Quote:
Originally Posted by hauntedheadnc
Considering that Richmond was the capital of the Confederacy, no.
In case it wasn't clear, I think the whole argument is silly. Is the place in question physically located south of the Mason-Dixon line? Was it a part of the Confederacy? If so, hooray -- it's Southern, no matter the modern demographics. It's akin to arguing up one side and down the other that some crummy suburb of Boston cannot possibly be in New England because it doesn't look like a Currier and Ives print.
|
Many people think that Southern means ‘Looks and votes like Alabama’ so Virginia can’t possibly be Southern anymore. But Illinois certainly doesn’t vote at all like Indiana despite being right next door. It doesn’t mean they’re not both Midwestern.
Being Southern is about how slavery and the Civil War forever changed the trajectory and culture of the region versus other parts of the United States. We don’t talk of a ‘rust belt’ in the South because hard industry in the 19th century preferred to invest capital in places that weren’t at risk of Secession or the political instability of Reconstruction. And without hard industry, the South doesn’t experience the Great Migration and Northern-style urban segregation to the same degree.
In the modern era, the South benefits from the lack of this industrial history with sprawling growth. Though the South has an ongoing rural to suburban migration that sets it apart from the West.
By that metric, Virginia is quite Southern indeed.