"vincent p. norris" wrote in message
...
Not possibly to some extent the influence of the culture of the state,
a consequence of the kinds of folks who emigrated there?

Possible? Sure, in a broad sense. As for these particular
individuals....

I was thinking "in a broad sense," not about individual family
backgrounds that you and George mentioned. Wasn't Wisconsin settled to
a large extent by Scandinavians and Germans of socialist political
leanings?

My knowledge of the political history of Wisconsin is shamefully scanty. I
do know that Milwaukee had a couple of popular socialist mayors early in the
20th century. Presumably their election reflected, to a more or less high
degree, the sentiments of the state's urban population but I have no idea
whether the predominantly rural citizens outside the Lake Michigan/Fox
valley corridor shared their political or economic views.

If those settlers brought with them atitudes about nature, the land,
public stewardship, etc., that found their way into the churches,
schools, and so forth, they would have some effect on the attitudes of
kids growing up in those states, wouldn't they?

Absolutely.

Although we soak up a lot of our personal values from our parents, we
also assimilate a lot from the culture of the society around us. I
think I'm very different from what I would be had I grown up in
Brooklyn or Boston or Dallas instead of the little hick town of
Scottdale, PA.

I'd be very interested in any evidence for the notion that there is more
to
it than that. I assume your question was meant in a broad philosophical
sense and that you didn't have any specific evidence in mind with respect
to
Muir, Leopold and Nelson.......or?

Right, Wolfgang; I have no evidence. Just the notion, derived from my
dipping into sociology and anthropogy over the years, that we all--and
especially the young--are influenced by our social surroundings.

I gather that the concept of "national character" has been the subject
of numerous books and is widely accepted among social scientists .
Why could there not be an analogous "state culture" in a country as
diverse as the U.S.?

As I'm sure you know, there are all sorts of problems with the notion of
"national character," not the least of which is that insofar as any such can
be reliably identified at all, they are subject to change over time. That
said, I really don't have any trouble accepting any of what you say above.
Call it national character, zeitgeist, or whatever you will, there can be no
doubt that despite individual differences there are characteristic themes
and moods that run through populations of various compositions in geographic
and political units of all sizes.

I'd like to be able to say that the Muir, Leopold, Nelson lineage is
indicative of a particularly keen and widespread environmental consciousness
here in Wisconsin, or at least commensurate with one. Unfortunately, I just
don't see it. I have no reason to believe that our environmental record and
its concomitant reflection on our citizens is any WORSE than that of other
states in general but, despite some encouraging successes in recent decades
(George's example of the rehabilitation of the Wisconsin river prominent
among them), I don't have much reason to thinks it's any better either. We
have our fair share of intractable environmental problems, made all the more
troublesome by widespread indifference as well conflicting agendas.

Wolfgang
who would bet a shiny new nickel that the identities of muir, leopold and
nelson are a complete mystery to most of the state's residents.