Is Atlanta the most important city in the South?
 

Asking for a friend. :)

Is Atlanta still even Southern? Asking for a related thread.

On the real, though: Houston, Dallas, and Miami have tantamount import to the importance of Atlanta. We can go all week long debating their relative merits, but there’s no clear stand out. It isn’t the northeast with New York, it isn’t the Midwest with Chicago, and it isn’t the west coast with Los Angeles.

That being said... if you want more fine grained regions not based upon just states, Dallas is the alpha city of the Great Plains, Houston of the Gulf Coast, Atlanta of the Deep South, and Miami of the Caribbean. But they’re all also “southern” in their own unique ways, whatever that means to you or any other poster.

I would ALSO think it would not be controversial to say that of those four, Atlanta is the most clearly “southern.”

How is Atlanta not southern?

I was joking. Clearly.

Yes, except in football.

Dallas and Houston are Southwest. Miami is Southern, but culturally distinct enough to not have a big cultural sphere of influence.

So Atlanta wins by elimination.

Dallas and Houston are southern, they were founded by white American southern slave owners, developed slave holding economies, fought two wars of independence against two countries so as to hold onto their slaves, instituted Jim Crow, racial segregation and a pseudo-caste system, and have minimal to nonexistent historical Spanish settlement, minimal to zero historical Tejano cultural influence during the Republic period, and did not even have large Mexican American immigrant populations until the 1990s. Explain to me how they aren’t southern again? San Antonio isn’t southern. Austin isn’t really southern. El Paso isn’t southern. The Rio Grande Valley isn’t southern. Fort Worth isn’t necessarily southern. But Dallas and Houston and Tyler, and Beaumont, and Nacogdoches*, and Waco, and Texarkana, and Longview, and Lufkin, and all of those other small cities? Those are indisputably southern.

*well, this one is disputable.

Yes, I'd say Dallas and Houston are part southern, part Texan.

There's nada that's southwestern about Dallas and Houston. El Paso is the only city that's southwestern, and I'd describe it as 3/4 southwestern, 1/4 Texan.

Yes, Atlanta is the most southern city, and the most important city in the south.

maybe i'm confusing SSP with city data but seems like we've hashed this one out before in more than one previous thread...

Houston is not the Southwest. Houston is more important than Atlanta.

As wwmiv said, the south doesn't have a clear and definitive alpha metro that stands above all others in the region the same way that the other 3 US macro regions do.

But atlanta is certainly one of the most important cities of the south.

Miami, atlanta, houston, and dallas. Slice and dice 'em however you like, but they're all in the same general and broad tier for importance in the south.

atlanta smaller population, smaller city area and smaller metro than dallas and houston. so if population cojones is your main metric, then no.

if you want to get down to southern pop culture, then for movies gone with the wind is pretty hard to beat, but giant gives it a classic hollywood era run for the money. and overall there are many more and better movies and stuff set in texas than georgia. they arent all sw texas settings either, like the tv show king of the hill. music between the two states is probably a tie though.

:shrug:

I live in Houston and would disagree. I'd say Atlanta has a bigger cultural footprint than we do but these two areas along with Dallas pretty much are on equal footing in the south.

Miami is its own thing in South Florida.

Houston is not southwest. It is southern/gulf coast with regard to climate, vegetation, culture. Houston has one of the highest annual precipitation rates of large U.S. cities. A large part of the region is pine forest, while other parts are coastal re vegetation.

Dallas is not southwest. Dallas is midwest with regard to climate, vegetation. The annual precip is similar to that of Chicago, Des Moines, Minneapolis, etc.

El Paso - now THAT is southwest.

Los Angeles is the biggest cultural hub of the West Coast and has the most people. And while it nominally has the largest economy, that is not true in a hegemonic way, as is true of NYC on the East Coast and Chicago in the Great Lakes. And in the world-changing sector of tech, which has gobbled up so many other sectors, the Bay Area and Seattle rival or supersede LA.

And I agree with you about the South. Just as I don't think LA is to the West Coast what Chicago is to the Great Lakes, I don't see any any city playing the "New York" hegemon of the South (which includes Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, and Miami).

patiently waiting and wondering to hear what san antonio is, but bummer you seem to have left out the red headed step sister of texas ??? :shrug::haha:

but seriously, the capital of la frontera is its own thing i suppose.

^^ yes, the west is definitely a bit more diluted than the northeast or midwest with the LA/Bay Area dichotomy, but LA's mammoth population advantage still puts it in a more definitive #1 role in its region than any metro area in the south does for that region, IMO.

What does "most important" mean?

Most important for what?

Money talks, so I'll say no.

DFW and Houston are more important.

yeah money and population both.

you cant drink enough coca cola in atlanta to make up for that texas oil money.