American Nations: The culture (clashes) of North America
Recently, cultural historian Colin Woodward released a very interesting book called American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America.
In my opinion it's one of the most interesting takes on American History/Politics. Well, not just American, as Canada features prominently in the book as does northern Mexico.
As the title suggests, Woodward points out eleven regional cultures that he argues make up North America.
However his larger point is far more interesting: clashes between the regions, with their different respective cultures have proven to be far more important in North American history than purely political, class, or economic issues. Every region has a different mindset that developed historically, and these manifest themselves in the afro-mentioned issues that are constantly fought over. Personally, I think this is one of the most interesting books on American history I have ever read.
Woodward's map is not meant to be taken strictly; cities often have more than one influence over them. For example...
Pittsburgh (where I'm from): Midlander, Appalachian
Chicago: Yankee, Midlander
New Orleans: New France, Deep South
Also, Hawaii and south Florida are not talked about in the book; Hawaii is of course of the Polynesian cultural set (with Asian and Yankee influence) and south Florida, centered around Miami, has a distinct Cuban flair, and is almost a Latin American city of sorts.
---
First Nations: Encompassing Northern Canada, Greenland, much of the Yukon and Alaska (you can't see this on the map but Woodward talks about it in the book). The "First Nations" of course refers to areas where Native Americans (and their values) still are predominant. Woodward argues that the First Nations of the far North are re-asserting themselves, controlling vast resources on their own terms.
-----
El Norte; The first non-native regional culture to develop. Essentially a pioneer Latino psyche, born on the fringes of Mexico, and what would become the Southwestern US after 1848. Woodward argues that El Norte is far different from Mexico proper; even the areas still within Mexico gravitate towards the United States and have little love for Mexico City's authority. This has manifested itself in many ways, including the Texas Revolution (which was of course also influenced by Appalacian and Deep South Texians), the insurgent Republic of the Rio Grande, and Pancho Villa's revolt.
----
Tidewater: The region including North Carolina, some of Maryland, Virginia proper, and Delaware. Centered on the Chesapeake, this was the first region inhabited by English-speaking colonists. Tidewater was of course highly influential on early American history with many of the more prominent founding fathers residing here. In more modern times, however, Tidewater has lost a lot of influence to the somewhat similar Deep South, the southern migration of Northerners, and the fact that it's culture was blocked from moving Westward by Scots-Irish Applacians, who were originally forced from Tidewater.
That said, Tidewater differed from the Deep South (with which it is sometimes grouped) in a few ways. Initally in colonial times, Tidewater lacked the racial caste system of the Deep South, and contributed greatly to the American Revolution whereas the Deep South largely did not. During the Civil War, Tidewater was ambivilent to secession at first, with Virginia and North Carolina barely breaking away from the US; Maryland and Delaware did not, although they did sympathize with their cultural brethren that did.Tidewater has always been a fundamentally conservative region, with a high value placed on respect for authority and tradition and very little on equality or public participation in politics. Such attitudes are not suprising, given that it was founded by the younger sons of southern English gentry, who aimed to reproduce the semifeudal manorial society of the English countryside, where economic, political, and social affairs were run by and for landed artistocrats. These self-identified "Cavaliers" [in an English Civil War sense, -Xan] largely succeeded in their aims, turning the lowlands [of previously mentioned states] into a country gentleman's paradise, with indentured servants, and later slaves taking the part of the peasants.
----
Greater Appalachian culture is the so-called "redneck" culture of the central US, stretching from mountainous Western Virginia and North Carolina to North Texas. It mixes and neighbors many different regions, in fact sitting in what would become Midlander Armstrong county I can look out my window and see historically and still considered (by Woodward, at least) Appalachian Westmoreland County (note the name) across the river out my window. In colonial times, Scottish, Scots Irish, and North English settlers cared little for the Tidewater gentry, Deep South aristocrats, Quakers from Eastern Pennsylvania, and Yankee paternal instincts and thus moved west, away from established cultures to form their own. Ironically, during the American Civil War most "redneck" Appalachians fought aganist the Confederates, even breaking apart southern states with their insurgent hatred for the established order. While generally pro-Union, Appalachians were not abolitionists by any means, thus creating divisions after the war with its former allies...lasting into the Civil Rights era where poor rural Appalachian dwelling whites feared an influx of blacks that would compete with them economically.
Woodward notes that Appalachians have supported every war in American history (once it is started, that is) due to this warrior ethic; and also observes that Appalachians make up a majority of rank and file members of the US military to the present day, as well as many prominent commanders.In the British Isles, this culture had formed in a state of near-constant war and upheaval, fostering a warrior ethic and a deep commitment to individual liberty and personal sovereignty.
---
Interestingly, Woodward includes the greater New York City Metro Area as it's own culture, and makes an excellent case for it.
At the time of it's founding, New Netherland was indeed extremely diverse, consisting of Dutch colonists, French Hugeonots, exiles from other colonies and European countries, blacks; both free and enslaved, Jews from mostly Iberian origins, and even a Muslim from Morocco who was a prominent farmer just north of the city. Today, "New Netherland" is still extremely diverse place, packed with a huge population of 19 million people. Before the Revolutionary War Upstate New York was also part of New Netherland, hence the "Orangemen" of Syracuse collegiate sports today, as well as many placenames.Modeled on its Dutch namesake, New Amsterdam was from the start a global commercial trading society: multi-ethnic, multi-religious, speculative, materialistic, mercantile, and free trading, a raucous, not entirely democratic city-state [See: Tammany Hall; the fact that the Mayor of NYC is still an extremely powerful figure -Xan] where no one ethnic or religious group has ever been in charge. New Netherland also nutured two Dutch innovations considered subversive by most other European states at the time: a profound tolerance of diversity and an unflinching commitment to the freedom of inquiry. Forced on the other nations at the Constitutional Convention, these ideals have been passed down to us as the Bill of Rights.
Still, diversity did not always mean tolerance and New York City contained one of the country's more prominent slave markets up until the Civil War, at a time where Slaves openly being sold was rare in most Northern states...the speculative and mercantile nature of the region taking presidence here. New Netherland did not really support emancipation, and a lot of opposition to Lincoln could be found there, peaking in Tammany Hall and the NYC draft riots of 1863.
Eventually, the power of Tammany Hall would be broken in the early 20th century for good by Franklin Roosevelt (in one of his first major political career moves) after weakening for some time. A huge influx of immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe during this time would change the face of the city, but the values of materialism, mercantilism, and free trade define greater New York City to the present.
---
Yankeedom, is essentially New England and its most direct diaspora, stretching West bordering Canada over to the easternmost counties of the Dakotas. Yankeedom also includes New Brunswick and Nova Scotia in Canada.
Yankeedom was founded by the Puritans...the Pilgrims...who first set foot in the region in 1620. In contrast to the "Cavaliers" who founded Virginia, Yankeedom was settled by "Roundhead" Puritans. The English Civil War would eventually split Tidewater and Yankeedom along these lines.
---From the outset, it was a culture that put great emphasis on education, local political control, and the pursuit of the "greater good" of the community, even if it required individual self-denial. Yankees have the greatest faith in the potential of government to improve people's lives, tending to see it as an extension of the citizenry, and a vital bulwark aganist the schemes of grasping aristocrats, corporations, or outside powers. For more than four centuries, Yankees have sought to build a more perfect society here on Earth through social engineering, relatively extensive citizen involvement in the political process, and the aggressive assimilation of foreigners. Settled by stable, educated families, Yankeedom has always had a middle-class ethos and considerable respect for intellectual achievement. Its religious zeal has waned over time, but not its underlying drive to improve the world and the set of moral and social values that scholars have sometimes described as "secular Puritanism".
Sometimes called "Middle America", the Midlands stretches from Eastern Pennsylvania and southern New Jersey in the East to Nebraska and Kansas to the West.
At first, the Midlands of Eastern PA were home to and largely governed by the Quakers, who were soon joined by German sects with similar beliefs such as the Mennonites and Amish. However, these groups at first came into conflict with nearby Appalachian settlers over how to deal with Native Americans, and would later be swamped by non-Mennonite German settlers in Pennsylvania, who then spread westward.
Historically, the Midlands were very apathetic towards the American Revolution; Woodward argues that many "Tories" resided here and fled to Ontario thus giving that area of Canada a Midlander feel. During the American Civil War, many Midlanders had been former serfs or peasants in Europe, thus leading them to entirely side with the North. In more recent times, Midlander states tend to be "swing states" politically.The Midlands spawned the culture of Middle America and the Heartland, where ethnic and idealogical purity has never been a priority, government has been seen as an unwelcome intrusion, and political opinion has been moderate, even apathetic. The only part of British North America to have a non-British majority in 1775, the Midlands has long been an ethnic mosaic, with people of German descent - not "Anglo-Saxons" - comprising the largest group since the late 1600's. Like Yankees, Midlanders believe that society should be organized to benefit ordinary people, but they are extremely skeptical of top down government intervention, as many of their ancestors fled from European tyrannies.
----
The Deep South originated not directly from Europe, but from other English colonies...specfically the British-ruled Caribbean slave colonies such as Barbados. From it's beginnings in Charleston, South Carolina, the culture of the Deep South spread west to East Texas.
However, the Deep South also has another side to it; it is the undisputed wellspring of African-American culture, even down to music and cuisine.....Founded by Barbados slave lords as a West Indies-style slave society, a system so cruel and despotic that it shocked even its 17th century English contemporaries. For most of American history, the region has been the bastion of white supremacy, aristocratic priviledge, and a version of classical Republicanism modeled on the slave states of the ancient world, where democracy was a privlege of the few and enslavement the natural lot of the many. It remains the least democratic of the nations, a one-party entity where race remains the primary determinant of one's political affilations.
Woodward cites that modern US Conservative beliefs on labor and the environment are largely born of Deep South beliefs, and politicans representing this region.....Its territorial ambitions in Latin America frustrated, in [1861] it dragged the federation into a horrific war in an attempt to form its own nation-state, backed by reluctant allies in Tidewater and some corners of Appalachia. After sucessfully resisting a Yankee-led occupation, it became the center of the states' rights movement, racial segregation, and labor and environmental deregulation.
----
New France is the most split of all the cultural regions, consisting of the Canadian Quebecois, "possessing a nation-state-in-waiting" (as Woodward says it) in Quebec. Also, southern Louisiana, home to the Acadians "Cajuns" who were exiled from Canada, maintain a New France bastion that intermingles with Deep South culture around New Orleans. New France blends the culture of peasants from Normandy (who made up the majority of early immigrants) with Native American influences.
Woodward argues that the Quebecois are the reason that Canada is so politically different from the US, while also commenting that the Deep South is the reason why the US is so different from Canada.Down to earth, egalitarian, and consensus-driven, the New French have recently been demonstrated by pollsters to be far and away the most liberal people on the continent. Long oppressed by their British overlords, the New French have, since, the mid-20th century, imparted many of their attitudes to the Canadian federation, where multiculturalism and negotiated consensus are treasured.
---
Woodward cites the Left Coast as the cultural region stretching from Juneau, Alaska...through British Columbia...and down to San Benito county, California. The "Left Coast" was originally dominated by Yankee-oriented merchants, missionaries, and woodsmen who arrived by ship and controlled the towns. These were joined by settlers from the Midlands of the US and Canada as well as Appalachia who traveled overland in wagon trains to the west coast.
Originally, the Yankee immigrants set to recreate New England, and were very idealistic, dedicated to intellectualism, and had faith in good government and social reform. This isn't in the book, but historically you can see this in action as Yankees arrived in California during the Gold Rush and tried to impose proper order to the chaos of the 49er settlements.
What makes the Left Coast different from Yankeedom or anywhere else is the embrace of individualism not really widely seen in 19th century New England, something that would define the region politically and economically, then affect the US as a whole.
---
The Far West is stated by Woodward to be a region where the terrain, climates, and environment affected development far more than any pre-existing cultures or ethnic groups. The "Far West" stretches from parts of Alaska and the Yukon down to the fringes of El Norte in the American Southwest.
High, dry, and remote, the interior west presented conditions so severe that effectively destroyed those who tried to apply the farming techniques used in Greater Appalachia, the Midlands, or other nations. With minor exceptions this vast region could not be colonized without the deployment of vast industrial resouces: railroads, heavy mining equipment, ore smelters, dams, and irrigation systems. As a result, the colonization of much of the region was directed by large corporations HQed in distant New York, Boston, Chicago, or San Francisco, or by the federal government itself, which controlled much of the land. Even if they didn't work for one of the companies, settlers were dependent on the railroads for transportation of goods, people, and products to and from far-off markets and manufacturing centers....This being seen today in problems with farm subsidies and defense spending....as well as the massive amounts of control that mining companies have over some Far West states....It's political class tends to revile the federal government for interfering in its affairs - a stance that often aligns it with the Deep South - while demanding it continue to recieve federal largesse. It rarely challenges it's corporate masters, however, who retain near-Gilded Age levels of influence over Far Western affairs.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Sphere
