U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-03-2013, 02:37 PM
 
10,167 posts, read 17,115,139 times
Reputation: 5742

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by NARFALICIOUS View Post
Northern States: None
Southern States: None
United States: All 50
With all due respect, that makes a good write/sound byte, but doesn't respect the whole history of this country. And that means the natural diversity of it all. Yes, we are all part of the United States. However, what makes it so is the very name "united STATES." Not all identical and alike, but with each sovereign state possessing it's own unique history, culture, and identity. And bound together and committed to perpetuating the same.

This whole notion of that "one size fits all" mentality is completely antithetical to what the Founding Fathers intended.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-03-2013, 06:38 PM
 
649 posts, read 981,927 times
Reputation: 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by vasinger View Post
Missouri I put in as a border state because although its midwestern geographically, it probably has the stongest southern feel to it. Kansas does too

Missouri also claimed a lot in the Confederacy, even though it offically went with the union, and southern MO borders on Arkansas and TN so thats definitely more southern, than midwestern.
Most of MO is Midwestern. The Southern part does exist by the border, but border influences are not unique to MO and are present in all border states. Why is it still Midwestern? Simple. Most of the state is Midwestern. Nobody in Kansas City and St Louis considers themselves as anything other than Midwestern. These two cities are in the North of the state, but the so-called Southern influences do not exist till the bottom 10-20% of the state.

In addition, KC, STL and Columbia which are undeniably Midwestern and politically blue make up almost 80% of the whole state's population.

Last edited by sadgirl80; 09-03-2013 at 06:47 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2013, 07:36 PM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,483 posts, read 10,467,331 times
Reputation: 5401
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb View Post
With all due respect, that makes a good write/sound byte, but doesn't respect the whole history of this country. And that means the natural diversity of it all. Yes, we are all part of the United States. However, what makes it so is the very name "united STATES." Not all identical and alike, but with each sovereign state possessing it's own unique history, culture, and identity. And bound together and committed to perpetuating the same.

This whole notion of that "one size fits all" mentality is completely antithetical to what the Founding Fathers intended.
Well said. I completely agree.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2013, 08:24 PM
 
Location: IN
20,849 posts, read 35,952,730 times
Reputation: 13297
Quote:
Originally Posted by sadgirl80 View Post
Most of MO is Midwestern. The Southern part does exist by the border, but border influences are not unique to MO and are present in all border states. Why is it still Midwestern? Simple. Most of the state is Midwestern. Nobody in Kansas City and St Louis considers themselves as anything other than Midwestern. These two cities are in the North of the state, but the so-called Southern influences do not exist till the bottom 10-20% of the state.

In addition, KC, STL and Columbia which are undeniably Midwestern and politically blue make up almost 80% of the whole state's population.
The southern influences are MUCH greater than 10-20% of the state. Even rural areas of northern Missouri feel influenced by southern speech patterns, foods, and ancestry. When I travel through those areas after living a bit further north the differences are quite apparent. True, the cities are Midwest but they have much stronger influences from the South than anywhere in the Upper Midwest without a doubt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2013, 11:30 PM
 
Location: Shaw.
2,226 posts, read 3,144,045 times
Reputation: 809
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee View Post
Good question. There could be a variety of reasons (not saying any of these are the reason).

Part of it may be historical. We started out with 13 colonies. New England (NH, RI, CT and MA), the Middle Colonies (NY, NJ, PA and DE) and the Southern Colonies (MD, VA, NC, SC and GA). At the time, the Northwest Territory was largely unsettled so it probably wasn't even on the radar for most people then. The Southern Colonies were large slave economies while the other colonies were not, which created the great cultural divide that eventually erupted in a Civil War. While it is true that Ohio, Michigan, etc. were part of the Union during the Civil War, the beef between North and South predated the admission of most of the Midwest, so the animosity from the South was largely directed towards people in Boston, Philadelphia and New York rather than Cleveland or Chicago. I still remember an image from my middle school history book showing Senator Preston Brooks from South Carolina bludgeoning Charles Sumner from Massachusetts over the head with a cane. When I think of abolitionism and the "North," I think of Boston and Philadelphia more than any two cities.
You're right about abolition being most strongly focused in Boston and Philadelphia. But at the time of the Civil War, Minnesota, Michigan, and especially Ohio were considered "the North," "Yankee territory," etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2013, 08:36 AM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
28,266 posts, read 26,242,183 times
Reputation: 11726
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgm123 View Post
You're right about abolition being most strongly focused in Boston and Philadelphia. But at the time of the Civil War, Minnesota, Michigan, and especially Ohio were considered "the North," "Yankee territory," etc.
I just provided an explanation for why some people only consider "the North" to be the Northeastern United States (that was the question Kemba asked).

Another reason may be because the word "North" actually appears in Northeast.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2013, 10:50 AM
 
Location: Calera, AL
1,164 posts, read 1,443,423 times
Reputation: 1569
To me, the only 100% purely Southern state is Mississippi. It by far has the lowest percentage of Northern transplants of any Southern state. There's no denying the Southern heritage of the surrounding states, but their identity is slowly eroding away, some faster than others (i.e. Florida, Georgia, N.C.)

Texas is Southern by location, but not entirely by culture. Same with Louisiana. Arkansas, Kentucky, and West Virginia have hints of Midwestern-ness to them in some areas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2013, 11:04 AM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
28,266 posts, read 26,242,183 times
Reputation: 11726
Quote:
Originally Posted by fezzador View Post
To me, the only 100% purely Southern state is Mississippi. It by far has the lowest percentage of Northern transplants of any Southern state. There's no denying the Southern heritage of the surrounding states, but their identity is slowly eroding away, some faster than others (i.e. Florida, Georgia, N.C.)
You could say that about anywhere. New York's identity is fading away with all of the people moving in from the South, Midwest, West Coast, etc.

It's funny how people only view culture as moving in one direction--northern culture influencing (or eradicating) southern culture. But if you see "northern culture" as wealth, social liberalism, secularism and diversity, then I could see how you'd have that perception (even though none of those things are "northern" per se). The question is why do people consider a given place to be more "northern" in character simply because it's wealthier, more liberal, more secular or more diverse? Why can't those things be southern too?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2013, 11:12 AM
 
Location: Calera, AL
1,164 posts, read 1,443,423 times
Reputation: 1569
But I thought being a bastion for people from all walks of life from all corners of the country, and indeed, all corners of the globe, was what gave NY its identity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-04-2013, 11:59 AM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
28,266 posts, read 26,242,183 times
Reputation: 11726
Quote:
Originally Posted by fezzador View Post
But I thought being a bastion for people from all walks of life from all corners of the country, and indeed, all corners of the globe, was what gave NY its identity.
There is a certain identity that New York had that's fading away. And it's something most visitors to New York will never know unless they leave Manhattan and the trendier parts of Brooklyn (unlikely). You don't hear too many accents in Manhattan (the accent is dying in the NYC area in general). Hell's Kitchen, the Lower East Side, Little Italy, and countless other neighborhoods have been dominated by transplants from Virginia, Ohio, Texas, California, Tennessee, Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia, Florida, etc. So with all of these new transplants, I wonder if NYC (or at least most of Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn) have a Midwestern/Southern/Western rather than a "northern" character. Or does this mish-mash of different people result in a culture that is somehow inherently "northern?"

I think people view diversity as a "northern" thing principally because of NYC. The logic goes "What city is diverse? New York. And where is New York? In the North. Therefore, a more diverse city is more like New York. And since New York is a northern city, any city that becomes more like New York therefore becomes more northern." That's incredibly bad logic, but I honestly believe that some people think this way. Diversity is not an exclusively "northern" characteristic. Yet when a place becomes more diverse, that diversity is often cited as a reason why a place is less southern, or alternatively, more northern.

Last edited by BajanYankee; 09-04-2013 at 12:08 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top