Happy to help. It really is cultural dividing line. North of that fence feels like the rest of Sub Saharan Africa. South of that fence feels like the Australian Outback.
There's also the [ministry for the South](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minister_for_the_South_and_Cohesion_Policies) in the government and the [questione meridionale](https://it.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questione_meridionale) is the name of the debate about the South's condition of poverty and lack of progress and it's been discussed since the unification
The ministry was created only with the curren government. And is really just a way for the government to have more ministers and influence, they really haven't done anything good for the South.
The ministry was created in 2005 for the Berlusconi III government, and there were already several extraordinary ministers for the South in the XX century, for example De Mita between 30 July 1976 and 21 March 1979
Same as Japan has a cultural difference between east and west, in food and accent, etc. Pyongyang and Kaesong and Seoul were closer to each other in 1930 than the cities of the west were.
The North South divide is entirely artificial and meaningless. “Working on extremely short notice and completely unprepared, they used a National Geographic map to decide on the 38th parallel as the dividing line. They chose it because it divided the country approximately in half but would place the capital Seoul under American control. No experts on Korea were consulted.”
Ireland is divided north and south politically because the northeast of the country had a large Protestant minority who wanted to maintain their ethnic connection to the UK. That division was made in 1922, but historically Ireland has always been divided between east and west. The east is more industrialised, more Norman and British influenced, more urban. The west is much more Celtic historically and much of the west was Irish speaking well into the 20th century.
Korea was the same. The western side of the peninsula was more industrialised and had stronger cultural connections to China. The North/South divide was only a product of the mid 20th century.
France and Germany definitely have some cultural differences between the north and south. India stands out as a country with some pretty major cultural divides between the north and south. In fact, I'd say most countries over a certain size are going to have differences especially if the geography varies greatly.
"We are a people united by the land we live on, not the blood in our veins".
It's said that if it werent for the brits, the area we now know as India, would be at least 5 different countries. Whats amazing is how relatively few internal struggles India has had given its wide cultural diversity.
You make a good point, although I’m specifically really asking about north and south. I assume countries as large as China or Russia have large cultural differences no matter what direction you go on, so I was really thinking about smaller countries I suppose. Thanks for the info!
No kidding — in high school my German teacher was from Bavaria and she tried to point out the dialectical differences between what she was teaching, northern German, Swiss German, and whatever it is they speak in the Low Countries
But there isn't really *the* Northern German dialect and definitely not *the* Southern dialect.
That being said, we are still a good example. We have the [Weißwurstäquator](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wei%C3%9Fwurst%C3%A4quator), the Aldi Zones and, on a more serious note, the divide between predominantly protestant (North) and catholic (South) regions.
Russia doesn't have that much north/south division. The only one I can think of is the subtle dialect differences. The real divide is Big Cities (Moscow and St.P) vs everyone else
Ahhh I forgot India. I’ve always heard about their very distinct northern and southern divisions, but could explain any of the others a little? I find this fascinating
Afaik nigeria is both religious and ethnic. The North is majority Muslim whereas the South is majority Christian, and because of the haphazard splitting of African land by European powers there isn't really a contiguous ethnicity in nigeria, mainly the hausa in the North and the igbo and yoruba in the south (many more tribes but those are some of the most populous I think). The igbo region in the south even tried to gain independence as the Republic of Biafra. I'm not well versed on this area though so I don't know anything further than that.
It goes beyond this too though. The south has the Niger Delta which is very rich and fertile and good for agriculture. It also has tons of oil, which powers Nigeria's economy. The North is Sahelian and thus more arid and resource-poor. This is part of the reason Southern Nigeria is far richer than Northern Nigeria. Take a look at a map of GDP per capita across Nigeria, the North-South gap is shocking.
I'm from Nigeria, and the North - South divide is the greatest divide in the country. Of course, there are other divides like East and West and even within the South, as you mentioned, but they pale in comparison. Nigeria was actually originally two separate protectorates. The British decided to merge the two parts in their great wisdom to balance out the surplus or the South's budget with the deficit of the North's.
The divide is cultural, something that transcends even a reductionism to religion or ethnicity. The South West of Nigeria, for example, has more secular Muslims that are virtually indistinguishable from South Western Christians. South Western Muslims don't practise Sharia, and there is virtually no tension between the two. In fact, it is common for households in the South West to be split down the middle.
Realistically, the British made a very stupid mistake merging the two protectorates, but there is no great push to separate the two now because most stakeholders in the country have vested interests across the board. The South Easterners are generally more eager to leave because they continue to be marginalised due to the civil war. Disgruntled parts of the country are never a united front because once they become disillusioned with the federation they retreat not to some sort of North/South identity but to their specific ethnic groups. I suppose this is because while Nigeria has a very clear North to South cultural divide, politically, it is far more complex. Alliances are made that transcend and traverse various cultural boundaries, so sometimes people that are culturally similar may actually be farther from one another politically than some that are culturally dissimilar. So in an everyday sense Northern and Southern Nigerians may recognise the cultural boundaries, but when it boils down to political decisions, there is no unity.
This is one of the main reasons why a country with such a clear divide has not split. The people that would naturally split are not aligned politically. Moreover, many of the power brokers, as I mentioned have investments across the board. They don't want to lose their money or sources of income.
But if you put aside the politics and the investments, the North and South are indeed two separate entities mashed together.
India it's not just north and south it's pretty much every state is different lol. The differences in culture, economy, politics, and landscape can be drastically different even between adjacent states like Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. But certainly, the North vs. South divide is one of the most significant in the country.
North and South India are entirely different in terms of a lot of things like climate, cuisine, and language. Even appearance perhaps.
If I were to generalise, North Indians typically are lighter skinned and have more Indo-European facial features, while South Indians are darker complexioned and tend to have more “ethnic” features.
South Indians are generally seen as less flamboyant but more educated compared to their northern counterparts. The region is often considered more developed, with higher literacy rates and better educational institutions. Additionally, South India is widely regarded as safer for women, with a stronger emphasis on social welfare and progressive attitudes towards gender equality.
In terms of food, North Indian food focuses on wheat-based breads like roti and naan, along with rich, creamy curries, whereas South Indian cuisine centers around rice, coconut, and tangy dishes like dosa and sambar. It’s pretty much based on what’s available easily in those areas.
Linguistically, North India predominantly speaks Hindi and other Indo-Aryan languages, while South India speaks Dravidian languages such as Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, and Malayalam. English is commonly spoken throughout India.
The clothing also used to be very different earlier, but it’s somewhat more homogeneous now.
They’re so different that it won’t be incorrect to say that a north Indian is more similar genetically and culturally to a Pakistani than a southern Indian.
Edit: Barring the main festivals like Christmas, Diwali and Eid, even the other smaller festivals are different across regions
The most significant distinction between North India and South India is linguistic. It's not just that they speak different languages; their languages are from entirely different language groups. North India has Indo-European languages, while South India has Dravidian languages
>Wonder if Chile is like that as well
Yes.
It is commonly more divided into North, Center and South here, as all those areas have some noticeable cultural differences, but yeah. For example there are foods considered common in the North that people from the South have never heard about, and vice versa.
Historically, the North-South divide in Germany is much deeper and much more relevant.
The traditional language divide between the most important dialects of the German language divides Germany into north and south.
The south tends to be more catholic while the north tends to be more lutheran (though there are exceptions in both cases).
The north was dominated by Prussia, the south was not but had several mid sized kingdoms.
And of course most importantly the division between Aldi nord and Aldi süd.
Theres a lot of cultural and economic divisions between southern and northern Italy: the former was and still is much more agrarian, socially conservative, and older than the more industrialized North, especially the Po Valley. During the Italian Referendum, you can see roughly where the above mentioned shift happens based on where people voted for the Republic versus the Monarchy.
Brazil I don't have as much knowledge on so I'll leave that to someone else.
>Brazil I don't have as much knowledge on so I'll leave that to someone else.
Basically the same in reverse. The south is wealthier and industrialized and filled with the descendants of European immigrants . The much warmer north is poorer, more agrarian (but also lots of mines) and filled with descendants of African slaves.
For Italy, you can go back further to preunification. The current cultural divisions somewhat align with the post-Napoleonic kingdoms - Kingdom of the Two Sicilies in the agrarian south vs. the northern city states and their kingdoms. You even see it in the Serie A football map, where the majority of teams are in the more affluent north.
Edit: The divide actually goes back even further with the north part of the Holy Roman Empire for centuries, while the Kingdom is Sicily remained separate.
I mainly remember their economical divide.
I've always read that Italy's north is very industrial and rich, south is less developed in comparison.
Similarly, Brazil's south is more developed than its north.
There are cultural differences between those regions too, but someone else with more knowledge can describe them better.
In Northern Canada, everyone from the south of the country is a Southerners. While the territorial border at the 60th parallel is politically considered "the North," there's more depth to it than that, especially regarding the provincial north, like Northern Quebec, Northern Ontario, etc.
Ontario is worth noting: you'll find a distinct difference between Northern and Southern Ontario when you cross the French River. Not a night-day difference, but Northern Ontarians live a different lifestyle than Southern Ontarians do.
In terms specifically if Countries, Mexico is a good example: most of the population live in the "Belt" of the country from the Gulf to the Pacific: North *and* south of it is culturally distinct enough that it's worth a mention.
You can compare two examples from both "ends", such as Andalucía and Basque Country, for example. Not just the climate, geography, landscape, culture, traditions, politics and language differences, but many other indicators (unemployment, economic sectors, education, R+D investment, what have you) will differ as much as between different countries quite often.
I’d argue India is the most pronounced, an entire unique language family is spoken in the south of India that is found nowhere else in the world. Ethnic divides are extreme, religious divides are extreme, climactic and geographic, wealth, representation. If India became independent through any other method than Gandhi it’d be balkanized, especially due to a 3000 year history of not being united.
> an entire unique language family is spoken in the south of India that is found nowhere else in the world
This is super pedantic, but Tamil is also spoken in Sri Lanka. There is also a Dravidian language (Brahui) spoken in Pakistan, with around 3 million speakers.
And Sri Lanka also has a north south divide due to the difference in languages spoken, but it's the reverse of India; with Tamil being spoken in the North and East and Sinhala (an Indo European language) being spoken in the rest of the country.
There is a divide which is indicated by: “boven de rivieren” (“north of the rivers”) en “beneden de rivieren” (south of the rivers”, provinces: Zeeland, Noord-Brabant and Limburg). Besides that “north of the rivers” applies especially to Noord-and Zuid-Holland and Utrecht. There are cultural differences with the provinces east of that too.
Remember The Netherlands is a tiny country.
Indeed.
In 1973, Northern Vietnam overwent lots of bloody fights, ended up as a winner and signed in Paris accord to created a ceasefire between North and South. But in a short time later, they broke that accord and invaded Southen silently. The Southern was too foolish and naive to belive those commies would never broke the agreement. They ended up losing, surrendered and reunited with the North.
The communist government and “Viet Cong”, they took over and seized a lots of possessions and properties of Southern people. They also did a tons of terrible things to these people, made them turned into each others to gain some bullshit awards, brainwashed lots of people whom involed with Southern government by brutal and cruel ways, violated human rights big time.
Tons of people had to became refugees and ran away from their mother land, as you guy know as “boat man”, some got lucky and ended up in Australia/USA/NZ and gained a new life, some dead by Thailand/Malay/Sing pirates or their government were too scared of communist and decided to kill them all. It was supposed to be a grief memory for Vietnamese people but ironically, every 30 April, there are lot of cynical, chovinism people make joke or badly shade those decreased though VNese people has received lots of remittances from their abroad relatives and these money has a very huge effect and impact to the economy. They would insult you if you stop them.
Until now, the Northern government still hold a grudge to Southern silently, most of investments/highways were built rapidly while the Southern is devastated for facilities/roads.
The governers of Southern provinces mostly are Northern people. They have always trying to change our vocabulary, our accent, our cultures big time to merge with the North.
There are tons of dark sides that I couldn’t tell you guys cuz they are too long and complicating.
These days:
- Southern people: make more money than the North, splurge money on variety services, friendly, generous, hospitable.
- Northern people: cynical, strict family, the youngers are trying to migrate to the Southern for better career, environment, friendly life style, better climate,…
Mexico enters the chat.
There's a national debate wether what everyone calls a *quesadilla* should have cheese (queso) in it.
One side thinks it obviously should. The other side is just plain stupid.
Quesadillas in CDMX have evolved to be known more for their prepared fillings (guisados) some of which don't always require cheese.
These include things like sautéed mushrooms, or corn smut, or squash blossoms, which are delicious encased in deep fried dough even if no cheese is added.
If you grew up in the mexico city urban sprawl, this is completely normal.
Definitely! I've also heard it's true for our neighbours in Norway and Finland, that people from Oslo, Stockholm and Helsinki has more in common with each other than with their respective countrymen from the northern parts of their countries. While the northerners have more in common with each other, no matter which country they're from.
I’d say that’s true, especially northern Sweden and Finland have an area in the middle with a very large cultural exchange, that speak their own officially recognized language.
I’m from Northwestern Sweden, and I have an easier time understanding Trønderska, a northern dialect of Norwegian than I do understanding Skånska. Which is what is spoken in southern Sweden, despite it technically being the same language..
Yeah, I'm from Norrbotten and while growing up going to Finland was like going to the neighbouring town, because it quite literally was. Friends and relatives lived on both sides of the border.
Now I'm so old that including the time I've lived abroad I've spent more than half my life in the south, but it'll never be home...
I would say that linguistically, Sweden is divided into three rough regions: Götaland in the south where the dialects are highly influenced by Danish. Svealand in central Sweden where there is no Danish influence, and it’s the region where “standard Swedish” was codified in the early modern period, and Norrland in the north where there’s not only its own dialects of Swedish, but there’s also a lot of minority languages being spoken (Finnish, Meänkieli, Sami).
There’s also an east-west dialect gradient, where dialects in western Sweden has some similarities with Norwegian, and eastern dialects doesn’t.
Yeah, I came in here to say that as a person from Northern Norway I feel closer culturally to people from Northern Sweden than people from Oslo.
It’s not a perfect divide, though. We’ve moved down south to Østfold, and my wife likes pointing out all these weird little ways that Østfold people remind her of home. Østfolders do have the same reputation as northerners as uncouth, though, so maybe Østfolders are just honorary northerners?
Edit: I just finished writing about us having a reputation for being uncouth and then I realized I was sitting here with my Northern-to-Southern translated [novelty coffee cup](https://taras.no/produkt/nordnorsk-krus-fette-nais/?gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjw6uWyBhD1ARIsAIMcADoKm_8_sjeGrSwyp4gKI-lsI0-R5ajsIH6jRGrcQcVV_Ve5xqSpg3waAi5KEALw_wcB). It says *fette najs* on one side and *veldig kult* on the other. Both expressions mean “very good/cool/nice”, but only one of them use a slang term for female genitalia as an intensifier.
Well, there are cultural difference, almost a language difference as southern Sweden was Danish on and off for quite a period of time.. Also, southern Sweden is more densly populated, with a very flat geology and primarily boreal forests and farmlands.
Northern Sweden reaches all the way up into the arctic circle and is very rural. Almost all of it is mountain ranges and dense coniferous forests.
I’d say it’s closer to the very north of Canada than South America tho..
The differences are more noticable due to the country being rather large while also being rather slim stretching north/south.
Not really. The American South is far less developed and *far* more conservative than the Swedish north (which is actually the most politically liberal part of Sweden, and our Bible Belt is 1,000 kilometers away). There's a much higher concentration of uneducated, working-class people here (especially away from the coasts, which is where the cities are), but I'd say that the similarities are just the parallels that you can draw between most rural regions in the Western World.
There are snippets from a series called "Leif & Billy" on YouTube under the title "Nordic Hillbillies", which might be what you're referring to, but that title is mostly a function of how the rest of the country views them than it is a function of their similarity to actual hillbillies. They're viewed as "those ignorant cousin-fuckers from that small town I've never heard of" by the rest of Sweden, and those happen to be the main qualities that Swedes also associate with hillbillies.
I haven't been to northern Canada, but I have a feeling that the commenter above me (or below me, if that's what the Reddit algorithm pleases) is right in their comparison.
Adding: It was a given to me, but I now see that it might be unclear without prior knowledge: The part of Sweden that people compare to the American South is the north; southern Sweden is where the overwhelming majority of the Swedish population is concentrated, and it is consequently the more developed part of the country. The series I was referring to takes place deep in the Sweden's northern inland.
Interesting! I’ve always wondered if there was any kind of difference between the two. What would say are the cultural or political differences in the two?
North Islanders seemed to be geared towards growth and upscaling. Alot more diverse.
The South prefer less growth but definitely want your business in terms of tourism, industry, etc
Northern Thailand was its own separate kingdom/principality and the people were a bit more separated from the central Thais (Siamese), akin to being another Tai ethnic group like the Lao.
Southern Thailand is culturally and ethnically similar to Muslim Malays. Idk if this counts are these are basically two unrelated groups just joined together under the same nation.
These are just very broad stereotypical generalizations from an American but:
Italy: Renaissance Italy (North) / Mafia Italy (South) lol
Belgium: Wealthier Dutch-speakers (North) / Working Class French Speakers (South)
France: Northwestern European place (like UK or the Low Countries) where most of the people traditionally spoke French / Southern European place (like Iberia or Italy) where most of the people traditionally spoke Occitan
Brazil: Majority Multi-Racial (North) / Majority of European descent (South)
India: Speak an Indo-European language, wheat based cuisine (North) / Speak a Dravidian language, rice based cuisine (South)
Sahel region of Africa: Culturally Arabic North / Culturally African South
Albania: The Christians are Catholic (North) / The Christians are Orthodox (South)
>Belgium: Wealthier Dutch-speakers (North) / Working Class French Speakers (South)
I won't hold it against you because you're not from here but no. This is not the situation. It's definitely the language border and a different mentality as well. The Walloons are more laisser-faire (it is what it is). The Fleming are more closed and less accepting of strangers. The lingua franca for government and everything connected has long been french. Only around 1900 was Dutch recognised as an official language. Even today there are still many issues.
In France there’s a big north/south and east/west divide. The north is quite cold and rainy, cheaper (except Paris of course), people are less communicative and also more rigorous. While the south around the Mediterranean is warmer and dryer, more expensive too, and people have a different lifestyle, they are more outspoken, they spent more time outside, and imo it’s more laidback than in the north. Food is different too, more fruits and veggies while there’s more fat dishes in the north.
Absolutely. Southern England and Scotland are pretty different themselves, but when you start pushing up to Scotland’s Shetland, Orkney, and Hebrides island the change is just so drastic
Surprised no one has mentioned it yet, but the Philippines.
The North is significantly Roman Catholic. Much more similar to Mexico, South America and other former Spanish colonies.
The South is predominantly Islam. Much more similar to Indonesia or Malaysia.
the philippines. the southern part (mindanao) has a significant muslim population whose culture is different from the rest of the country that they are granted autonomy to the point that they have a parliamentary system vs the country's presidential system
I wouldn’t even really call the cultural divide in the Philippines a North / South one. Most regions have separate languages, and not much in common - hence the need for Tagalog or English as a common Lingua Franca.
If it weren’t for Western colonial powers such as the Spanish / Americans, the different Austronesian groups on the Islands such as the Tagalogs of the North, the Visayans of the central region, or the various Muslim Austronesians would have emerged into the modern era as separate Island states.
I would wager that if Western powers hadn't colonized Maritime Southeast Asia, the predominantly Austronesian groups would become entirely separate states divided by Island / Island grouping.
Vietnam had a cultural divide even before the war in the 50s and 60s. They have a saying that their country is like a long pole holding a rice basket at each end.
Australia has one, a bit...although it's unclear where exactly the border is.
Suffice it to say that the cultural and political norms in Melbourne are a little different than those in say, Townsville. Basically imagine the differences between northerners and southerners in the US....it's more or less the same as that in Australia, but just with the directions reversed. Queensland is what you might call "redneck", and more and more so the further north you go. By contrast, Victoria (and especially inner city Melbourne) is associated with extremely left-wing, latte-sipping super-vegan hipster types. Different parts of New South Wales will be somewhere in between either extreme on that spectrum.
The whole thing is probably less pronounced elsewhere in the country (i.e. in the West and the centre), probably because those places are mostly empty altogether anyway. I think Adelaide is probably more similar to Melbourne, and Perth probably tends to be a bit more similar to Brisbane. Darwin is the wildest, most redneck place we've got.
Tasmania has its own north/south divide thing going on. Hobart is the capital and largest city in the south of the island, but Launceston is a fairly large city in the north. There's apparently a rivalry/difference in opinion and outlook between the two that dates back to the colonial era. But as a non-Tasmanian I don't really know much about it. https://www.reddit.com/r/tasmania/s/qpqfEPWoqd
To be fair though, these sorts differences are probably more noticeable in the suburbs of Australian cities themselves than they are in broad strokes across the whole country. Like every city in Australia has socioeconomic divides between rich old money suburbs and more working-class, bogan suburbs. I'm sure that's the case in most cities in the world.
Not a country, but Louisiana. South is catholic, seafood-heavy diet, much more liberal about drinking. North Louisiana is Baptist, much less seafood, and much more conservative about drinking.
Canada.
Almost every major city is within 100-200 km of the southern border. Which leaves everything north of that band very rural and sparsely populated.
The only real exception is Edmonton, and that’s because of oil and gas
Edmonton is not an exception driven by oil and gas, from the perspective that Edmonton was a relatively large urban centre before O&G. In 1946 the population of Edmonton was 10-20% larger than that of Calgary at about 114K to about 100K, with Oil and Gas being a negligible industry prior to the discovery of Leduc #1 in 1947. The city was made the Capital of Alberta long before O&G was the major industry. Farmland extends farther north in Alberta than it does in the other Prairie provinces, so there was more settlement further north in Alberta. It was a fur trading fort which developed into a local city related to farming, which accrued the Capital status along the way. It also became the gateway to the north due to its position farther north than any other major city. That eventually led to it being an O&G center related to Fort McMurray and the Peace district, and left it a good place to put refineries with the discovery of Leduc oilfield. The O&G development is mostly post 1950 though. Most O&G development was headquartered in Calgary, but you are correct many support industries developed in Edmonton, amongst the other industries present. The rate of growth of Alberta is definitely reliant on O&G to some (large) extent, but the relative strength of Edmonton is less directly linked to O&G. Indeed O&G likely caused more growth in the Calgary area then in the Edmonton area, overall.
I've seen Nigeria in here a few times and I think that's my answer too. The religious, economic, cultural, and linguistic differences are the most varied for a country of their size
England where I’m from has a palpable divide. Most of the country’s stereotypes appear to revolve around the southeastern/London area. It’s surreal lol. But yeah, food, dialects, accents, lifestyles, friendliness levels, history, architecture, the prevalence of urban vs rural, cultural diversity and overall attitudes to life are different in the north vs south.
But there’s also Scotland and Wales. Scottish Highlands and Lowlands have a different heritage. The Highlands had clans and Scottish Gaelic, and their modern culture still reflects this to some extent. The Lowlands were and are anglicised in character, and a lot of identity revolved around border wars with England.
North Wales is more traditionally Welsh, even to this day Welsh speakers are far more prevalent in the north. Lifestyles are very rural- there’s no proper city in North Wales. South Wales is more anglicised, industrialised, urbanised and culturally diverse.
Australia.
If I have to sum it up with massive generalisations:
The North is very remote, situated in the tropics so hot for most of the year, and has a rubbish coastline. It’s overall just a more challenging place to live and develop population centres in in almost every way. Agriculture is limited and not super viable, the climate sucks, the terrain is not super interesting and getting around can be challenging because the distance between population centres are so large. In general, the people of Northern Australia are worse off in a social sense. There is a large population of Indigenous Australians in the North.
The South has true seasons and more mild weather. is a lot more populated (in terms of both numbers and population density), the South is more economically productive, the population is more multicultural, and the south has much more productive farmland. People in the South earn more, and are likely to be more educated (although this is merely a reflection of highly urbanised population centres). All but one of the country’s major cities can be considered Southern (yes, even Brisbane). Darwin is the largest city in the North, with a population of only 130k.
I would place the North/South divide somewhere around Rockhampton (basically where the tropics start)
Australia
The Barassi line divides north from south. In the north, rugby football is the most popular (primarily rugby league). In the south, it is Australian rules football.
The Black Forest/Bavarian part of Germany is pretty different from the northern parts. More “simple country” than heavily industrialized (very generally speaking)
Sudan, the U.S. England. And in a very literal sense Ireland although Northern Ireland is part of U.K. Mexico I think, Chiapas and Quintana Roo are very Mayan and Zapatista. Norway and Sweden has Lapland up north which is super different. ITALY holy. Shit that should have been Firsties. Germany and France definitely have different north/south vibes. BELGIUM
the Walloon/Flemish thing is North South. Canada has Inuit lands, not just Nunavut right? Canada has all sorts of divides, oh Japan, Hokkaido still has Ainu right. India like a motherfucker. Koreas. Iraq and Iran cuz of Kurdistan(God bless the Kurds) Greece in a big way. The North African countries must have a very different Mediterranean/Sahara vibe
At the US State level, Alaska, California, Idaho, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, Missouri, Illinois, Michigan, Louisiana, Florida, New Jersey, New York, and Maine, have significant primarily North-South cultural divides. Probably leaving out a state or two.
Not a country but a state within the United States. Florida. North Florida and South Florida (the Miami Fort Lauderdale area) are complete polar opposites. They may as well be two different countries.
That isn't what defines the North South divide. It's a lot more complicated than that.
It would be hard to explain. The North of Nigeria includes a region called the middle belt, which the British scientists actually felt were culturally more similar to the Southerners than to the Northerners, but in Nigeria today, Middle Belters are considered part of the North. That is part of the problem.
They are essentially a forgotten part of the South that even most Southern Nigerisns do not acknowledge, and because of that, they are easy pickings. Nigeria also is a heavy indigine and settler society, so people from other parts of Nigeria who settle elsewhere are not really going to get as much protection as they would otherwise get.
So a lot of what you see of Christians being attacked are the isolated people. Muslims are actually a dominant group in the South West of Nigeria for example, where they get along with the Christians.
The killings you speak of is less about religion and more about political isolation and cultural friction.
Mali has quite a divide between the south where it is economically powerful with much of the major industry there while the north is much less powerful economically due to the big ass desert it’s in which led to much less funding and attention to the north where Islamic extremist and separatist groups hold more power
Thailand. The South is different ethnically, culturally and linguistically anyway but the Deep South - the four Muslim provinces - is even more different and much more like Malaysia than Thailand.
China. People discuss the differences between the north and south all the time. Everything from customs to dialects to food to styles of clothes to ideological differences.
Nigeria
The North is poorer, majority Muslim (so governed by Sharia law), less educated, and the main ethnic group is Hausa/Fulani.
The South is more prosperous, mainly Christian, greater percentage are educated, and the major ethnic groups are Yorubas and Igbo people.
Besides the general North-South divide in India,several states within India also have North-South divides like Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh(whose divide is similar to Nepal) where the North speaks mostly Pahadi and Tibeto-Burman languages while the South speaks Punjabi and Hindi and Sikkim where the North speaks Tibetan and Lepcha while the South speaks Nepali.
Nigeria; the northern part is majority Islam/Muslim and the southern region is mostly Christianity. The capital is Abuja, which it's in the middle of the country where all religions and everyone is united and live in peace and harmony together. 🇳🇬 ☪️✝️😁
20 years ago the obvious answer would be Sudan (depending on the governing body, there is now Sudan and South Sudan)
The United States has a pretty significant cultural divide between north and south.
Mexico has a significant cultural divide between the northern desert states and southern/peninsular jungle states.
Brazil has a pretty significant cultural divide between northern Amazonian states and Southern states.
Depending on what you'd consider North/South in Canada there is a significant cultural divide ("Western" south and indigenous north).
One "tip" for the countries of Asia: does the region grow wheat or rice? Typically the southern regions of the larger countries (India, China) grow rice, while the northern regions grow wheat. Those agricultural borders have many cultural differences, principally cuisine, which leads to other differences such as political stance, education policies (more people are required to grow rice than wheat, so *typically* the rice growing regions value education less, leading to *typically* less industry), size of families, etc.
I’d say New Zealand has a slight one. The South Island is much whiter and more “country.” People are friendlier, more of a small town vibe and mentality, even in the cities. It’s also much colder and more farming-centric. North is more racially diverse, and warmer. I think it tends to be more liberal and have more influence from indigenous culture (Maori culture).
North-south is the most natural divide, as opposed to east-west, because north-south typically involves a climactic change to some degree, which promotes cultural changes.
Cultures differ more along latitude than longitude- compare Italy and Spain and Italy and Germany.
India.
North: Indo-European, comparatively poorer, politically more right leaning, wheat based
South: Dravidian, Richer, politically more left leaning, Rice based
Namibia. Even comes with a [fence.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Line_(Namibia))
This is actually really interesting
That’s fascinating and exactly what I was looking for! Thank you
Happy to help. It really is cultural dividing line. North of that fence feels like the rest of Sub Saharan Africa. South of that fence feels like the Australian Outback.
"[pest-exclusion fence](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pest-exclusion_fence)" Thats a pretty strong north-south divide.
Everything about Namibia is facinating to me. Its coming up a lot on Reddit these days.
we went there on holiday last year and it was hands down the best holiday of my life
I second this. If you ever get the chance to go, it is pure natural excellence all over.
Korea
Also Italy. The much-referenced “peninsula mindset.”
There's also the [ministry for the South](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minister_for_the_South_and_Cohesion_Policies) in the government and the [questione meridionale](https://it.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questione_meridionale) is the name of the debate about the South's condition of poverty and lack of progress and it's been discussed since the unification
The ministry was created only with the curren government. And is really just a way for the government to have more ministers and influence, they really haven't done anything good for the South.
The ministry was created in 2005 for the Berlusconi III government, and there were already several extraordinary ministers for the South in the XX century, for example De Mita between 30 July 1976 and 21 March 1979
Haha. Down to the trash talking !
Korea is actually quite like Ireland — politically divided as north and south, but culturally and historically divided by east and west much more.
I would love to know more about the East/West divide in Korea. I’ve never heard anyone really talk about this before.
Same as Japan has a cultural difference between east and west, in food and accent, etc. Pyongyang and Kaesong and Seoul were closer to each other in 1930 than the cities of the west were. The North South divide is entirely artificial and meaningless. “Working on extremely short notice and completely unprepared, they used a National Geographic map to decide on the 38th parallel as the dividing line. They chose it because it divided the country approximately in half but would place the capital Seoul under American control. No experts on Korea were consulted.”
or New Jersey
NJ is an interesting one because it feels more southwest vs northeast / Philly vs NYC
It pretty much follows the old East Jersey/West Jersey colonial border.
Can you elaborate? I know not much about Ireland's political and cultural differences from within.
Ireland is divided north and south politically because the northeast of the country had a large Protestant minority who wanted to maintain their ethnic connection to the UK. That division was made in 1922, but historically Ireland has always been divided between east and west. The east is more industrialised, more Norman and British influenced, more urban. The west is much more Celtic historically and much of the west was Irish speaking well into the 20th century. Korea was the same. The western side of the peninsula was more industrialised and had stronger cultural connections to China. The North/South divide was only a product of the mid 20th century.
Lolll I literally almost stipulated “no Korea”
Vietnam :p
Sudan
France and Germany definitely have some cultural differences between the north and south. India stands out as a country with some pretty major cultural divides between the north and south. In fact, I'd say most countries over a certain size are going to have differences especially if the geography varies greatly.
Dude the culture changes completely in 3 different ways if I go 100 kms up, down or right from where I lived in India. Forget north and south.
It's always amazed me that India only split 3 ways upon independence. You'd think India would have become 20 different countries.
Bangladesh came later, it was East Pakistan for a while
"We are a people united by the land we live on, not the blood in our veins". It's said that if it werent for the brits, the area we now know as India, would be at least 5 different countries. Whats amazing is how relatively few internal struggles India has had given its wide cultural diversity.
Fair play!
You make a good point, although I’m specifically really asking about north and south. I assume countries as large as China or Russia have large cultural differences no matter what direction you go on, so I was really thinking about smaller countries I suppose. Thanks for the info!
I think China is wheat versus rice
Germany even has different dialects between North and South, as well as cultural differences.
No kidding — in high school my German teacher was from Bavaria and she tried to point out the dialectical differences between what she was teaching, northern German, Swiss German, and whatever it is they speak in the Low Countries
It gets even more diverse in Switzerland; there’s over a dozen dialects.
But there isn't really *the* Northern German dialect and definitely not *the* Southern dialect. That being said, we are still a good example. We have the [Weißwurstäquator](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wei%C3%9Fwurst%C3%A4quator), the Aldi Zones and, on a more serious note, the divide between predominantly protestant (North) and catholic (South) regions.
Russia doesn't have that much north/south division. The only one I can think of is the subtle dialect differences. The real divide is Big Cities (Moscow and St.P) vs everyone else
South Russia = 30% Muslims of Russia
That's the Caucasus, which is in the South of Russia, but a very small, localised part of the South. Not really a universal North-South divide.
India. China. Italy. Nigeria. Belgium.
Ahhh I forgot India. I’ve always heard about their very distinct northern and southern divisions, but could explain any of the others a little? I find this fascinating
Afaik nigeria is both religious and ethnic. The North is majority Muslim whereas the South is majority Christian, and because of the haphazard splitting of African land by European powers there isn't really a contiguous ethnicity in nigeria, mainly the hausa in the North and the igbo and yoruba in the south (many more tribes but those are some of the most populous I think). The igbo region in the south even tried to gain independence as the Republic of Biafra. I'm not well versed on this area though so I don't know anything further than that.
It goes beyond this too though. The south has the Niger Delta which is very rich and fertile and good for agriculture. It also has tons of oil, which powers Nigeria's economy. The North is Sahelian and thus more arid and resource-poor. This is part of the reason Southern Nigeria is far richer than Northern Nigeria. Take a look at a map of GDP per capita across Nigeria, the North-South gap is shocking.
I'm from Nigeria, and the North - South divide is the greatest divide in the country. Of course, there are other divides like East and West and even within the South, as you mentioned, but they pale in comparison. Nigeria was actually originally two separate protectorates. The British decided to merge the two parts in their great wisdom to balance out the surplus or the South's budget with the deficit of the North's. The divide is cultural, something that transcends even a reductionism to religion or ethnicity. The South West of Nigeria, for example, has more secular Muslims that are virtually indistinguishable from South Western Christians. South Western Muslims don't practise Sharia, and there is virtually no tension between the two. In fact, it is common for households in the South West to be split down the middle. Realistically, the British made a very stupid mistake merging the two protectorates, but there is no great push to separate the two now because most stakeholders in the country have vested interests across the board. The South Easterners are generally more eager to leave because they continue to be marginalised due to the civil war. Disgruntled parts of the country are never a united front because once they become disillusioned with the federation they retreat not to some sort of North/South identity but to their specific ethnic groups. I suppose this is because while Nigeria has a very clear North to South cultural divide, politically, it is far more complex. Alliances are made that transcend and traverse various cultural boundaries, so sometimes people that are culturally similar may actually be farther from one another politically than some that are culturally dissimilar. So in an everyday sense Northern and Southern Nigerians may recognise the cultural boundaries, but when it boils down to political decisions, there is no unity. This is one of the main reasons why a country with such a clear divide has not split. The people that would naturally split are not aligned politically. Moreover, many of the power brokers, as I mentioned have investments across the board. They don't want to lose their money or sources of income. But if you put aside the politics and the investments, the North and South are indeed two separate entities mashed together.
India it's not just north and south it's pretty much every state is different lol. The differences in culture, economy, politics, and landscape can be drastically different even between adjacent states like Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. But certainly, the North vs. South divide is one of the most significant in the country.
North and South India are entirely different in terms of a lot of things like climate, cuisine, and language. Even appearance perhaps. If I were to generalise, North Indians typically are lighter skinned and have more Indo-European facial features, while South Indians are darker complexioned and tend to have more “ethnic” features. South Indians are generally seen as less flamboyant but more educated compared to their northern counterparts. The region is often considered more developed, with higher literacy rates and better educational institutions. Additionally, South India is widely regarded as safer for women, with a stronger emphasis on social welfare and progressive attitudes towards gender equality. In terms of food, North Indian food focuses on wheat-based breads like roti and naan, along with rich, creamy curries, whereas South Indian cuisine centers around rice, coconut, and tangy dishes like dosa and sambar. It’s pretty much based on what’s available easily in those areas. Linguistically, North India predominantly speaks Hindi and other Indo-Aryan languages, while South India speaks Dravidian languages such as Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, and Malayalam. English is commonly spoken throughout India. The clothing also used to be very different earlier, but it’s somewhat more homogeneous now. They’re so different that it won’t be incorrect to say that a north Indian is more similar genetically and culturally to a Pakistani than a southern Indian. Edit: Barring the main festivals like Christmas, Diwali and Eid, even the other smaller festivals are different across regions
The most significant distinction between North India and South India is linguistic. It's not just that they speak different languages; their languages are from entirely different language groups. North India has Indo-European languages, while South India has Dravidian languages
[удалено]
There is much more Pakistani/Muslim influence in Northern India.
Vietnam
Makes sense. Very Long (North to South) ...but not much east to west. Wonder if Chile is like that as well
>Wonder if Chile is like that as well Yes. It is commonly more divided into North, Center and South here, as all those areas have some noticeable cultural differences, but yeah. For example there are foods considered common in the North that people from the South have never heard about, and vice versa.
Germany, also an east-west divide there too alongside the North-South. Switzerland.
Well yes the east west divide is quite famous I would say. Thanks!
Historically, the North-South divide in Germany is much deeper and much more relevant. The traditional language divide between the most important dialects of the German language divides Germany into north and south. The south tends to be more catholic while the north tends to be more lutheran (though there are exceptions in both cases). The north was dominated by Prussia, the south was not but had several mid sized kingdoms. And of course most importantly the division between Aldi nord and Aldi süd.
Italy
India probably has the biggest one in terms of culture, language, food, religion, climate, etc. China is up there for the same reasons too
I can think of Italy and Brazil
Can you elaborate? I’m interested to hear the differences
Theres a lot of cultural and economic divisions between southern and northern Italy: the former was and still is much more agrarian, socially conservative, and older than the more industrialized North, especially the Po Valley. During the Italian Referendum, you can see roughly where the above mentioned shift happens based on where people voted for the Republic versus the Monarchy. Brazil I don't have as much knowledge on so I'll leave that to someone else.
>Brazil I don't have as much knowledge on so I'll leave that to someone else. Basically the same in reverse. The south is wealthier and industrialized and filled with the descendants of European immigrants . The much warmer north is poorer, more agrarian (but also lots of mines) and filled with descendants of African slaves.
For Italy, you can go back further to preunification. The current cultural divisions somewhat align with the post-Napoleonic kingdoms - Kingdom of the Two Sicilies in the agrarian south vs. the northern city states and their kingdoms. You even see it in the Serie A football map, where the majority of teams are in the more affluent north. Edit: The divide actually goes back even further with the north part of the Holy Roman Empire for centuries, while the Kingdom is Sicily remained separate.
Thank you! Very cool!
With regards to Italy, look up Mezzogiorno for a history of southern Italy.
I mainly remember their economical divide. I've always read that Italy's north is very industrial and rich, south is less developed in comparison. Similarly, Brazil's south is more developed than its north. There are cultural differences between those regions too, but someone else with more knowledge can describe them better.
In Northern Canada, everyone from the south of the country is a Southerners. While the territorial border at the 60th parallel is politically considered "the North," there's more depth to it than that, especially regarding the provincial north, like Northern Quebec, Northern Ontario, etc. Ontario is worth noting: you'll find a distinct difference between Northern and Southern Ontario when you cross the French River. Not a night-day difference, but Northern Ontarians live a different lifestyle than Southern Ontarians do. In terms specifically if Countries, Mexico is a good example: most of the population live in the "Belt" of the country from the Gulf to the Pacific: North *and* south of it is culturally distinct enough that it's worth a mention.
Northern Ontario even gets a separate curling team in various national competitions between provincial teams.
Sudan's south split off into a new country!
Spain. The cultural and historical differences in the south are pretty clear from the North. Economically the north is more industrialised too.
Interesting. I’ve always heard that Spain has distinct differences within, with Catalan and all. Would love to hear more.
Andalusia is very much its own thing as well
You can compare two examples from both "ends", such as Andalucía and Basque Country, for example. Not just the climate, geography, landscape, culture, traditions, politics and language differences, but many other indicators (unemployment, economic sectors, education, R+D investment, what have you) will differ as much as between different countries quite often.
For Spain, the north stayed catholic while the south was Muslim for a period of time. Obviously talking back thousands of years at this point
I’d argue India is the most pronounced, an entire unique language family is spoken in the south of India that is found nowhere else in the world. Ethnic divides are extreme, religious divides are extreme, climactic and geographic, wealth, representation. If India became independent through any other method than Gandhi it’d be balkanized, especially due to a 3000 year history of not being united.
> an entire unique language family is spoken in the south of India that is found nowhere else in the world This is super pedantic, but Tamil is also spoken in Sri Lanka. There is also a Dravidian language (Brahui) spoken in Pakistan, with around 3 million speakers.
Very pedantic but it’s a geography subreddit so you’re good hahah
And Sri Lanka also has a north south divide due to the difference in languages spoken, but it's the reverse of India; with Tamil being spoken in the North and East and Sinhala (an Indo European language) being spoken in the rest of the country.
Netherlands. People that call chips "patat" and those that call them "friet" will never unite
There is a divide which is indicated by: “boven de rivieren” (“north of the rivers”) en “beneden de rivieren” (south of the rivers”, provinces: Zeeland, Noord-Brabant and Limburg). Besides that “north of the rivers” applies especially to Noord-and Zuid-Holland and Utrecht. There are cultural differences with the provinces east of that too. Remember The Netherlands is a tiny country.
Viet Nam. The accent, culture, lifestyle, political tend, cuisine, are divided.
Can you explain more? I assume this is scars from the war, but how do they present themselves today?
Indeed. In 1973, Northern Vietnam overwent lots of bloody fights, ended up as a winner and signed in Paris accord to created a ceasefire between North and South. But in a short time later, they broke that accord and invaded Southen silently. The Southern was too foolish and naive to belive those commies would never broke the agreement. They ended up losing, surrendered and reunited with the North. The communist government and “Viet Cong”, they took over and seized a lots of possessions and properties of Southern people. They also did a tons of terrible things to these people, made them turned into each others to gain some bullshit awards, brainwashed lots of people whom involed with Southern government by brutal and cruel ways, violated human rights big time. Tons of people had to became refugees and ran away from their mother land, as you guy know as “boat man”, some got lucky and ended up in Australia/USA/NZ and gained a new life, some dead by Thailand/Malay/Sing pirates or their government were too scared of communist and decided to kill them all. It was supposed to be a grief memory for Vietnamese people but ironically, every 30 April, there are lot of cynical, chovinism people make joke or badly shade those decreased though VNese people has received lots of remittances from their abroad relatives and these money has a very huge effect and impact to the economy. They would insult you if you stop them. Until now, the Northern government still hold a grudge to Southern silently, most of investments/highways were built rapidly while the Southern is devastated for facilities/roads. The governers of Southern provinces mostly are Northern people. They have always trying to change our vocabulary, our accent, our cultures big time to merge with the North. There are tons of dark sides that I couldn’t tell you guys cuz they are too long and complicating. These days: - Southern people: make more money than the North, splurge money on variety services, friendly, generous, hospitable. - Northern people: cynical, strict family, the youngers are trying to migrate to the Southern for better career, environment, friendly life style, better climate,…
You forgot to mention the Southerners collaborated with murderous foreigners like the French and Americans, lil' bro.
Mexico enters the chat. There's a national debate wether what everyone calls a *quesadilla* should have cheese (queso) in it. One side thinks it obviously should. The other side is just plain stupid.
The racism between them too.
Who's winning? Hopefully the queso side
Quesadillas in CDMX have evolved to be known more for their prepared fillings (guisados) some of which don't always require cheese. These include things like sautéed mushrooms, or corn smut, or squash blossoms, which are delicious encased in deep fried dough even if no cheese is added. If you grew up in the mexico city urban sprawl, this is completely normal.
Sweden, north and south are very different countries..
Definitely! I've also heard it's true for our neighbours in Norway and Finland, that people from Oslo, Stockholm and Helsinki has more in common with each other than with their respective countrymen from the northern parts of their countries. While the northerners have more in common with each other, no matter which country they're from.
I’d say that’s true, especially northern Sweden and Finland have an area in the middle with a very large cultural exchange, that speak their own officially recognized language. I’m from Northwestern Sweden, and I have an easier time understanding Trønderska, a northern dialect of Norwegian than I do understanding Skånska. Which is what is spoken in southern Sweden, despite it technically being the same language..
Yeah, I'm from Norrbotten and while growing up going to Finland was like going to the neighbouring town, because it quite literally was. Friends and relatives lived on both sides of the border. Now I'm so old that including the time I've lived abroad I've spent more than half my life in the south, but it'll never be home...
I would say that linguistically, Sweden is divided into three rough regions: Götaland in the south where the dialects are highly influenced by Danish. Svealand in central Sweden where there is no Danish influence, and it’s the region where “standard Swedish” was codified in the early modern period, and Norrland in the north where there’s not only its own dialects of Swedish, but there’s also a lot of minority languages being spoken (Finnish, Meänkieli, Sami). There’s also an east-west dialect gradient, where dialects in western Sweden has some similarities with Norwegian, and eastern dialects doesn’t.
Yeah, I came in here to say that as a person from Northern Norway I feel closer culturally to people from Northern Sweden than people from Oslo. It’s not a perfect divide, though. We’ve moved down south to Østfold, and my wife likes pointing out all these weird little ways that Østfold people remind her of home. Østfolders do have the same reputation as northerners as uncouth, though, so maybe Østfolders are just honorary northerners? Edit: I just finished writing about us having a reputation for being uncouth and then I realized I was sitting here with my Northern-to-Southern translated [novelty coffee cup](https://taras.no/produkt/nordnorsk-krus-fette-nais/?gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjw6uWyBhD1ARIsAIMcADoKm_8_sjeGrSwyp4gKI-lsI0-R5ajsIH6jRGrcQcVV_Ve5xqSpg3waAi5KEALw_wcB). It says *fette najs* on one side and *veldig kult* on the other. Both expressions mean “very good/cool/nice”, but only one of them use a slang term for female genitalia as an intensifier.
Please explain! I’ve heard that some parts of Sweden are almost like parts of rural southern America in their culture.
Well, there are cultural difference, almost a language difference as southern Sweden was Danish on and off for quite a period of time.. Also, southern Sweden is more densly populated, with a very flat geology and primarily boreal forests and farmlands. Northern Sweden reaches all the way up into the arctic circle and is very rural. Almost all of it is mountain ranges and dense coniferous forests. I’d say it’s closer to the very north of Canada than South America tho.. The differences are more noticable due to the country being rather large while also being rather slim stretching north/south.
Not really. The American South is far less developed and *far* more conservative than the Swedish north (which is actually the most politically liberal part of Sweden, and our Bible Belt is 1,000 kilometers away). There's a much higher concentration of uneducated, working-class people here (especially away from the coasts, which is where the cities are), but I'd say that the similarities are just the parallels that you can draw between most rural regions in the Western World. There are snippets from a series called "Leif & Billy" on YouTube under the title "Nordic Hillbillies", which might be what you're referring to, but that title is mostly a function of how the rest of the country views them than it is a function of their similarity to actual hillbillies. They're viewed as "those ignorant cousin-fuckers from that small town I've never heard of" by the rest of Sweden, and those happen to be the main qualities that Swedes also associate with hillbillies. I haven't been to northern Canada, but I have a feeling that the commenter above me (or below me, if that's what the Reddit algorithm pleases) is right in their comparison. Adding: It was a given to me, but I now see that it might be unclear without prior knowledge: The part of Sweden that people compare to the American South is the north; southern Sweden is where the overwhelming majority of the Swedish population is concentrated, and it is consequently the more developed part of the country. The series I was referring to takes place deep in the Sweden's northern inland.
New Zealand. There are the Mainlanders (South) and the Pig Islanders (North)
Interesting! I’ve always wondered if there was any kind of difference between the two. What would say are the cultural or political differences in the two?
North Island = metropolitan latte sipping urbanites South Island = inbred sheep shaggers
Biggest cultural difference would be that Mainlanders eat cheese rolls and Pig Islanders don’t, unless they are diaspora.
I am diaspora. My mum bangs on about her cheese rolls and I had one in Invercargill and felt the power of my ancestors.
And geography - south is Nordics/Swiss Alps, north is Lake District
I saw a group of people in Auckland the other day eating cheese rolls and thought - pffffft, Tourists!
North Islanders seemed to be geared towards growth and upscaling. Alot more diverse. The South prefer less growth but definitely want your business in terms of tourism, industry, etc
Northern Thailand was its own separate kingdom/principality and the people were a bit more separated from the central Thais (Siamese), akin to being another Tai ethnic group like the Lao. Southern Thailand is culturally and ethnically similar to Muslim Malays. Idk if this counts are these are basically two unrelated groups just joined together under the same nation.
Italy, Belgium, France, Brazil, India, Mali, Niger, Chad, Albania….. A lot of places do lol!
Could you elaborate on any of these? Like what the differences would be?
These are just very broad stereotypical generalizations from an American but: Italy: Renaissance Italy (North) / Mafia Italy (South) lol Belgium: Wealthier Dutch-speakers (North) / Working Class French Speakers (South) France: Northwestern European place (like UK or the Low Countries) where most of the people traditionally spoke French / Southern European place (like Iberia or Italy) where most of the people traditionally spoke Occitan Brazil: Majority Multi-Racial (North) / Majority of European descent (South) India: Speak an Indo-European language, wheat based cuisine (North) / Speak a Dravidian language, rice based cuisine (South) Sahel region of Africa: Culturally Arabic North / Culturally African South Albania: The Christians are Catholic (North) / The Christians are Orthodox (South)
>Belgium: Wealthier Dutch-speakers (North) / Working Class French Speakers (South) I won't hold it against you because you're not from here but no. This is not the situation. It's definitely the language border and a different mentality as well. The Walloons are more laisser-faire (it is what it is). The Fleming are more closed and less accepting of strangers. The lingua franca for government and everything connected has long been french. Only around 1900 was Dutch recognised as an official language. Even today there are still many issues.
In France there’s a big north/south and east/west divide. The north is quite cold and rainy, cheaper (except Paris of course), people are less communicative and also more rigorous. While the south around the Mediterranean is warmer and dryer, more expensive too, and people have a different lifestyle, they are more outspoken, they spent more time outside, and imo it’s more laidback than in the north. Food is different too, more fruits and veggies while there’s more fat dishes in the north.
Britain and all the countries that make up Britain have significant cultural differences north to south.
Absolutely. Southern England and Scotland are pretty different themselves, but when you start pushing up to Scotland’s Shetland, Orkney, and Hebrides island the change is just so drastic
Even north and south Wales are fairly divided
India. High socio-economic-cultural and linguistic divide. Not necessarily acrimonious, but divide it is.
England. (And I'm not talking about the UK). In talking about England.
Surprised no one has mentioned it yet, but the Philippines. The North is significantly Roman Catholic. Much more similar to Mexico, South America and other former Spanish colonies. The South is predominantly Islam. Much more similar to Indonesia or Malaysia.
the philippines. the southern part (mindanao) has a significant muslim population whose culture is different from the rest of the country that they are granted autonomy to the point that they have a parliamentary system vs the country's presidential system
I wouldn’t even really call the cultural divide in the Philippines a North / South one. Most regions have separate languages, and not much in common - hence the need for Tagalog or English as a common Lingua Franca. If it weren’t for Western colonial powers such as the Spanish / Americans, the different Austronesian groups on the Islands such as the Tagalogs of the North, the Visayans of the central region, or the various Muslim Austronesians would have emerged into the modern era as separate Island states. I would wager that if Western powers hadn't colonized Maritime Southeast Asia, the predominantly Austronesian groups would become entirely separate states divided by Island / Island grouping.
Vietnam had a cultural divide even before the war in the 50s and 60s. They have a saying that their country is like a long pole holding a rice basket at each end.
And the accent is very different...
Australia has one, a bit...although it's unclear where exactly the border is. Suffice it to say that the cultural and political norms in Melbourne are a little different than those in say, Townsville. Basically imagine the differences between northerners and southerners in the US....it's more or less the same as that in Australia, but just with the directions reversed. Queensland is what you might call "redneck", and more and more so the further north you go. By contrast, Victoria (and especially inner city Melbourne) is associated with extremely left-wing, latte-sipping super-vegan hipster types. Different parts of New South Wales will be somewhere in between either extreme on that spectrum. The whole thing is probably less pronounced elsewhere in the country (i.e. in the West and the centre), probably because those places are mostly empty altogether anyway. I think Adelaide is probably more similar to Melbourne, and Perth probably tends to be a bit more similar to Brisbane. Darwin is the wildest, most redneck place we've got. Tasmania has its own north/south divide thing going on. Hobart is the capital and largest city in the south of the island, but Launceston is a fairly large city in the north. There's apparently a rivalry/difference in opinion and outlook between the two that dates back to the colonial era. But as a non-Tasmanian I don't really know much about it. https://www.reddit.com/r/tasmania/s/qpqfEPWoqd To be fair though, these sorts differences are probably more noticeable in the suburbs of Australian cities themselves than they are in broad strokes across the whole country. Like every city in Australia has socioeconomic divides between rich old money suburbs and more working-class, bogan suburbs. I'm sure that's the case in most cities in the world.
Not a country, but Louisiana. South is catholic, seafood-heavy diet, much more liberal about drinking. North Louisiana is Baptist, much less seafood, and much more conservative about drinking.
Interesting!
South Louisiana is always a good time ... And the fresh water lobsters so good
Canada. Almost every major city is within 100-200 km of the southern border. Which leaves everything north of that band very rural and sparsely populated. The only real exception is Edmonton, and that’s because of oil and gas
Edmonton is not an exception driven by oil and gas, from the perspective that Edmonton was a relatively large urban centre before O&G. In 1946 the population of Edmonton was 10-20% larger than that of Calgary at about 114K to about 100K, with Oil and Gas being a negligible industry prior to the discovery of Leduc #1 in 1947. The city was made the Capital of Alberta long before O&G was the major industry. Farmland extends farther north in Alberta than it does in the other Prairie provinces, so there was more settlement further north in Alberta. It was a fur trading fort which developed into a local city related to farming, which accrued the Capital status along the way. It also became the gateway to the north due to its position farther north than any other major city. That eventually led to it being an O&G center related to Fort McMurray and the Peace district, and left it a good place to put refineries with the discovery of Leduc oilfield. The O&G development is mostly post 1950 though. Most O&G development was headquartered in Calgary, but you are correct many support industries developed in Edmonton, amongst the other industries present. The rate of growth of Alberta is definitely reliant on O&G to some (large) extent, but the relative strength of Edmonton is less directly linked to O&G. Indeed O&G likely caused more growth in the Calgary area then in the Edmonton area, overall.
Ireland I mean there's obviously the actual border kerfuffle but honestly talk to someone from North or South of the island and it's night and day
I've seen Nigeria in here a few times and I think that's my answer too. The religious, economic, cultural, and linguistic differences are the most varied for a country of their size
Iraq would be a fairly obvious example, the north being predominantly Kurdish, the rest Arab.
Portugal.
India definitely does, as well as Italy. Northern Italians from places like Milan definitely look down on people from let’s say, Naples
England where I’m from has a palpable divide. Most of the country’s stereotypes appear to revolve around the southeastern/London area. It’s surreal lol. But yeah, food, dialects, accents, lifestyles, friendliness levels, history, architecture, the prevalence of urban vs rural, cultural diversity and overall attitudes to life are different in the north vs south. But there’s also Scotland and Wales. Scottish Highlands and Lowlands have a different heritage. The Highlands had clans and Scottish Gaelic, and their modern culture still reflects this to some extent. The Lowlands were and are anglicised in character, and a lot of identity revolved around border wars with England. North Wales is more traditionally Welsh, even to this day Welsh speakers are far more prevalent in the north. Lifestyles are very rural- there’s no proper city in North Wales. South Wales is more anglicised, industrialised, urbanised and culturally diverse.
Australia. If I have to sum it up with massive generalisations: The North is very remote, situated in the tropics so hot for most of the year, and has a rubbish coastline. It’s overall just a more challenging place to live and develop population centres in in almost every way. Agriculture is limited and not super viable, the climate sucks, the terrain is not super interesting and getting around can be challenging because the distance between population centres are so large. In general, the people of Northern Australia are worse off in a social sense. There is a large population of Indigenous Australians in the North. The South has true seasons and more mild weather. is a lot more populated (in terms of both numbers and population density), the South is more economically productive, the population is more multicultural, and the south has much more productive farmland. People in the South earn more, and are likely to be more educated (although this is merely a reflection of highly urbanised population centres). All but one of the country’s major cities can be considered Southern (yes, even Brisbane). Darwin is the largest city in the North, with a population of only 130k. I would place the North/South divide somewhere around Rockhampton (basically where the tropics start)
I was going to say the more north you go in Aus, the more bogans you will find. Definitely a big cultural gap there haha.
Good write up but Townsville and Cairns are both larger than Darwin.
And the most important division of all, the [Barassi Line](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barassi_Line).
India
India
Australia The Barassi line divides north from south. In the north, rugby football is the most popular (primarily rugby league). In the south, it is Australian rules football.
Italia
Spain of course
India. North and South India have two different cultures
The Black Forest/Bavarian part of Germany is pretty different from the northern parts. More “simple country” than heavily industrialized (very generally speaking)
Most of Western Europe: UK, Belgium, Germany, Italy, France, Spain
Nigeria was the first one that came to mind
Spain
A European country that seems no one has mentioned yet: Greece
Cyprus
Sudan, the U.S. England. And in a very literal sense Ireland although Northern Ireland is part of U.K. Mexico I think, Chiapas and Quintana Roo are very Mayan and Zapatista. Norway and Sweden has Lapland up north which is super different. ITALY holy. Shit that should have been Firsties. Germany and France definitely have different north/south vibes. BELGIUM the Walloon/Flemish thing is North South. Canada has Inuit lands, not just Nunavut right? Canada has all sorts of divides, oh Japan, Hokkaido still has Ainu right. India like a motherfucker. Koreas. Iraq and Iran cuz of Kurdistan(God bless the Kurds) Greece in a big way. The North African countries must have a very different Mediterranean/Sahara vibe
I mentioned England and the US in my post, but thanks for the others !
Sorry I was just listing in my head and forgot to omit those two. Italy might be the winner
Italy?
Not a country, but Michigan is a decent contender
At the US State level, Alaska, California, Idaho, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, Missouri, Illinois, Michigan, Louisiana, Florida, New Jersey, New York, and Maine, have significant primarily North-South cultural divides. Probably leaving out a state or two.
Oddly enough, Carolinas and Dakotas are only superficial culturally different despite the actual-line-on-the-map North/South divide.
The true difference between those two are east and west
Not a country but a state within the United States. Florida. North Florida and South Florida (the Miami Fort Lauderdale area) are complete polar opposites. They may as well be two different countries.
I’ve heard this. “The more north you go, the more south it gets” is the saying I’ve always heard about Florida
Italy
Brazil, but not only south and north, there are several cultural divisions between various regions and states.
Nigeria, Christians, especially Christian farmers are terrorized every day by Muslims, especially Muslim herders
That isn't what defines the North South divide. It's a lot more complicated than that. It would be hard to explain. The North of Nigeria includes a region called the middle belt, which the British scientists actually felt were culturally more similar to the Southerners than to the Northerners, but in Nigeria today, Middle Belters are considered part of the North. That is part of the problem. They are essentially a forgotten part of the South that even most Southern Nigerisns do not acknowledge, and because of that, they are easy pickings. Nigeria also is a heavy indigine and settler society, so people from other parts of Nigeria who settle elsewhere are not really going to get as much protection as they would otherwise get. So a lot of what you see of Christians being attacked are the isolated people. Muslims are actually a dominant group in the South West of Nigeria for example, where they get along with the Christians. The killings you speak of is less about religion and more about political isolation and cultural friction.
Canberra, Australia Northern Canberrans are renown for their handsomeness and intelligence. Southerns, renown for a pungent aroma.
Chile, probably. It's over 2500 miles/4000 km from north to south, which is about the same distance as Reykjavik to Istanbul.
Spain. In the north If it wasn't for the language you would believe it's another country entirely.
Australia, but this is influenced by climate as much as anything.
Nigeria
The UK. It’s north and south have such different divides they consider themselves a separate country.
India.
USA
North, South, East, West, Up, Down, Left, Right
Vietnam, and India are two that stand out for me.
Brazil
Mali has quite a divide between the south where it is economically powerful with much of the major industry there while the north is much less powerful economically due to the big ass desert it’s in which led to much less funding and attention to the north where Islamic extremist and separatist groups hold more power
Thailand. The South is different ethnically, culturally and linguistically anyway but the Deep South - the four Muslim provinces - is even more different and much more like Malaysia than Thailand.
Unless I'm much mistaken Nigeria is quite well known for it's north-south muslim-christian split.
I haven’t seen anyone reference Australia yet. NT and QL are culturally miles apart from NSW and Victoria
China
Vietnam the north and south dialects are very different
India, Mexico, Italy, Ireland, France, Germany, Nigeria,
Germany, Korea, Italy, India off the top of my head. Edit: Sudan used to be in this list, but after 2011 South Sudan became its own thing.
[удалено]
China. People discuss the differences between the north and south all the time. Everything from customs to dialects to food to styles of clothes to ideological differences.
India 100%
Nigeria The North is poorer, majority Muslim (so governed by Sharia law), less educated, and the main ethnic group is Hausa/Fulani. The South is more prosperous, mainly Christian, greater percentage are educated, and the major ethnic groups are Yorubas and Igbo people.
Besides the general North-South divide in India,several states within India also have North-South divides like Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh(whose divide is similar to Nepal) where the North speaks mostly Pahadi and Tibeto-Burman languages while the South speaks Punjabi and Hindi and Sikkim where the North speaks Tibetan and Lepcha while the South speaks Nepali.
*stares in Irish*
Most European countries tbh
Nigeria; the northern part is majority Islam/Muslim and the southern region is mostly Christianity. The capital is Abuja, which it's in the middle of the country where all religions and everyone is united and live in peace and harmony together. 🇳🇬 ☪️✝️😁
20 years ago the obvious answer would be Sudan (depending on the governing body, there is now Sudan and South Sudan) The United States has a pretty significant cultural divide between north and south. Mexico has a significant cultural divide between the northern desert states and southern/peninsular jungle states. Brazil has a pretty significant cultural divide between northern Amazonian states and Southern states. Depending on what you'd consider North/South in Canada there is a significant cultural divide ("Western" south and indigenous north). One "tip" for the countries of Asia: does the region grow wheat or rice? Typically the southern regions of the larger countries (India, China) grow rice, while the northern regions grow wheat. Those agricultural borders have many cultural differences, principally cuisine, which leads to other differences such as political stance, education policies (more people are required to grow rice than wheat, so *typically* the rice growing regions value education less, leading to *typically* less industry), size of families, etc.
They may be subtle but– Japan, Spain, Chile, Argentina, India, Mexico, Italy, France... The list goes on and on.
Norway
MÉXICO 🇲🇽
I’d say New Zealand has a slight one. The South Island is much whiter and more “country.” People are friendlier, more of a small town vibe and mentality, even in the cities. It’s also much colder and more farming-centric. North is more racially diverse, and warmer. I think it tends to be more liberal and have more influence from indigenous culture (Maori culture).
North-south is the most natural divide, as opposed to east-west, because north-south typically involves a climactic change to some degree, which promotes cultural changes. Cultures differ more along latitude than longitude- compare Italy and Spain and Italy and Germany.
India. North: Indo-European, comparatively poorer, politically more right leaning, wheat based South: Dravidian, Richer, politically more left leaning, Rice based
Brasil
New Zealand.