Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
North VS. South
- Thread starter TSE
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The dialects are fascinating within our country I was raised mostly out west by a father who was a southerner he was raised in Kentucky and Tennesee, I am marrying a New Yorker-they call it soda around here she gets a little pissed every time I use the word Soda-pop LOL I have another friend who is from the east coast who says "potato wedges" I figure it's a New England thing when referring to what I know as Jo Jo's--He goes ******* when I call em that.
WHATEVER!! People only complain about accents when they don't like the person who is doing the talking. I'll prove it.
"Hey ya'll, what's going on?" from this guy = "What a redneck did you hear how he talked?"
ON THE OTHER HAND
"Hey ya'll, what's going on?" from this young lady = "Wow! She's so sweet and did you hear that cute accent she has."
Don't even try and deny it. We all know it's true.
The dude in the first pic is probably thinking "heck if she was mah sister I'd hit that!"
I went and visited my sister recently in Pennsylvania. We are all from Texas. It was a huge difference. The food there was waaaayyyy different. Not only regionally but even things we have here. They just cooked things differently.
The culture was different as well. Even at something such as a baseball game, it was a whole different world. Here in Texas a little league game is pretty much life or death. We scream, celebrate, have banners etc... up there I swear the only people cheering were myself and my sisters family. People looked at us like we had lost it.
Heading into Washington, DC was something different entirely. One thing that stood out, and I'm sorry if it offends someone but all the Obama propaganda was ridiculous. Here we celebrate our state and America. There it seemed that the Obama symbol was the new American flag. It was quite disheartening.
It seems to me the difference I noticed was here in the south we have time to chill out, relax and enjoy ourselves. Up there it seems that people are running, running, running and don't really have too much time to interact, kick back and have a good rib. I will admit the oysters in Boston were off the chain though.
After that trip to Washington D.C., can't say I blame them. Did we not "secede" from the British when it got bad?
North FTW. The beer's cheaper, people are friendlier, and a typical house doesn't cost 30 times national average wage
You have definitely got to be talking about somewhere else lol... It is def cheaper to live in the south and we pretty much brew our own beer down here.
It's the accent, ain't it?
Ah come on now, Paula Dean sounds pretty cool, right? (don't insult my Paula Dean)
how do you have fake friendly? did people approach with fake smiles and try to sell cobbler or what?
Definitely not. But it unfortunately was part of it. One of the reasons the confederate flag draws up so much hate, even if it is a bit unwarranted. I mean for the Native Americans of our day the American Flag could bring up hate since we pretty much stole their land and tried to wipe them out, but that doesn't tell the whole story of what that flag represents.
The dialects are fascinating within our country I was raised mostly out west by a father who was a southerner he was raised in Kentucky and Tennesee, I am marrying a New Yorker-they call it soda around here she gets a little pissed every time I use the word Soda-pop LOL I have another friend who is from the east coast who says "potato wedges" I figure it's a New England thing when referring to what I know as Jo Jo's--He goes ******* when I call em that.
Here in Texas we call it a coke. "hey let's go get a coke". This could mean Dr. Pepper or Sprite. Just slang I suppose, although with so much integration it's lost to small regions.
Potato wedges are definitely just "fries" here (we don't talk about them darn French, jk!).
No idea what a Jo Jo's is. Maybe a cafe on a ranch road?
I live and grew up in FL, there are a few people down here who parade around confederate flags, but those people either want attention or have minimal education.
When it comes down to it, the majority of people here could give a damn.
Now if a split USA would keep New Yorkers and Canadians from taking over this place in winter I'm all for it!!!
When it comes down to it, the majority of people here could give a damn.
Now if a split USA would keep New Yorkers and Canadians from taking over this place in winter I'm all for it!!!
Jo Jo's is the word for it from the Pacific Northwestern Dialect mainly and Coke is a powdery substance that keeps you awake also know amoung the locals of the region as "more expensive than meth" LOLPotato wedges are definitely just "fries" here (we don't talk about them darn French, jk!).
No idea what a Jo Jo's is. Maybe a cafe on a ranch road?
He was not saying that. He was saying that Kansas was apart of the north. As a way to get Kansas to become part of the north Lincoln allowed slavery to be legal there. It was a compromise so Kansas would be part of the north.
Not really. Kansas (and other border states) was about 50/50 when it came to pro-slavery and abolitionists, so if Lincoln would've banned slavery even in the border states, there was a good chance that the border states would've gone Confederate. The border states also were very industrialized compared to the Confederate States so industry would've been raised roughly 70% if they would've joined the Confederacy.
It was a smart move by Lincoln.
It was a smart move by Lincoln.
Not exactly. Although there were a lot of fighting between abolitionists and pro-slavery forces when Kansas was a territory, leading to the time known as "bleeding Kansas", it was eventually admitted to the union as a free state in 1861. The Kansas-Nebraska Act in the 1850s introduced popular sovereignty, which allowed the people of the territory to decide if it would be a free or slave state. As a result, both sides poured into the state in an attempt to influence the vote. At one point, a pro-slavery constitution was drawn up, but was denied by Congress. Eventually, an anti-slavery constitution was drawn up, and Kansas entered as a free state. Not that it mattered, as the Civil War broke out a few months later.
Yeah of course. Gaining numbers, voters and money. But wasn't Lincoln also the one that was against slavery?
I mean the war was after all mainly to abolish slavery, right? I doubt Lincoln had any intentions of doing whatever it took to gain the South's land and resources, as well as tax revenue and access to southern ports etc...
Seems hypocritical to me. Why allow slavery in some states but not others? This just proves that slavery wasnt the reason for the war like so many people believe. It only became an issue when the North realized that they could loose the war, and wanted to keep the South from getting help from European Nations.
Yeah of course. Gaining numbers, voters and money. But wasn't Lincoln also the one that was against slavery?
I mean the war was after all mainly to abolish slavery, right? I doubt Lincoln had any intentions of doing whatever it took to gain the South's land and resources, as well as tax revenue and access to southern ports etc...
Initially, Lincoln's goal was to keep the union together. There is some debate as to why he shifted the focus to abolishing slavery, but it did shift. It could have been to gain support from hardline abolitionists, or to build support in the general public. By 1863, support for the war was waning, and it was an opportunity to turn it into a moral crusade.
At the risk of getting this moved to PRSI: As a history major, I just want to say this is something that bugs me about living in the South. Too many people around here just parrot that the war was about "state's rights", not slavery. Yeah, it was about states rights - the right to keep slavery. Southern politicians saw the writing on the wall. They had pushed through legislation to keep a balance between slave and free states in the Senate. See the Missouri Compromise, Compromise of 1850, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act. After all that, they saw that the new states in the midwest and far west weren't coming in as slave states. This meant they would be outnumbered in the Senate, and they feared a loss of political power, and that they would be powerless to stop Congress from outlawing slavery. This is what ultimately led to the Civil War.
This is one of the things that bugs me about living in the South. Too many people still cling to The Lost Cause.
Actually the reverse is true; the Confederacy, Lee's Army of Northern Virginia, was composed of young rural Southern boys who joined the Army to repel the Union from the South - defend state's rights - and they generally cared little on slavery as an issue... meanwhile the Union Army, the Army of the Potomac, was composed initially of Northern volunteers that were truly concerned to preserve the republic and fight for Old Abe. They too, at least initially, had little interest in slavery; preserving or defending it... While "slavery" as an issue may have played a large part in early state secession, it played no part whatsoever in the war itself. You have to examine the Armies and the war, the Confederate Army and the Union Army, to see that slavery was not the reason for the war - state's rights, the right of a state to secede and the right of state to defend itself, was the reason for the Civil War.
Down here in Virginia, we refer to that period as the War of Northern Aggression; the war itself did not settle the slavery issue - hell the Emancipation Proclamation didn't even settle the slavery issue. Moreover, the slaves themselves were in even worse shape through the next two decades during Reconstruction when many died...
Yeah of course. Gaining numbers, voters and money. But wasn't Lincoln also the one that was against slavery?
I mean the war was after all mainly to abolish slavery, right? I doubt Lincoln had any intentions of doing whatever it took to gain the South's land and resources, as well as tax revenue and access to southern ports etc...
Lincolns plans concerning abolition involved emancipation and shipping all the slaves back to Africa when the war ended (Liberia was founded by many former US slaves in the post civil war era as a result of his plan) the man wasn't so much against slavery as he was about racial separation--emancipation was a means to an end.
Yeah of course. Gaining numbers, voters and money. But wasn't Lincoln also the one that was against slavery?
I mean the war was after all mainly to abolish slavery, right? I doubt Lincoln had any intentions of doing whatever it took to gain the South's land and resources, as well as tax revenue and access to southern ports etc...
no, the war was not about slavery
The issue was and always was about a federal government vs state's rights..NOT slavery
Slavery was a small part of the civil war
States' rights exceed far beyond just slavery lol
Those who believe the American Civil War "wasn't about slavery" need to read this page that explores some of the popular "myth conceptions" of Southern history. The page "helps to explore some of these myth conceptions using facts -- not hearsay -- and actual quotes -- not interpretations -- from those actually involved. "
And on a related subject: Those who believe Lincoln "planned to ship the slaves back to Africa" should read this page which explores the facts regarding Lincoln's support of slave colonies.
And on a related subject: Those who believe Lincoln "planned to ship the slaves back to Africa" should read this page which explores the facts regarding Lincoln's support of slave colonies.
Here in NC, if someone asks for a Coke they are going to get a Coke. If they wanted a Sprite but asked for a Coke, we'd call them an "idjit". One might ask "what sort of sodas do you have?" or "what sort of soft drinks do you have?". If they ask "What sort of Coke do you have?", the answer would be "regular or diet".
Oh... and Cheerwine ftw
I've always been secretly interested in stuff like this. Back in secondary school the slang was "a can". If you wanted a fizzy drink in a metal can you bought "a can". It could be Coca Cola, Dr. Pepper, 7up, whatever.
But after going college in a different county and then university in a different town/city I just call them what they are. A coke is a regular cola, Dr. Pepper is Dr. Pepper. My parents call it "pop", my grandparents use "cans". It's not an interesting thing to be interested in
.
I do agree that the average soldier didn't really care about slavery or any of the political issues of the day. That's been true throughout history. My point is that the political issues leading up to the war were due to slavery. Would new states be slave or free, slave states being outnumbered and outvoted, possible abolition of slavery if the northern states gained said majority, etc. The leaders of the southern states saw all this, and the secession movement started. I do agree that once the war started, all this went out the window. The root cause of secession, and the war, however, was states' rights to keep slavery. Oh yeah, and I really don't like that "War of Northen Aggression" thing. I hear it all the time around here. In case people forget, the first shots were fired by the southern troops when they fired on Ft. Sumter.
I do agree about the aftermath, however. Reconstruction led to a bitter resentment of the federal government and the North in general. These feelings continue to this day. Once it was over, it also led directly to things like sharecropping, Jim Crow laws, etc.
As I said before, the political reasons for the secession movement were heavily involved with slavery. The slavery question led directly to the secession movement. I still believe, however, that the states have every right to seceed. There is nothing in the Constitution saying that there is no leaving the Union. It's worse than the mafia: Once you're in, you can never leave or we'll kill you.
localoid is right. A lot of the talk of states' rights didn't spring up until after the war, when the whole idea of the Lost Cause became popular.
Yeah of course. Gaining numbers, voters and money. But wasn't Lincoln also the one that was against slavery?
I mean the war was after all mainly to abolish slavery, right? I doubt Lincoln had any intentions of doing whatever it took to gain the South's land and resources, as well as tax revenue and access to southern ports etc...
Lincoln was against slavery, yes. But he also didn't want to the Civil War to happen, even when it did. He tried several times telling the Confederate States that he would allow slavery if they would just get back into the Union. The Emancipation Declaration was an example of this.
He believed in ending slavery, but through political means and popular opinion, not using war.
I read it, nothing in that article contradicts what I said--Lincoln had planned for it, the plans were followed though on a voluntary basis even if Lincoln had a change of heart while holding political office. Abolitionism did not necessarily mean love for the slaves according to this same article as quoted here:
The point of abolition in that age wasn't centered around concepts of equal rights but fairer treatment of what were considered by some as little more than intelligent animals.
My quick story on moving from Ohio to rural Georgia. When we got here my father was looking for the DMV to have his drive's license updated. Asking around several people refereed him to the "new courthouse". This confused my father since the only courthouse he could find was built in the 1880s. Finally he wandered into the old courthouse and found the DMV was inside. He later asked one of the people who tried to send him the the "new courthouse" why they refereed to it that way when it was over 140 years old. The man, without a smile, pointed his toothpick at dad and said "because your General Sherman burned our old one to the ground."
Growing up in Ohio the civil war was part of history but down here, its still very much part of life and people seem to find ways to remind me that.
Growing up in Ohio the civil war was part of history but down here, its still very much part of life and people seem to find ways to remind me that.