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.
The southern states are Virginia, West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, and North Carolina.
The Midwestern states are North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio.
The Northeastern states are Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, and Delaware (plus the D.C. area).
Not every state on the Confederate flag was legitimate...I agree Kentucky's Civil War status isn't what makes it southern...it is it's behavior after the Civil War that does. Kentucky went to great lengths to make it known it was a Southern state after the Civil War. Missouri, Maryland, and Delaware did just the opposite, cutting most of their Southern ties.
Yea, those states certainly didn't establish Jim Crow after the War.
Are you serious? Do you actually research before you type your bs on these forums?
Going up the coast: (number of Jim Crow laws, last year passed)
Florida: 19, last 1967
Georgia: 27, last 1963
SC: 22, last 1957
NC: 23, last 1957
VA: 25, last 1957
MD: 15, last 1957
DE: 9, last 1953
NJ: 12, last 1957
NY: 15, last 1953
CT: 9, last 1958
RI: 6, last 1960
MA: 15, last 1957
NH: 7, last 1957
ME: 5, last 1954
These threads keep popping up, which is understandable. The south is the most "happening" region in the united states.
I am from the deep south, Alabama, I know good and well what is southern and what is not. With that I will say all the states you have listed (excluding Delaware) are southern states in my book. A special note on missouri I have never been there but hope to someday so I canont really declare whether the state is southern or not.
The south is the largest region in the united states. With that said I hate when people compare large southern metros to rural southern life. Not all of the south is rural or conservative. I have heard many kentuckians saying that they did not classify themselves as southerns and many marylanders who call themselves southerners. While both states are southern in their own way, just because you border the northeast or midwest as in the cases with KY & MD does not mean that you are northern. They are called BORDER states for a reason.
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 5,094,873 times
Reputation: 1028
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeyserSoze
Yea, those states certainly didn't establish Jim Crow after the War.
To answer the OP, all of them.
They still retained some Southern influences, but lost most of them after the Civil War. It's a known fact that Jim Crow was practiced in several other states outside of the south as well...including Indiana, Kansas, and New Mexico. At least in Missouri, Jim Crow was only legally enforced in terms of segregation in public schools. to my knowledge, it was also practiced in New Mexico, Kansas, and Indiana even practiced Jim Crow. As far as segregation after the War, that was around in many states outside of the south, including Illinois and Ohio for at least several more decades. And plenty of public places all over the United States discriminated against blacks and practiced Jim Crow, whether or not it was legal or illegal in that state....police never went to great lengths to enforce the law there pretty much anywhere. Jim Crow in these three states also was nowhere near the severity in the South...all three of these states increased in black population during the Great Migration. Many were already in the process of desegregation when Brown vs. Board hit, at least Missouri was. There was little to no resistance against Brown vs. Board in MO, MD, and DE to my knowledge. Not so with the rest of these states. As a short answer, Jim Crow is not necessarily good evidence of the south, especially with MO, which only had one legally sanctioned law..St. Louis was in the process of desegregating its schools well before Brown vs. Board. De facto segregation has been around forever.
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 5,094,873 times
Reputation: 1028
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreasuredJewel
These threads keep popping up, which is understandable. The south is the most "happening" region in the united states.
I am from the deep south, Alabama, I know good and well what is southern and what is not. With that I will say all the states you have listed (excluding Delaware) are southern states in my book. A special note on missouri I have never been there but hope to someday so I canont really declare whether the state is southern or not.
The south is the largest region in the united states. With that said I hate when people compare large southern metros to rural southern life. Not all of the south is rural or conservative. I have heard many kentuckians saying that they did not classify themselves as southerns and many marylanders who call themselves southerners. While both states are southern in their own way, just because you border the northeast or midwest as in the cases with KY & MD does not mean that you are northern. They are called BORDER states for a reason.
I disagree both with Maryland and Missouri being southern, as well as your definition of a border state...you call these states border states, yet also call them southern...a border state means a state that is torn between regions. And this really only applied during the Civil War...I agree that today kentucky leans southern. Whatever your impression will be when you visit here, I have been to Alabama 4 times, all by car, and had a chance to talk with the locals. The only part of Missouri that even feels and acts even slightly like Alabama is the bootheel. Maryland is definitely more like Delaware and Pennsylvania than Virginia. Both of Missouri's two major cities, of where the majority of its population resides, St. Louis and Kansas City, are solidly Midwestern. Does Missouri have southern influences? Yes. is it the south? Far from it. I happen to have relatives from Louisiana and South Carolina who will back me up on this 100%. i was even called a yankee by somebody working a gas station at Spartanburg...if people in SC, the MOST southern state, won't let me into their world, that's about all the proof I need
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 5,094,873 times
Reputation: 1028
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreasuredJewel
These threads keep popping up, which is understandable. The south is the most "happening" region in the united states.
I am from the deep south, Alabama, I know good and well what is southern and what is not. With that I will say all the states you have listed (excluding Delaware) are southern states in my book. A special note on missouri I have never been there but hope to someday so I canont really declare whether the state is southern or not.
The south is the largest region in the united states. With that said I hate when people compare large southern metros to rural southern life. Not all of the south is rural or conservative. I have heard many kentuckians saying that they did not classify themselves as southerns and many marylanders who call themselves southerners. While both states are southern in their own way, just because you border the northeast or midwest as in the cases with KY & MD does not mean that you are northern. They are called BORDER states for a reason.
The University of North Carolina's survey, likely done much more professionally than your's, will show you where the true south lies. Feel free to google it. It's also been mentioned in numerous discussions on here. Less than 25% of people from MD, DE, and MO identified as southern. By contrast, more than 70% of people from Kentucky and Oklahoma identified as southern. These were not small groups of people either...several hundred if I recall per state.
Last edited by stlouisan; 11-06-2011 at 10:49 PM..
Are you serious? Do you actually research before you type your bs on these forums?
Going up the coast: (number of Jim Crow laws, last year passed)
Florida: 19, last 1967
Georgia: 27, last 1963
SC: 22, last 1957
NC: 23, last 1957
VA: 25, last 1957
MD: 15, last 1957
DE: 9, last 1953
NJ: 12, last 1957
NY: 15, last 1953
CT: 9, last 1958
RI: 6, last 1960
MA: 15, last 1957
NH: 7, last 1957
ME: 5, last 1954
Pretty apparent where they drop off: Maryland.
Well played, sir. Excellent research. In addition to that, there were many lynchings all over this country, well in the 20th century. Notable lynchings occured in Omaha and Springfield, Illinois, not exactly likely places you'd associate with those acts. I think that museums and schools in general don't do a great job of educating kids about the true extent of Jim Crow. It also seems like the Union soldiers are painted as heroic abolitionists trying to free the slaves from their evil, dirty Southern masters. Could not be further from the truth. I remember as a young boy my elementary school teacher basically telling us essentially that the North were the good guys and the South were the bad guys....it is nowhere near that simple. Most of these Union soldiers, and most Unionist politicians, were interested in the preservation of their country, as were the political leaders...the majority of them didn't give a crap about slavery, and certainly didn't see blacks as equals. General Sherman let several hundred slaves drown in a river in Georgia after blowing up a bridge that they could've used to run them across to safety. Even though slavery was ended in the Civil War, Northerners did not exactly look favorably on blacks...there was either legal or de facto discrimination against them practically everywhere in the United States until the start of the Civil Rights Movement. The simple fact that it took 100 years to pass the Civil Rights Act shows us that the South gets more credit than it deserves for African American struggles in this country. Basically....not all Southerners are racists, and not all racists are Southerners.
Perhaps a better test than Jim Crow would be if the state experienced the first phase of KKK activity, which started at the end of the war and lasted until the mid-1870's.
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 5,094,873 times
Reputation: 1028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobilee
Perhaps a better test than Jim Crow would be if the state experienced the first phase of KKK activity, which started at the end of the war and lasted until the mid-1870's.
Most of the states where the first Klan was the most pro-active to my recollection were the Deep and Mid-South states. I'm not sure how far north it extended beyond that. I know the second Klan extended its influence well into the rest of the south and into the north during its second rising in the early 20th century.
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.
, but lost most of them after the Civil War. It's a known fact that Jim Crow was practiced in several other states outside of the south as well...including Indiana, Kansas, and New Mexico. At least in Missouri, Jim Crow was only legally enforced in terms of segregation in public schools. to my knowledge, it was also practiced in New Mexico, Kansas, and Indiana even practiced Jim Crow. As far as segregation after the War, that was around in many states outside of the south, including Illinois and Ohio for at least several more decades. And plenty of public places all over the United States discriminated against blacks and practiced Jim Crow, whether or not it was legal or illegal in that state....police never went to great lengths to enforce the law there pretty much anywhere. Jim Crow in these three states also was nowhere near the severity in the South...all three of these states increased in black population during the Great Migration. Many were already in the process of desegregation when Brown vs. Board hit, at least Missouri was. There was little to no resistance against Brown vs. Board in MO, MD, and DE to my knowledge. Not so with the rest of these states. As a short answer, Jim Crow is not necessarily good evidence of the south, especially with MO, which only had one legally sanctioned law..St. Louis was in the process of desegregating its schools well before Brown vs. Board. De facto segregation has been around forever.
Excellent research. In addition to that, there were many lynchings all over this country, well in the 20th century. Notable lynchings occured in Omaha and Springfield, Illinois, not exactly likely places you'd associate with those acts. I think that museums and schools in general don't do a great job of educating kids about the true extent of Jim Crow. It also seems like the Union soldiers are painted as heroic abolitionists trying to free the slaves from their evil, dirty Southern masters. Could not be further from the truth. I remember as a young boy my elementary school teacher basically telling us essentially that the North were the good guys and the South were the bad guys....it is nowhere near that simple. Most of these Union soldiers, and most Unionist politicians, were interested in the preservation of their country, as were the political leaders...the majority of them didn't give a crap about slavery, and certainly didn't see blacks as equals. General Sherman let several hundred slaves drown in a river in Georgia after blowing up a bridge that they could've used to run them across to safety. Even though slavery was ended in the Civil War, Northerners did not exactly look favorably on blacks...there was either legal or de facto discrimination against them practically everywhere in the United States until the start of the Civil Rights Movement. The simple fact that it took 100 years to pass the Civil Rights Act shows us that the South gets more credit than it deserves for African American struggles in this country. Basically....not all Southerners are racists, and not all racists are Southerners.
