American Nations: Part I
On America's Many Foundings
Welcome to my American Nations series. In these posts, I look at the history and politics of the United States through the lens of regional identity and ethno-nationalism. The series was inspired by my recent reading of the 2011 book by Maine journalist Colin Woodard. You’ll find Part I below; here are links for Part II; III; IV; V; VI; VII; and the Epilogue. Happy reading!
I was a patriotic kid growing up, so, naturally, the Fourth of July was one of my favorite holidays. After watching an All-American parade in town, our family would decamp to my grandparents’ house on a lake, where we’d shoot off fireworks and watch the Founding Fathers prance around in 1776. Thank God kids now have Hamilton. Even into high school, I’d force friends to endure dramatic readings of the Declaration of Independence. The country’s been roiled by fights over the nature of our founding in recent years; The 1619 Project offers a counter-history in which the real birth of the United States occurred in Jamestown with the importation of the first enslaved Africans to North America.
But what if they’re both wrong? What if neither 1776 nor 1619 marks the genesis of the U.S.? After all, historians now speak of several American Republics over the centuries. 1776 created a confederation of independent nation-states for the purposes of waging war, much like the E.U. today. 1787 strengthened that loose alliance into a sovereign federated republic under the Constitution. The Civil War and Reconstruction era constituted a Second Founding, with the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments remaking the nation in fundamental ways.
The New Deal and Civil Rights age resulted in a Third Republic, when an empowered Federal government enforced a still broader set of rights, and attempted to create a social democracy. One might argue we’re going through yet another founding, as the far-right destroys what was left of the New Deal consensus and even the gains of the Civil War. Should it cement its power in the coming years, the fascist movement underfoot will birth a Fourth Republic—an autocratic regime closer to the vision of Jefferson Davis than Abraham Lincoln.
And perhaps even four foundings aren’t enough. Colin Woodard’s American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America hit bookstores in 2011; after reading it last month, I believe it should be required of every American, young and old. It transformed my vision of the United States. Woodard, a journalist from Maine, covered ethnic conflicts in Europe for many years, including the Yugoslav civil war of the early ‘90s. He took his insights from those experiences and applied them on the United States. What he discovered is fascinating.
In lively prose packed with insight, Woodard argues that the primary source of the socio-political divisions in the United States today is not class, generation, or race. Not even the rural-urban divide. Rather, it's the ethno-national cultures specific to each region of North America (including Mexico and Canada). He derives this thesis from historian David Hackett Fischer’s 1989 tome Albion’s Seed, which traced the cultural contours of English settlers. Woodard expands Fischer’s approach and finds that there are at least eleven—and maybe as many as fifteen—different regional cultures spread over the continent. These enclaves spill across state lines and even international boundaries.
Each of these "nations" had its own "founding," with a specific set of European colonists arriving in a specific place at a specific time for a specific reason, bringing with them a unique ideology. This worldview encompassed attitudes toward government, religion, labor, gender, race, immigrants, and the relationship between the individual and the community. In other words, "thick" values that added up to a comprehensive vision of what makes for a "good" society. Here are Woodard’s capsule descriptions of each nation, in chronological order, along with its corresponding political ideology:
First Nation (15,000-20,000 years ago). Founded by the predominant indigenous peoples in Canada south of the Arctic Circle, today it consists of much of Yukon, Northwest Territories, Labrador, Nunavut, Greenland, the northern tier of Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta, northwestern British Columbia, and the northern two-thirds of Quebec. It has preserved much better its culture and customs than the Native Americans in the United States. This nation is the largest by landmass but the smallest by population (300,000). It is a highly communalistic, matriarchal, and egalitarian society, with little to no private property. It boasts a strong environmentalist ethic and direct democracy.
El Norte (Monterrey, 1560). The oldest of the Euro-American nations, El Norte dates back to the late sixteenth century, when the Spanish empire founded Monterrey, Saltillo, and other outposts in what are now the Mexican-American borderlands. Today this resurgent culture spreads from the current frontier for a hundred miles or more in both directions, taking in south and west Texas, southern California and the Imperial Valley, southern Arizona, most of New Mexico, parts of Colorado, and the six northernmost Mexican states. Most Americans are aware that the region is a place apart, where Hispanic language, culture, and societal norms dominate; few realize that among Mexicans, nortenos have a reputation for being more independent, self-sufficient, adaptable, and work centered than their central and southern countrymen. Long a hotbed of democratic reform and revolutionary settlement, various parts of the region have tried to secede from Mexico to form independent buffer states between the two federations. Today it resembles Germany during the Cold War: two peoples with a common culture separated from one another by a large wall. A centre-right Catholic region, its values are faith, family, and tradition. Present figures include former Mexican President Vincente Fox. Christian Democracy.
New France (Acadia, 1604-Quebec, 1608). Founded by an expedition led by Pierre Dugua, this nation grew to encompass the lower third of Quebec, north and northeast New Brunswick, and southern Louisiana. It envisioned a tolerant, utopian society, open to French Catholics and Protestants alike, coexisting in a friendly manner with the First nations. Instead of attempting to conquer and enslave them (like the Spanish) or drive them away (like the English), the New French intentionally settled near the indigenous peoples, learned their customs, and established trade and military alliances based on mutual respect. While they intended to assimilate the Natives peaceably, ultimately the French themselves became acculturated into the lifestyle, technology, and values of the First Nations, creating a new, hybrid culture that fused French and aboriginal customs. This region boasts the greatest degree of enlightened individualism—with high tolerance for homosexuality, women’s equality, and multiculturalism—and the least respect for “traditional” forms of authority of any nation. Bohemianism.
Tidewater (Jamestown, 1607). Built by the younger sons of southern English gentry, Tidewater was meant to reproduce the semi-feudal manorial society of the countryside they’d left behind, where economic, political, and social affairs were run by and for landed aristocrats. These self-identified “Cavaliers” largely succeeded in their aims, turning the lowlands of Virginia, Maryland, southern Delaware, and northeastern North Carolina into a country gentleman’s paradise, with indentured servants and, later, slaves taking the role of the peasantry. The region—which comprises the Chesapeake country of Virginia and Maryland, the lower two counties of Delaware, and much of eastern North Carolina—has always been fundamentally conservative, with a high value placed on respect for authority and tradition and very little on equality or democratic politics. This culture is vanishing from the stage, largely due to the expanding federal halos around D.C. and Norfolk. This region gave us George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison and their belief in class hierarchy and noblesse oblige. Contemporary figures include William F. Buckley and George H.W. Bush. Conservatism.
Yankeedom (Massachusetts Bay, 1620-30). Founded on the shores of Massachusetts Bay by radical Calvinists and touted as a new Zion, Yankeedom has always put great emphasis on perfecting Earthly society through social engineering, individual sacrifice for the common good, and the aggressive assimilation of outsiders. It prizes education, intellectual achievement, community (rather than individual) empowerment, and broad citizen participation in politics and government, the latter seen as the public’s shield against the machinations of grasping aristocrats, corporations, and other tyrannies. From its New England core, it has spread with its settlers across upper New York; the northern strips of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois and Iowa; parts of the eastern Dakotas; and on up into the upper Great Lakes states and Canada’s Maritime Provinces. You’ll find a remarkable concentration of venerable colleges and universities in this band, just one of the many legacies of its settlement history. Representatives include Eugene Debs and Sen. Bernie Sanders. Social Democracy/Democratic Socialism.
New Netherland (New Amsterdam, 1624). Established by the Dutch at a time when the Netherlands was the most sophisticated society in the Western world, this region has displayed the salient characteristics of 17th-century Amsterdam throughout its history: a global commercial trading culture—multiethnic, multi-religious, and materialistic—with a profound tolerance for diversity and an unflinching commitment to the freedom of inquiry and conscience. Like seventeenth-century Amsterdam, it emerged as a leading global center of publishing, trade, and finance, a magnet for immigrants, and a refuge for those persecuted by other regional cultures, from Sephardim in the seventeenth century to gays, feminists, and bohemians in the early twentieth. Not particularly democratic or concerned with great moral questions—it sided with the South on slavery prior to the attack on Fort Sumter—it nonetheless has found itself in alliance with Yankeedom in defense of a shared commitment to public-sector institutions and a rejection of evangelical prescriptions for individual behavior. Today it comprises greater New York City, including northern New Jersey, western Long Island, and the lower Hudson Valley. It’s a 21st-century city-state and North America’s most powerful and globalized city. This region boasts figures like Theodore Roosevelt and his cousin, Franklin Delano. Liberalism.
Deep South (Charleston, 1670). Established by slave lords from Barbados as a West Indies–style slave society, this region has been a bastion of oligarchic authoritarianism from the get-go—a punishing regime of gang labor, commercial agriculture, and state torture, where power was the privilege of the few, enslavement the “natural” lot of the many. From its original beachhead around Charleston, it spread apartheid across the southern lowlands, ultimately encompassing much of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida, and Louisiana, plus western Tennessee and southeastern portions of Arkansas, Texas, and North Carolina. Its racial caste system smashed by outside intervention during the Civil War, Deep South continues to fight for rollbacks of federal power, taxes on capital and the wealthy, and environmental, labor, and consumer safety protections. This part of the country has fought to display Confederate symbols—statues, flags—in public places. Figures include Jefferson Davis, George Wallace, and Donald Trump. Fascism/Christian Nationalism.
The Midlands (Philadelphia, 1682). America’s great swing region was founded by English Quakers, who believed in humankind’s inherent goodness and welcomed people of many nations and creeds to their utopian colonies on the shores of Delaware Bay. Pluralistic and organized around the middle class, the Midlands spawned the culture of Middle America and the Heartland, where ethnic and ideological purity have never been a priority, government has been seen as an unwelcome intrusion, and political opinion has been moderate, even apathetic. An ethnic mosaic from the start—it had a German rather than British majority at the time of the Revolution—it shares the Yankee belief that society should be organized to benefit ordinary people, but it rejects top-down government intervention. From its cultural hearth in southeastern Pennsylvania, southern New Jersey, and northern Delaware and Maryland, Midland culture spread through central Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois; northern Missouri; most of Iowa; southern Ontario; and the eastern halves of South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas. Values include civic organizations, neighborliness, and community relationships. Figures include Michael Sandel, Robert Putnam, and Jane Addams. Communitarianism.
Greater Appalachia (Donegal, PA, 1717). Founded in the early 18th century by waves of settlers from the war-ravaged borderlands of northern Ireland, northern England, and the Scottish lowlands, Appalachia has been lampooned by writers and screenwriters as the home of rednecks, hillbillies, crackers, and white trash. It transplanted a culture formed in a state of near-constant warfare and upheaval, characterized by a warrior ethic and a deep commitment to personal sovereignty and individual liberty. This pugnacious region harbors an intense suspicion of external authority—be it the lowland aristocracy or Reconstruction-era Yankee social engineers. Appalachia has shifted alliances based on whoever appeared to be the greatest threat to its freedom; since Reconstruction and, especially, the upheavals of the 1960s, it has been in alliance with the Deep South in an effort to undo the federal government’s ability to overrule local preferences. From its hearth in south-central Pennsylvania, it spread down the Appalachian Mountains and out into the southern tiers of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois; the Arkansas and Missouri Ozarks; the eastern two-thirds of Oklahoma; and on down to the Hill Country of Texas, clashing with Indians, Mexicans, planters, and Yankees along the way. This is the culture J.D. Vance and former Sen. Jim Webb wrote about, and the part of the country that says they’re “American” when census takers ask their ethnic ancestry. Right Libertarianism.
The Left Coast (Pacific Northwest, 1850s). A Chile-shaped nation wedged between the Pacific Ocean and the Cascade and Coast mountain ranges and stretching from Monterey to Juneau, the Left Coast is the unlikely result of two early colonization streams: merchants, missionaries, and woodsmen from New England (who arrived by sea), and farmers, prospectors, and fur traders from the Appalachian Midwest (who came by wagon). Yankee missionaries expended considerable effort to make it “a New England on the Pacific,” but were only partially successful: the Left Coast is a hybrid culture of Yankee idealism, faith in good government and social reform, and the Appalachian commitment to individual self-expression and exploration. The staunchest ally of Yankeedom and greatest champion of environmentalism, it battles constantly against Far Western sections in the interior of its home states. It’s a very successful combination: This thin strip of the world is home to most of the companies that dominate early 21st-century life: Apple, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and Facebook, just to name a few. Figures include Peter Thiel and Steve Jobs. Left Libertarianism/Anarcho Syndicalism.
The Far West (1870s): The other “second-generation” nation, this is the one part of the continent where environmental factors trumped ethnographic ones. High, dry, and remote, it stopped the Eastern cultures in their tracks and—with the Mormon exception—was only colonized via the deployment of vast industrial-scale resources: railroads, ore smelters, dams, and irrigation systems. As a result, settlement was largely directed and controlled by far-off corporations or the federal government, both of which exploited it as an internal colony, to the lasting resentment of its people. Far Western political leaders have focused public resentment on the federal government (on whose infrastructure spending they depend) while avoiding challenges to the region’s corporate masters, who retain near Gilded Age influence. The region encompasses nearly all of the interior West of the 100th meridian, from the northern boundary of El Norte to the middle reaches of Canada, including much of California, Washington, Oregon, British Columbia, Alaska, Colorado, Canada’s Prairie Provinces, and all of Idaho, Montana, Utah, and Nevada. No surprise this is where the militants who took over a national wildlife refuge in early 2016 came from, acted, and were found “not guilty” by local jurors. Figures include William Jennings Bryan and Barry Goldwater. Progressive/Reactionary Populism.
Greater Polynesia; Baja Florida; El Valley Central Del Sur; Newfoundland. Subsequent commentators have identified at least four additional nations. Hawaii, an independent kingdom until the U.S. annexed it via coup in the 1890s, is animated by the Aloha Spirit of Polynesia—peace, unity, humility and compassion. With its emphasis on kinship, the ethic of Aloha holds that citizens should be regarded with the utmost respect and care. Common ownership of property, redistribution of goods, and reciprocity characterized Polynesian society. Baja Florida encompasses the southern tip of Florida (with its Cuban ex-pat community) and extends through the former Spanish Caribbean, including the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico. It is a multicultural, multiracial, multiethnic melting pot. California’s Central Valley is a hybrid culture of El Norte and the Far West. And Newfoundland, in present-day Labrador, contains yet another distinctive regional identity.
Greater Africa (1619-1808). A major omission from Woodard’s book was any discussion of Africans and how they fit into these nations. But just last month, Fischer himself published a landmark study of their presence in early America entitled African Founders: How Enslaved People Expanded American Ideals. In it, he demonstrates—through deep archival research and ethnography—that Africans were brought to the Americas from distinct regions of their home continent, each with a unique culture. Far from constituting a uniform “Black” culture, they were as different from each other as the Euro-American nations were from themselves. Rather, the Euro-American nations imported Africans from specific regions, and these enslaved people fused their native customs and beliefs with that of the region they were brought to. This mutual exchange led to various syncretic, hybrid, distinctively American cultures. I just got the book, so stay tuned for more details.
Once a specific nation (after displacing the native peoples) created a self-sustaining community, its moral worldview set the "tone" there ever after. Its values became the dominant cultural force in the region. Its roots dive deep and exercise an enduring hold, their customs of thought and action reproducing themselves over time. Certain members in the region may not agree with the dominant culture, but they have to deal with its omnipresent influence. Even once the original members of the nation die out or are "replaced" by successive waves of immigrants, the culture they created lives on. Rather than change a nation, immigrants assimilate to the values of the region they move to. Within a generation, the newcomers act and think like the original settlers. Over time, Americans have reinforced these regional cleavages by moving to the nation that best suits their own values—what’s been dubbed “The Big Sort.”
For example, there are almost no Dutch left in New York City anymore. Yet the region still operates with their cultural value system: financial capitalism, ethnic pluralism, self-expression, cultural, scientific, and artistic flourishing, haphazard government, and machine politics. In essence, classical liberalism. Likewise with Yankeedom. The Puritans are long gone. But their utopian vision of using collective self-government to better society through education, civic bodies, and central planning endures. Any wonder why Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren—progressive utopians—both come from Yankeedom?
Woodard’s thesis has been subsequently proven through DNA analysis. And using the U.S. census data of 2020, the population figures for the various nations come out thus (with percentage of the population and growth since 2010 in parentheses).
Greater Appalachia: 61,533,060 (Percentage of U.S. population: 18.6%. Growth since 2010: 7.9%)
Yankeedom: 55,621,657 (16.8%. 3.00%)
The Deep South: 45,394,520 (13.7%. 9.3%)
Midlands: 35,738,282 (10.8%. 3.6%)
El Norte: 34,125,662 (10.3%. 6.2%)
Far West: 30,320,297 (9.2%. 10.4%)
Left Coast: 18,806,600 (5.7%. 9.8%)
New Netherland: 17,678,926 (5.35%. 6.2%)
Tidewater: 13,199,554 (3.9%. 9.00%)
Spanish Caribbean: 8,222,786 (2.5%. 10.6%)
First Nation: 6,790,000 (1.72%. 6.09%)
New France: 2,674,862 (0.81%. 3.4%)
Greater Polynesia: 1,455,189 (0.44%. 6.50%)
Greater Africa: TBD.
The advantage to this hermeneutic is that it bakes multiple factors into its analysis: class, race, religion, gender, etc. It also avoids moral judgments or monolithic narratives about the United States. There’s neither the nationalist myth of Trump’s 1776 Commission—in which America was born perfect and has gotten better ever since—nor the woke narrative of The 1619 Project, which transposes the racial vision of Tidewater and, especially, the Deep South onto all the other nations. Rather, it’s an empirical account that aims for descriptive accuracy and attends to complexity. Once you comprehend its taxonomy, you can read all of American history through its lens; you see how these various nations have sought to cooperate and oppose each other for cultural dominance. In my coming posts, I’ll summarize this history, and explore where we are today and what the future of these nations might hold. For now, just remember: July 4th is not our only founding.
New book in my list. Interesting lens to view the different regions. NYT just published an article about how the dems need to be more responsive to the more conservative factions with the party. This would help explain some of that.