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 true that DC is a low-rise city. And it's defined more by its federal buildings, monuments and other historic sites than it is by the skyline, unlike the other northeast cities. I think the city is deceptive in that way.
To those who make the case that they live in DC and they don't consider themselves Southern, therefore DC can't possibly be a Southern city: You are denying your city's heritage. DC has been around a lot longer than you have, and while it has become more and more like a Northeastern city over the past few decades, its cultural and social heritage is definitely Southern.
To those who make the case that they live in DC and they don't consider themselves Southern, therefore DC can't possibly be a Southern city: You are denying your city's heritage. DC has been around a lot longer than you have, and while it has become more and more like a Northeastern city over the past few decades, its cultural and social heritage is definitely Southern.
To those who make the case that they live in DC and they don't consider themselves Southern, therefore DC can't possibly be a Southern city: You are denying your city's heritage. DC has been around a lot longer than you have, and while it has become more and more like a Northeastern city over the past few decades, its cultural and social heritage is definitely Southern.
It's important to learn from the past, but not live in the past. Does a modern Massachussetts native deny their heritage if they don't identify with Puritanism or witch trials?
The song is interesting. Our history books really did not teach us how close Maryland was to seceding from the Union. President Lincoln considered sending Union ships to bombard Baltimore harbor, but instead decided to suspend habeas corpus and declare martial law in Maryland. This is food for thought for posters like missroxyhart,who believe that Maryland's joining the union actually has some significance when it comes to the argument we're having. Had Philadelphia remained the capital of the United States, Maryland in all likelihood would have seceded.
I enjoy this topic more than others on C-D because it probably exposes hypocrisy and bias more than any other. My family members in the DC area are very quick to ridicule other family members as being country, unsophisticated, and slow by mere virtue of their geographical and cultural identity. But when you tell them that Jim Crow reigned supreme in DC and its suburbs just as it did in Montgomery, and when you tell them that Skins fans were singing Dixie and waving Confederate flags at their games as recently as the 1960s, they get defensive. The common refrain is that "We can't be southern because we have shoes, and we're educated, and we don't talk funny, and we can read, and we don't have to sit on the back of the bus!" Isn't that just like saying, "He can't be half black...he's too smart, clean, articulate and hard-working!"
Umm no, I was actually making fun of your arguments. Because according to you, one point or time period in history decided that today D.C. is Southern, and it's as simple as that. You kept repeating that since D.C. was Southern once, it must always be. Well, Maryland spurned the CSA and stuck with the Union once, so it must always be Northern, see how that works?
The way you argue, New England is still British and NYC is Dutch because they were historically and that's just how it is, because culture and boundaries don't evolve over time apparently. And speaking of food for thought, you can keep giving half the facts if you want, but half the story isn't the whole story. Maryland had as much Union sympathies as Confederate, 50% of Maryland's Black population was free, Maryland voted down secession, 77% of all Maryland troops joined the Union Army, Maryland voted for Lincoln in 1864, Maryland passed it's own new constitution abolishing slavery when they were unaffected by the Emancipation Proclamation. And by the way, most of the people Lincoln had imprisoned were all released within two months of their arrests except one who was exiled, and in any case, they were not the majority. Maryland might have had significantly more CSA sympathies than a state like MA but that's obvious considering it's border position. But looking at people's attitudes, you could find sympathies for both sides in any state back then and today. You can find plenty of Confederate supporters in CT today and I'm sure there's plenty of people who look back at the Union sympathetically in Atlanta.
Back to history. Quit treating it like the end all answer of today. I already asked, but if just one part of history matters sooo much, what does D.C. as the capital of the Union mean? Doesn't that just say it all? What does New Jersey not officially finishing the process of abolishing slavery until 1865 mean? Don't tell me how it was a much more Southern institution in MD when 50% of all Blacks were free at the time of the Civil War, and many of it's slaves were released shortly after the Revolution. History didn't stop in 1865, and it didn't stop in 1960. Even if D.C. was Southern in 1960 that doesn't mean it has to be today. Cultural boundaries and cultures themselves evolve, expand, and contract over time with the spread of influence and integration, and don't bring up why Atlanta isn't Northern with all it's transplants for instance, cause I've already answered that and I'm still waiting for a response.
"Atlanta is nowhere near Baltimore and the rest of the Northeast, and can't integrate with the rest of the Northeast coast in the same way, it's really that simple.
If a region can't grow beyond it's own confines, how did Bos-Wash even develop? How did the NY area grow into SW CT? How did the Bay Area in NorCal happen? How did Florida become Southern after it was bought from Spain and how did California become American after the Mexican-American war?"
Weren't those partly a function of history, the passage of time?
A region growing and evolving is a function of history.
And quit playing the victim and saying everyone who says D.C. can't be the South because the South means backwards, dumb, and racist, I haven't said anything like that anywhere and I don't think that. You said something like that though, claiming earlier that Maryland was Southern and not Northern thanks to it's backwards Jim Crow laws. I thought that was cute though... "And this is funny. How many times on this site have we seen, "the North is so segregated, it's worse than the South!" So MD being racist means it not Northern anymore... good to know, I knew we were the good guys. (Your sarcasm detector should be exploding now) Now the South "wins D.C." cause it's the most racist? So the North is the most racist when people want to disparage it, otherwise we can't borrow the title cause the South needs it to claim D.C. and MD."
But that was part of your history argument. You were saying history totally matters today in relation to how we should view a region with examples like Germany and Japan. I totally agree that history does affect a region and culture today, but not just one part of history, you can't just pick and choose which parts you want to support your arguments, which are all so far double standards. MD was half Southern so it's all Southern, sorry but that works both ways. History does matter, and in the last 50 or 60 years of our history, D.C. has become more and more culturally integrated with the Northeast. It can in a way a city like Atlanta couldn't because of proximity. As the Bos-Wash region grew and continues to grow, expand, and integrate more and more, it's cities did and do form a more uniform culture.
Anyway, don't just pick out whatever pieces of my argument you can argue against or try to take out of context. If you wanna argue with me then respond to everything I say or don't bother.
Well, I have lottsa homework to get back to, so argue on.
It's important to learn from the past, but not live in the past. Does a modern Massachussetts native deny their heritage if they don't identify with Puritanism or witch trials?
But modern Massachusetts is pretty far removed from that aspect of their history. That's not quite the case with DC as only a generation or so ago most people would have considered it to be at least more Southern than it is right now. That said, I don't consider history to be the end all, be all in terms of contemporary identity, but it does play a role.
But modern Massachusetts is pretty far removed from that aspect of their history. That's not quite the case with DC as only a generation or so ago most people would have considered it to be at least more Southern than it is right now. That said, I don't consider history to be the end all, be all in terms of contemporary identity, but it does play a role.
Umm no, I was actually making fun of your arguments. Because according to you, one point or time period in history decided that today D.C. is Southern, and it's as simple as that. You kept repeating that since D.C. was Southern once, it must always be. Well, Maryland spurned the CSA and stuck with the Union once, so it must always be Northern, see how that works?
You should quote me on that. Find one sentence I wrote that says anything close to what's in bold. Over the course of this entire thread, my position has always been that DC is NOT THE NORTHEAST. After all, the question is "Is DC a Northeast City?" Why attribute false statements to me when you can simply browse this thread and find the statements I've made. I said the following:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
This topic has been tossed about on C-D a number of times. My answer is "no." The chief characteristics of Northern cities are (1) heavy industry at some point in time; (2) heavy late 19th/early 20th century immigration from Europe, which led to (3) large white, ethnic and primarily Catholic blue collar populations. Because DC never really had any of those things, I don't consider it a northern city.
The whole confederacy thing and slaves is only one part of my argument as to why DC is not northeastern. Saying that a city is not northeastern is not the same as saying that it's southern. My argument is more or less that DC is not a northeastern city because it is so dissimilar from the northeastern cities. The fact that the area had a ton of slaves, had strong Confederate leanings, lacked a manufacturing base with the accompanying immigration, and was under Jim Crow are a combination of factors that greatly distinguish DC/VA/MD from, say, Boston. Whether DC is southern or not is beside the point. I just know for sure that it's not northeastern.
Quote:
Originally Posted by missRoxyhart
Even if D.C. was Southern in 1960 that doesn't mean it has to be today. Cultural boundaries and cultures themselves evolve, expand, and contract over time with the spread of influence and integration, and don't bring up why Atlanta isn't Northern with all it's transplants for instance, cause I've already answered that and I'm still waiting for a response.
Do you see the title of this thread? The only two answers to this question are "yes, because..." and "no, because..." Many posters, including yourself, have answered that DC is northern because "cultural boundaries and cultures themselves evolve, expand, and contract over time with the spread of influence and integration." I get this point. No need to repeat it ad nauseum. But my response to this was that evolution does not mean transformation to a city imbibed with northern culture. All cities evolve. I mean, do you think Richmond in 2010 is the same as Richmond in 1960? You might say that Richmond is still considerably more southern than DC, but that does not mean that DC is more northern. It only means that DC is less southern. Follow me?
The major point of disagreement, I think, is that demographics don't really define cultural identity. In other words, DC can still be considered a northern city notwithstanding the fact that it lacks an old-guard white, ethnic population. You can disagree with that all you want, but at the end of the day, you have to agree that this is something that sets DC apart from Boston, New York, and Philadelphia.
I didn't write the language you were responding to in the rest of your post.
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.
