Are southern Americans and northern Americans different cultural groups/nations? (sales, 2014)
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.
the only true difference I can see today is how not necessarily Northerners but specifically NE Northerners or Yankees or whatever the hell it's called, seem to have a great hatred or dislike for the South, even today for some reason?
of course Im basing this just from what I've read on this website so my view is extremely limited.
I'm scared to go up there after seeing this website and the headaches on it. Im afraid I'll get shot as soon as someone hears my southern accent or something . lmfao
they hate us, for real.
I dare to say, the Civil War or stupid modern politics matter more to them than it ever has to us.LMAO
at lease in my generation.
Im scared to go up north after seeing these threads.
So, following this logic, there was almost no one of European descent in the northern U.S. until the late 1800s...except that NYC, Philly, and even Chicago were by far the largest population centers in the country well before the late 1800s. If this were not the case, then how could the Union troops in the Civil War have so far outnumbered those of the Confederacy?
I am a native of NW Ohio. European settlement, even that far west, began in the late 1700s. My family on both sides have been in that area since the very early 1800s, along with most other families with European roots. Most of the cities and small towns in this general region were founded by the late 1700s or early 1800s, in fact, the small town in SE Michigan where I live now was founded in 1836 by a Scottish immigrant. Detroit was founded by the French in 1703.
Maybe you are thinking of the whole Ellis Island thing, but trust me, European immigration to the northern U.S. started well before the late 1800s. It was actually in the early 1600s. Think: Pilgrims!
just IMHO, many white northerners are somewhat of a mixture of later 19th century/early20th century immigrants and earlier colonial immigrants as well, in their family trees.
where as in the South, even though there were a few Irish Catholic and even Italian immigrants and strongholds like in southern Louisiana, by and large, the typical ancestry/family tree of most white southerners are overwhelmingly from the earlier colonial era which makes it different from Northerners who's family tree maybe only partly from that era or not even at all in some cases
the real difference is the fact that even with the colonial ancestry, white northerners are more diverse individually.
some had Puritan roots, some had Welsh roots, French, Penn Dutch, NY Dutch etc.. as well as being mixed with later 19th century migrants
even in places like Ohio, the colonial immigrants came from both Penn and NE but also later some came from the upper South as well like from places such as TN or KY or VA so anyone there today can still have more diverse ancestry from their neighbor
its completely different in the South.
there are really only 3 major immigrant groups who settled here . The English and Scotch-Irish being most dominant and then some Germans too.
there were few numbers of French Protestants and some others but those 3 were the major ones, with the English and Scotch-Irish being the most numerous and the English settlers only came from one region back in England more or less.
and this bottleneck population is the group who re-produced and spread throughout the entire Southeast.
you can say with absolute certainty that just about every single white southerner with roots here, have alot of Scotch-Irish ancestry, a lot of southern English ancestry and at least a small degree of German ancestry, but there's hardly ever alot of German ancestry in a southerner's family tree even though there are usually some German names.
the only true exception to this, is with the large French heritage and ancestry of many people in LA and the Gulf Coast but they also have British ancestry mixed in too.
basically the white population of the South all came from similar backgrounds and all have a basic typical ancestral mix in common, more or less, but with a lot of French added to it in the Gulf region.
white northerners are not like that, even ones who have much colonial ancestry, even that varies from person to person in the North and not to mention, when people say "the North" they mean 3/4 of the entire U.S.
Ohio is not NE, so whatever colonial settlement there was in Ohio is not the same as in NE even if some settlers from NE moved into Ohio and mixed with people there.
all I know is even for white northerners or anyone outside the South even if they have colonial background it still varies and there was much more migration in that part of the U.S than in the South.
the settlement pattern was different and more varied, even in colonial times.
in the South, again, only 3 major colonial groups really settled here and their descendants married each other generation after generation and they were practically the only white settlers here, with the French in the Gulf States being the only real exception.
when you say up North? that can mean anything, there's people there who can have Old NY Dutch ancestry or Puritan ancestry or Welsh Quaker ancestry or even French Canadian ancestry or Scandinavian ancestry all from colonial times and then add the 19th century immigrants into the mix and it just adds more so regardless, Northerners tend to vary in their ancestry from one family to the next for one reason or another so that stuff matters alot more to them where as in the South, with the exception of a few French Hughenouts , or some others, just about every white southerner has south-west English, Scotch-Irish, and German ancestry and little else, with the exception of the French ancestors of most people along the Gulf coast, but they also have in common the same mix as other white people in the South too.
White Southerners with roots here are relatively a homogenous group in terms of their ancestral mix/background, which probably also explains the more broadly shared cultural traits from New Orleans to Appalachia despite smaller regional differences also.
I have to say, having spent time living in the UK, it is very noticeable when you travel in the South how much more British people look.
I mean, British people as a whole are actually pretty heterogeneous. You can and do see pure-blooded English people (particularly around London) who could pass for Italian. So nearly any white American could "pass" as being British.
However, it's really only in the South that I see large numbers of people who have the stereotypical British look. A good example of this is Alison Lundergan Grimes, Kentucky's Secretary of State, and failed challenger against Mitch McConnell. I always expected her to speak with a British accent when I saw her, not a southern one.
Do you consider Norwegians to be a different nation/cultural group from Swedes and Danes?
There is a fair bit more similarity between Norwegians and Danes and Swedes than there is between Northern Americans and Southern Americans. In fact, Norway was in a state union with the Swedes and Danes for over 500 years.
Norway is a different country than Denmark or Sweden, and has its own language and customs. That said, they're more or less variations of each other (Danish and Norwegian are basically different dialects, with a fairly high degree of mutual intelligibility; Swedish to a lesser extent) but they also have a lot of shared history and culture too. One big difference I know between Sweden and Norway is that Sweden is a haven for ice hockey, while Norway prefers soccer. All in all, while they have their own identities, they no doubt share feelings of brotherhood as well.
the only true difference I can see today is how not necessarily Northerners but specifically NE Northerners or Yankees or whatever the hell it's called, seem to have a great hatred or dislike for the South, even today for some reason?
of course Im basing this just from what I've read on this website so my view is extremely limited.
I'm scared to go up there after seeing this website and the headaches on it. Im afraid I'll get shot as soon as someone hears my southern accent or something . lmfao
they hate us, for real.
I dare to say, the Civil War or stupid modern politics matter more to them than it ever has to us.LMAO
at lease in my generation.
Im scared to go up north after seeing these threads.
Nope. We really could not care less.
If you feel this way, please DON'T come North. You'll just bring your stereotypes here and tick people off for real.
The South has always been more politically and socially conservative than the North. There are exceptions of course -- some of the larger cities and some of the university-dominated areas. But this divide between Northern and Southern ways about thinking of life are big and impressive and have been going on for a while.
The South is far more traditionally religious than the North, with many more regular church goers. It is mostly reflexively pro-business, anti-union, and anti-government on most big national policy issues. It is also far more connected to and favorable about the military than other parts of the country. And it became an almost all-Republican area in the years following the Civil Rights era of the 1960s, when Democrats and Northern liberal Republicans fought to pass major laws to protect and enfranchise its black citizens. Hell, there are still noticable numbers of Southerners that romanticize the Old Confederacy, fly the confederate stars and bars flag, and can't quite get over the fact that they lost the Civil war.
And I am NOT giving Northerners a pass here either. You can certainly find church-going, pro-business, bigoted Northerners. Anyone who lives here knows that. But such veiws are just not as dominant or as socially accepted north of the Mason-Dixon line.
Much has been said or written about how the U.S. is becoming homgenized and on some levels that is true. White southerners will cue up for a Woody Allen movie and New Yorkers can enjoy stock car races and shop at Wal-Mart. But the deeper cultural divides that stem from the South's history of slavery, Jim Crow, and an agrarian past are not going to fade fast.
I've always felt that a lot of the dominant traditional culture of the South was historically based in slavery, while in the North, the domniant traditional culture stemmed from waves of European immigration. (And yes, I know that white Southerners are descended from immigrants.)
People really need to stop using the Mason Dixon Line as any type of cultural divide. If you ever lived within a 100 miles of the Mason Dixon Line you know how inaccurate it is to describe it as any type of strong cultural boundary between the North and South.
If you feel this way, please DON'T come North. You'll just bring your stereotypes here and tick people off for real.
I wouldn't pay him much mind. He doesn't represent the bulk of Southern folks. It's clear he's paranoid and has an axe to grind, as evidenced by his insulting my home state (with little factual basis to boot).
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.
