text:
Monday, April 9, 2012
Presenting the (slighty revised) American Nations map
I'm pleased to present the improved version of the detailed American Nations Today map, which will appear in the Penguin paperback edition of the book to be released in the fall of 2012. [Update, 11/4/12: the paperback is now available.]
This map makes a two minor improvements over the original. We've bumped up the state and provincial borders a notch so as to make the map easier to navigate. I've also added a label to south Florida, since everyone always asks about it. There are also three county corrections: Allegheny (PA), St. Louis (MO) and St. Charles (MO) were always supposed to be in the Midlands (as they are in the text), but got misassigned to Greater Appalachia due to my own sloppiness. (Three thousand little boxes, so little time.)
[Update: 6/13/18: In the intervening years I found two other errant counties on this map: Bernalillo (NM) should be El Norte and Suffolk (NY) is Yankeedom.]
Feel free to either download the JPEG file above or a higher resolution PDF file and show it to your friends and colleagues. It's a wonderful conversation starter and comes from a book that would make an ideal gift for any occasion, except Talk Like a Pirate Day.
As always, let me know what you think, either here at World Wide Woodard or at the American Nations Facebook page.
[Update: 3/15/15: Here are population figures for the U.S. portions of the American Nations.]
[Update: 6/13/18: Here also is the map for Alaska, for those who are curious.]
[Update: 5/1/16: American Nations' sequel is out: American Character: A History of the Epic Struggle Between Individual Liberty and the Common Good.]
[Update: 1/7/17: Here is an analysis of the 2016 Presidential Election. Also caught and corrected error in the maps: Bernadillo County, NM should be El Norte (not Far West.)]
141 comments:
- AnonymousMay 7, 2012 at 7:54 PM
This should be interesting. It looks like something of an update on Joel Garreau's "Nine Nations of North America" from the 1980s. Some of the borders seem similar (South Florida as Caribbean, El Norte mimics MexAmerica, The Left Coast is Ecotopia. But the Greater Appalacia looks far different as does the Midlands. Guess I have to wait for the book to come out.ReplyDelete
@Anonymous - The book came out last October, so you need not wait. It's the paperback that comes out this coming fall.ReplyDelete
I'm enjoying your book so much i cannot stop reading it. Finally i get to understand this complex country of 11 nations. One word, though. You should include a chapter on the Hispanic community of Pan-caribbean origins: Cubans, Venezuelans, Dominicans and Panamanians, most of them living in South Florida. They -Cubans, specially, have a significant clout in American politics because unlike Hispanics of Mexican descent arrived to the US they were middle class people, often better educated. This is probably why your readers (i included) feel your brilliant book to have a historic gap. Congrats and thanks for your interesting account.ReplyDelete
- AnonymousMay 24, 2012 at 6:59 AM
This is great but I recommend some research in several areas. I sell software to school districts in Missouri and Southern Illinois.ReplyDelete
First there are several Illinois Counties that are really in the midlands due to their German-American Population. Washington and Clinton counties are more midlands than Greater Appalachia. The academic performance of the students and the lower rates of free and reduced lunch are greater there than in counties north of them. This is the same for Effingham and nearby counties east of that area.
In Missouri you should google information about "little Dixie". This area is peopled by descendents of Confederate militias. Hermann, St. Charles, Boone, and St. Louis Counties are Midland. But, Calloway, Audrain, Ray, Carroll, Randolph, Pike, Ralls, are either in Greater Appalachia or the Old South.
You should also consider putting Cape Girardeau County in the Midlands.
The Bootheel counties might belong in the old south (Pemiscott, New Madrid, Dunklin and environs.Replies
Colin -Delete
I know Cape Girardeau County in Missouri quite well, having visited it frequently over the last 30 years. Based on what it is now, I'd disagree with "anonymous".
The city was founded by the French, as was Ste Genevieve and St Louis, as a trading post and river port.
Having grown up in and around St Louis, which it appears you put into Midlands, the two are quite different in their cultures. St Louis is much more "upper Mississippi" than Cape which is more like Nachez and Memphis. I think Cape Girardeau County belongs in Greater Appalachia. Especially as the rest of the county is true Ozarks. Culturally Cape Girardeau County is almost identical to the bootheel counties. Anonymous may wish it different. And if the Ozarks don't belong in Greater Appalachia, no place does. It is no accident that Rush Limbaugh comes from there; his politics is as Greater Appalachia as can be, and his audience, too.
I imagine you have or will get many such suggestions about counties that you put on or near boundaries.
I think your assessment is terrific. That you based it not on today but on those who settled an area is truly amazing, because it rings so true with my own wide reading and experience of the PEOPLE and the postures people take in at least 6 of your states. YES, we are truly different peoples in the different regions, and it is clear in our politics - who are sent to Congress and what positions they take.
It is natural for people to project their own rationales upon others they deal with, thinking that others will be rational in the same way they are. But that is not true and it creates conflict when people don't act as we expect them to (based on our own ways of approaching things).
GOOD JOB. Now to go buy the book.
@Ignacio - I agree entirely that there is a Spanish or Pan Caribbean regional culture, and that southernmost Florida is a part of it. Adding it -- and 500 years of its history -- to the book was just one step too vast for what was already a vast analysis. Perhaps in a sequel (which could cover the regional cultures in Mesoamerica as well.)ReplyDeleteReplies
- AnonymousSeptember 5, 2013 at 1:38 PM
I personally would love to see such a sequel. I'm interested in similar info about South America and Europe, as well. And then there's the rest of the world. You weren't planning anything else, were you? How overwhelmingly extensive and all-consuming could it be, after all? In the meantime, though, I'm grateful for and inspired by your work.Delete
This comment has been removed by the author.Delete
Yeah I was like, why is South Florida completely ignored????Delete
This comment has been removed by the author.Delete
@Anonymous of May 24 - Thanks much for this excellent on the ground intel. I've been aware of Little Dixie -- it's that section of Greater Appalachia north of St. Louis -- but the sources you provide suggest it to be a third larger than assigned. Will check into the other counties you describe.ReplyDelete
- AnonymousJune 20, 2012 at 12:50 PM
Is the District of Columbia included in Greater Appalachia?ReplyDelete
@Anonymous - Although the map doesn't make this clear, D.C. is a non-conforming federal district, artificially created and populated by people drawn from other regional cultures. (It is not a coincidence that the land the District occupies straddles the border between Tidewater and the Midlands. Originally Arlington was part of it.)ReplyDelete
I would agree with Anonymous in that more of Central Illinois should be in the Midlands. Central Illinois is not really Appalachian, and the cities of Central Illinois like Bloomington, Decatur, Springfield, Galesburg, and Urbana are much more like Iowa than Kentucky or Tennessee. Abraham Lincoln was from Springfield and Central Illinois produced lots of Conscience Whigs and nonSouthern Republicans (like Bob Michel and Ray Lahood). Illinois south of Effingham is very much part of Greater Appalachia. Even the accents are different that those of Central Illinois (I travel and interact with school districts all over the State because of my job and I lived in Urbana for four years).ReplyDelete
@Joe - Thanks much for your input. It's very helpful to have feedback from on the ground. (Drawing the boundaries of the Midlands is one of the most difficult exercises as it is, in many ways, a buffer state. You could have Scots-Irish and Anglo-Protestant New Englanders living side by side with Germans and others and it would be very "Midlander", so the cultural markers are less distinct from afar.)ReplyDeleteReplies
Colin -Delete
If I may chime in again, I lived in both Southern Illinois and Central Illinois (as well as Chicago, Maine, Cleveland, and Denver) - I agree with both Ben and Joe. Central Illinois is like Iowa or most of northern Ohio.
Southern Illinois is part of the Ozarks, in all but name.
NOT the same cultures.
I-70 may be a decent dividing line, as they suggest. Some parts of Southern Illinois are much more like Mississippi or Joplin, MO than Central Illinois.
Haha - I can barely make it out, but I see you put Ford County, IL in the midlands, not Appalachia. (It has a distinctive shape.) I agree. I lived there for 2 years and the culture is NOT like Southern Illinois, but like Iowa.
Steve - Thanks much for your comment here. I'm not clear on what your disagreement is with the map, though. Southern Illinois - like the Ozarks - is indeed in Greater Appalachia. Central Illinois is Midlands so, yes, a different culture.Delete
As someone who lived for many years in Champaign, let me add another vote for including central Illinois in the Midlands, rather than Greater Appalachia. Perhaps I-70 would be a useful border between the two. There is a surprisingly large cultural distinction between southern Illinois and central Illinois, which also appears in this map of religious pluralities by county: http://bigthink.com/strange-maps/237-regionalism-and-religiosityReplyDeleteReplies
Another vote for moving the Midlands border southwards is registered.Delete
@Colin Woodward, If you have a chance, you may want to do some research on "Little Egypt" which is the portion of Illinois South of Effingham and is distinctly Southern. Also, you may want to do a little research on "Michiana", the area of Indiana which borders Michigan. Michiana (and the rest of Northwest Indiana) is very culturally close to Chicago (greater New England) and Michigan. Both Little Egypt and the Northern tier Indiana (the Northwest Region and Michiana) are great examples of small regions within a state dominated by a different culture (nation). The populations of these mini-regions generally feel alienated from the state governments and state cultures which are often antithetical to the values of the smaller region.ReplyDelete
- Lara OsborneJuly 21, 2012 at 12:29 PM
You might consider making this graphic into a poster and selling it.ReplyDeleteReplies
Thanks much. You're actually the sixth person to mention that. If I was certain that each of you represented 200 customers, I'd be at the printer now!Delete
Yes. Colin may not sell so many in Greater Appalachia or the Deep South, but people in the other states would be proud to be associated with their regions.Delete
Sign me up for one!
I'm intrigued by your inclusion of the Nordic, agricultural upper Midwest in the same region as the predominantly Anglo-Celtic, forested-industrial New England/upstate New York and Chicagoland, a nation unto itself that spreads out for 100 or so miles in all directions from the center of the city of Chicago (the way New Netherland takes in the New York City area). I see very little to unite these regions other than similarity of settlement patterns in the first half of the 19th century, generally pragmatic-liberal politics, extreme weather, and support of public radio.ReplyDelete
It also seems odd that the greater Great Lakes area minus Chicagoland (the Inland North, the Rust Belt, the Pierogi Belt, the Polka Belt, the Lake Effect Snowbelt, the Bowling Belt, or whatever you want to call it) is divided among several regions. It seems as culturally cohesive as anything on this map.Replies
It's best you read the book to understand the whys of this, but I stand by the borders.Delete
I disagree that the "greater Great Lakes area minus Chicagoland" has great cultural cohesion. I refer you to the other comments on this page from residents of Illinois. The Western Reserve and southern Ohio don't see eye to eye about much of anything, either during the Civil War or the past few presidential elections. I could go on but, seriously, check out the book.
- AnonymousAugust 20, 2012 at 10:58 PM
re: Talk Like a Pirate DayReplyDelete
I once heard New Orleans referred to as the northernmost Caribbean port. I was delighted to find so much information and allusion in a simple little sentence.Replies
Yes, New Orleans is an amalgam, in American Nations terms, of the Spanish Caribbean, New France, and the Deep South, which is why it's so fascinating.Delete
- AnonymousSeptember 21, 2012 at 6:08 PM
For the next edition of your map I would recommend a greater deep dive into Southern Ontario as well. My background is in industrial sales so I interact with a broad spectrum of groups within this area. Southern Ontario is quite diverse and should not be completely lumped into the Midlands region.ReplyDelete
Yes the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) to Ottawa Valley region is Midlands but I would argue that Southwestern Ontario culturally and politically doesn't fit into this rubric. Windsor for instance has more in common with Detroit and Chicago than it does to Toronto. Windsor/Chatham/Sarnia (Essex, Kent and Lambton Counties) are economically tied with the Midwest US, not the GTA. Windsor and Sarnia for instance even have the culture and even the cities look "American." The influence of Catholicism is much more present here than in the rest of Ontario. Much of Windsor for instance was developed by Midwesterners (almost a a Midwestern colony in the Commonwealth you could say) and of course the auto industry brought Midwest corporate culture to the area. Windsor has the Detroit style of aggressive labour unionism that quite frankly would be more at home in Chicago/Detroit or even Montreal than in "polite" Toronto. Southwestern Ontario is also more extroverted culturally and has a more "live and let live" culture than staid Toronto.Replies
I'd be pleased to do a deeper dive into southern Ontario, and thanks much for your thoughts.Delete
I'm guessing you haven't read the book itself, though, and may misunderstand the salient characteristics of the Midlands, which would more easily embrace "the influence of Catholicism", being "developed by Midwesterners" and "live and let live culture" than the Yankee ethos I'm guessing you'd seek to place the southwest of the province in.
- AnonymousSeptember 24, 2012 at 6:41 PM
I have partly read the book and have been rereading sections, that is true... My point, to clarify, was to accentuate the differences between Yankee and Midland culture within Southern Ontario. The GTA and cities away from the border, such as London, Kitchener/Waterloo, Kingston, Ottawa, etc. definitely have a different culture and worldview than for instance Windsor and Sarnia. After all, Toronto and Kingston were settled primarily by "United Empire Loyalists" those who fled the Revolution. The elites of Toronto were called the "Family Compact." Southwestern Ontario was settled by the French and has a much more Catholic infused culture with more than a touch of New France settlement. A cursory comparison of street names and land surveying in Windsor and Detroit for instance shows a French influence that you do not see even in London, ON. (Many common names between Windsor and Detroit names as well) The area is a meeting point between Yankeedon and The Midlands as detailed in the book. Perhaps a county by county analysis of Southern Ontario for the next edition such as done for MI and NY would be appropriate? Maybe the Toronto area actually has more Yankeedom influence while Metro Detroit and Windsor are part of the Midlands?Delete
All interesting ideas. The paradigm would argue for both areas being in the Midlands (on account of the Late Loyalists -- really Midlanders fleeing the aftermath of a Revolution they'd never supported), though Windsor and the like are so close to the borders of Yankeedom, one might perhaps feel the cultural pull (being on within what the cultural geographers would call the periphery of Yankee culture.)Delete
You do get a certain degree of variation even within a "nation". Consider northern and southern France or northern and southern Italy or Germany. Or New England vs Yankee Michigan vs Yankee Minnesota. Broadly speaking, they're all a shared culture, but it doesn't mean they're entirely homogenous. Perhaps the same is true comparing the Toronto GSA with the southwest of Ontario?
- AnonymousSeptember 21, 2012 at 6:10 PM
One thing I would love to see someone create a "pedestrian vs. motorist" right-of-way map. From my extensive experience traveling all over North America, you can tell a lot about a place by conscious motorists are of pedestrians. Do they stop traffic to let them cross or do the drive past them?ReplyDelete
That and liquor laws. You can tell a lot about the local culture by their liquor laws since most liquor laws are local and they are so varied from state to state (or province to province)
I have to disagree with the people who said that central Illinois should be Midlands. I was born in Danville and have lived in Champaign for 30 years. Take the University of Illinois away from Champaign-Urbana and you are left with a small town mentality. Quite a few of these people have white collar jobs but inside a mix of worldviews. There are a lot of people here with what I would call a hillbilly or peasant worldview. They have nice enough cars and homes but when you talk to them about politics or economics, that is when you see the above stated worldview revealed.ReplyDelete
Regarding a printed map-a print on demand service?
Thanks for the book--it really comes at a good time.Replies
Thanks much for your input. Central Illinois has been the subject of quite a bit of discussion.Delete
I haven't yet taken any action toward creating a printed map on demand, although with the high res PDF many users-with-plotters may be able to produce their own.
Do enjoy; the paperback is out at exactly the right time, me thinks.
Markmors -Delete
I would ask you if you thought that area around Champaign is more like Iowa (Midlands) or Southern Illinois - culturally. YES, farmers, farmers, farmers - but Appalachian farmers or Iowa farmers? Big difference, and having had three kids go to IL State Univ. and lived a bit north in farm country there, as well as having spent a good deal of time in and also around Cape Girardeau (noted above) the culture in the area as I see it is MUCH more Midlands than Greater Appalachia.
I would ask if you've spent any time in the lower half of the state? Or in the true Ozarks?
- AnonymousNovember 2, 2012 at 2:27 PM
IMO --- McLean Co Illinois should be midlands; Tuscarawas Co Ohio should be Greater Appalachia.ReplyDeleteReplies
Thanks much for your input. There's been a lot of discussion of the Midlands/Appalachia border in IL and OH, so I appreciate your votes on that.Delete
- AnonymousNovember 10, 2012 at 1:54 AM
Allegheny, PA works much better in the Midlands. Pittsburgh is clearly heavily influenced by the our neighbors in Greater Appalachia, but our culture is far more northern. Since reading your book a couple of months ago, I've been noting the Appalachian/Midland divide in practically every interaction I have had. There's a major change in attitudes, values and even accent as you move eastm south or west. I think this boundary even explains driving behavior, with a peculiar local inability to cooperatively merge onto a highway, and an agression to anyone who tries to change lanes.ReplyDeleteReplies
Thanks much for the feedback. I'm glad it rungs true on the ground.Delete
Allegheny County was always supposed to be in the Midlands - it's referred to as such in the book - but I tagged the wrong county when I was helping create the first version of the map. (It's corrected in this map, which appears in the Penguin paperback edition.)
Greetings from the Czech Republic, Colin, where your book is being put to good use in two courses I'm over here teaching on a Fulbright Fellowship: "Cultural Geography of the US" and "Race, Culture and Politics of the US and UK." These are in the Dept. of English and American Studies at the Univ. of Ostrava.ReplyDelete
Basically, your account is the core of the story I'm telling students about the development of the US, especially as this bears on its politics. I'm supplementing that story with material from Michael Lind, Kevin Phillips, and Ira Berlin's "The Making of African America." Of course, we've also got the election in the background (or sometimes foreground) as a contemporary point of reference.
The one thing I'm finding frustrating is that the 11-nations schema, while overwhelmingly true I think, leaves two or maybe three things unexplained. You see the problem as soon as you overlay a county map of the election results on your map. Yes, Yankeedom, the southern alliance, the Left Coast and El Norte are all visible in those results, but you have to kind of squint to see them, because lots of counties in each region voted the "other" way. The best single explanation of why, it seems to me, is urbanization: rural counties even in Yankeedom are Republican, and urban areas even in the Deep South are Democratic. Related to that, African-American areas are Democratic; that includes big cities in most regions, and also several tracts in the South that politically cut across the tendencies of the Southern Alliance.
It would be nice if there were a single account, a kind of Unified Theory as it were, that incorporated these facts along with -- and equally as elegantly -- as your account of the 11 regions. As it is, "American Nations" makes clear why, for instance, Ohio and Colorado are swing states, but it's harder to see without a bunch of further explanation why Nevada is one too (on your map it's all "Far West"), or a rural Yankee state like Wisconsin, or a gentrifying southern state like Virginia with a substantial A-A population.
The one other thing that I find I have to reach outside my core sources to explain is the overwhelming dominance of Baptists in the South. Based on the regions' origins, one would expect the Deep South to be Anglican or Methodist and Greater Appalachia to be Presbyterian. Again, I understand the later influence of revivalism and the like, but I'd love to see this incorporated into a Unified Theory too.
Anyway, your book came out just as I was beginning prep work on these courses, and it's helped me immensely, so thanks very much for that!Replies
Thanks much. Believe it or not, I've passed through Ostrava many times by train heading to and from Hungary and Poland back in the 1990s.Delete
Yes, some counties vote "the other way", but not as many as you might think, and rural/urban explanations often fall short. (How to account for 15 of 16 counties in Maine -- a rural, overwhelmingly white state -- having supported Obama two elections in a row?) The cores of major cities do tend to vote Democratic, but that doesn't explain why rural counties fail to show consistent patterning.
On religion, turn to historical sources on how the Second Great Awakening played out in different parts of the country. Add the (regionally based) split over whether slavery was God-ordained or not (which have us Southern v American Baptists, Southern v United Methodists, etc) and you'll see how regional cultural characteristics shaped religious denominations.
Colin -Delete
I am finding my connection to the places discussed here uncanny. (I even have connections in Southern Ontario.)
But Ostrava...LOL
I also have a connection to Ostrava, a lovely friend of ten years. Amazing...
Jeff S -
If I could suggest one explanation for the Baptists in the Deep South and Appalachia at this late date... And perhaps for Colin as well:
I was raised a Baptist, so I have connections to THAT, too. The Presbyterian point you make is valid. But the Elmer Gantry effect - the proselytizers - I think changed the culture to a more strict brand of religion.
It might be worth noting that the Scottish Reformation was the same strictness, and when they lost power in the Scottish Enlightenment, they left and came to America in order to adhere to that strictness. The old story we all were told that they came to America FOR religious freedom is 180° backward: They wanted to keep clamping down on others, and when the others said hell no, they ran off in a huff so that they could do the Salem type of religion away from the much more liberal atmosphere in Scotland after 1700. In that way the Baptist message would seem to have been more to their liking than moderately liberal Presbyterianism.
I could be wrong, but if you look up some of that, it might make it more clear to you.
And enjoy Ostrava! It is a beautiful city.
- AnonymousNovember 29, 2012 at 4:23 PM
Colin: First, let me tell you how much I enjoyed the book.ReplyDelete
Now that we're done with the election, a great deal of the results can be explained by your book. But there's one anomaly: Why do the counties of the eastern Midlands (Iowa and east) tend to vote for Democrats, while the western Midlands (Nebraska, Missouri and points west) go so reliably for Republicans?
There is a similar East/West split in Yankeedom: The eastern parts are quite liberal, while the Yankee portions of the upper Midwest also went Democrat, but by uniformly smaller margins.Replies
I don't yet have a scientific answer for you, but certainly the national characteristics have the strongest signal in their oldest (generally easternmost) cores, and weakest as you approach the 100th meridian. Still the patterns hold.Delete
I would note that the Midlands has always been politically ambiguous, so one would expect a mixed checkerboard, all other things being equal. (Note that much of the Missouri midlands voted Democratic in this cycle; its the Appalachian sections that carried the day for Romney there.)
I would seriously question Anonymous' assertion that the upper Midwest went Democratic but by smaller margins. 95% of northern Illinois outside the city of Chicago is conservative (and Midlands), and I include the collar counties in that for the most part. But Chicago and the collar counties are not in the Midlands on your map. The rest of northern IL are conservative. If ANYTHING, I would group everything west of Chicago as Midlands, NOT Yankeedom. At least as the cultures now are. Colin, you might include the collar counties as Yankeedom, but really, they don't belong. I've lived in and dealt with Yankeedom a good deal, and the Chicago collar counties ain't it.Delete
[Politics: In terms of the election, compare it to 2008, when I believe that Illinois had the highest percentage of Demoocratic votes of any state (in spite of all the conservatives "downstate." Why did it change in 2012? MANY, MANY felt betrayed by Obama from day one. His continuing of Bush policies will rankle forever for those folks. They think of him as a traitor.]
Wisconsin is another culture altogether. They DO seem like Yankeedom. The people of WI have the same taxation mindset you talk about in Yankeedom. All the way south to the state line and all the way to the Mississippi. Including south in Iowa to the Dubuque area as you've called it, Colin. Nice going on that part.
But Northern Illinois, no. Considerably different peoples. If you cross the state line southbound, the people are different down in their cores. Really. Republican to the core. Reagan country. He grew up in Dixon, right about the center of the IL Yankeedom you've shown. Which area is as Midlands as Iowa is. They have nothing in common with New England and eastern Yankeedom.
This is godawful. Please explain to me why Austin, TX and the, well, ANY part of Texas is akin to appalachia.ReplyDeleteReplies
I suggest you read the book. I don't provide cliff notes to the rude.Delete
- AnonymousDecember 29, 2012 at 12:19 AM
I loved your book! I grew up in Wisconsin in a family that came from New England several generations ago, so I really understand the NE influence on Wisconsin. Now I live in Washington, and for the first time I understand why Seattle is so different from the eastern part of the state.ReplyDelete
But here's what I don't understand--if you look at the 2012 county electoral map, you'll see that there are large regions of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Minnesota that are very red. Why are these regions--often settled by Germans, Scandinavians, Polish--different from the blue parts of the state settled by the same ethnic groups? As far as I know, these parts of the northern midwest were not settled by Appalachians or southerners.
Thanks for the most enlightening book I've ever read which has helped my understand the crazy politics in this country!Replies
Thanks much - I'm glad you enjoyed the book.Delete
There are, indeed, "red" sections in the "Yankee" Upper Midwest states. The paradigm would argue that Yankees set the cultural DNA of the area and that, over time, newcomers' descendents generally assimilate into that dominant cultural landscape. There are variations in political behavior even within the nations, to be sure. (A look at an electoral map in Germany, England, Italy, or Japan will reveal the same.) But I'd posit that these continue to represent a minority position.
I think a revised map is a great idea (and add my vote for making this map into a poster), yet I'm frustrated by the absence of a larger map which takes into the account northernmost North America, that we might see how far the borders of the Far West, Left Coast, New France, and First Nations extend. I'm particularly interested in seeing more of First Nations, given what your book said (at least I think it did; it's been awhile since I read it) about the growth of First Nation autonomy in Canada, and its future ties with Greenland.ReplyDelete
My second point: You mention New Orleans' "amalgam" status as blending Spanish Caribbean, New France, and the Deep South; how much damage was done to that cultural status as the result of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, given the mass exodus from the city in the aftermath? Or has it rebounded?
An excellent point; I have the data for the Far North of the continent on a county and Canadian census unit level -- just a matter of making the map. One of these days....Delete
I don't have an answer on New Orleans, having not been there since Katrina, but as a general proposition, culture has a way of surviving.
- AnonymousFebruary 11, 2013 at 9:52 PM
Colin, Thanks much for your book. I read Garreau's Nine Nations years ago, and more recently, Fischer's Albion's Seed - so it was super to see you acknowledged their contributions - AND build on them.ReplyDelete
I teach a class in the philanthropy and used Fischer as part of my introduction to explain some of the historical patterns of the development of nonprofits. Your observations lead me to consider how those are expressed today. Your thoughts?
Thanks.... MReplies
M - Definitely check out E. Digby Baltzell's "Puritan Boston and Quaker Philadelphia" if you haven't already. He analyzes differences in philanthropy in great detail, and argues that they are due to deep cultural differences dating back to the early colonial era.Delete
- AnonymousFebruary 22, 2013 at 4:24 PM
Enjoyed your book very much and have recommended to others.
However, I don't feel that Colorado can any longer be classified as part of the " Far West" or at least parts of Colorado cannot be. Many former residents of the loopy " Left Coast" have fled to Colorado but kept the ideology which wrought that they fled from. They have, unfortunately, also bred.
Colorado has sadly become the easternmost outpost of the Far Left.
( I'm serious about this is as a native of a neighboring state.)Replies
Anonymous - I find this intriguing and funny, both. There are elements of your comment of imagined superiority. This contrasts with my own sense that the Far West is actually a lesser one of the 11 Nations. Raised on the Midlands side of the Midlands-Greater Appalachia divide, I've also lived in Yankeedom (New England proper and Chicago suburbs for many years) and Colorado (long ago). Colorado even 40 years ago was trending toward Yankeedom-Midlands-Left Coast. "Don't Californicate Colorado" was already on bumper stickers. It was the Far West that seemed alien and backward to me - pockets of people who seemed to idolize the Marlboro Man. Even then this seemed like people having difficulty moving out of the 1800s. The great influx since then of people from back east and from California since then have probably made it less Marlboro Man.Delete
All of this tends to corroborate Woodard's premise of culture being dictated by the original settlers.
And yet every influx in itself is a settlement of a new culture and poses complications to the basic premise: How many new settlers does it take to overwhelm the culture? After all, the Native Americans' cultures got overwhelmed - this being Woodard's idea in the first place. So, such overwhelming can happen. And enclaves exist all over he world. Ergo, when does an enclave of Californians in a lightly populated state like CO become dominant - like white man's culture dominated the various parts of North America?
- AnonymousFebruary 22, 2013 at 5:10 PM
I wrote the above and just realized that a subject to explore is " The California Diaspora"; it seems no one has analyzed it in depth and it is real and happening.ReplyDelete
The cause and effect both on Cali and the areas to which they flee.
- AnonymousFebruary 24, 2013 at 8:26 PM
When researching my family history I found that many early "Yankees" (pre-1800) moved from Connecticut and Long Island/Brooklyn to the Raritan River Valley of NJ. I imagine that their influence was overwhelmed by the New Netherlands crowd, or absorbed into the Midlands set, but there were so many that they must have had an impact for a while.ReplyDeleteReplies
@Anonymous - In moving to New Netherland or Midlands environs, your Yankee forebears would have been in good company. The cultural fabric of both those places prized pluralism, and Yankees were among the significant participants in their "national" life.Delete
I was raised in Ohio, lived 41 years in central Florida...and finally have relocated to the Left Coast. yes...there were massive differences between all 3 places...i prefer the intelligence and tolerance of Ecotopia...we dont have all the answers but compared to the midlands and deep south, we are just fine...it remains to be seen if these differences stand up to immigration and the onslaught of digitized Wall Street capitalism....which destroys the planet,people and all life in reality...ReplyDelete
- AnonymousJune 11, 2013 at 7:48 PM
I read your book ("Nations") last year and found it fascinating.ReplyDelete
I grew up in western Illinois (Quincy), moving later to Phoenix, Arizona. I agree with your designation of Phoenix's county (Maricopa) as El Norte. When I moved here fresh out of college 30 years ago, I would have described Phoenix at the time as a Far West culture, and it had been for the previous 100 years. It was a Native American culture that several hundred years ago carved out the canal system upon which modern metro Phoenix has modeled its vital canals. White settlers arrived here just after the Civil War, centuries after the Native settlements were abandoned, and began anew as a crop-based agricultural economy (cotton and citrus, mostly). There was a Hispanic presence for years, but was a fairly small minority until the Mexican and Central American influx in the 1990's and 2000's transformed the area to what could inarguably be called a border culture, or El Norte (Tucson to the south, by contrast, has always been an El Norte culture, having been founded 200 some years ago by the Spanish colonials).
I agree with some of the other contributors here that much of "urban" central Illinois might be re-designated from Greater Appalachia to a Midlands status. Quincy, tucked into the corner of far western Illinois in Adams County, definitely deserves a re-visitation of its status as well. Quincy differs from the other central Illinois towns in that it is a Mississippi River town in an area of rolling hills rather than towns like the prairie farm towns of Springfield, Decatur, Bloomington, etc., to the east. It is one of the oldest major towns in Illinois, founded by "Yankee" John Wood around 1825, and described by Mark Twain in his 1883 "Life on the Mississippi", as having "the aspect and ways of a model New England town". The town was further settled in the mid- to late-19th century by German immigrants (including some of my ancestors). Quincy to this day has strong public schools a good appreciation of the arts, having the oldest civic arts council in the U.S. So I think Quincy, Illinois' Adams County definitely merits a Midlands (heck, maybe even a "Yankeedom") designation.
I know that a proper designation of every county and municipality in the U.S. is a tall order, and I think it's great that you've created this forum for listening to your readers.Replies
Thanks for your on the ground input on this. With enough "crowdsourcing" feedback, perhaps I can improve the map in places going forward.Delete
- NathanaelJune 17, 2013 at 4:30 PM
Yankeedom and the Midlands are far, far more mixed with each other than they appear on your map.ReplyDelete
- AnonymousJune 21, 2013 at 2:13 PM
"buy my book if you want to disagree with me"ReplyDelete
I don't care if you buy it or not, but read it. Your library probably has a copy.Delete
- AnonymousJuly 19, 2013 at 5:07 AM
I have said and postulated these same things which you say for a very long time. Having grown up in Eastern Massachusetts, a yankee child of old yankee families, in a very yankee suburb of Boston-- but having lived in NYC, California, Washington State, and small rural towns in Massachusetts and also Maine in my career as a reporter/editor/journalist, and having traveled across both Canada and the US several times; I have found these differences obvious. Even starkly so. Long a fan of David Hackett Fischer, I have also been a fan of Albion's Seed. Somehow I missed 'Nine Nations', but have found and read, with general approval, (and certain questions), your book. It is clearly an important work, raising necessary questions and providing needed answers, and I congratulate you on it. Though living now a captive on the Canadian/NY border, (which is clearly French-Canadian, but with the strong but fading imprint of the Vermont Yankees who settled here but then moved on), I frequently try to return to Yankeeland for emotional and intellectual sustenance. Summer on the Cape and the coast of Maine suit my soul, as does nothing else. Summer also suits my French-Canadian schoolteacher wife, though she doesn't like the water, Rt. 128, crowds, (no one lives in Malone, NY anymore so people shock her), or seafood. One question I have would be about Alexander Hamilton's origins, and why you gave the generally acknowledged selfless banker of the Revolution, Robert Morris, such terrible press. He advanced millions, never got them back, so of course he had to try any way he could to try to break even. And he still taught Hamilton all he knew, allowing them to make sure the new nation was established on a secure economic foundation. In my view, which many share, if the border ruffians had been allowed to succeed in their anarchy, they would have killed the USA in her crib. Robert Morris deserves better. Without him, for better or worse, John Adams' vision of a strong and free America, subservient colonies no longer, would have not been possible, and we would be living different lives in different countries. (I am not old Anonymous-- just so technically unsavvy as to declare myself in any other way.)ReplyDelete
- AnonymousJuly 28, 2013 at 9:03 PM
I live in El Norte and find much of what you write to be true. You are the only person besides myself to give significance to the Proposition 8 vote of 2008 in assigning regional significance. Santa Barbara was the only SoCal county to vote against Prop 8, and although it has other Left Coast tendencies, you cannot uproot it from El Norte and place it in the Left Coast on that basis.ReplyDelete
My area of disagreement with you is in the assimilation of Latinos (primarily Mexicans) into American culture. You say you expect El Norte to secede from the US (and Mexico) one day and become its own nation. I beg to differ on that and offer as evidence this excellent article from the liberal LA Times analyzing the disappearance of legendary Mexican-American radio talkshow host "Piolin" from the radio airwaves.
The LA Times (among others) attributes the marked decline in his popularity to the assimilation of young Latinos who are more likely today to listen to English-language radio talks stations and/or music stations.
I am linking this recent article and highly recommend you read the entire article, as well as some of the comments (click on "Read Comments" to get more then the 3 most recent comments):
Thanks for raising this and for the link. If I understand right, you're arguing that, in the L.A. context at least, El Norte is not the dominant culture, thus the assimilation of young Latinos into the English-speaking world, rather than the reverse. I'd be interested what others who live in your region think. (I, of course, live on the opposite end of the country.)Delete
One correction: I never said I expect El Norte to secede. In the Epilogue I suggested it was just one of many possibilities over the next century, including the possibility that the borders of the US, Canada, and Mexico will remain the same.
- AnonymousAugust 8, 2013 at 7:20 PM
In terms of being the "dominant culture" I would have to say LA is probably the capital of El Norte. If as LA Times says, more young Latinos are assimilating in the 2nd & 3rd generations (my personal experience supports that) I suspect that is happening all over El Norte. Even across the Mexican border many American trends are embraced by young Mexicans, even though most of them dont speak English.Delete
I'll admit that my personal experience with El Norte comes from having lived in southernmost Texas, a strong counterpoint to what you're saying about L.A. (If these nations were to have cultural capitals, I'd nominate San Antonio.)Delete
In this vein, check out this piece from this week's print edition of The Economist, in which we meet white, English-speaking South Texas teenagers celebrating their quinceañera. www.economist.com/news/united-states/21582530-teenagers-san-antonio-give-foretaste-americas-hispanic-future-power
- AnonymousAugust 31, 2013 at 6:30 PM
Good point. San Antonio has a strong claim to being cultural capital of El Norte. Because LA is also an entertainment capital it has a different flavor than San Antonio, which tends to be more old-school, traditional Mexican. (I dont see "quinceaneras" ever making any impact on white Anglos in western El Norte: AZ & SoCal).Delete
Even though SoCal has more Latinos in total numbers than Bexar county, Bexar has a significantly higher Latino % (59%-48%)
My understanding of San Antonio/south Texas is that Latinos (I shy away from the bureaucratese term Hispanic) have been in political power for a longer time. When Antonio Villaraigosa was elected mayor of LA around 2005 or so, he was the first Latino/Mexican mayor in 130+ years.
Of the 3 other largest SoCal cities, the only one that has had a Latino mayor is Santa Ana (78% Latino) which has had the same Latino mayor since 1994. Long Beach (41% Latino) has never had a Latino mayor, nor has Anaheim (53% Latino), where a measure to increase Latino representation on the City Council was recently defeated. Anaheim has had only 3 Latino City Council members in its 140-year history (none presently).
One point I think is worth mentioning, LA media dominate Westside was founded by an all togetor different group the most of the city. The Westside was founded by artists and business people of New York. They are by far the dominate cultural system of west LADelete
Interesting. At a higher resolution you can find all sorts of enclaves and "micro-cultures" for sure: the Acadians of Cheticamp, NS; the Scots Highlanders of the rest of Cape Breton, NS; the sort-of 18th century Dutch fundamentalists who founded the Grand Rapids, MI area (still a bastion of conservatism amid a Yankee sea with lots of major Dutch-descended figures like the DeVoss clan); the Scots-Irish of Midcoast Maine and Londonderry, NH, etc, etc.Delete
- AnonymousNovember 7, 2017 at 4:32 AM
Lawrence, KS is a surviving Yankee enclave for now. Settled by Massachusetts families pre-civil war as a Free State outpost, it retains it's New England cultural roots (now threatened by migrations from Kansas City and Topeka) making Douglas county a consistent solidly blue block in an otherwise red state.Delete
Indeed - and named for Lawrence, Mass. if I recall correctly.Delete
- AnonymousAugust 22, 2013 at 4:33 PM
Nowhere in Oklahoma or Texas should be a part of the Midlands. They are some mix of Far West and Greater Appalachia.ReplyDeleteReplies
Yes, except for that northern panhandle/western panhandle area.Delete
- AnonymousNovember 15, 2013 at 4:13 PM
Then how are Philadelphia and Baltimore in the same region as the OK and TX pandhandles? Philadelphia/ Baltimore are much more in favor of government and pro labor union than the western areas of the Midlands.Delete
The map is based on early settlement patterns. Those small parts of Oklahoma and Texas are the farthest flung regions of a settlement flow and resulting cultural ethos anchored in the 17th century Quaker-founded colonies on Delaware Bay. Reading the book, of course, will make this all much clearer.Delete
- AnonymousSeptember 1, 2013 at 12:33 PM
I read your book and I thought it was well written and argued a theory that seemed absolutely counter-intuitive excellently. My suggestion is to add detailed maps showing the national differences for important controversies, which can be hard to imagine given only a textual description.ReplyDeleteReplies
That idea was shot down by the publisher back in the day, but hopefully will have more maps for you soon through some academic collaboration.Delete
Columbus is not Appalachian. Huge mistake there.ReplyDeleteReplies
Several people have said that. Midland, you think?Delete
Colin -Delete
Midland. All the way from there to the Yankeedom border. Lived in Ohio five years, got to Columbus several times. Columbus is not Cleveland, not Yankeedom. But FAR from being Appalachia. From Columbus north it is like Iowa. Farmers, but Iowa type farmers.
- AnonymousNovember 9, 2013 at 8:54 PM
I was born in rural east central Indiana (in one of the Indiana counties still included in "Greater Appalachia" designation, and not "Midland".) All my relatives were descended from family members who migrated from North Carolina and Virginia through Ohio and then settling in Indiana. Red state folks through and through. Socially conservative, very self reliant and suspicious of outsiders and outside ideas. White, protestant, and very Republican. And with lots of "southern" foods, speech and mannerisms. When the word for soft drink is tested my home county says "Coke" for any variety of carbonated drink. And check out the "hoosier apex". Right where I came from. Colin I think you're pretty accurate, moving Appalachia northward into what others have viewed as midland. My raising and subsequent years in east central Indiana tell me so.ReplyDeleteReplies
Thanks much. Always great to hear confirmation from the ground!Delete
- AnonymousNovember 12, 2013 at 7:39 PM
I really enjoy this map! I am a DC native, but lived in Montgomery County MD for several years growing up. I lived specifically in the part of Montgomery right across the river from the Louden Co/Fairfax Co VA border, so I am really from a border zone! Your research holds true with my experience growing up here- there is definitely a lot of cultural mixing going on the the DC metro. I'm really interested in what you have to say about the characteristics of these 11 nations, i.e. Tidewater, Greater Appalachia, and the Midlands. I look forward to reading your book for more!ReplyDeleteReplies
You are on that border for sure. I lived in DC for four years, so have seen that first hand.Delete
The book really does unpack it all -- the map is just the wrapper to get your attention!
This is a tremendously interesting book and, to me as a recent immigrant from Europe, explains the many quirks in American society. But, I'm reading in on my Kindel - and it is missing maps. Quite important, I would say, as the whole book is about geography and migration.ReplyDelete
The Kindle edition doesn't have the maps? Let me check into that.ReplyDelete
I just wrote a comment to you via your Facebook location and realized now that I forgot something: you write about how lingustic and dialect maps hint at or show patterns of settlement which then tend to be retained cultural and politically. With regard to "Canada" and the "US" on both sides of the Great Lakes some language maps put Ontario and say Chicago and other cities on a very similar dialect. Yet the Canadians are not participating in the Northern Cities Vowel Shift http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Cities_vowel_shift and they have "Canadian Rising". So I am not discounting your principle premises, just showing that "Canada" appears to lead to variations within the "nations" in a somewhat systematic fashion.ReplyDelete
- AnonymousJanuary 19, 2014 at 7:34 PM
Hi Colin: I just read through your comments and are reading the book. While your publisher shot down the idea for detailed maps - there is a subset of us, who not only admire your work and are very visually oriented. We would greatly benefit from maps, the larger the better. I for one am willing and able to pay the freight for your work and publishing costs for such map or maps. Please keep us informed of any plans for maps.ReplyDelete
- AnonymousMarch 3, 2014 at 12:09 PM
I have read many of the comments that take issue with how their particular counties or local areas have been described in your 'Nations map today' . I have just recently read your book and am less interested in whether or not my county is accurately described in today's terms than I am with the overall descriptions of the Nations, their migration patterns and the implications on our modern life and political dialogue. I wish this book would be required reading in high school history classes. I was glued to the pages. Thank you.ReplyDeleteReplies
Thanks kindly; glad you enjoyed.Delete
- AnonymousJanuary 25, 2015 at 7:54 AM
Shouldn't it be the Twelve Nations if South Florida is part of the Spanish Carribean?ReplyDeleteReplies
Depends on where you want to stop counting. There's also Greater Polynesia (Hawaii), Newfoundland and - in central America - probably a post-Aztec (Central Mexico), a Maya (Southern Mexico, Guat., parts of Honduras, etc.), an Anglo-Creole (Belize, Bay Islands, etc), and other regional cultures -- all technically parts of North America.Delete
- AnonymousFebruary 5, 2015 at 12:15 AM
A few corrections:ReplyDelete
Yankeedom extends too far west. Some rural parts of Michigan are incredibly conservative and very unlike New England.
The cities and immediate suburbs of Philadelphia, Baltimore, and DC should be either part of "New Netherland" or some other category like "New Netherland Outlying Islands". There's far more in common between Montgomery Co, MD, and NYC, than Montgomery County and a random county in the middle of Iowa.
If Anne Arundel county, MD, is in the Tidewater region, Cecil and Harford definitely should be as well.Replies
If you read the book you'll find this is based on original settlement streams, Wilbur Zelinsky's Doctrine of First Effective Settlement, so your points regarding the big cities of the Mid-Atlantic region are incorrect.Delete
Disagree also on Cecil and Harford, which were originally claimed by William Penn and settled from the Midlands beachhead.Delete
Anonymous -ReplyDelete
As one who follows this post, I can see that there will be some exception taken to any number of specific places being in X state or Y state.
I think you make good points.
- AnonymousFebruary 20, 2015 at 5:12 AM
I think your assessment is generally solid, though focusing entirely on historical migration patterns and not on modern ones causes a bit of confusion. You might try making a map that reflects migration since the post-war period. You might also consider including cultural transition zones and overlaps, as there are many. I have a few maps of Texas that I used in teaching American cultural studies to Europeans--one showing historical settlement, one showing religion, one showing 'dry' vs. 'wet' counties, and another showing the number of illegal whiskey stills seized in a given time period. Combining those maps with, for example, electoral maps is a lot of fun.ReplyDeleteReplies
This is built upon Wilbur Zelinsky's Doctrine of First Effective Settlement, so I stand by my use of early colonization patterns. I agree about the "overlap" in the sense that cultures have cores, domains, and spheres. I talk about this in the book, page 17.Delete
Excellent ideas about whiskey stills, dry and wet counties, etc. There are a lot of fun maps I use in my presentations.
- AnonymousFebruary 20, 2015 at 5:26 AM
Santa Fe, NM would be a suitable rival to San Antonio for the capital of El Norte, if only for its historical and symbolic importance. An even better though little known option might be the town of Española, which has been (almost) continuously inhabited by Spanish speakers since Juan de Oñate arrived there in 1598. I wonder if these venerable northern outposts of New Spain shouldn't be treated as separate from other parts of El Norte...ReplyDeleteReplies
That's an interesting proposition. Of course, none of these "nations" really have capitals, but San Antonio also has historical and symbolic importance -- and is far larger than your suggested rivals.Delete
- AnonymousApril 10, 2015 at 12:53 AM
Excellent map and really interesting subject matter in the comments section,. I'm ordering American Nations as soon as I finish typing this! As a lifelong North Carolinian, I definitely agree that the state can be divided 3 ways between the nations, however I'd redraw the boundaries in the Carolinas:ReplyDelete
In SC, I'd move Greenwood,York, Lancaster, Union and Chester counties to Greater Appalachia. More Scotch-Irish German Piedmont mill-town than Gone With The Wind historically and are now in markets that are definitely in the Greater Appalachian region (Chester, Lancaster, Chester are Charlotte, Greenwood and Union are Greenville-Spartanburg).
The NC Sandhills are part of the Greater Sandhills (think Columbia SC or Augusta GA) and are 100% Deep South, not split between 3 nations. Sandhill counties that should be moved are Anson, Richmond, Montgomery, Moore, Lee and Dunn.
The map splits the Piedmont Triad in half between the Tidewater and Greater Appalachia. The region is 100% Greater Appalachia. Guilford, Alamance and Davidson need to be moved.
Sorry to be nit-picky. This kind of stuff fascinates me, can't wait to read American Nations!Replies
Thanks much; it's always good to have detailed feedback "from the field" and North Carolina's especially wide Piedmont region has always been a tricky one. With SC, though, note that the map is based on the legacy of "first effective colonizers" not necessarily on current economic orientations.Delete
Enjoy the book and let me know what you think once you've read it.
I am a big fan of your work/book! I am a Far Western native (rural Wyoming) whose left-leaning identity led to my move to the region's big city (Denver). Growing up in WY, Colorado, and especially Denver was perceived as more liberal, and recent policy (marijuana legalization, marriage equality,etc.) and election results support this, but in the book there's not much discussion. Some of this could be explained by Far Western libertarianism, and I'm sure El Norte has its influence (though that Nation's Southern Colorado counties are fairly rural and insignificant.) My question is do the recent demographic changes in migration from more liberal nations to Denver and other communities play a role in altering this states' politics? Or will Denver/CO maintain its Far Western roots in its culture? I was wondering if you could elaborate your take on this.ReplyDeleteReplies
Hi Mike, and thanks for your note. First: yes, the examples you cite don't surprise me as these are essentially civil liberties matters, and the strong libertarian streak in the Far West supports such. (This is why some of the earliest women's suffrage successes also occurred in the region and why, in my thinking, part of the reason Obama did so well there in 2008 (running in a sense against the Cheney legacy), but not as well in 2012 after the NSA scandals.)Delete
But it's also true that cities everywhere in the world tend to be more progressive than the rural areas they're embedded in. (Though cities in the Deep South are much more conservative than their counterparts in Yankeedom and rural areas of northern New England -- while more conservative than Portland or Burlington -- still supported Obama in both elections, etc.)
Finally: I predict recent demographic in-migration will not be the driver of changes in political behavior in the middle and long term, because the "dominant culture" tends to assimilate the children and grand-children of migrants, be they from another "American Nation" or abroad. (But if one section of a state gains far more people than another -- witness El Norte in Texas -- that can change statewide results.
- AnonymousJuly 22, 2015 at 3:13 PM
Yesterday was the first time that I had the opportunity to view this map. Including the coastal counties of Northwest Indiana as part of "Yankeedom", rather than the Midlands, is simply remiss. This is particularly true, in the case of La Porte County.ReplyDelete
From an historical standpoint, the 1850 Census of La Porte County clearly revealed that the regional birthplace of adult settlers was, in descending numerical rank, the Mid-Atlantic first, the South second, and thirdly New England.(just above foreign-born residents) In fact, the three states that contributed the most adult residents to La Porte County then were--in descending order--New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia. There were more New Englanders here than in other Hoosier counties. But they never were a dominant element of the population. Moreover, in the mid 19th Century, an antipathy existed between New Englanders and Indiana. Consequently, the former preferred to settle in other Midwestern states.
This county was clearly NOT dominated by the influence of Yankee Calvinists or any other single group.
The data and observations of writers from that time period characterized La Porte County as a kind of "microcosm of America"-- with MANY cultural players.
So what accounts for the Northwest/North Central Indiana today being the politically "Blue" end of an otherwise very "Red" state?
This simple answer is 20th and 21st Century developments. Indiana became the "Crossroads of America". And in this last century, the Northwest/North Central became a major "Crossroads of Indiana". It made this diverse place MUCH more diverse, yet. With the development of all of the transportation thoroughfares that now cover this part of the state came also new peoples, bringing new ideas, new cultures, etc. with them. The heavy industries established here had well-unionized workforces. In turn, they were served by, and contributed to, a very well-organized Democratic Party, within these counties. Having "Blue" adjacent neighbors, like Chicagoland and the Upper Midwest (Michigan) didn't hurt either.
But the bottom line is that the political characteristics of any place develop over time like layers of geological strata. With the more recent layers having greater relevance to what is happening now.
Consequently, if you want to know why the Northwest Indiana coast is the "Blue" end of a very "Red" state, you need not look any further than the world of the 20th and 21st Centuries to get a very comprehensive answer.
Obviously I disagree with your argument that the most recent layers are the most relevant. Perhaps if you read the book -- it should be in your local library -- you'll come around to my point of view.Delete
- AnonymousAugust 3, 2015 at 2:41 PM
Colin, I have been enjoying your book in my car, listening to the Audible version. You should have them bundle this downloadable PDF with the audio file on the Audible site. Many of the audiobooks have PDF companion files.ReplyDelete
Love the book. Great insights.Replies
An excellent suggestion. I'll try to contact the Audible people and see if we can make that happen.Delete
Quite fascinating, but whither Alaska and Hawaii?ReplyDelete
Culture certainly goes north/south between Canada and the US. As a British Columbian, I often find myself more at home in California than I do in Alberta. I agree with the earlier commentator querying how you class Ontario, however. Having lived in both eastern Ontario and south-western Ontario, I would say the east is far more "Yankee" in its sensibilities. South-western Ontario feels very mid-western, in an American sense, in a way eastern Ontario does not.
Many thanks for a fascinating book.
Hi! I really enjoyed reading your book, but could you say more about why you consider Orange County, NY to be part of Yankeedom? I grew up there, and I feel like the area probably has more in common with New Netherland. Thanks!ReplyDelete
- AnonymousJanuary 9, 2016 at 6:16 PM
Hi Colin. I have read your book and have a few questions about the map posted above. Firstly, it would seem through your writing that Chicago should really be a part of the Midlands and not Yankeedom. Also, I would think Cincinnati would be a part of the Midlands considering its strong German heritage.ReplyDeleteReplies
No, Cook County is evenly shared between the Midlands and Yankeedom (though it doesn't show that on the map), just as New Orleans is shared between Deep France and New South. Cincinnati proper is likely a Midlands enclave trapped within Greater Appalachia, just as Milwaukee is probably a Midland enclave embedded within Yankeedom.Delete
This comment has been removed by the author.ReplyDelete
- AnonymousJanuary 12, 2016 at 5:30 PM
Hi. I have read your book and very much enjoyed your explanation of the ethno-cultural US regions. However, I would like to hear your opinion on Donald Trump. It would seem that he is very anti the liberalism strong in NYC yet he is doing very strongly in polls there. Also, being a populist you would expect him to do well in the west but that is not happening. Finally, he is polling very well in the Deep South but he doesn't seem like a candidate the oligarchs would support very much. Thoughts?ReplyDelete
Colin -ReplyDelete
I've been sort of keeping up with this for better than 3 years now, and it makes as much sense now as it originally did. Taking it down to the county level as you have done is brilliant. Counties each seem to have kind of their own mentality - local yet spread out, and imbuing people within each one with THAT county's "reality" about how the world is.
In terms of my own experiences, I've lived in several of the "Nations", and your assessments agree with my own.
1. Born in St Louis, I spent most formative years just across the river - only 5 miles from the Arch. A different place. MANY more hillbillies.
2. Spent a year not far from Boston. Absolutely Yankeedom. Yankeedom Central, maybe even.
3. Another year in Maine. Ditto.
4. Spent 5 years in Cleveland. Yes to Yankeedom. Not the same as Columbus or Cincinnati or Toledo. Out to Sandusky is the same.
5. Two years in Denver. What a culture shock there for me. THE WEST, indeed. It was the first time (after all the above) that I really felt like I was in a different country.
6. Two years about 100 miles SSW of Chicago (Ford county) and repeated trips back there - yes, to it being different from both S Illinois and Chicago.
7. Many years around Chicago. More in common with Cleveland and New York and Boston. Though few in Chicago seem to have ever traveled to the eastern parts of Yankeedom. They would feel at home.
8. Many visits to Cape Girardeau (as noted above) and S Illinois and I know how very Appalachian it is. If you renamed Appalachia into "Ozarkia" or "Ozarkana" you wouldn't get much argument from me.
I don't know, but I DO find it very interesting that Dallas is included in Appalachia. As opposed to the other big Texas cities - Houston in Deep South, San Antonio in El Norte.
Austin? Austin is not Texas, while still being in Texas - an island of what? More like Champaign-Urbana in IL (Greater Appalachia??? - WOAH!), but with a swagger, perhaps.
And speaking of Urbana (Champaign County), THAT I would suggest is more like Yankeedom, DEFINITELY. Much more like Worcester, Mass than like Springfield or Dallas. Can I persuade you to review Champaign County? It's more Yankeedom than is Ford County, just north. If not founded by college people, certainly fully imbued with that.
So, it took me a while, but I did find one county of disagreement. And it IS attached to Yankeedom. A little finger down into Champaign County - like the one stretching cross MO to St Louis - is that so hard to do? . . . LOL
[BTW, the choices of who to comment as are different than before. I am the Steve Garcia from above, there as my Google ID. The drop down does not give me that option now, so I am on here now as Steve G from Blogger. someone changed something...]
- AnonymousJanuary 13, 2016 at 6:09 AM
Hi Colin.ReplyDelete
Great book by the way. Concerning the Deep South. Would you say the growing proportion of African-Americans threatens to undermine the oligarchs power on the political system. If so, what kind of culture will it spawn. A New France style enclave in the South?
This comment has been removed by the author.ReplyDelete
I'm a life-long resident of Illinois--a Midlander born but with family ties and former residences just over the border into Greater Appalachia. I was thrilled by your map because it explains why I feel like a fish out of water when I go into northern Illinois, Wisconsin or Michigan. However, I agree with other commenters that the southern border of the Midlands here is problematic. Subjectively, I'd put it a few counties south. Perhaps there's a different historical metric to be added that would clarify it. Or perhaps a look at the character of the colleges and universities founded in this area in the mid-19th century - among them a "normal school" for teachers (now Illinois State), a church-affiliated college (Illinois Wesleyan), and a progressive land-grant agricultural college (the University of Illinois) - and their role in the wider local culture of the late 19th century might prove useful in disambiguating this boundary. Having had dealings with all three of these universities, I would say they do not feel like institutions with Appalachian roots. However, less than 50-100 miles south, Decatur and Springfield are definitely Appalachian. (Among other things, I totally hear it in the accent.)ReplyDeleteReplies
Yeah, if Colin Woodward is open to changes of counties, that is one I'd agree on. I would include Champaign County (Univ of IL), as well as your McLean county (IL State U). The culture of both counties is dominated by the state colleges. I was just up in Champaign-Urbana last month (from Mexico where I now live), and it is more like Ann Arbor than it is like Appalachia or even Springfield, as you say.Delete
And, heck! He's got An Arbor in Yankeedom! Not even The Midlands. Not sure about THAT one at all, either!...LOL
An Arbor is to Detroit as Champaign-Urbana is to Chicago. Seriously. A little farther away, but the same.
STRANGE: I see a GAP in Yankeedom, between about Clinton/Sandusky, OH to the corner of Michigan. I didn't think gaps were permitted! LOL
Maybe Champaign-Urbana and Bloomington-Normal can be included in Yankeedom, too! (Honestly, I am familiar with the college towns in Massachusetts a bit, and as I was writing this, I had actually thought of Champaign-Urbana a lot like those towns/counties.)
I DO agree with you, and I hope Colin will take it under advisement. I ran across some of the history while at U of I, and I discovered that the university played a huge part in the earlier culture of the county.
And I DID notice long ago that Ford County, IL was included in The Midlands - which I was happy to see. I know Ford county well, too. Champaign Co. and McLean Co. are much more The Midlands than Ford County, which is like the most rural county in IL. I used to live there.Delete
This comment has been removed by the author.ReplyDelete
Does anyone know what would be a good description of South Florida and Hawaii, as well as, the various cultural nations of Mexico?ReplyDeleteReplies
I call South Florida part of the "Spanish Caribbean" (with cultural hearth in Cuba.) Hawaii is Greater Polynesia. I don't drill down into the other "nations" of Mexico, but south of El Norte there are probably distinct Central Mexican (post-Aztec), Mayan (Chiapas - extending on into Guatemala and parts of Belize) and maybe a Yucatan-ish one.Delete
Does and/or did New France have a large amount of influence on US politics, not just Canadian politics?ReplyDelete
No. New France has never had a significant portion of the US population. It does have a large effect on Louisiana politics, of course, though in recent decades it has behaved much more like the Deep South.Delete
Would you also include the northern most part of New England, like Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont as part of New France since they still retain a large amount of French Arcadian culture and language along the border. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_language_in_the_United_StatesReplyDeleteReplies
No, because there is not a single county where the "effective first settlers who created a self-perpetuating society that exists today" were Acadian/Quebecois. (If we dove down to the municipal level, I would assign a number of towns in Maine's Upper St. John Valley to New France, but Aroostoock Cty as a whole is not.)Delete
Your articles are very well written and unique.ReplyDelete
see this
Dramatic data from ancestry.com showing a match between genetics and political/cultural boundaries - https://blogs.ancestry.com/cm/what-770000-tubes-of-saliva-reveal-about-america/ReplyDelete
Pindiespace - Indeed. I did a full American Nations treatment of this here that you may find interesting: https://medium.com/s/balkanized-america/the-11-nations-of-america-as-told-by-dna-f283d4c58483ReplyDelete
Loving "American Nations." As a bilingual French speaker, I'm curious... with the majority of Northern and Southern Louisiana voting Republican, can we say that the Deep South has taken over New France, pushed out the majority of liberal-leaning individuals with the help of recent hurricanes?ReplyDelete
Also, as an Ohioan I'm curious as to the data that placed Columbus in Appalachia. Cincinnati? Definitely! But Columbus is all Midlands based on voting patterns, agricultural history, city planning, and based on the values of the inhabitants.
Andrew - This is something I'm curious about as well. It sure seems like New France has flipped to being part of Deep South in the past three decades, at least in terms of political behavior. It was definitely a place apart for the century before that. People also ask about Columbus -- most common question about the map really. As I recall, I placed it with Greater Appalachia primary because of linguist's dialect maps, which put it firmly there. Some people in the area have defended its Appalachian placement, others denounce it, so it's not clear-cut, but definitely open to debate.ReplyDelete
I grew up in northern Alabama and went to college in Mississippi. My classmates there would always ask if I was from the northeastern corner of Mississippi because of how I pronounced certain words. At the time I thought that Mississippians were quaint for being able to pick out regional Mississippi accents. After reviewing your map I know realize that they were picking up on a different national accent. My mind is blown.ReplyDeleteReplies
I love it! Early settlement patterns explain *a lot* of things.Delete
I've lived in Columbus my entire life and much of my extended family is from somewhere in eastern Ohio, and I can't for the life of me understand why the Midlands/Appalachia border was drawn how it was.ReplyDelete
If it were up to me, I would probably draw the border going right between Franklin and Pickaway county. I went to school for several years in Pickaway county, and the culture there has noticeably more in common with Kentucky and West Virginia then anything I've ever seen in Columbus or any of the other counties further north. Columbus is pretty much right on the faultline between the two regions though, so I don't have that much problem with choosing Appalachia for it over the Midlands.
The part I really disagree with though is the idea that Guernsey, Muskingum, Tuscarawas, or even Jefferson counties are somehow less Appalachian than the Columbus area, which is just absolute madness to me. That part of Eastern Ohio has always been considered as part of Appalachia, not just culturally, but also geographically and politically, so that decision doesn't make any sense to me at all. Did you have a reason for drawing the boundaries for Ohio where you did?
I find the placement of Columbus and Cincinnati in Greater Appalachia rather odd, as both have Midlands accent (the historic Cincinnati accent even contained several vowel soundings only found in New York city and New Orleans). Likewise, both cities featured heavy settlement by European immigrants - Italian, Irish, German and others - as well as a heavy influx of New Englanders and Mid-Atlantic settlers, as opposed to Virginians and South-Atlantic settlers. Likewise, Cincinnati has for most of its history had Catholicism as the religion with the largest number of adherents, and was one of the birthplaces of Reformed Judaism. I would see both cities as Midlands pockets, with Cincinnati with an old veneer of New Netherlands (due to some religious plurality and possible connections to New York city in the 19th century.ReplyDelete
That said, the 'hinterlands' of both cities could likely be part of Greater Appalachia - when I visited with my wife (she is British), she noticed a definite cultural shift about 5 miles after we crossed the Ohio river into northern Kentucky. She observed a similar shift to the east and west as well (perhaps 20 miles out of the city centre), but not to the north or north-east. One last point I should note - younger Cincinnatians have lost the distinctive vowel sound, and sound more generically Midlands when speaking. So perhaps it should just be purely Midlands at this point in its history.


text:
The historical record of progress in AIDS research lies not only in the medical literature, but also in the community-produced clinical trial directories that have tracked experimental protocols as they opened and closed over the years. Studies of failed treatments generally don't get published, and many of yesterday's therapeutic hopefuls have faded from the collective memory. Pick up an old clinical trial directory, however, and you can find the entry criteria for a "tat inhibitor" study that people once traveled across the US to try and join. The directories also reflect the effects of increasing community involvement in designing research protocols, such as increased study of opportunistic infection treatments, less restrictive entry criteria and greater attention to protecting the interests of trial participants. The very creation of the publications reflected a thirst for information about experimental treatments that most scientific investigators had never previously experienced.
"To rely solely on official institutions for our information is a form of suicide," wrote John S. James in the May 9, 1986 issue of his groundbreaking San Francisco-based newsletter, AIDS Treatment News.
Looking back over two decades of trials, important themes emerge that continue to sound in current debates about the direction of HIV/AIDS research. Most prominently, the agendas of the various stakeholders -- people with HIV/AIDS, the pharmaceutical industry, the government and the scientists -- have regularly collided, with the outcome often decided by who wielded the most money and political power rather than the logic of a given position. Unsurprisingly, it was people with HIV/AIDS and their advocates who had to battle hardest to be heard and, despite significant victories, this remains the case today.
Find a Bug, Find a Drug: AZT with Everything (1987-1989)
The identification of HIV in 1983 prompted a hunt for an antiretroviral magic bullet that one activist characterized as "find a bug, find a drug." But people with AIDS were dying from infections such as pneumocystis carinii pneumonia, or PCP, that could potentially be treated with older off-patent drugs that the brand name pharmaceutical industry -- and the researchers that relied on them for funding -- had little interest in studying.
The saga of aerosolized pentamidine starkly illustrates the point. Pentamidine, an old antiparasitic treatment, was known to have activity against PCP but, for optimal preventive use, it had to be inhaled using a nebulizer, a device used for asthma treatments. Although some doctors began using the drug for PCP prevention, insurers would typically not reimburse for it due to the lack of official FDA approval. The urgent need for a clinical trial turned attention to the newly established, government-sponsored AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG), which was set up to address such critical research questions. The ACTG, however, appeared to inherit from the government an ability to take a simple task and, assisted by endless committee discussions, transform it into an unassailable morass of confusion and complexity.
Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and thus ultimate head of the ACTG, went as far as telling activists attending a 1987 meeting that there was no data to suggest PCP prophylaxis was beneficial and that it may, in fact, be dangerous. While the ACTG continued to agonize over exactly how a pentamidine trial should be conducted, the HIV/AIDS community stepped in to fill the void. The then newly established CRI in New York, headed up by Dr. Joseph Sonnabend, worked with their counterparts in San Francisco to initiate and complete an independent study which led to the approval of aerosolized pentamidine for PCP prevention in 1989. Subsequent studies would confirm the survival benefit associated with this relatively simple intervention.
The ACTG appeared more efficient when it came to setting up trials of anti-HIV drugs. AZT was approved in 1987 based on evidence of a short-term survival benefit in people with advanced disease (a previous episode of PCP or T-cells less than 200), but the ACTG rushed to implement studies that might expand the drug's use to people who hadn't yet developed symptoms. A few ACTG-affiliated researchers, seemingly whipped into a froth of therapeutic euphoria by AZT's arrival, advocated early use of the drug without any supporting evidence whatsoever. Many people living with AIDS had reason to be less enthusiastic about the drug, particularly those whose nights were interrupted by clanging alarms reminding them to take their next every-four-hours AZT dose (the horrifying schedule for the equally horrifying 1,500 mg daily dose used at the time).
A Seat at the Table (1990-1993)
"The companies who want their profits, the bureaucrats who want their turf, and the doctors who want to avoid making waves have all been at the table. The persons with AIDS who want their lives must be there, too."
-- John S. James, AIDS Treatment News, May 9, 1986
Frustration with the ACTG's monomaniacal approach led to a legendary protest in May 1990, when over a thousand activists stormed the campus at the National Institutes of Health demanding a seat at the table. Anthony Fauci, always the consummate politician, calmed the situation by inviting a few protesters into his office for a meeting. The end result was the birth of the ACTG's Community Constituency Group (CCG).
The CCG included more than 30 activists who distributed themselves across each of the various committees of the ACTG, including the executive committee. Imperfect as the system may have been, there is evidence in clinical trial directories of the era that the community input was valuable. For example, there were 13 ACTG trials of opportunistic infection treatments in the New York State directory published by AIDS Treatment Resources in the winter of 1990. By winter '93, the number had expanded to 21, and two trials were specifically studying treatments for opportunistic infections in women.
Attempts to involve a wider community also led to the opening of a second Federally-sponsored clinical trials network, the Terry Beirn Community Program for Clinical Research on AIDS (CPCRA). Terry Beirn was a dedicated activist who served as managing editor of the first national HIV clinical trials directories published by the American Foundation for AIDS Research (amfAR). While the ACTG studies were conducted at academic centers around the US, the CPCRA included community-based clinics with the aim of involving a more representative and diverse population of people with HIV. The approval of drugs studied primarily in gay white men (while partly a testament to initial activism and altruism on their part) represents not only a political but also a critical scientific issue for women and communities of color, and it was hoped that the CPCRA would help address the problem. Today, the CPCRA is having to fight for its existence, demonstrating that the lack of diversity in trials remains another of the recurring, unresolved themes of HIV/AIDS research.
The sad coda for this period was the 1993 International AIDS Conference in Berlin. The ill-founded enthusiasm for early AZT treatment crashed and burned with the results of the Concorde study, which showed no survival benefit and a hint of just the opposite, wreaking psychic havoc on people with HIV but apparently leaving the researchers that had advocated the approach unscathed.
Protease Inhibited (1994-1996)
The first protease inhibitor crept into human safety trials in 1991. By 1994, Ro 31-8959, now known as saquinavir, had made it as far as an ACTG Phase II/III study (dubbed ACTG 229). In getting there, however, saquinavir provided a lesson in the limitations of community input into the ACTG process. On September 30, 1992, CCG representative Mark Harrington wrote a polite but concerned letter to principal investigator Ann Collier about the slated trial:
"I remain perplexed about the current design of ACTG 229. In particular, I share the CTRC's (Clinical Trials Review Committee) concern about 'the selection of 600 mg tid [three times a day] as the dose of Ro 31-8959 [saquinavir] since there is no established maximum tolerated dose.' Doses as high as 1200-1800 mg tid have been tested in HIV-negative patients and found to be safe . . . but people with HIV have only been given doses up to 600 mg tid. I would concur with the CTRC that 'the need for the pharmaceutical sponsor to be forthcoming with data from their European trials' is pressing as we proceed towards opening ACTG 229."
The dose selected by the ACTG was (surprise!) 600 mg tid. The fallout from this decision was profound. The final results of the study, employing a new technique called PCR to measure the amount of HIV's genetic material in the blood (the now familiar viral load test) revealed a slightly better reduction in people taking saquinavir combined with AZT and ddC (Hivid) compared to the double combination of AZT and ddC. A similar incremental benefit in T-cell count increases was also observed. But, due to the low dose of saquinavir, the effects were short-lived. Yet worse, many trial participants developed resistance to the drug that would turn out to blunt the effect of newer protease inhibitors which, although no more potent against HIV in the test tube, were being given at doses that led to dramatically better viral suppression and immunologic recovery. Had Harrington's warning been heeded, this disaster could have been avoided. A high-dose saquinavir study eventually confirmed what the CTRC suspected: antiviral activity was dramatically enhanced without significant additional toxicity.
Thankfully, 1995 saw more impressive results from studies of saquinavir's protease inhibiting brethren, ritonavir (Norvir) and indinavir (Crixivan). Combining a protease inhibitor with two nucleoside analogues was shown to lead to prolonged suppression of HIV replication and a surprising rebound in T-cell counts and functional immunity. Although low-dose saquinavir was eventually approved in December '95, the more effective drugs followed rapidly on its heels, receiving approval in March '96. These events followed two studies showing a survival benefit (and a correlation between survival and viral load reduction) with dual nucleoside therapy, lending credibility to the notion that the addition of a protease inhibitor would further prolong life. The 1996 International AIDS Conference in Vancouver launched the idea of these triple combinations into the public imagination, inaugurating the era of Highly Active AntiRetroviral Therapy (HAART).
HAART Realities (1997-2000)
At the community level, it rapidly became apparent that HAART could produce remarkable health rebounds in people with symptomatic disease and AIDS. The drugs did not work for everyone, but the advantages over single and dual nucleoside treatments were abundantly clear. The availability of HAART altered the research landscape by finally making more effective treatment available outside of clinical trials. Efforts to compare regimens continued and added two nucleoside analogues plus a non-nucleoside (NNRTI) drug to the HAART roster, but the past few years are perhaps best characterized by the trials that either didn't happen or were achingly slow to get started.
Most notably, the key question of when it is best to begin HAART treatment has gone unanswered to this day. In a woeful bout of collective amnesia, many of the same researchers that championed early intervention with AZT argued that HAART should be given to almost everyone with HIV. A panel dominated by these supposed experts was created by the government in 1996 to produce guidelines on using HAART, leading to a recommendation that treatment be started when the T-cell count fell below 500 or if viral load rose above 20,000 copies. The handful of community representatives involved (supported, it should be emphasized, by a few brave doctors on the panel) had to threaten a walkout in order to have the following text inserted as a footnote: "some experts would defer therapy until the CD4 count falls below 350." Earlier this year, the guidelines were revised to reflect this more cautious approach and, once again, the early intervention cheerleaders have somehow held on to their jobs and reputations.
The guesswork employed to guide initiation of therapy was echoed in recommendations for second and third line regimens aimed at people with multiple drug resistance. An unappealingly small market for industry, it was left to a small group of committed activists and doctors -- the Coalition for Salvage Therapy (CST) -- to beat the bushes for trials that might help guide those running out of treatment options. This uphill battle is still being fought today and, tragically, many people (including several sorely missed members of CST) have died as a consequence.
The idea that HAART may produce cumulative and unpredictable side effects was also largely ignored by many (although not all) researchers. Instead, it became popular to blame the strange syndromes being reported by the community on HIV itself. Thus, "HIV-Associated Lipodystrophy (HAL)" was christened, despite the fact that HIV had little, if anything, to do with the drug-induced syndrome of elevated blood fats and mitochondrial damage (mitochondria are vital energy-producing components of human cells). Reports by women of sex-specific toxicities also went unheeded for several years, something that might not have occurred had there been adequate representation of women in HAART trials. Treatments for these problems, and strategies for uncovering their cause and reducing their incidence, have been slow to reach clinical trials, as is evidenced by the grand total of eight listed in the most recent New York State clinical trial directory.
Yet another significant, and under-appreciated, assumption about HAART was that it had to be used continuously to produce sustained health benefits. Dr. David Ho solidified this idea by proposing that HIV might be eradicated with prolonged therapy. The shocking lack of biological plausibility did not prevent Ho's hypothesis from being embraced by large swathes of both the scientific and (perhaps more understandably and forgivably) HIV/AIDS advocacy communities. It took the increasing burden of treatment fatigue and toxicity to give pause to eradication enthusiasts, and the real world perspectives of clinicians like Bill Powderly to eventually note that perhaps treatment interruptions could be both safe and beneficial if a careful eye was kept on immune system function and health.
Percolating around the issue of interrupting treatment was a radical claim made by immunologist Bruce Walker at the 1998 International AIDS Conference in Geneva: "Eradication is not required -- the immune system can control HIV." Although supported by considerable evidence from animal studies -- and some hints from humans -- the notion was greeted with skepticism and, in some cases, outright disdain. The lack of interest on the part of the pharmaceutical industry is perhaps not surprising, given that the emphasis was reducing time on drug therapy. However, like the broadening of opportunistic infection studies in the early '90's, activism by many groups has helped force the issue. Get a copy of CRIA's latest clinical trials directory for New York State, and you'll see the first few multi-site studies of both treatment interruptions and interruptions accompanied by therapeutic immunizations that might conceivably enhance control of HIV in the absence of HAART. Even large companies like Merck and GlaxoSmithKline are now exploring these strategies in studies, making this an area to watch closely as research moves into the new millennium.
Eyes on the Prize (2001-?)
The disheartening persistence of agendas that ill serve people with HIV/AIDS cannot undo the successes of the post-HAART epoch. The number of deaths and AIDS diagnoses has plummeted in the wealthier nations of the world, providing some respite from the horror of the epidemic's early years. But as the mainstream media reflect on two decades of AIDS, it is disturbing to read quotes that so selectively portray the effects of community activism and exaggerate the role of leaders who have so often let down people with HIV. Anthony Fauci, who has kept his job as director of NIAID, credits advocates for making clinical trials "user friendly," but chooses not to mention the PCP prevention trial that CRI pulled off when no one else would. The pharmaceutical industry lauds the accelerated approval mechanisms that have hurried drugs to market, but cannot seem to conduct post-marketing studies to identify new side effects or define how the drugs should best be used. Robert Schooley, who once described a colleague as "imbecilic" for advocating delayed initiation of HAART, still runs the ACTG. While sobering, these facts serve as a reminder that continuing activism and community involvement in HIV/AIDS research is essential if the oft-forgotten, but surely ultimate, goal is to be reached. A cure.
Richard Jefferys, formerly Access Project Director at the AIDS Treatment Data Network, now writes for the IAVI (International AIDS Vaccine Initiative) Report.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Adults in filthy home case already on probation
CLEVELAND - Liberty County authorities investigating possible animal cruelty this week discovered a baby - who belonged to parents on probation for child abuse - whose existence appears little known to the outside world and whose mother admitted to sometimes placing the 1-year-old in a dog cage.
Inside the rural home, among the festering trash, feces and the stench of decay, deputies found the baby. Beside an animal crate. With roaches crawling on her.
Law enforcement officers were not the only ones surprised to discover a child in a filthy environment with a dead horse and dozens of severely malnourished animals.
Child welfare officials and neighbors were stunned to learn that a baby lived with parents who pleaded guilty to child injury last year and at an address from which five other youngsters had been removed.
"We did not know about the baby," Child Protective Services spokeswoman Gwen Carter said Wednesday.
The 12½-month-old girl was discovered on Tuesday evening in the 100 block of County Road 2802 as authorities investigated the conditions of animals on the property, said Capt. Rex Evans, a spokesman for the Liberty County Sheriff's Office.
The child was drinking spoiled milk from a dirty bottle, investigators observed.
"The conditions were deplorable," Evans said, adding that deputies also found evidence of narcotics.
Felony animal cruelty
Mabel Jo Larsen, 32, the baby's mother, was sitting outside the home when authorities arrived. She spoke with deputies for an extended period before mentioning the baby inside.
According to Liberty County court records, Larsen reported that "she puts the child in the cage sometimes so that she and the child can get some sleep."
The mother also said the crate ensures "she then knows where the child is and is able to keep the child away from the animals."
Larsen was taken into custody and charged with felony animal cruelty. The 1-year-old was placed in foster care, Carter said.
Additional criminal charges against the mother are pending, Evans said.
Deputies are searching for the baby's father, 34-year-old Aaron Michael Parker, to talk to him about conditions at the home.
Child injury charges
Larsen and Parker pleaded guilty to child injury charges a year ago - six weeks after the baby was born - and were sentenced to probation.
The felonies relate to allegations of physical and emotional abuse, as well as neglect, of Parker's then-10-year-old daughter in October 2009.
The charges stemmed from reports that Larsen and Parker were withholding food and restraining the malnourished girl with "zip ties" in their home.
The child, now 13, lives with a relative and Parker's parental rights have been terminated.
That investigation led CPS officials to remove four other children who were not identified as abuse victims.
The children, now 7, 9, 10 and 12, are living in an adoptive home, Carter said.
CPS records show that of the six children removed from the home since 2009, Parker is the father of four and three are Larsen's offspring.
Larsen was arrested again in April after violating her probation, records show.
Malnourished animals
When investigators with previous knowledge about the household were told a small child was found inside this week, "they were amazed," Carter said.
"We had no idea. I don't know if they hid it from neighbors, but if anybody in that community would have known, they would have immediately contacted CPS," she said.
Authorities returned to the home on Wednesday to continue to search the property and were joined by animal welfare volunteers. Because of the suffocating heat and debris, crews wore air packs and protective suits inside the home.
The Houston SPCA removed 15 dogs, including four puppies, and two horses. All appeared malnourished. Many of the dogs had visible eye and skin problems.
Houston SPCA vice president Tara Yurkshat said the sickly animals would need medical attention.
Most of the 20 to 30 underfed cats observed on Tuesday had escaped through an open back door by Wednesday.
Neighbor Cecil Palmer said he saw Parker and Larsen bury a horse in their backyard one night about six months ago.
Many neighbors notified animal control about the couple in the past, Palmer said, adding that he had never seen a child at the house.
Another neighbor, Shanna Hopkins, said she called authorities three years ago after Parker's older child showed up outside her house.
The girl appeared extremely underfed with matted hair as well as cuts and bruises.
Hopkins was shocked that the couple had another baby.
"With all this," she said, "I hope something happens now."
firstname.lastname@example.com twitter.com/erinmulvaney firstname.lastname@example.com twitter.com/cindylgeorge email@example.com


text:
Beat the Streak Report: Thursday, May 28
Today's recommended picks
Joe Mauer, C, Twins
3-for-5 (.600 AVG) lifetime vs. Red Sox starter Josh Beckett; .425 AVG in '09
Stephen Drew, SS, Diamondbacks
14-for-27 (.519 AVG) lifetime vs. Braves starter Derek Lowe
Jacoby Ellsbury, OF, Red Sox
.340 AVG during 22-G hit streak
BTS all-time leader: Michael Karatzia, 49
MLB all-time leader: Joe DiMaggio, 56
Yesterday's results
Choteria continued to chug along at the front of the pack, riding a 1-for-5 performance from Carl Crawford to push his BTS streak to a season-high 34 games. Still, he was unable to get any breathing room in the standings, as adnaz received two hits from Aaron Hill to stay one rung behind, at 33 games.
The rest of the Top 5 contestants also held steady in the rankings. stubs_22 received a three-hit effort from Ichiro Suzuki to push his streak to 29 games, while No Nickname and brett_chance pushed their streaks to 28 games by tabbing Crawford and Justin Morneau (1-for-5), respectively.
Yesterday's Top 5 most selected players
1. Justin Morneau (MIN): 6.9%, 1-for-5
2. Alfonso Soriano (CHC): 6.8%, 1-for-5
3. Albert Pujols (STL): 6.5%, 0-for-2
4. Ichiro Suzuki (SEA): 4.2%, 3-for-4
5. Joe Mauer (MIN): 3.4%, 1-for-3
3 Comments
I picked Ichiro yesterday but my streak was reset to zero today….anyone else have that happen?
did u pick someone who didn't get a hit today? Day games seem to be updated right after the game now. Same thing if u just didnt pick someone today.
Choterita & adnaz are beginning to run away. Anyone else worried a bit? Choterita is picking a bit like Spooky from last yr. Make just the right enough pick to get that one hit to torment you.