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.
I read this term recently and grew curious. The opposite of the deep south states by location.
I imagine it would be: New York, New England, Michigan, northern Illinois, Wisconsin, northern Iowa, Minnesota, northern Nebraska and the Dakotas.
Edit: Maybe north tier PA as well?
Although definitions may vary what states are Deep South (and even South in the first place), The Deep South almost always follows state lines. So I would take out northern Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska and Pennsylvania for "The Deep North". Keep it simple.
I wouldnt say there is any cultural unity amoung the states of the far north like there is in the southeast/gulf coast states. They could be grouped in the following way. Upper New England and upstate New York share some things in common. Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota share some things in common, Montana and the Dakotas share some things in common, and the Pacific northwest is a world of its own. When southerners use the term "north" to describe all the people who live above and beyond the mason dixon line they assume there is the same kind of unity amoung people in the north like there is in the south. It just is not that way, someone in a midwest state like Michigan is completly different from someone in a northeast state like Conneticut. I think alot of people in the south dont realize this fact. While southern states do have some differences amoung themselves, there is much more regional unity than there is above the mason dixon. The midwest/northeast division is just as profound as is the division between the south and north. In fact most midwesterners would likely suggest that they have more in common with southerners than with people of the northeast.
Location: Appalachian New York, Formerly Louisiana
4,409 posts, read 6,536,583 times
Reputation: 6253
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielj72
I wouldnt say there is any cultural unity amoung the states of the far north like there is in the southeast/gulf coast states. They could be grouped in the following way. Upper New England and upstate New York share some things in common. Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota share some things in common, Montana and the Dakotas share some things in common, and the Pacific northwest is a world of its own. When southerners use the term "north" to describe all the people who live above and beyond the mason dixon line they assume there is the same kind of unity amoung people in the north like there is in the south. It just is not that way, someone in a midwest state like Michigan is completly different from someone in a northeast state like Conneticut. I think alot of people in the south dont realize this fact. While southern states do have some differences amoung themselves, there is much more regional unity than there is above the mason dixon. The midwest/northeast division is just as profound as is the division between the south and north. In fact most midwesterners would likely suggest that they have more in common with southerners than with people of the northeast.
You have a point.
Lower Midwesterners could say they have more in common with the south, but with just a little study, most Midwesterners can't actually claim that. There are places in the rural Northeast that have a lot in common with the south as well. But regardless, both regions make up the north.
Most states up north have rivalries with each other. I guess that alone is sort of an ironic cultural unity.
Edit: Also, there are some cultural ties up north. Lower Michigan and western New York have a lot in common. New England tends to be one unit. Southern NY and Pennsylvania are a lot alike. From an outside point of view, Wisconsin, the UP and Minnesota are very, very similar. So on so forth.
I don't think I've ever heard the term "Deep North." "Deep South" kind of concerned the parts of the South slaves were exiled to, being "sent Deep" or at least that was the legendary meaning. I'm not sure the Puritans or Quakers "sent people" "Deep North" in that way, not even in legend.
Still I'd guess maybe Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont. They have some opposites to the "Deep South" states. They were traditionally Republican, but became more Democratic. (The Deep South was traditionally Democratic, but became more Republican) They're highly white whereas Deep South states have some of the highest percentage black. They're among the least religious states according to studies where the "Deep South" states are among the most religious.
However "Deep North" just means "Far North" and "Away from the East or West Coast" than it'd probably be more Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, North Dakota, Montana, and Idaho.
I am picturing this as similar to the Deep South in terms of a geographical feature. I picture the Deep South as in the coastal plain lowlands of either the Atlantic or Gulf coasts. I would picture the Deep North as heavily forested mostly rural lands. And in that I picture Northern New England and New York as one group, and another part that is the Northern Great Lakes region.
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.
