(no subject)
Sep. 24th, 2017 05:40 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatFound THIS the other day on Facebook, and it reminded me of a conversation I was having with Peasant about the regional culture and colonization of the US.
In his fourth book, "American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures in North America," award-winning author Colin Woodard identifies 11 distinct cultures that have historically divided the US.
"The country has been arguing about a lot of fundamental things lately including state roles and individual liberty," Woodard, a Maine native who won the 2012 George Polk Award for investigative reporting, told Business Insider.
"[But] in order to have any productive conversation on these issues," he added, "you need to know where you come from. Once you know where you are coming from it will help move the conversation forward."
Below are a few examples of how Woodward describes the US regional cultural makeup.
I don't know if I entirely agree with his views. For one thing what about the 50% of the population that jumps around? A lot of us move due to jobs, family, education, spouses, children (see family), climate, and finances (some areas are pricier than others).
And, the recent immigrants from other areas?
I'm from three of these areas, possibly four. New Netherland, The Midlands, and Yankeedom.
But, it's interesting that the wealthy British and Irish colonized the slave colonies and participated heavily in the slave trade. (Bad British and Irish). While the Dutch, Quakers, Scottish Calvinists...went the opposite route.
Again, I don't think it was that clear cut or easily mapped. People move around a lot. And he forgot the Welsh miners who settled in PA, Virginia and Kentucky.
In his fourth book, "American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures in North America," award-winning author Colin Woodard identifies 11 distinct cultures that have historically divided the US.
"The country has been arguing about a lot of fundamental things lately including state roles and individual liberty," Woodard, a Maine native who won the 2012 George Polk Award for investigative reporting, told Business Insider.
"[But] in order to have any productive conversation on these issues," he added, "you need to know where you come from. Once you know where you are coming from it will help move the conversation forward."
Below are a few examples of how Woodward describes the US regional cultural makeup.
Yankeedom
Encompassing the entire Northeast north of New York City and spreading through Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, Yankeedom values education, intellectual achievement, communal empowerment, and citizen participation in government as a shield against tyranny. Yankees are comfortable with government regulation. Woodard notes that Yankees have a "Utopian streak." The area was settled by radical Calvinists.
New Netherland
A highly commercial culture, New Netherland is "materialistic, with a profound tolerance for ethnic and religious diversity and an unflinching commitment to the freedom of inquiry and conscience," according to Woodard. It is a natural ally with Yankeedom and encompasses New York City and northern New Jersey. The area was settled by the Dutch.
The Midlands
Settled by English Quakers, The Midlands are a welcoming middle-class society that spawned the culture of the "American Heartland." Political opinion is moderate, and government regulation is frowned upon. Woodard calls the ethnically diverse Midlands "America's great swing region." Within the Midlands are parts of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska.
Tidewater
Tidewater was built by the young English gentry in the area around the Chesapeake Bay and North Carolina. Starting as a feudal society that embraced slavery, the region places a high value on respect for authority and tradition. Woodard notes that Tidewater is in decline, partly because "it has been eaten away by the expanding federal halos around D.C. and Norfolk."
Greater Appalachia
Colonized by settlers from the war-ravaged borderlands of Northern Ireland, northern England, and the Scottish lowlands, Greater Appalachia is stereotyped as the land of hillbillies and rednecks. Woodard says Appalachia values personal sovereignty and individual liberty and is "intensely suspicious of lowland aristocrats and Yankee social engineers alike." It sides with the Deep South to counter the influence of federal government. Within Greater Appalachia are parts of Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virginia, Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Indiana, Illinois, and Texas.
Deep South
The Deep South was established by English slave lords from Barbados and was styled as a West Indies-style slave society, Woodard notes. It has a very rigid social structure and fights against government regulation that threatens individual liberty. Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Texas, Georgia, and South Carolina are all part of the Deep South.
El Norte
Composed of the borderlands of the Spanish-American empire, El Norte is "a place apart" from the rest of America, according to Woodard. Hispanic culture dominates in the area, and the region values independence, self-sufficiency, and hard work above all else. Parts of Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and California are in El Norte.
The Left Coast
Colonized by New Englanders and Appalachian Midwesterners, the Left Coast is a hybrid of "Yankee utopianism and Appalachian self-expression and exploration," Woodard says, adding that it is the staunchest ally of Yankeedom. Coastal California, Oregon, and Washington are in the Left Coast.
I don't know if I entirely agree with his views. For one thing what about the 50% of the population that jumps around? A lot of us move due to jobs, family, education, spouses, children (see family), climate, and finances (some areas are pricier than others).
And, the recent immigrants from other areas?
I'm from three of these areas, possibly four. New Netherland, The Midlands, and Yankeedom.
But, it's interesting that the wealthy British and Irish colonized the slave colonies and participated heavily in the slave trade. (Bad British and Irish). While the Dutch, Quakers, Scottish Calvinists...went the opposite route.
Again, I don't think it was that clear cut or easily mapped. People move around a lot. And he forgot the Welsh miners who settled in PA, Virginia and Kentucky.
no subject
Date: 2017-09-25 12:04 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2017-09-25 12:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2017-09-25 12:39 am (UTC)Overall, the basic idea remains controversial among historians, many of whom are skeptical of drawing broad social conclusions like this. Fischer's is the most persuasive.