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.
Except "Old South" in this context doesn't refer to age. Next you'll be telling me that Charlotte is "Old South" and Birmingham isn't.
Don't be obtuse.
Don't use titles without knowing what they mean. Old South is not an antonym of "the new South". It refers to the British Colonial South, which does not include Jackson or Birmingham. Looking at history, there was absolutely a time in which Jackson was seen as a "newer south" than Columbia, so you were incorrect by saying "never" anyway.
Regardless, the entire south is living in 2015, so I find New South to be obsolete.
Don't use titles without knowing what they mean. Old South is not an antonym of "the new South". It refers to the British Colonial South, which does not include Jackson or Birmingham. Looking at history, there was absolutely a time in which Jackson was seen as a "newer south" than Columbia, so you were incorrect by saying "never" anyway.
Regardless, the entire south is living in 2015, so I find New South to be obsolete.
Here you go...
In case you hadn't noticed, I was responding to someone else who used that term as I myself didn't introduce it to this discussion so your diatribe should have been directed at that poster. Secondly, it was clear what he meant by it and yes, it is indeed used as an antonym of "New South" often. So save the cute little lesson because it wasn't necessary and you know good and well the reference wasn't to the thirteen original colonies in the South or the 18th/19th centuries.
Nice attempt to flex and appear relevant, but move along now.
In case you hadn't noticed, I was responding to someone else who used that term as I myself didn't introduce it to this discussion so your diatribe should have been directed at that poster. Secondly, it was clear what he meant by it and yes, it is indeed used as an antonym of "New South" often. So save the cute little lesson because it wasn't necessary and you know good and well the reference wasn't to the thirteen original colonies in the South or the 18th/19th centuries.
Nice attempt to flex and appear relevant, but move along now.
So you weren't the one who initially misused the term. My bad, but you did say that Columbia had never been "Old South" more than Jackson. This is still incorrect regardless of what context you use it in.
Nothing I said was false, so I'm still right and the two of you still get to be wrong. Though I may have kept my little lesson to myself had you kept the word "obtuse" to yourself.
So you weren't the one who initially misused the term. My bad, but you did say that Columbia had never been "Old South" more than Jackson. This is still incorrect regardless of what context you use it in.
Nothing I said was false, so I'm still right and the two of you still get to be wrong. Though I may have kept my little lesson to myself had you kept the word "obtuse" to yourself.
Actually you did give false information and were wrong, as the term "Old South" is used to refer to the agrarian plantation economy of the South and as such, is an antonym of the "New South":
Furthermore, the term is also used within the context of the Jim Crow South wherein Jackson's history and reputation certainly looms larger than Columbia's:
So to recap: you erroneously limited the term "Old South" to one of geography in the colonial era and wrongly stated that "Old South" is not the opposite of the "New South" when indeed it is used within that context. So yes, you get to be very, very wrong and the way in which the term "Old South" was initially used within the context of this discussion is valid. You basically tried to show off and instead fell flat on your face, not to mention you have added nothing of substance to the actual discussion.
I truly hope you're not this obnoxious and childish in person, and definitely not while you're in the wrong on top of that.
Actually you did give false information and were wrong, as the term "Old South" is used to refer to the agrarian plantation economy of the South and as such, is an antonym of the "New South":
Furthermore, the term is also used within the context of the Jim Crow South wherein Jackson's history and reputation certainly looms larger than Columbia's:
So to recap: you erroneously limited the term "Old South" to one of geography in the colonial era and wrongly stated that "Old South" is not the opposite of the "New South" when indeed it is used within that context. So yes, you get to be very, very wrong and the way in which the term "Old South" was initially used within the context of this discussion is valid. You basically tried to show off and instead fell flat on your face, not to mention you have added nothing of substance to the actual discussion.
I truly hope you're not this obnoxious and childish in person, and definitely not while you're in the wrong on top of that.
Eh, call me a definition purist. Apparently, "Old South" has been given such a loose meaning in the same fashion that the "Deep South" has, usually because people can't come up with a better term for what they're trying to describe. "Is _____ the Deep South?" are the types of questions that ensue when the true and actual meaning of a term is lost amongst the laymen. But you did your Googling and supported your argument, so I'll concede defeat. I've got the balls for it.
Yet for all of my obnoxiousness and childishness, isn't it funny how you're the one throwing out all the insults?
You still can't seem to explain away how Columbia "never" manages to be the Old South over Jackson. In 1821, how can a brand new Jackson, Mississippi be the "Old South" more than an established Columbia, South Carolina?
Eh, call me a definition purist. Apparently, "Old South" has been given such a loose meaning in the same fashion that the "Deep South" has, usually because people can't come up with a better term for what they're trying to describe. "Is _____ the Deep South?" are the types of questions that ensue when the true and actual meaning of a term is lost amongst the laymen. But you did your Googling and supported your argument, so I'll concede defeat. I've got the balls for it.
Yet for all of my obnoxiousness and childishness, isn't it funny how you're the one throwing out all the insults?
Yep, you were wrong and had to nerve to make a big hoopla in the process.
Quote:
You still can't seem to explain away how Columbia "never" manages to be the Old South over Jackson. In 1821, how can a brand new Jackson, Mississippi be the "Old South" more than an established Columbia, South Carolina?
Jesus dude, was the context in which that statement was made COMPLETELY lost on you???? Even when supposedly conceding defeat, you still try to nitpick in order to find a way to win. Just rest.
Yep, you were wrong and had to nerve to make a big hoopla in the process.
I must reiterate that the big hoopla would appear to be coming from the person slinging attacks.
Quote:
Jesus dude, was the context in which that statement was made COMPLETELY lost on you???? Even when supposedly conceding defeat, you still try to nitpick in order to find a way to win. Just rest.
Not trying to find a way to win. I'm trying to get an answer to what I've been confused by since the beginning of our discussion. So which of your two "Old Souths" is more applicable to Jackson than Columbia in 1821?
You may get your punches in, but you'll never KO mega man.
I must reiterate that the big hoopla would appear to be coming from the person slinging attacks.
Not trying to find a way to win. I'm trying to get an answer to what I've been confused by since the beginning of our discussion. So which of your two "Old Souths" is more applicable to Jackson than Columbia in 1821?
You may get your punches in, but you'll never KO mega man.
Columbia brings to mind a bit more of a progressive, growing, prosperous atmosphere than Jackson, but I would agree that both are widely considered the "Old South" (whatever that actually means) capital cities. No city or state wants to be lumped in with MS, so that may have something to do with it.
Columbia brings to mind a bit more of a progressive, growing, prosperous atmosphere than Jackson, but I would agree that both are widely considered the "Old South" (whatever that actually means) capital cities. No city or state wants to be lumped in with MS, so that may have something to do with it.
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.
