Is the US One Nation or Many?

Whether or not you agree with this, it is a fascinating read.

http://www.tufts.edu/alumni/magazine/fall2013/features/up-in-arms.html

Interesting. This seems to collate with what I as an Outsider perceive of the states as well: that there are different blocks of thought that are followed by the states.

Donnachaidh wrote:Whether or not you agree with this, it is a fascinating read.

http://www.tufts.edu/alumni/magazine/fall2013/features/up-in-arms.html

Thank you for the link. If you hadn't recommended it I wouldn't have read it. Second sentence is so blatantly skewed I would have stopped there.

I don't actually think it is the eleven nations that he thinks it is. Or all defined by who settled an area.

A lot of it is how long ago they were settled? Where do the people that live there now come from?

Not as neat an orderly as he would have us think.

Not a bad swing at it and somewhat skewed but something to think about.

Of course I think the divisions are more in line with that personality poll I posted a bit back.

Thank you,
T2M

I agree with Donnachaidh this is a good thoughtful article to help understand different Americas. thinkstoomuch is correct it might be a bit simplistic.

Poker

Many thanks for that. I obviously can't vouch for its accuracy, but it rings true and explains much that has puzzled me (and I suspect other 1st world commenters). For many years I've puzzled over how the US seems to send out conflicting messages. Sometimes it seems like every developed country, yet other times you wonder if they are speaking through a time warp from the 17th century.
I now believe I have some understanding of the attitudes of some of those posting here, where as before, I sometimes wondered if they were deliberately playing the hillbilly to wind some of us up. Things are more exotic than I could have believed.
Steve Stirling alludes to something similar in his Emberverse novels of how post apocalyptic America would evolve numerous very different cultures.

He is arguing for his own recently published book.

His most mistaken argument is "isolation of regions."
Actually, people have *always* been moving between
regions, exchanging ideas with other people.
Some off-the-cuff examples:
James Madison studied at Princeton.
A Pennsylvania man represented small-state Delaware at
the Constitutional Convention.
A Conneticut man represented slave-state Georgia.
Both presented their constituents' views better than
the native representatives did.
One of Thomas Jefferson's granddaughters
married a Bostonian.
Abe Lincoln and Jeff Davis were born 100 miles apart,
in Kentucky.
Woodrow Wilson was Governor of New Jersey when he ran
for President. He was born and raised in Virginia.

I am remembering more examples than I can type here!
That is why the USA is *one* nation.

HTM

Donnachaidh wrote:Whether or not you agree with this, it is a fascinating read.

http://www.tufts.edu/alumni/magazine/fall2013/features/up-in-arms.html

Absolutely we are one nation, Howard. We are also a collection of very different polities. Our states are shaped by different experiences that each cherishes and wishes to maintain.

The unsophisticated observer might miss the slight distinction between important but nonessential differences between American states and those absolutely core characteristics shared by the vast majority of America. Don't blame them, we Americans can easily miss or forget the distinctions too.

Which takes us back to Sarah Hoyt's piece earlier and the ongoing discussion about national healthcare. Sarah illuminates many of those core characteristics. The healthcare debate illustrates how the one sized fits all solution annoys the different states. What works for a densely populated state like Massechusetts is a nightmare to execute for relatively sparsely populated but large state like Oklahoma.

Howard T. Map-addict wrote:He is arguing for his own recently published book.

His most mistaken argument is "isolation of regions."
Actually, people have *always* been moving between
regions, exchanging ideas with other people.
Some off-the-cuff examples:
James Madison studied at Princeton.
A Pennsylvania man represented small-state Delaware at
the Constitutional Convention.
A Conneticut man represented slave-state Georgia.
Both presented their constituents' views better than
the native representatives did.
One of Thomas Jefferson's granddaughters
married a Bostonian.
Abe Lincoln and Jeff Davis were born 100 miles apart,
in Kentucky.
Woodrow Wilson was Governor of New Jersey when he ran
for President. He was born and raised in Virginia.

I am remembering more examples than I can type here!
That is why the USA is *one* nation.

HTM

Donnachaidh wrote:Whether or not you agree with this, it is a fascinating read.

http://www.tufts.edu/alumni/magazine/fall2013/features/up-in-arms.html

Howard T. Map-addict wrote:He is arguing for his own recently published book.

His most mistaken argument is "isolation of regions."
Actually, people have *always* been moving between
regions, exchanging ideas with other people.
Some off-the-cuff examples:
James Madison studied at Princeton.
A Pennsylvania man represented small-state Delaware at
the Constitutional Convention.
A Conneticut man represented slave-state Georgia.
Both presented their constituents' views better than
the native representatives did.
One of Thomas Jefferson's granddaughters
married a Bostonian.
Abe Lincoln and Jeff Davis were born 100 miles apart,
in Kentucky.
Woodrow Wilson was Governor of New Jersey when he ran
for President. He was born and raised in Virginia.

I am remembering more examples than I can type here!
That is why the USA is *one* nation.

HTM

I appreciate the post thank you. You raise a valid point.

But once they get there what happens?

For that matter most of what you say could apply to the EU(in a general sense, I am not all that good on specific examples, other than France being defended by many Englishmen dieing for them). Is the EU a "Nation".

Thanks for the thought fodder,
T2M

This leads to what might be the core question, how do we define what is and is not a nation?

thinkstoomuch wrote:I appreciate the post thank you. You raise a valid point.

But once they get there what happens?

For that matter most of what you say could apply to the EU(in a general sense, I am not all that good on specific examples, other than France being defended by many Englishmen dieing for them). Is the EU a "Nation".

Thanks for the thought fodder,
T2M

You're welcome.

Once they get there, several things might happen.
Some of them stay. Some move on. Some go back.

EU/Europe = important question.
In the sense of nation-state, very dubiously.
In the old-fashioned sense of "people sharing the same
culture, or very similar cultures,
then IMHO yes, very likely, in many ways.
Once upon a time, that "nation" was called Christiandom.
Its political expression was called "Roman Empire."
Cities as far away as Moscow claimed to be "3rd Rome."

Of course, mine is the "expansive" or "liberal" view.
Other's miliage varies.

HTM

thinkstoomuch wrote:
I appreciate the post thank you. You raise a valid point.

But once they get there what happens?

For that matter most of what you say could apply to the EU(in a general sense, I am not all that good on specific examples, other than France being defended by many Englishmen dieing for them). Is the EU a "Nation".

Thanks for the thought fodder,
T2M