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.
Lack of historical education? Are you familiar with Martin Luther King?
Without Atlanta, African Americans wouldn't be equal.
It is also disrespectful for the poster to say the South has not contributed as much in the history of this country compared to other parts of the nation because their new.
I honestly see a bit of arrogance from your post as well. The North shouldn't acknowledge cities in the South because their new but the South should acknowledge the cities in the North because their older more established? It doesn't work that way.
C'mon Spade you are missing the point it's all about density
The new South has 4 cities which are growing like crazy and will all continue to grow in stature (maybe even density too )
Lack of historical education? Are you familiar with Martin Luther King?
A man, not a city, and when most people think of MLK I would guess the March on Washington, Birmingham Jail, and the Montgomery boycotts come to mind before the place of his birth does.
And this is a thread about international recognition. The civil rights movement was a national phenomenon, whereas the inception of the United States is one of the most important events in human history to date.
Atlanta is an up-and-coming city, breaking into the top-ten along with other sunbelt cities like Houston. I highly doubt the rest of the planet feels that Atlanta, Georgia has international recognition.
A man, not a city, and when most people think of MLK I would guess the March on Washington, Birmingham Jail, and the Montgomery boycotts come to mind before the place of his birth does.
And this is a thread about international recognition. The civil rights movement was a national phenomenon, whereas the inception of the United States is one of the most important events in human history to date.
Yes, the events that fought against the massive ignorance, racism, violence, brutality, and oppression that the Southern states showed to minorities largely happened in the South. And their impacts are all largely limited to the borders of the United States.
Unless you're saying that Birmingham, Alabama deserves status as an Alpha world city, I'm honestly not sure what you're arguing at this point.
If that's the case, it sounds like their may be a lack of historical education in the South, as no part of this country would exist if not for those two cities. Unless being the two cities most integral to the American Revolution doesn't garner prestige in the South.
The northern cities certainly played a huge part in America's founding, but let's not forget that the first permanent English settlement in the the America's was Jamestown, Virginia. Charleston, SC and New Orleans, LA were very important early cities, and many of our country's earliest leaders and presidents were from Virginia, so it isn't like the South didn't also play a very important role in our history.
The northern cities certainly played a huge part in America's founding, but let's not forget that the first permanent English settlement in the the America's was Jamestown, Virginia. Charleston, SC and New Orleans, LA were very important early cities, and many of our country's earliest leaders and presidents were from Virginia, so it isn't like the South didn't also play a very important role in our history.
Can we get back to the topic of discussion now?
No one has claimed the South hasn't impacted American history. This is about what individual cities have international recognition deserving of 'Alpha' world status. Atlanta does not number among them, and it would be absurd to claim it does.
Certainly more than it did ten years ago, but I would never think of considering Atlanta one of the top 10 American cities, let alone one that has international recognition. Maybe its different in the South, but I can assure you that Atlanta does not have a lot of prestige in the North.
That's ridiculous, IMO. Certainly NYC, LA, Chicago, SF, Boston, Philly, and DC belong there, but Atlanta definitely has a place on the list; any other city that might typically follow wouldn't have a significantly stronger case for being there (maybe except Miami).
Either way, I can think of a couple of other cities that might not be generally be considered in the "top 10" but still have widespread national recognition, at least for people who aren't totally ignorant of geography; NOLA definitely comes to mind.
Certainly more than it did ten years ago, but I would never think of considering Atlanta one of the top 10 American cities,
Are you being serious?
ATL Trumps MSP, Denver, Seattle, SD, SJ, etc
so I can't see any city that would be in the top ten before these:
NY
DC
Chicago
LA
Houston
Philly
SF
Boston ATL
Miami
DFW
after this I would add Seattle, MSP, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Phoenix, San Diego, Denver, Pittsburgh, San Jose, Charlotte, Sacramento........
Can't think of ten cities that would be ahead of Atl.
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.
)
