Canada's Cultural Distinctness if Part of USA?

If Canada were annexed by the US sometime after 1781 and sometime before the middle of the nineteenth century, what would its culture be like, especially regarding sectionalism? Would Canada still have a "Canadian" identity, or would it devolve into a Newfoundlander, Quebecois, etc. identities?
 
Basically, no.The Maritimes would end up as connected to New England; Ontario would be proud of its Loyalist ancestry; the rest would be identical to the rest of the U.S.
 
Canadian identify as distinct from the US is something that many Canadians struggle with today. One could only imagine if Canada was never an independent country?

In reality I think there are certain North American regional commonalities.

There was a book in the 1980's called the 9 nations of North America

Ninenations.PNG


I disagree with the empty quarter as a couple large metro regions reside there currently.
 
The western parts of Canada would see an influx of settlers from the south, just as Alaska and the western United States did, in addition to settlers from the east and immigrants from other countries, so in the end, no, there wouldn't be any distinction between "Canada" and the areas south of it. The West Coast and the Upper Midwest would just go further north, while the rest would maintain unique identities (Ontario may or may not be seen as part of the Midwest, the Maritimes might be grouped in with New England or the Northeast, but Quebec and perhaps New England would remain distinctive). I could see the far north, including Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut, comprising a new regional identity along with Alaska - called The Far North, perhaps.
 
The easiest railroad routes from the East Coast to the Pacific Northwest go through Chicago and then north - I believe the easiest pass is Yellowhead. The easiest routes to Winnipeg likewise pass through Chicago. The only reason there are railroads between Toronto and the Prairies passing north of the Great Lakes is that Canada specifically subsidized them in order to have an all-Canadian transcontinental route.

This means that in any TL in which there's no international border at the Great Lakes, Winnipeg and points west end up settled by people coming in from south of the Great Lakes. So there wouldn't be anything Canadian about the identity of the people in those areas.

At the same time, there would be a lot of traffic between Ontario and Chicago. Really, Ontario would be one of several Eastern regions, alongside New England, New York, and Pennsylvania, feeding settlers into the Midwest. In the same manner that we see linguistic distinctions in the Midwest today stemming from New York vs. Philadelphia vs. Baltimore settlement, we would see an additional linguistic band for Ontario. Canadian raising would be widespread in Michigan.

Ontario would probably forget its Loyalist roots pretty quickly. I mean, does anyone in New York know that New York remained under British control throughout the war? Probably not. For one, how many New Yorkers have ancestors who were in the US in the 18c? The same question can be asked of Ontarians, too - Canada got a ton of immigration in the 19c, to say nothing of more recent immigration. A lot more immigration to Canada was British than to the US, but in a TL without a US/Canada distinction, this wouldn't be the case.
 
I'll assume somehow the USA wins big in 1812. Maybe intervention in the 1837 Canadian rebellions.

Ontario's Loyalist identity will probably remain in place a lot longer than the Maritimes', which will rejoin its New England kin in local feeling pretty quickly, to the extent these new Maritime states will probably even be called part of New England proper. The Maritimes' Loyalist bit I want to say will be like Rhode Island being a bastion of Quakerism - an interesting bit of history that is decidedly history in this world?

Ontario will join the Upper Midwest/Great Lakes culture, as PA_Dutch said, but will remain slightly more distinct due to the above Loyalism bit. However, the Upper Midwest/Great Lakes areas within OTL America were settled by New England, whilst Ontario was populated primarily by Mid-Atlantic Loyalists (Yankee Loyalists went mainly to the Maritimes) - this gives it a connection to the Ohio Valley/Lower Midwest which was also settled by the Midlanders/Quakers/Mid-Atlantic people. So you may have the Mid-Atlantic Midwest (Ohio River-touching areas), Yankee Midwest (Great Lakes touching areas), and Loyalist Midwest (Ontario), which blends the two with its Loyalist twist. I too also believe the Ontarian Loyalist identity will fade away into a historical thing, the way New York was once New Netherlands, Florida and east Texas were once Spanish, etc.

Alon made an interesting point, I suppose you could have *Ontarian settlers moving west to Winnipeg and beyond; but the Yankees who settled Minnesota, the Dakotas, and Montana may take up *Manitoba westward as well for their pioneering.

The American Pacific Northwest was already heavily settled by Yankees and they'd definitely move north into *British Columbia. We talk about New England-Maritimes connections, Midwest-Ontario ones, but IMO the Pac-NW is the most blurred of these Americo-Canadian blendings. Even more so then the Maritimes being part of 'Greater New England', we'll see the Pacific Northwest as a single ethnocultural region.

Quebec will become its own republic because American nativism will be strong in this period - no Catholics, no non-English-speaking peoples they can't overwhelm a la the Cajuns or Californios. Past being in American economic orbit, it'll be left alone by everyone, which suits it and America just fine.

TL;DR: The Maritimes and British Columbia will definitely meld into being 'Greater New England/Cascadia' seamlessly, while Ontario will blend into the Midwest but keep a bit of its own identity due to its Loyalist past. The Prairie Provinces will take in some Ontarian settlers but be mostly settled by Yankees a la Minnesota and the Dakotas as the Erie Canal and railroads are built.
 
Last edited:

Lateknight

Banned
It would basically be the same. Canada's basically just the U.S. anyway the Canada's are just want to be special that's why say different.
 
It would basically be the same. Canada's basically just the U.S. anyway the Canada's are just want to be special that's why say different.

Ha, ha, ha, ha.

No.

What is America but a Canada that split off from the Empire into republicanism, by contrast?

The Canadian provinces have genuine and very real regional cultural connections and sharings with the neighboring US states, but Canada's history has made it its own nation - and if the people feel different, well... that's called ethnogenesis.
 
Ha, ha, ha, ha.

No.

What is America but a Canada that split off from the Empire into republicanism, by contrast?

The Canadian provinces have genuine and very real regional cultural connections and sharings with the neighboring US states, but Canada's history has made it its own nation - and if the people feel different, well... that's called ethnogenesis.

Good points.

What we know of Canada now has its origins with the American Loyalists who fled after the Revolution. One could argue that Canadians are the true "americans" at least in terms to the Americans from the 17th to late 18th century.
 
So would there be a Canadian and American style football in the college and professional ranks?

Hopefully so, because Canadian Football is pretty fun to see.

New England and East Coast colleges play under one set of rules, then influence PA and OH.

Quebec and Ontario join together for their rules (OTL Canadian Football).

After that, who knows ...... maybe the Canadian rules are just played in Quebec, Ontario, and maybe the Maritimes, and Michigan (Michigan wants to be different than Ohio)

Ivy League rules (American football) are played everywhere else.
 
Top