You're viewing part of a thread.
I think you forgot what I said. This is what I said:
As someone who has spent many years in both South-Central and West-Central Indiana… What? We’re the South in all but name.
This literally means it is not the South.
You have turned this around to say that almost every part of the South is only the South in name because almost none of them past your purity test.
So you are but you are not.
These are conflicting statements. You either are, or are not. And Indiana is nowhere near the south. Even including Kentucky is debated. What you are is rural Mid-West.
No, I'm not but I'm not.
I'm not talking about geography. I'm not sure why that hasn't been clear to you this entire time.
I didn't think you were.
Then why were you talking about how specific states were not in the South as if it ended at a political border?
Either the South stops at the Kentucky/Tennessee line and stops again on the Georgia/Florida line or you're not talking about geography.
It can't be both.
Because you kept bringing it up.
I think you need to review the order of conversation here and what you have previously said, implying that crossing an imaginary political boundary that separates one state from another has some sort of relevancy.
I never said the borders of the states were the borders of culture. They are merely convenient units to show the breadth of a culture. In fact I split states several times once we got to drilling down at your request. And none of this makes Indiana part of Southern culture. It is firmly Mid-West and part of Ohio River Valley culture built through the 150 years or so the river was the main mode of transport. In fact it's this same culture that reaches down into Western Kentucky. Which is why Kentucky is only debatably southern, switching depending on which map you use.
How much time have you spent in Indiana and where did you go?
I'm not doxxing myself for Internet points.