top of page
Writer's pictureTom McAndrew

Geography & American politics: Cotton, Coal and Cities

Article aimed at a 16-18 year old readership and great for teacher's to use to fuel discussion and debate.


Geography has profoundly shaped American politics, affecting everything from economic policies to electoral patterns. Geographical features such as fertile soils, mineral deposits, and urban centres have created regional interests that continue to play pivotal roles in American politics. In this article, we’ll explore the influence of geography on American politics by focusing on the historical and contemporary importance of loess soils for cotton cultivation, the effects of urbanisation, and the impact of coal deposits and mining communities.


The Formation of Loess Soil and Cotton Growing Areas




The American South, especially the Mississippi Delta, has long been associated with cotton production. This association has a foundation in the region’s unique geography, particularly the presence of loess soils. Loess is a fine, wind-blown silt that forms fertile soil when deposited over centuries. This soil type is especially prevalent in the Mississippi Delta region, creating an ideal environment for cotton cultivation. Loess soil retains moisture and is rich in minerals, making it well-suited for crops like cotton that require a long growing season and a consistent water supply.


Loess soil's origins trace back to glacial and desert environments. In North America, as glaciers receded during the last Ice Age, they left behind vast amounts of silt and clay that, over time, were redistributed by wind. This wind-borne silt settled in the valleys and lowlands, including areas around the Mississippi River, forming deep, fertile layers. The Mississippi Delta’s loess soils provided the basis for a profitable cotton industry, which became central to the Southern economy in the 19th century.


This concentration of cotton-growing wealth fostered a political landscape focused on agrarian interests. Cotton production required a large labour force, leading to the widespread use of enslaved people before the Civil War. As a result, Southern states aligned their political interests with maintaining the institution of slavery, a stance that directly contributed to the American Civil War. Even in the post-Reconstruction era, the South's agricultural economy shaped regional politics, with issues like agricultural subsidies and land rights often taking precedence. Today, the legacy of this era is evident in political attitudes towards federal agricultural policies and rural development in Southern states. 


Coal Deposits, Mining, and Political Dynamics




Coal mining provides another powerful example of geography’s role in politics. The Appalachian region, encompassing parts of West Virginia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, has substantial coal deposits, which formed millions of years ago as plant matter compressed under sediment and heat. By the late 19th century, coal mining had become the economic backbone of Appalachia, providing jobs and supporting local economies.

With coal’s economic importance, Appalachian communities developed a political identity focused on protecting mining. Politicians representing these areas often championed coal interests, supporting policies that protect mining jobs and energy independence. These coal-reliant communities tended to align with the Republican Party, which opposed environmental regulations seen as threats to the coal industry. When coal demand declined due to shifts towards renewable energy, Appalachian regions faced economic hardship, reinforcing their support for Republican politicians who promised to revitalise coal.


This support continued into recent elections, where Donald Trump’s pro-coal stance appealed to voters in Appalachian states like West Virginia. Despite economic changes, these communities remain politically loyal to candidates who oppose environmental regulations, as many perceive federal restrictions on coal as a direct threat to their livelihoods.


The interesting part is when we visualise an overlay of the map of loess and coal deposits - the combination of the two often paints a very red picture in terms of Republican support. Conservative candids will continue to have the advantage in these areas for many years to come. If you study the map below from the 2024 Presdiential elections, whichTrump has convincingly won, you will notice that the red areas coincide with those that have large loess and coal deposits. Illinois seems like an anomaly until you see a close up view of the county results (see the second map below) - the main Democrat wins were in the urban centres and that carried the state for them. The rural areas of Illinois were mostly won by the Republicans. And this leads us to the part played by urbanisation.





Source: Associated Press


Urbanisation and the Shift in Political Power


As the United States industrialised, urbanisation rapidly reshaped political allegiances. Industrialisation in the 19th and early 20th centuries led to booming cities in the North, which attracted immigrants and internal migrants seeking work. With population-based representation, densely populated cities gained more influence in politics.


Urban centres faced unique challenges, such as housing shortages, labour rights, and infrastructure needs. These issues shaped the Democratic Party’s alignment with urban interests, as it increasingly advocated for policies supporting urban labourers and immigrant communities. A landmark shift occurred during the Great Depression when Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal policies (1932) offered public works, unemployment relief, and social security benefits. Roosevelt’s policies resonated deeply in industrialised cities like New York and Chicago, where workers and minority groups became a loyal Democratic voting base.




Further, the Democratic Party’s support for civil rights under President Lyndon B. Johnson expanded urban Democratic support. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 and Johnson’s Great Society programmes appealed to diverse urban populations, particularly in the North. In contrast, the suburban and rural regions increasingly leaned Republican, especially during Ronald Reagan’s presidency in the 1980s. Reagan’s policies promoted limited government, appealing to voters in less urbanised areas who saw large government programmes as intrusive.


The urban-rural political divide has only intensified. In recent elections, such as those in 2016 and 2020, rural areas remained staunchly Republican, supporting candidates like Donald Trump, who prioritised reduced regulations and promised to revive traditional industries. Meanwhile, urban areas overwhelmingly backed Democratic candidates, solidifying a trend where cities consistently support Democratic platforms, while rural areas align with Republican ideals of individual freedom and limited government intervention.


Summary and other factors too


The political geography of the United States is deeply influenced by its natural resources and historical development patterns. Fertile loess soils in the South fostered a profitable cotton industry, creating economic and political dependencies on agriculture and influencing the Southern stance on slavery and states’ rights. In contrast, industrialisation in Northern cities led to political allegiances that prioritised workers’ rights and urban infrastructure, driving urban areas toward the Democratic Party.


Coal deposits in Appalachia have reinforced a regional political identity focused on mining and energy independence. As coal becomes less economically viable, these areas still often support conservative candidates who oppose federal environmental regulations. The divide between urban, rural, and resource-rich areas remains strong, with urban centres supporting Democratic platforms and rural and resource-based regions leaning Republican.


From agricultural subsidies to environmental policies, these geographical influences play a crucial role in shaping American politics. Understanding the historical and geographical factors underlying political alignment offers insights into regional loyalties that continue to shape the U.S. political landscape today.


Were geographical factors the only reasons for the recent Trump and Republican Party win? No, there were a multitude of complex interweaving factors such as party strategy and tactics that involved a clear and consistent message on the economy, the strength of feeling of migration as an issue (more to come on this soon!), support of very influential people like Elon Musk and Joe Rogan; the effect of failed assassination attempts, the broad appeal to the 'manosphere' & 'heterodoxy' groups to name but a few. That said, the historical geographical factors were at play to a strong extent and will continue to be at play for many elections yet to come.


Main Sources:


  • National Park Service. (2021). Mississippi Delta Loess. www.nps.gov

  • Schwartz, M. (2019). Soil, Politics, and Cotton in the Antebellum South. University Press.

  • U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2021). Coal Explained. www.eia.gov

  • Eller, R. D. (1982). Miners, Millhands, and Mountaineers: Industrialization of the Appalachian South. University of Tennessee Press.

  • Pew Research Center. (2020). Urban-Rural Divide in American Politics. www.pewresearch.org

  • Axelrod, A. (2009). The 1930s: A Decade of Modern American Politics. Facts On File.

  • Hudson, J. C. (2002). Across This Land: A Regional Geography of the United States and Canada. Johns Hopkins University Press.

  • Foner, E. (2017). Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863–1877. Harper Perennial.

  • Lewis Dartnell (2020), Origins: How the Earth shaped Human History. Vintage

  • Sven Beckhert (2015), Empire of Cotton: A Global History. Vintage

12 views

Comments


bottom of page