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.
Technically, there is no capital of the South. Just a group of cities, spanning a whole lot of miles, many of whom think they're the capital of the South. It's not like the North - NYC, the Midwest - Chicago, or the West - LA or SF. There is not a dominant city in the South, that can compare to the dominance of the cities in the other regions, so why is it a necessary thing (for some), to keep hashing this over...
Um, actually, the South is very similar to the other regions - with a "capital" and dominant city: Atlanta.
I would even say Atlanta, as the Capital of the American South, and Chicago, as the Capital of the American Midwest are the ones that most embody "dominance" of their respective regions.
I mean yeah but what relevance does this have on the discussion at hand since only the colonial South existed at the time and Atlanta hadn't even been founded yet?
It's obvious that your context here is the historic South, and nobody disputes NOLA's status historically as the largest and most important city in the heavily slaveholding South although it was very much anomalous within the South as were other cities in the largely rural, agrarian region. But even considering this exclusively historic context, your inconsistency in defining the region is problematic IMO. When you need New Orleans to be the largest city, it's the Confederacy but when you want to determine the region's geographic center or have, say, Baltimore's immigrant cultures and heritages represented in New Orleans' cultural melange, then it's the Census-designated 16-state South--which is a product of the 1910 Census. The goalposts shift a bit in service of your argument which totally ignores Southern history since the close of the Civil War.
Exactly even from his use of the word "dixie". I dont even hear white Souheners use this word anymore. Dont even really see it in advertising either
Technically, there is no capital of the South. Just a group of cities, spanning a whole lot of miles, many of whom think they're the capital of the South. It's not like the North - NYC, the Midwest - Chicago, or the West - LA or SF. There is not a dominant city in the South, that can compare to the dominance of the cities in the other regions, so why is it a necessary thing (for some), to keep hashing this over. I don't get the South thing, and then, there's Texas. From what I read here, Texas is it's own entity, and doesn't belong anywhere, other than where the person discussing it, wants it to be. Although Texas couldn't be farther South, as it would be in Mexico, it's not considered to be in the South? If I look at a map, it sure looks like it's in the South, to me. If it's not in the South, surely neither Dallas or Houston could be considered to be the capital of the South, but yet Houston is to be considered in the poll. Pretty convoluted, if you ask me.
Economically yes you are correct but like Mutiny said ,"from a historical context,New Orleans fits that bill by far. It wasnt just the economics but its overwhelming cutural contributions to the South that in some ways today make it a contender outside of Atlanta. You cant discount the magnitude of what cultural aspects play on how people perceive as important.
This is why so many people think Atlanta.Culturally, it outshines the rest.
Largely becase for long it has been a place of importance for black people. The AUC is a huge center of importance as is being the birthplace of the much revered MLKjr.
Even if you look at others non blacks,Atlanta has more institutions of higher learning in the SOuth. Then with its role as the 6th Districts FED Reserve and Courts headquarters for much of the South versu the FED in Dallas covers Texas,Northern Louisiana and Northern New Mexico.
I remember when they were trying Noriega and it was the court or appeals in Atlanta that was in charge even though Miami was where he was convicted and charged.
I also dont think you can discount Atlanta's connection to NYC from everything to flights,investment and migration patterns .
There are as many people going to Atlanta as there are to Houston from Southern Louisiana as well as iNorthern Floridians go to Atlanta before they go to Miami.
Top 10 Areas Sending Residents to Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA,
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN-WI
Gainesville, GA
Athens-Clarke County, GA
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX
Augusta-Richmond County, GA-SC
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA
And here are the cities for Dallas-Ft Worth
Houston, TX.
Austin, TX.
Los Angeles, CA.
San Antonio, TX.
New York, NY.
Chicago, IL.
Atlanta, GA.
Oklahoma City, OK
Washington, DC
Lubbock, TX
Phoenix, AZ
Bryan-College Station, TX
Kileen-Temple, TX
San Diego, CA
Waco, TX
If you check the other TX cities,it looks pretty much the same.
You see Atlanta pulls from a lot more from not onlt the region but beyond.
Every city out of region TX pulls from Atlanta has and many more. That should tell you something
This was from 2010 buts its accelerated. Ive seen it from my Airbnb clients
Quote:
What's perhaps more surprising though is that Miamians are (in one of the few possible sentence in which this would make sense) moving north the South.
693 Miamians moves to Fulton County, Ga where Atlanta is located. In return only 325 ATLiens landed in Miami. Similar patterns are seen in surrounding Georgia counties, parts of North Carolina, and parts of Texas.
If this was the case, every single thread about "the capital of the South would be so overwhelmingly for Atlanta. Even off CD you ask that question people relly dont have to think much before they will say Atlanta.
Just Google "Capital of the South and see what comes up for more than two pages.
Texas is like California. It competes with itself due to its sheer size. You can get a clear answer if you ask what is teh Capital of the Southwest" because its just so hard to qualify.
Texas maybe South-Western but its by most definitions still very Southern. Its like the name implies,a mesh of two.
Texas is still very much Southern. I dont see how it could be said its not. Dallas is definitely Southern. If there was an argument for a city less Southern in Texas,it would be Austin at the very least.
I just had a thought:Why is it when people (especially non Southerners) think of the South they dont think of Black people as "Southeners"?
This goes for Houston and Dallas too with its large historic Hispanic populations.
Like Blacks in the South vs Northeast or even West,Hispanics in TX have cultural differences from each other just like white people.
A large Hispanic population doesnt mean the same thing in TX as it does in FL. The CA Hispanic pop is more like those in South Florida than TX.
Last edited by CleverOne; 01-15-2021 at 11:20 PM..
As it should be. The thing about the Texas cities, is that while Texas is Southern, it’s also extremely Texan. That and it’s location make Dallas/Houston as poor choices for being seen as “capital” of the South. DC and Miami have the location (and other) issues as well. The only other city with a chance would be the historical “capital”, New Orleans. But in 2021, it’s hard to make the case for it.
So we are left where we began, the shining example of the New South which hosted the Olympics.
Technically, there is no capital of the South. Just a group of cities, spanning a whole lot of miles, many of whom think they're the capital of the South. It's not like the North - NYC, the Midwest - Chicago, or the West - LA or SF.
Technically, there are no such things as regional capitals since regions are not self-governing political jurisdictions with constitutionally-outlined powers; in the U.S. there are only state capitals and our national capital. (as well as territorial capitals). And those capitals are whatever their respective state governments and our federal government say they are. That is the only qualification needed to have state or national capital status.
The point of this thread--and this entire subforum actually--is to express a diversity of perspectives and generate discussion based on comparisons among various places in the U.S. It's an inherently subjective exercise but objective, factual data is used to support one's assessments. Asking questions with simple, straightforward answers defeats the purpose of a discussion forum like this; that's why we have Google.
Augusta has some too, and I know this well, but I can assure you the average person makes no such distinction.
Sure Augusta has some but Savannah is obviously steeped in it the most.
The average person makes no such distinction between what? The colonial history and culture between Savannah and Atlanta or Savannah and Augusta? I'd disagree no matter which two you are comparing but I'd like some clarity.
Quote:
Even here in the forums Atlanta is purported as being a far more stereotypically southern city than I remember it being. Because what most people think of as the South is tied mostly to the Southeast, Atlanta has an edge here
Atlanta isn't Valdosta and nobody has said as much. Among the cities under discussion here, it is definitely the most characteristically Southern whose history and identity are based on widely-recognized Southern themes and cultural markers.
Quote:
Arguably, and it's the hair splitting I'm not really interested in, sorry. How it is in anyway arbitrary to use the most official definition of the current South that exists is beyond me, but I guess it's not as fun as coming up with my own definition like Mr. Aries
This entire subforum is dedicated to the art of hair-splitting. We permanently reside in the weeds in these parts and you know this. Come on...
The U.S Geologic Survey has an answer for your question concerning your arbitrary use of "the most official definition of the current South":
No level of government has official designations for regions. The U.S. Board on Geographic Names, which is responsible by law for standardizing geographic name usage throughout the Federal government, is often asked for official names and boundaries of regions, but does not and cannot provide them.
Regions are application-driven and highly susceptible to perception. Individuals might agree on the core of a region, but agreement deteriorates rapidly outward from that core. The criteria or application would have to be defined, such as physiographic (this would include parts of States, but there is more than one system); political (definite disagreement based upon perception); cultural (unlimited variables); and other applications.
Regional definitions applied by any organization reflect their particular needs or application, not a government standard.
Nevertheless, the Census Bureau's regional designations are widely used because the comprehensive demographic data the agency collects on an ongoing basis is widely used and easily accessible. But the primary purpose of the data is for funding allocation to state and local governments which isn't really germane to the discussion here, plus the Census-designated South is the region that tends to be debated the most since it doesn't really reflect public perception about the states comprising the South, from both Southerners and non-Southerners. It seems that the states typically mentioned as being among the most difficult to classify regionally are borders states within the Census-designated South such as TX, OK, WV, MD, DE, etc. With the exception of TX (which many believe straddles several regions, including the South, and regard as its own region due to sheer size), none were part of the Confederacy. From my perspective, THAT is the designation of the South that most seem to agree with, much more than that of the Census-designated South I'm sure.
Although admittedly not the most practical for a topic like this, I think a few of the various regional designations used by federal government agencies are good to use as references. I seriously doubt anything resembling a consensus could be reached about which ones are better to use, but I'd suspect the odds would be that the BEA map would get the highest marks.
Quote:
...yes, you and everyone else here has "better" arguments for the capital of the South. I guess that's why this topic has been created for the umpteenth time with no consensus ever being reached
I thought it would be interesting to offer a different perspective, but if we're all just supposed to say "aTLAnTa" then I don't see the point in beating this dead horse any further. Why is there even a poll? With New Orleans as an option no less
I merely stated why I don't think New Orleans makes for the best option present-day and that some of your supporting reasons came across more like trivia facts (which I actually do like as facts for their own sake) without an explanation of how they tie in to your claim. Now I think if we were talking about the most impactful or most recognized of all the Southern cities that could be said to have been regional capitals throughout American history, you'd definitely have a stronger argument.
But just because I disagree with what you're saying doesn't mean I'm trying to shut you up and pressure you to agree with me. I'm very confident in the strength of my argument but that doesn't mean that people who see it differently don't have valuable contributions to make to the discussion or aren't allowed to critique my reasoning.
Quote:
Edit: Now I see that you seem to think I'm trying to combine these two different definitions of the South and I'm not. I'm making two independent points actually, just pointing out New Orleans relevance in different ways at two separate times in history. I thought that was clear.
What I was saying was that it's pretty easy to see NOLA's relevance in the Confederacy based on its size if nothing more, but that's not apparent for the point you tried to make about its geographic position within the Census-based South. The most common advantages conferred by a more centralized position within a particular area would be ease of access and logistical suitability which is a bit ironic in this case since New Orleans is somewhat isolated and situated in an ecologically-sensitive and disaster-prone location which works against it (and probably helps explain why its upriver inland peer, Memphis, developed into a more significant logistical hub and remains so). And looking at the rather expansive West, it's probably safe to say that none of the most viable candidates for the capital of that region are anywhere near its geographic center.
A large Hispanic population doesnt mean the same thing in TX as it does in FL. The CA Hispanic pop is more like those in South Florida than TX.
Do not agree with this. The CA Hispanic population is more like the TX Hispanic population than it is like South Fla.
Also, why Texas is Southern, Texans out more emphasis on being Texan than being Southern.
Do not agree with this. The CA Hispanic population is more like the TX Hispanic population than it is like South Fla.
Also, why Texas is Southern, Texans out more emphasis on being Texan than being Southern.
State pride might be the most Southern thing of all, to our detriment.
Do not agree with this. The CA Hispanic population is more like the TX Hispanic population than it is like South Fla.
Also, why Texas is Southern, Texans out more emphasis on being Texan than being Southern.
You are right. I guess i meant from a socially economic perspective maybe CA Hispanics areeven more nuanced than TX but they have more similarities as well.
Geez. You are Texan.
Texas is just "Texas" only to people from Texas but maybe the exception of Californians, if you are in the Northeast ,Midwest or South , Texans are Southern despite what Texans think of themselves
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.
