People always talk about how Canada and the U.S. are so different; about what we don't have in common. Then, occasionally, we talk about the similarities. But hasn't anyone ever noticed this: some regional differences within one country look more evident than differences between the two countries?
For example, I live in Vallejo, California, a suburb of San Francisco. I frequently go to the Vancouver area. I don't actually feel like a foreigner for a number of reasons:
1) ethnic makeup: I am Asian, Filipino to be exact, but I have passed for both Chinese and East Indian before, so I fit in very well - plus, except for some subtle differences, people from the two regions don't talk very differently (my accent would stick out way more in parts of Texas than in Vancouver)
2) cultural attitude: Vancouver and San Francisco are both known to be relatively tolerant, yet relatively progressive, compared to the rest of North America
3) climate: we're both known for summers that aren't too hot and winters that aren't too cold
On that note, I have been to Detroit and Miami, both of which feel more foreign than Vancouver does, regardless of what the passport says. For one thing, neither region has a lot of Asians (Detroit - mostly black American, Miami - largely Caribbean and Latin American). The general attitudes/ways of life are also quite different, and so is the weather (Detroit has 4 distinct seasons, including freezing winters, while Miami is subtropical, rarely falling below 20 deg C).
I'll be that if you make similar comparisons between Vancouver and places like Winnipeg, Quebec City, or Nfld, you will find that Vancouver has more in common with Seattle and San Francisco.
So, are our countries really that different? Despite all our bickering between the two of us, we seem to have more internal regional differences than differences between the two of us.
For example, I live in Vallejo, California, a suburb of San Francisco. I frequently go to the Vancouver area. I don't actually feel like a foreigner for a number of reasons:
1) ethnic makeup: I am Asian, Filipino to be exact, but I have passed for both Chinese and East Indian before, so I fit in very well - plus, except for some subtle differences, people from the two regions don't talk very differently (my accent would stick out way more in parts of Texas than in Vancouver)
2) cultural attitude: Vancouver and San Francisco are both known to be relatively tolerant, yet relatively progressive, compared to the rest of North America
3) climate: we're both known for summers that aren't too hot and winters that aren't too cold
On that note, I have been to Detroit and Miami, both of which feel more foreign than Vancouver does, regardless of what the passport says. For one thing, neither region has a lot of Asians (Detroit - mostly black American, Miami - largely Caribbean and Latin American). The general attitudes/ways of life are also quite different, and so is the weather (Detroit has 4 distinct seasons, including freezing winters, while Miami is subtropical, rarely falling below 20 deg C).
I'll be that if you make similar comparisons between Vancouver and places like Winnipeg, Quebec City, or Nfld, you will find that Vancouver has more in common with Seattle and San Francisco.
So, are our countries really that different? Despite all our bickering between the two of us, we seem to have more internal regional differences than differences between the two of us.
