I'd like to learn about other places!/What's the world like?

[Gnomvid]

This may be because of my own family's background but I 've always felt there was something odd about the way books like Albion's Seed and American Nations sub-divided America, namely that only the first waves of European immigration count. For example, the NYC and its immediate region is called "New Netherland" and its distinctive identity is traced to the Dutch Settlement, but what is there in modern NYC that is culturally Dutch? Sure, even in the early 19th century there was heavy Dutch influence in New York (our 8th president, Martin Van Buren was a native Dutch speaker), but NYC's and northern New Jersey's present distinctiveness as a regional culture probably owes more to late 19th/early 20th century Italian/Irish/Ashkenazi Jewish immigration.

The area of the country I'm from is accounted part of Yankeedom, and indeed migrants from upstate New York and New England were important in the history of the region. But I'd argue that German/Polish/Scandinavian influence forms the base element for a lot of Upper Midwestern culture today. Kielbasa and sauerkraut aren't Yankee dishes. (Perhaps with some mustard on rye bread, mmmm)

"New Netherland" don't you mean "New Amsterdam"? that's what the Dutch settlers called what's now NYC

Edit: also neither Kilbasa nor Sauerkraut have anything to do with Scandinavia sour cabbage does though which is different as it's not fermented as Sauerkraut is

[Hoosigander]

"New Netherland" don't you mean "New Amsterdam"? that's what the Dutch settlers called what's now NYC

Edit: also neither Kilbasa nor Sauerkraut have anything to do with Scandinavia sour cabbage does though which is different as it's not fermented as Sauerkraut is

New Netherland is what Colin Woodward calls it in his book American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America which is what I was responding to.

I was arguing that the culture of the Upper Midwest is nowadays characterized by a blend of northern European cultures that immigrated in the late 19th, early 20th century which included (amongst them my own great grandparents) Poles and Germans, which were two thirds of my Poles/Germans/Scandinavian formulation. Kielbasa is a Polish dish and Sauerkraut is German, although pickled cabbage is part of a tasty Polish dish called Kapusta.

[Razade]

New Netherland is what Colin Woodward calls it in his book American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America which is what I was responding to.

I was arguing that the culture of the Upper Midwest is nowadays characterized by a blend of northern European cultures that immigrated in the late 19th, early 20th century which included (amongst them my own great grandparents) Poles and Germans, which were two thirds of my Poles/Germans/Scandinavian formulation. Kielbasa is a Polish dish and Sauerkraut is German, although pickled cabbage is part of a tasty Polish dish called Kapusta.

I did say he didn't get it exact. It's a broader narrative. The fact they're part of a different group of immigrants means little, it's a map of sociopolitical culture as much as ethnic cultures. The Upper Midwest has more in common with "Yankeedom" politically than it does with the Midlands.

[BWR]

For those interested in learning about Norway: A Frog in the Fjord

A French lady who moved to Norway and started a blog (in English) about her experiences and observations of Norwegians and Norway in general. For the most part she's spot on, and people complaining about her being wrong just don't want to admit she has a point.

[warty goblin]

I live in Iowa. Where I am now (central Iowa) is flat, and has corn. Since the price of corn has fallen a bit the last few years, we also have soybeans again.

But I grew up in the northwest corner of Iowa; in an area known as the Driftless. This is the corner of Iowa, going into Minnesota and Wisconsin that got missed by the glaciers during the last ice age, so there's hills and bluffs, and a much stronger tendency to grow forest than most of the great plains states. It's a genuinely beautiful part of the world, there's not a lot of big, spectacular vistas, but many pleasant and lovely little places tucked away here and there. There aren't really any major cities (or even minor cities), but many of the small towns here have weathered the decline of the family farm and the great rural exodus better than in the rest of the state, and so are fairly vibrant and alive. There's good walking and biking trails, the restaurants are several cuts above what you'd expect from dinky little midwestern towns, and the steep, unfarmable hills means there's lots of trees along the river valleys and the roads are twisty, confusing mess to navigate. My little corner was mostly settled by German and Norwegian immigrants; but since the world wars, the most prominent ethnic group is Norwegian, so there's a thriving folk art community as well.

[Hoosigander]

I did say he didn't get it exact. It's a broader narrative. The fact they're part of a different group of immigrants means little, it's a map of sociopolitical culture as much as ethnic cultures. The Upper Midwest has more in common with "Yankeedom" politically than it does with the Midlands.

I don't have any problem with the regions he draws up in the book, and they work as an analysis of regions that tend to vote in certain ways. He does, however, try to connect those regions to particular cultures and I just plain find it odd that even in areas which were highly affected by 19th century immigration he always ties things to 17th century immigrant groups. Besides, more recent immigrants (anything after the 17th century) are critically important to understanding which regions behave in what ways politically. The urban political machines that historically enabled one unnamed political party's electoral dominance of large parts of Woodward's Yankeedom were built on later waves of immigrants. Nor are the waves of northern European immigrants to the Upper Midwest insignificant to the political history of those regions.

[ForzaFiori]

This is...really really reductive. As in absurdly reductive. Alaska also doesn't have a seperate culture from its surrounding region. You've missed Appalachia entirely which in no way falls into a "North West" mentality. You've omitted the interconnection of the Four Corner States with the associated Native tribes which goes well beyond "minority" ethnic groups, completly steamrolled over the mix of cultures found at the boarders of Mexico and Canada and the bleed over there in. California is divided between North and South with the South being far more closely related to Cascadia than the North is. Texan South Westernness is far more Southern than Arizonan or Californian South Westernness. Really just as reductive as one can get.

This...isn't really true either. Also it's a lot, there's a space. The strife is, mostly, along political lines which we can't talk about here and less to do with state boarders. Maybe in the South you'll find stuff like that going back to the War but that's pretty political too.

I'd say you haven't listened to enough places. I could explain to you, at length, as to why Florida and Kansas are two of the worst places you could ever choose to live. State nationalism isn't like country nationalism because we've had this idea of AMERICA since...well around World War One is when it really kicked off as a way to unify the nation. You'll find a lot more State level nationalism in the South owing to their more independent mentality than the "North".

tl;dr: The U.S is really complex and a discussion on nationalism and culture is difficult to get into without politics and religion.

state nationalism is incredibly intense in the SE. We still believe in America, yes, but that the SE is by far the best part of the country, and generally southerners believe that their state is the best part of the SE, and their region of their state is the best part of their state. Part of that does go back to the Civil War (though, without getting political, I think it has more to do with the states rights issues from before the war rather than just still being mad that we lost. We've always been more about our own state than the country as a whole it seems), but I have no idea if it's like that in the rest of the country. I haven't left the SE since I was like...11.

There's no way I could have listed every single region of the US, So I tried to list the major, over arching ones that are used by most people. Also, Appalachia is in the eastern US, no where near the NW, and is generally a part of either the NE (in the case of say, Appalachian Pennsylvania), or the SE (the area I live in, the "uplands" of Virginia, the carolinas, and georgia), and while there is a difference between say appalachian and the respective low country of each state, the appalachian regions have more in common with the low country of their own state than with the appalachian area of a state that is 1000 miles away (for instance, the culture where I live in Upstate SC is MUCH more similar to the culture of say, Charleston, in the low country, than it is in Appalachian Pennsylvania, or even in a place like West Virginia. I'll admit that I could be wrong about Alaska having a distinct culture, but I just figured it wouldn't be like most other places in the US (which culture do you believe it falls into? Pacific NW?), but to the others, native tribes of the 4 corners would be part of the indian/ethnic cultures (fun fact, since after whites, the largest group in the US is like 15% of the population, that makes pretty much every ethnicity a 'minority'), california is split between a form of SW culture (Southern california, along with the places that used to be owned by Mexico) and Pacific NW (Northern california, which tends to be similar to oregon and washington.). The mixed cultures along the border would either be minority cultures (IE, the culture of latinos), or the regional culture (SW culture has massive influence from mexico, duh, because it was part of them. The northwest is gonna be influenced by Canada as a part of its culture. If your from Mexico or Canada and still live just like you did there, then you are part of a minority/ethnic culture - a culture from a people that isn't the 'majority' [at this point, actually a plurality] in America). Texas is half southern, half southwestern, depending on the place. It's not reductionist, its just general, because I wasn't trying to type out a response this long originally. Please try to be less condescending next time though, if you don't mind, especially if you're then going to make ridiculous mistakes yourself.

[Fishybugs]

I live in Washington State. The pearl of the Pacific Northwest. Specifically, in Olympia, right at the southern tip of the Puget Sound. If you're the outdoorsy-type at all, then Washington has everything you could possible want. From ocean to an 18,000 foot mountain in an hour drive. Ski resorts, thousands of acres of state and national parks, one of the last rainforests in North America, as well as protected waterways for boating. Any type of terrain is available for any type of sport.

Not outdoorsy? Washington is a burgeoning tech capital with Microsoft and Boeing, as well as major entertainment such as Wizards of the Coast within an hour drive of me.

Of course, the trade-off is that the cost of living here is about 7-14% above the national average, and rising. The word is getting out that the weather here isn't as bad as we advertise.

[Ninja_Prawn]

The word is getting out that the weather here isn't as bad as we advertise.

Mhm. Once of my closest friends moved to that region last year. She's not one to stay put; it was her 8^th move in 5 years - but she loves Washington so much that she's putting down roots and starting a family there!

[2D8HP]

I live in Washington State...... The word is getting out that the weather here isn't as bad as we advertise.

My wife grew up in Seattle (she's a U.W. alum whereas I'm an uneducated Troglodyte!), and she often described it as "depressing", but when I visited Seattle in the winter of 1998 the weather in seemed little different from San Francisco's, and the City seemed like a San Francisco intertwined with Oakland. But how much latter the sunrise was, was very noticible! Despite that I quite liked Seattle, it had some great bookshops!
Portland, Oregon which I only saw from the inside of a Greyhound bus and bus station seemed much more distinct. Portland seemed like an old dense City like San Francisco, but surrounded by miles of forest instead of suburbs.
The only other places I've seen outside of California has been a week in Washington, D.C. and two weeks in Ottawa, and a day in Montreal. Despite being francophone, Montreal seemed the closest to home!

[Ninja_Prawn]

Portland seemed like an old dense City like San Francisco

From what I've heard, Portland was deliberately laid out in small blocks so that there would be more corner lots - because corner lots fetch higher prices!

Whether that's true or not, people also say that the layout has fostered a unique culture. I'd like to visit someday, for sure.