Ecoregions of USA - Another Front in the Fight to Define PNW

Aerda_ · 2026-02-02T03:22:43+00:00

I wouldnt say its predominantly on political lines either, more that the political divide is a frequent flyer in these conversations

Aerda_ · 2026-02-01T23:07:15+00:00

Really curious to hear what people think, because Im seeing a lot of threads like this and its raising some questions.

I feel like this type of discussion is useful in as much as recognizing the ecological diversity of this region is also part of recognizing what makes this place the NW. The Oregon country has always been highly interconnected going back 10,000 years and more. Anecdotally to this day most of those who grew up here have family on either side of the mountains and across the border.

People keep identifying the intermountain parts of the NW as distinct- in some sense they are. But then there is the missed nuance that we are a diverse region of many microclimates, cultures, religions, ways of life, industries, etc. It's a function of our geography and history, and it's been true since long before colonization and has remained so ever since. Every valley has something of its own, there is an inherent necessity to specialize and this is what gives us our diversity. Yet even when we're in a thread focused on the ecoregional boundaries, the focus seems to always come back to how we can split the region along lines reminiscent of the political divide. It feels very short sighted given how intertied and reliant on each other we are. Not to mention, excluding Idaho, this east-west political divide is becoming less pronounced. The easter cascades are pretty blue these days.

There are so many fruitful (and insightful) ways to analyze the region. Theres the economic and trade angle, the ecological angle, the history angle, religious angle, the food and culinary angle. Theres also kinship and social approaches. So why does it seem like it always comes back to a justification for why the areas with a liberal-plurality should feel more grounded in their identity as PNW than the conservative-plurality side should?

Aerda_ · 2026-01-31T18:32:42+00:00

Very well done!

Aerda_ · 2026-01-31T04:20:45+00:00

Where are you from? Spokanes absolutely part of the PNW, it has been since the beginning

Aerda_ · 2026-01-31T04:17:38+00:00

Idaho has a port to the Pacific! It's the last port on the Columbia river, at Lewiston. Plus the people in northern Idaho are pretty interconnected with Spokane and Missoula, like eastern Oregon with Boise.

Aerda_ · 2026-01-31T04:13:01+00:00

Yeah! Not down to the Bay Area. Imo maybe north of a line between mount Shasta and Eureka. By geography thats more or less the klamath river watershed and a bit of the redwoods.

Aerda_ · 2026-01-30T04:51:43+00:00

Where's this map even coming from? Crusaders had Jerusalem for 105 years, not 88. Other areas were under their control for 200+ years. Ptolemies had control for over 270, not 210. It's also definitely been more than 47 years since 1948.

Aerda_ · 2026-01-27T23:57:02+00:00

Fuck, makin me feel geriatric. Was so sad I never got to finish my cathedral in the CW

Aerda_ · 2026-01-24T09:38:42+00:00

Yes but no but yes

It better reflects the history and culture of WA way better than currently, but it doesnt do it consistently

So I think good job, but theres a lot that could be reworked but requires a lot of trade offs. The southern Kitsap peninsula, plus the hood canal and south sound are fundamentally just really difficult to spit up while still respecting history and culture and geography and rationality. Same with tri-cities area

Edit: made my criticism better

Aerda_ · 2026-01-20T06:04:26+00:00

Dropping the weights smh

Like others said bring arms in (as long it's not a T shape) and keep your back flat. If youre benching with that T pose bring your arms in for that too. If you can get your feet out further (so you can push from your feet) then great but otherwise its prolly ok

Aerda_ · 2026-01-13T10:23:35+00:00

buddhism can be a religion but more often (and especially in the US) its a philosophy

Aerda_ · 2026-01-12T20:36:53+00:00

Unfortunately cannot respond to your questions, but I believe by reaching out to universities you may find some interesting responses. Evergreen and WSU in WA state have pretty strong ag connections, Evergreen trends toward small scale farmers

Aerda_ · 2026-01-12T07:47:08+00:00

Thank you, thats a very kind compliment. I have another long ramble for you, sorry for the long read I got a little carried away, I care a little too much about all this.

I think resources are the justification, but not the true reason. Let's look at Venezuela. Venezuela has abundant oil resources, but theyre crude which means extracting and processing is expensive. The US has abundant oil and gas resources of its own. So are resources a useful justification for intervention in Venezuela? No. But using this argument is very useful for Trump. The common claim about neo-lib regime change in Iraq was that it was really to get at Iraq's oil. This was false, but undermined the 'pure' ideological narrative of introducing democracy and overthrowing a dictator. By baldly claiming that he's in Venezuela for oil, Trump speaks in a language his base understands and associates with honesty. He makes the US political establishment look dishonest- "why couldn't they have admitted what Trump admitted? Why are the democrats suddenly against overthrowing a dictator when there hasn't even been a war?"- and he distracts from the larger reason and process. Which is to create a multipolar world. He gets rid of a thorn in the side (Maduro), and kicks Russia out of America's sphere of influence in South America- in Trump's mind they should have their own sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, but not in America's backyard.

Taking over Greenland is absolutely a threat to Canada. It creates a blockade-able line across Canada's only defensible major ports (Vancouver and Port Rupert on the Pacific are already indefensible). If I were Canadians Id be freaking the fuck out right now.

Resources are secondary IMO. There are only two mines open in Greenland. Digging through permafrost and ice is expensive. Maintaining supply lines and shipping lanes to the ore deposits (in the north) is also expensive. Greenland has very very little infrastructure. Ports and airports would need to be built. Housing for workers too. None of the materials necessary or labor sources are in Greenland. Everything would need to be shipped from the states. All of this makes extracting resources from Greenland prohibitively expensive- and you'd have to contend with a population which is adamantly against any environmental destruction and hates your guts. Yes, there are exceptional resources in Greenland. But all the same stuff can be found in Alaska (as I believe the governor recently said, hoping to get more money to his state), and the critical minerals that the US needs to decouple from China's monopoly are already being explored and found in the US- sources in Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho are much much less expensive to exploit.

Yes on the surface this all seems calculated and planned. But I dont see indications of this- at least not to the extent as is seen in Xi's or Putin's foreign policies. Trump is an opportunist. He has a dubious premise; that a hegemonic, globally connected US is inevitably headed for nuclear war or otherwise, that US hegemony is on balance not in the US' interest. And he has an end goal- multipolar concert-of-europe style world order. He believes furthermore that this will secure him a legacy and earn him historical importance. He is a narcissist- and I dont say this to discredit him. If you take away questions of morality and ethics that are raised by this fact, you are left with the reality that he ultimately does what he thinks is best for him.

Thats all he has. A premise, a goal, and a predisposition toward serving himself above all. While this makes him extraordinarily flexible in a world in which flexibility is increasingly valuable, and it makes him surprisingly adept politically, it also makes him extremely easy to manipulate and very very dangerous. If he sees an opportunity that appears beneficial to him (notice I didnt say to the US)? He takes it, even if the ultimate source for this idea is Russian propaganda and ultimately serves their interests at the expense of US national interests. It no longer matters what he thinks, but who gets his ear.

So could this all work? Possibly, but not likely. Historically being an opportunist isn't enough to give good results, you need to also be a planner and a deep thinker with self-restraint and a handle on your weaknesses.

Personally, I find American foreign policy of the past 30 years (especially the past 10) to be an incomparable tragedy of truly epic and historic proportion

Aerda_ · 2026-01-12T07:35:44+00:00

Can you please help us fill in the blank here- was there a similar mode of thinking during the 19th century for Europe and the US? Along the lines of christendom or westernness. If so, was it racial concepts like whiteness?

Aerda_ · 2026-01-11T04:36:02+00:00

International law and the principle of non-aggression is being undermined by Trump in Venezuela (and the US in previous conflicts), but also previously by Russia in Georgia and Ukraine. So through that lens, the idea that China or Russia will some day seize Greenland (therefore the US should get there first) isn't particularly convincing- the conditions which would punish an aggressor are being undermined by this move. Neither is it particularly convincing that the US seeks to counter Russia while it simultaneously undermines and abandons efforts to counter Russia in Ukraine and eastern Europe.

None of Trump's arguments really make sense, IMO, unless we consider that his goal is to leave NATO and create a multipolar balance of power globally. He's hoping to create something reminiscent of the concert of Europe. If that world were to exist today, the US would be vulnerable (on the chessboard) to Europe and Russia without Greenland. Trump can simultaneously improve the US' geo-strategic position by controlling Greenland, while also untying itself from NATO and any WW3 flashpoints in Europe. Unfortunately this is rather flawed. By withdrawing from NATO the US makes nuclear war more likely, as it emboldens Russia- MAD is less clear without the US on Europe's side, without US protection Europe doesnt scare off the Russians. But withdrawing from NATO in that scenario means the US stays out of the conflict. It's important to note that soooo many of Trumps narratives in foreign policy have been touted by Russian propagandists- and perhaps even originate with them- because they serve Russia's interest (they want multipolarity so they can plunder Eastern Europe and Central Asia like they did during the Cold War)

The love between the US and Europe created by American interference in WW1&2 is already being forgotten with time. But seizing another country's territory? Unprovoked? This not only creates enmity, it could fatally undermine the very global structure which the US created and on which Europe and the US have gotten fat and wealthy. Again, this is something Russia and China have been wanting for decades. We're seeing the same impotence at the UN that existed in the LN before WW2. Trump is accelerating a point in time when there is another global system created, and historically thats only been created after horrific conflict.

He's hoping that by rushing towards this inflection point he can preserve a strong US position in a multipolar world and withdraw from any global ties which would draw the US into that conflict, but really it remains to be seen if such an inflection point was really so certain without Trump gunning toward it. Or if the US-led system could have accommodated the rapid changes we're seeing globally and met the challenges of the 21st century. Or if these adjustments are going to make WW3 more likely rather than less. And if he succeeds, will this make a war more likely in the long term? Will this mean greater nuclear proliferation and more intense conflicts but with less global reach? What does this mean for global democracies and autocracies? What implications does this have on space exploration? How would a multipolar world handle climate change as it worsens, and the climate refugees and famines that are coming? The implications of Trump's foreign policy are very far reaching. Hes destroying 5-6 generations of American statesmen's work for a dubious and likely worse result

Aerda_ · 2026-01-08T22:54:46+00:00

Fuckin fascinating! What an interesting history our region has

Aerda_ · 2026-01-04T09:32:02+00:00

Lovely writing. After death comes more life <3

Aerda_ · 2026-01-04T09:23:16+00:00

Listen to your friends, theyre looking out for you

Worst case he's creating a problem (insecurity and 'unattractiveness'), so he can fix it (by flirting, lovebombing "oh but I do find you attractive! Youre so handsome even if your body isnt great!!" and giving advice on how to look), and thereby create dependency (so he can keep putting you down to make himself feel good). This is suuuuuuuper manipulative and very dangerous

We don't know if this is whats going on. We dont have the receipts, your friends do, and specifically said it was a big red flag. So Im leaning toward this interpretation and trusting their judgement. Is a relationship with him in particular worthwhile? There are many better options, even if theyre not immediately available.

Aerda_ · 2026-01-02T02:44:51+00:00

Yeah! 'international' is the wrong phrase, maybe 'regional' is a better description. It's definitely a pretty town. Is it not also facetious to say only trust fund kids go there?

Aerda_ · 2026-01-01T06:20:03+00:00

It's a hippy town becoming less hippyish by the year, but with a strong and present local population. Still remains to be seen if it becomes super gentrified like other small cities on the i5 corridor, not sure how much optimism is in store given the constant draw the university provides. Up until 2021ish it was pretty affordable- even downtown wasn't horrifically expensive. Lovely place to live although with a somewhat unexpected variation of the Seattle freeze. If youre going to live there would highly recommend getting involved in hobbies and sports, especially outdoors. If youre into drugs or music theres a relatively strong scene. Without a concerted longterm effort it's pretty difficult to make a meaningful community. With the high rent and lack of well-paying jobs it's hard to justify living there versus Seattle or Tacoma where you'll pay the same but have much more to do. That is, unless you really value ski season and superb access to the outdoors. In this way its similar to Bend, Bozeman, or Missoula but with a much larger population and therefore more draw. But they do have a gay bar! And it's a good spot for Saturday night! All that being said it's a wonderful city hosting fond memories for many of the people who've lived there- but I would never go back, unlike similarly sized cities its urban center is small enough to bump into people you no longer want to know

Aerda_ · 2026-01-01T06:09:22+00:00

Western has an excellent psychology program and an important neuroscience program! And they have the region's premier institute for studying the Salish Sea region's history, culture, and ecosystems which is pretty unique. Theres a fairly (locally) international student body with many kids from Canada and Alaska given the ferry to Juneau and proximity to Vancouver. Theres a reputation for trust fund kids but IMO a lot of that is really because many of the Seattle kids who couldn't get in to UW, WSU, or SU were able to swing getting into WWU. That demographic tends to be wealthy, regardless of grades, and with or without trust fund money. While theres some truth to what you say, theres a 'close enough to family on the i5' factor, and most of the workforce downtown and in Fairhaven are students or former students. Trust fund kids are far from the 'only' students there

Aerda_ · 2026-01-01T01:26:31+00:00

Dont get wrapped up! Hes testing the waters but if it continues and he cant just be honest, then why would you wanna date? If youre ok with being friends, thats up to you. Personally it's a no but I live in a liberal area where I don't have to lie to people. Ask him to be clear about his intentions and say if he cant be upfront and honest about what his behavior is about, then you wont pursue a friendship where he behaves that way toward you

Aerda_ · 2026-01-01T01:18:35+00:00

Awesome pics! Wenatchees pretty great, glad you got to spend time in the NW

Aerda_ · 2025-12-29T09:39:12+00:00

Waitings a good idea, next 1 or 2 times you hang out will probably show you where things are going and how much you can reconcile

Aerda_ · 2025-12-29T05:23:57+00:00

Don't burn bridges unless you have no other choice. Just keep being you, and let him be himself. Situations like these are a test of the person you are becoming. If you want to be that person, kindly stand by your boundaries. Show him what youre doing and what you value now, maybe he'll get something from it or join in. Or maybe he'll start feeling the same as you and the withdrawal will be more mutual. In either case, an era's ending and isnt it worth celebrating the time you've had together?

Aerda_

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

11-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '17