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.
It's pretty solidly mountain west. Along with WY and CO.
That pretty much sums it up. Much of Montana west of the continental divide has been occasionally claimed by the "Cascadia" movement, that's true, and even as much as I tend to think of that particular area as Northwestern in the broad sense, it has kind of lost its alignment with the West Coast (I assume the OP is referring more specifically to the Pacific Northwest) as both the Western third of MT and much of the PNW have slowly veered away from their libertarian cultural orientations, something that, arguably I guess, was triggered by the decline of extractive industry (logging in particular) in both areas.
It's also true that one could definitely observe, say, Montana's eastern third as being pretty similar to North Dakota in many ways--both sides of the MT-ND border have a long history of social and political prairie populism, similar geography and climate, have long been comprised of small, conservative agricultural communities, both have experienced extreme economic decline, stagnation and population loss prior to Bakken development (NoDak is way ahead of Montana in this particular area), and both areas apparently have quite a few Vikings fans.
But really, as for this nonsense that Montana is at all Midwestern, uhh, NO. I've never even seen any agreement that the Dakotas are rightfully Midwestern in a cultural sense; in general, though, people in the Dakotas are pursuing their own economic betterment and really don't care about Montana; Eastern Montanans, though few in numbers, identify primarily as Montanans and tend to be, in my view, far more insular and anti-growth than their neighbors on the NoDak side. Montanans and North Dakotans are indeed friendly neighbors, but family, not so much.
And let's not forget South Dakota, a state that Montana shares about 70 miles of border with, and yet, as far as I know, there still isn't even paved access between the two.
Personally, I'm happy to think of Montana as part of the Mountain West, even with its Eastern Hinterlands (which aren't Midwestern, by the way ).
But really, as for this nonsense that Montana is at all Midwestern, uhh, NO. I've never even seen any agreement that the Dakotas are rightfully Midwestern in a cultural sense; in general, though, people in the Dakotas are pursuing their own economic betterment and really don't care about Montana; Eastern Montanans, though few in numbers, identify primarily as Montanans and tend to be, in my view, far more insular and anti-growth than their neighbors on the NoDak side. Montanans and North Dakotans are indeed friendly neighbors, but family, not so much.
Interesting. What do you mean by a decline of libertarian values by the way? Do you mean Montana is becoming more socialist, more stereotypically conservative or more socially progressive?
I definitely agree with you about NoDak being more pro-growth, Montanans are really into preserving their wide open spaces while North Dakotans seem to have more "practical" Midwestern values. I think in terms of the demographics Montana is more like the Midwest though. It doesn't have a large Hispanic presence and it shares the German-Scandinavian heritage that typifies the northern Midwest. Linguistically Montana has some north-central features too, I don't think the California Vowel Shift has effected the speech of young Montanans that much but then again I might be completely wrong?
I definitely agree with you about NoDak being more pro-growth, Montanans are really into preserving their wide open spaces while North Dakotans seem to have more "practical" Midwestern values.
Montana is more into preserving it's wide open spaces because it's a WESTERN state, and that's pretty much what all Western states do with their land. ND has much more arable land than Montana does, so being "practical" about the use of that land for agriculture (and now oil) has nothing to do with it being Midwestern. It has everything to do with making use of the land, regardless of it's region.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valsteele
I think in terms of the demographics Montana is more like the Midwest though. It doesn't have a large Hispanic presence and it shares the German-Scandinavian heritage that typifies the northern Midwest.
You can have this opinion all you like. For all I care people can believe the moon is made of cheese, the Earth really is flat, and the Easter bunny is real. However, the fact will always remain that any Midwestern traits that Montana supposedly has are so few and insignificant that it really amounts to nothing. Montana has a small hispanic population because it's neither an agricultural hub nor does it have any major cities to attract hispanics into it's meager population. Not to mention it's geographical location. Idaho doesn't have many hispanics either. Should we now start considering Idaho "Midwestern? I live in WA and we have a large German-Scandinavian presence here. Is Washington now "Midwestern" instead of Pacific Northwest?
These points don't mean much for regional classification.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valsteele
Linguistically Montana has some north-central features too, I don't think the California Vowel Shift has effected the speech of young Montanans that much but then again I might be completely wrong?
The California vowel shift has affected an entire generation, regardless of their regional location. I have younger cousins in Texas who were born and raised there, and they sound like little Valley girl/surfer dudes every time they open their mouths. You'll hear that exact same accent among the youth of Montana. I know I have.
How many times have you been to Montana? You seem convinced enough about it being more in line with the Midwest than the West. I'm just curious why you feel so strongly about it. You must have spent a lot of time there to have such a strong opinion.
Interesting. What do you mean by a decline of libertarian values by the way? Do you mean Montana is becoming more socialist, more stereotypically conservative or more socially progressive?
Well, in the case of WA state for example, there's now a much more urban, educated, white-collar presence west of the Cascades than there was even 30 years ago, and that's where, really, all of the political power is concentrated; while WA remains reasonably libertarian in the economic sense (liberal yuppies love money), its demographic and industrial changes over the past three decades or so have managed to pull the state to the left (not always in negative ways, don't get me wrong). Would I consider the PNW socialist, though (by which I mean WA and OR here)? No.
In Montana, however, we have had no such demographic and economic changes since our extractive industries went into decline; the state's young, educated workforce depletes more and more every year; there is a white-collar presence here, but it tends to be older and doesn't favor progressive politics the way it does further west. Although it seemed that Montana was on the cusp of becoming a moderate blue-state as recently as 2008, that seems far, far from being the case now.
So it pains me to say that Montana, once a place where state politics were a cohesive microcosm of progressive, conservative and libertarian politics, seems to be taking a hard turn to the right over the last four years, which only further alienates us from the Northwest (unless we're talking about Idaho, but I don't think either of us are). I'll cross my fingers that 2016 brings things back to moderation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valsteele
I definitely agree with you about NoDak being more pro-growth, Montanans are really into preserving their wide open spaces while North Dakotans seem to have more "practical" Midwestern values.
There are a lot of Montanans who possess a self-defeating and irrational fear of change in general, and they constantly evoke the state's geography and the supreme lifestyle that it supposedly provides in order to justify the anti-growth stupidity that has kept this place in a chokehold for no less than 40 years. This is an entirely top-down phenomenon, but don't try to tell those independent, freedom-loving Montanans that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valsteele
I think in terms of the demographics Montana is more like the Midwest though. It doesn't have a large Hispanic presence and it shares the German-Scandinavian heritage that typifies the northern Midwest. Linguistically Montana has some north-central features too, I don't think the California Vowel Shift has effected the speech of young Montanans that much but then again I might be completely wrong?
Montanans primarily report their ancestry as being German and English if I remember correctly. Scandinavian ancestry, as well as Lutheranism, is certainly present here, but almost entirely in the state's Eastern third, which, as others have mentioned, holds a small percentage of Montana's population (but increasingly manages to wield a lot of political influence, for better and worse).
The way you characterize our dialect in Montana does have me a little curious as to whether or not you've actually met anyone from here (I see you live in Oregon, so I'd be surprised if you haven't, but still). The Midwestern-esque accent that you and others have mentioned seems to exist here only on a very sporadic, individual basis if you ask me, and it's even remotely likely to be heard, in my experience, in a few places along the Hi-Line and in the very far eastern areas of the state (again, where few Montanans live). That aside, based purely on linguistics, I don't see how you could really distinguish a Montanan from an Oregonian or, for that matter, even a Californian.
Last edited by Montguy; 11-16-2014 at 09:20 PM..
Reason: Typo
Most of Montana is part of the Western plains in my opinion so it isn't midwestern. To me the Midwest ends at about the 100th Meridian though you can give or take about 100 or so miles on either side since the Nebraska Sandhills start at the 99th Meridian and a lot of Kansas and Colorado to the west feels midwestern.
To me Eastern Montana is a lot like the high plains of western Nebraska and South Dakota and Wyoming. Not really midwestern. The only places I could say might be midwestern might be along the Missouri really close to the North Dakota border.
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.