Years ago, I had a small argument with BrainGlutton.
I said the USA is not strictly a nation-state, in that the boundaries of ethnocultural identity and political identity were too disparate. (I still think this is true, BTW. A white American often sees a chicano as foreign and an anglophone Canadian as familiar.)
He said it was; that there’s a common culture across the country.
Well, maybe; in the sense that there is a political ruling class that expects to be in charge. Even the historically chicano state of New Mexico has a substantial sub-population of anglos, who even win political office.
But what is that common culture? Is it Ann Coulter’s “Anglo-Protestant” culture? I don’t think it’s that straightforward. The USA’s ruling class has multi-ethnic, multi-religious roots. But it is, well, kind of white, isn’t it?
It seems like there’s a dominant white, anglophone culture that want to go into any corner of the USA and take over. Hawai’i, with its preponderance of Japanese-Americans, avoids complete domination. But Louisiana, home of the Creole people and refuge of the Acadian? Dominated by white anglos. Nueva México? California? Poor Arizona? Overrun by even more sons of old Dixie.
Now and again someone will talk about how different states have different “cultures.” But the cultural divisions in the USA bear no resemblance to most state lines. (I say most. No surveyor separated Hawai’i, the ocean did.) So we have the farces of state governments and US Senators both representing the “different” states, while largely coming from a few common stocks.
A man “from” Maine had sons become governors of Texas and Florida! But they were all educated in Massachusetts, apparently!?
We have majority-minority districts in the US House of Representatives, and in state legislatures. But we don’t have (much in the way of) majority-minority states. (Again, Hawai’i is an exception.)
Maybe we should. Maybe we really, really should.
Let’s say (generously) that the dominant culture is about 75% of the populace, and rules 48 of the present states. (I’ll grant that Hawai’i and New Mexico are different.) OK, to get to parity, we have to flip some states, or add [del]16 states[/del] 14 states to reach 16. (That is, 48/3.) About six of these can be black-majority states carved out of present territory (say, the northern ends of the Deep South states). Eight or nine can be “Latin” states, and one or two can be “mixed but *not *predominated by whitebreads.”
I don’t have a map drawn up yet, I’m just blue-skying right now.
Now, “white Democrats” are probably going to complain about this like they complain about majority-minority districts. Something about dividing the working classes and costing them elections. Well, right now it looks like your coalition bled out on a street in north St. Louis County. So, tough.
Now, I know this board. Every response will be a variation of, “No, you imbecile.” But I want you to *defend *your answers.