One of the most original books I read in
the last year was “American Nations, a history of the eleven rival regional
cultures of North America” by Colin Woodard, a journalist living in Maine.
The thesis of the book is that the first European settlers in a given
part of the continent established the
prevailing cultural and
political norms for the area and
that subsequent immigrants, even those with very different
ethnic and religious backgrounds,
adopted the norms of
the original settlers. Although
the original settlers may have arrived 400 years ago in different parts of North America, their norms can, Woodard argues, be seen in
the voting patterns of different parts of North America to the
present day.
During my five
years as an Ambassador in the United States, I spent a lot of time studying the voting patterns of
different states and reading American history, and I have to say I find
Woodard’s thesis to be fully borne out by my own observations.
Among the eleven “nations” he identifies
are
an internationalist one around New York city, which still has the
internationalist bias of its original Dutch settlers,
a Yankee nation in New England and a northern belt going west to
Chicago, which is influenced by the Puritan and statist ideas of the original
settlers of New England
an Appalachian culture which is deeply suspicious of all authority in
church or state
a culture of the
Deep South influenced by slavery and its resultant class distinction
an Hispanic culture that
straddles the US /Mexican border
Power in the United States is influenced by
the shifting of the alliances between these different “nations”.
Another very interesting book I have just
completed is “Lloyd George and Churchill, Rivals for Greatness” by Richard
Toye.
Churchill and Lloyd George were both
Ministers in the last single party Liberal Government to hold office in
Britain. It held office from 1906 until it split, and was overthrown, in favour
of a National Government headed by Lloyd George during the First World War
Churchill and Lloyd George were both deeply
distrusted by their Ministerial colleagues, who saw both of them as too clever
by half. They were, and remained, close political friends, but were rivals as
well. They did not always speak well of one another in private.
Until the 1920’s, Lloyd George was the more
successful of the two. He also had more innovative thinking on economics in the
1930’s. Churchill had a better
understanding of the threat posed by the rise of Hitler. When Churchill became
Prime Minister in 1940, he wanted to bring a then elderly Lloyd George into his
Government, but the latter was pessimistic about Britain’s war prospects and
did not take up the challenge.
No comments:
Post a Comment