|
steinrokkan posted:I have always wondered, would those American ancestry people in the South be actually of some British ancestry, or would that whole area be a weird mix of descents?
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 11:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 13:18 |
|
|
It is peculiar that those counties in the Northeast bordering on Quebec are majority "French", yet one single county reports as "French Canadian".
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 11:52
|
|
|
The anglish were german though not really seeing the problem.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 11:56
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:I have always wondered, would those American ancestry people in the South be actually of some British ancestry, or would that whole area be a weird mix of descents? Mostly Scotch-Irish, I think?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 11:57
|
|
|
Buller posted:The anglish were german though not really seeing the problem. That's not how it works.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 11:58
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:IIRC, they're descendants of the same kind of people that settled in Ulster.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 12:01
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:I have always wondered, would those American ancestry people in the South be actually of some British ancestry, or would that whole area be a weird mix of descents? pretty much white British, yes, plus with a considerably higher level of black and native admixture than the north because of lack of large scale 19th century immigration, similar to latin america to a degree
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 12:14
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Presbyterians? Assholes. White Southerners probably are more British than other white Americans since they've had less immigration from Europe since independence.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:I have always wondered, would those American ancestry people in the South be actually of some British ancestry, or would that whole area be a weird mix of descents? They are generally descended from Protestant Scottish and Irish settlers, particularly protestant Scots that had first moved to Ireland and then later moved on to the Americas. Usually the proper English settlers got choicer lands and were wealthier, often running plantation farms when in the South, while these people were generally poorer and forced towards more marginal lands, and doing things like mining. They were also among the groups who were most hateful against any Catholic immigration later in history, in conjunction with the plain old English descendants of the Puritans in New England. What'd be nice to see is someone compiling that map again with the 2010 census data, and indeed with earlier census data so we can see how the identification as "American" has spread over time. I also wonder if that census being in an election year, as half of them are, had any influence on people choosing to report as "American" for their ethnicity.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
HorseRenoir posted:here's a stupid map from alt-right twitter Holy poo poo, where to begin. First of all, love the Chinese text for Vancouver. Does Labrador have some affinity to Quebec, or vice versa, that we should know about? "Orphaned Province of Hawaii" wow. Ignoring that Hawaii is much more able to be independent than NUNAVUT of all places, just ... what? Adorable how he thinks Aztlan would stop at the ... wait, is that even a river in Texas? I thought it might be the Pecos but that is further south. Spitballing myself but I can't imagine Chicago staying just a city state. It could easily unite the region and create an union of southern Great Lakes cities or city-states, with Detroit, Cleveland, and Milwaukee. Possibly with the Twin Cities and some others, because lol at Minneapolis, St Louis, and Cleveland being in the "Anglo-American Republic" without some healthy ethnic cleansing. Chicago would be the core of an octopus whose tentacles are the highways linking the cities. This is weirdly one of the few Balkanization maps that doesn't involve an independent Utah or Deseret, and for that it fails miserably. How nice of independent Nunavut to not annex the islands it shares with the Northwest Territories! How does the African American Republic not arch deeper into the Carolinas? (Also, wow, talk about ethnic cleansing) Properly, Aztlan wouldn't give a flying gently caress about Nevada above Vegas and surrender that to Deseret, which would also occupy southern Idaho (northern Idaho going to Cascadia). Also, do they seriously have the border between Cascadia and Aztlan running through Suisun Bay? So ... is San Francisco in Aztlan or Cascadia? San Jose is clearly in Aztlan. Just, just a shameful map.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
Southern settlement isn't monolithic. South Carolina for instance had more connection with British indies settlements. Georgia was a prison colony. The Deep South wasn't settled until after independence and didn't really come into its own until after the second great awakening which affected the its character more than the original national origin of its settlers. If anything can be said to link all of the South together it's that in fertile land near navigable water, slavery allowed for concentration of economic and political power in the hands of a few.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
The Southern accent is the closest to the way the British accent used to be hundreds of years ago, vaguely like how Quebecois French is frozen in its own amber.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
Teriyaki Hairpiece posted:The Southern accent is the closest to the way the British accent used to be hundreds of years ago, vaguely like how Quebecois French is frozen in its own amber. Well, back when colonization happened, there were already a lot of unique accents across Great Britain. The Appalachian South accent (but not like the lowland ah live on a plantation accent) is closest to how a lot of people were speaking across the Southwestern areas of England, iirc. The stereotypical rural New England accent is a lot like people were speaking in the sort of middle-notheast section of England, except they didn't so much r to ah yet. There's other artifacts like this, a lot of little details of Philadelphia and New York area accents come from the original Dutch colonists, even though they and their descendants have long been outnumbered by tons of immigration.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
Aren't there some isolated islands off the coast of North Carolina/Virginia where people speak in an accent close to some form of Elizabethan English?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
The Tangier, VA accent has definite parallels with the British West Country accent. I think general Southern American English has a few other influences though, it seems to have lost some of the common link sounds with West Country. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIZgw09CG9E That says to me that Southern American and West Country both came from something a little more like Tangier.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncontacted_peoples
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
Convenient of the Central African peoples to arrange themselves in question mark shaped areas like that.  What does that actually mean, is it just not known who's out there?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 22:19
|
|
|
Black shading is "there definitely are uncontacted peoples in this area", black question mark is "there might be".
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
Seeing all the terrible maps of U.S balkanization makes it a lot easier to understand how the europeans messed up Africa and the Middle East so badly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
I like the uncontacted tribe living in the south of French Guiana, which would make them citizens of the European Union Also I thought that Papua New Guinea had uncontacted tribes as well, but it turns out there are plenty of tribes who are "contacted" in the sense that the government vaguely knows that they exist and vice versa instead e: you should really check out the Attenborough documentary "A Blank on the Map" from 1971, where he sets out in what was then still the Australian Territory of Papua and New Guinea to establish first contact with an uncontacted tribe, it's really interesting System Metternich fucked around with this message at 23:57 on Dec 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 23:50
|
|
|
US balkanization maps are always funny because there's the obvious ones - the old Confederacy, Texas, California, New England, maybe the Rust Belt - and then there's the vast expanse with all the food and nukes nobody knows what to do with.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
Golbez posted:Does Labrador have some affinity to Quebec, or vice versa, that we should know about? Not that I'd credit the makers of this piece of idiocy with the education to know this, but the Québec government does not recognize Newfoundland's ownership of Labrador. For this reason and others, there's long-standing political tension between Canada's oldest province and its newest.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
System Metternich posted:I like the uncontacted tribe living in the south of French Guiana, which would make them citizens of the European Union
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 06:15
|
|
|
Byzantine posted:US balkanization maps are always funny because there's the obvious ones - the old Confederacy, Texas, California, New England, maybe the Rust Belt - and then there's the vast expanse with all the food and nukes nobody knows what to do with. Honestly you'd imagine that the areas where nothing is would simply be ruled as vast farming estates or ranch lands controlled by family groups: aka tribal confederacies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 13:23
|
|
|
Golbez posted:
Chicago and Detroit look far apart on a map, but people don't realize that if you drive it you're never more than 5 minutes from an Oriental Massage Spa.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Byzantine posted:US balkanization maps are always funny because there's the obvious ones - the old Confederacy, Texas, California, New England, maybe the Rust Belt - and then there's the vast expanse with all the food and nukes nobody knows what to do with. don't forget cascadia!
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
Cascadia is at least something that some locals seriously considered, unlike Free Nunavut.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
I like the singular "First Nation."
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
SimonSays posted:Not that I'd credit the makers of this piece of idiocy with the education to know this, but the Québec government does not recognize Newfoundland's ownership of Labrador. For this reason and others, there's long-standing political tension between Canada's oldest province and its newest. Actually they do recognize Newfoundland's ownership of Labrador, they just recognize a different southern border.  A is the Privy Council's agreed border, B is Quebec's claim.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
Is there even anything there for them to make use of, or is it just them wanting empty land for the sake of it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
Teriyaki Hairpiece posted:Honestly you'd imagine that the areas where nothing is would simply be ruled as vast farming estates or ranch lands controlled by family groups: aka tribal confederacies. ranches at best, the midwest is heavily dependent on motorized travel i.e. trains or automobiles in order to be economically viable. without these things it would devolve to hunter gatherer horselord steppes
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Is there even anything there for them to make use of, or is it just them wanting empty land for the sake of it? So it's more the latter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 20:27
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Is there even anything there for them to make use of, or is it just them wanting empty land for the sake of it? Going by the World Population Density Map (which seems to be pretty precise) and Google Maps there seems to be lots and lots of absolutely nothing. Quebec's claim possibly includes small parts of the Route 510 Highway, but I can't imagine that that would play any role whatsoever. Also all of Labrador's mines are in the mountaineous west and north, whereas this region doesn't seem to have anything regarding natural resources as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
You should always push your borders as far as you can, on the off chance the territory becomes valuable in the future. Had our politicians realized that back in the decades following WW2, Norway might very well never had gotten its hands on all that oil.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
It looks like a watershed issue too. Look at where those rivers begin.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
Mystic_Shadow posted:It looks like a watershed issue too. Look at where those rivers begin. Sort of? Apparently the Quebec-Labrador border was never well defined, at least as far as Quebec was concerned - "From Quebec’s point of view, Labrador existed only as a manifestation of fishing rights, but not much else — not unlike the French Shore — and should therefore not intrude inland more than, say, a mile." So the current border is the combination of two things, arrived at by a (British) court in 1927. (How or why this was decided though, who knows.) - "In 1927, the Privy Council fixed Labrador’s inland border on the watershed (or the highest point of land) between the Atlantic Ocean and the Hudson Bay. It coupled this to the 1825 straight-line border, refining the definition to grant the town of Blanc-Sablon to Quebec." Quebec was not happy but changed their complaint to that the watershed definition should continue to the east, I guess? Also the straight-line part was set by the 1825 Labrador Act where before Labrador (maybe) extended south to the Gulf of St. Lawrence (somewhere). The blog doesn't really say more and now I'm bored.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
Mystic_Shadow posted:It looks like a watershed issue too. Look at where those rivers begin. If there's anything motivating Quebec's claims on Labrador, beyond pride, this is it. There are large hydroelectric developments on the Churchill River in Labrador that have long been a source of friction between the two provinces. But, for the most part of all Northern Canada can be described as a vast, howling, uninhabited wilderness. You would think Quebec has enough tress and rocks to satisfy themselves but evidently not.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 22:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 13:18 |
|
|
Gleri posted:If there's anything motivating Quebec's claims on Labrador, beyond pride, this is it. There are large hydroelectric developments on the Churchill River in Labrador that have long been a source of friction between the two provinces. It's uninhabited now, but that may change in a few decades due to climate change. I assume the Canadian government owns most of it, but I'm sure private investors are looking to buy some as a long term investment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 23:09
|
|