state that would garner much attention or votes. This is the best mention Kentucky has had throughout the whole thread! Trust me, I wish I had included it now, even if it did have 0 votes at this point.
I think where it gets confusing, is that there are several different definitions of what constitutes "The South". Some people go by the old Confederate States of America standard. The census bureau includes Missouri, Oklahoma, and Maryland. Even Delaware gets lumped in from time to time. Then you have those who argue (not me) that Texas, Florida, and Oklahoma aren't "true" Southern states. I've even heard people make that same argument for Arkansas, though it's rare. Others still try to make the argument that cities like Atlanta, Houston, Dallas, and Charlotte should turn in their "Southern card", as they have been to heavily diluted by transplants. It gets silly. Sorry if I added to the silliness, even if I do stand by my opinion of Kentucky being Southern.
The problem is that we're talking about today, not 75 years ago. Of course Georgia is still Southern, but with Atlanta (which comprises over half of Georgia's population) being such a large melting point and having experienced rapid growth for the past couple decades, that dilutes things just a bit for Georgia, particularly in comparison to Mississippi. People are very informed about the South, but they have a much more comprehensive understanding about this issue than you seem to have, at least with respect to time.
So I'm uninformed while you're downplaying the fact that more black people were lynched in Georgia than any other state during the 20th century. If not for research, I would still today think that this dubious distinction belonged to Mississippi instead of Georgia just like everyone else. So you want to talk about the here and now when the design principle of Georgia's current state flag (since 2003) is based on the " First National Flag of the Confederacy " which is something that many Georgians seem to not be aware of....And you talking about uninformed...Yeah I hadn't the slightest idea that the Atlanta race riot of 1906 was actually a racial massacre of Negroes
So I'm uninformed while you're downplaying the fact that more black people were lynched in Georgia than any other state during the 20th century. If not for research, I would still today think that this dubious distinction belonged to Mississippi instead of Georgia just like everyone else. So you want to talk about the here and now when the design principle of Georgia's current state flag (since 2003) is based on the " First National Flag of the Confederacy " which is something that many Georgians seem to not be aware of....And you talking about uninformed...Yeah I hadn't the slightest idea that the Atlanta race riot of 1906 was actually a racial massacre of Negroes
It's no about the old south. Having the credit of more lynched black people or anything confederate should not be used to measure southern culture today.
Ok I stand corrected on the confederacy part. Let me re-phrase: it was neutral, but under a confederate shadow government, or rather a self-appointed group of confederate sympathizers, during the civil war.
Now, back to the year 2014. You say "force"? Really? How, exactly, am I "forcing" anything here? Please explain. I'm fairly certain I was sharing an opinion... just like your apparent opinion that Kentucky is a Midwestern state.
By the way, have you ever been to Kentucky? Outside of Louisville or the Cincy suburbs, that is? I have. It seemed a hell of a LOT more Southern to me than Midwestern... but let me be clear, that's just my opinion. Not trying to "force" it on you.
I guess it was just your phrasing that made me misconstrue your point. Yeah I've been to Kentucky, and while it was undoubtedly country, it just didn't strike me as southern. There are certainly traits of the south but one can also observe traits of the Mid Atlantic and of course the Midwest. Even if you look at a map, Kentucky is closer to Ontario than it is most of the south!
So I'm uninformed while you're downplaying the fact that more black people were lynched in Georgia than any other state during the 20th century. If not for research, I would still today think that this dubious distinction belonged to Mississippi instead of Georgia just like everyone else. So you want to talk about the here and now when the design principle of Georgia's current state flag (since 2003) is based on the " First National Flag of the Confederacy " which is something that many Georgians seem to not be aware of....And you talking about uninformed...Yeah I hadn't the slightest idea that the Atlanta race riot of 1906 was actually a racial massacre of Negroes
I never called you uninformed; read again.
Again, all you keep talking about is events that happened a century ago. And are you going to argue that Georgia is more Southern than Mississippi today based on state flags, with Mississippi's still including the Confederate battle flag? Seriously? Are you going to argue that NC is just as or more Southern than Mississippi based on that same logic???
There's a reason your arguments aren't getting any traction around here, and it's not because you're more enlightened than everybody else; it's because your perspective is extremely limited and doesn't consider anything beyond the mid-20th century. You seem to have trouble comprehending the fact that things change. People can easily see how flawed your arguments are, but knock yourself out.
I guess it was just your phrasing that made me misconstrue your point. Yeah I've been to Kentucky, and while it was undoubtedly country, it just didn't strike me as southern. There are certainly traits of the south but one can also observe traits of the Mid Atlantic and of course the Midwest. Even if you look at a map, Kentucky is closer to Ontario than it is most of the south!
What's mid-Atlantic about Kentucky??????????
A good bit of the state is Appalachian Southern, which isn't quite the same as Deep South-Southern. I think that's what might be tripping you up, so to speak.
A good bit of the state is Appalachian Southern, which isn't quite the same as Deep South-Southern. I think that's what might be tripping you up, so to speak.
Well nothing is tripping me up. I mean mid Atlantic in the sense that WV and parts of VA would be considered.
The fact that it is part Appalachia is a good point. That is a vein that ties it to many other states in the Northeast and Midwest. Yet there's no connection to the Deep South with the exception of a very small part of western KY along the delta with Missouri.
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.
