Talk:German American

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Portal:United States
 United States Portal
This article is within the scope of the United States WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to United States-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

I removed the claim that President Garfield was German because he campaigned in German. He spoke many languages but I could find no evidence that he was German himself. A couple sites specifically called Hoover the first German-American president. Rmhermen 15:01, Jan 18, 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Proposals for expansion

I think it would be interesting to add some bits on German-American politics. German Americans were, after all, the backbone of the 19th century US socialist movement, and also of the anarchist movement; they've overwhelmingly voted Republican, and largely moved to the Right as the Republican party has gone from a left-wing to a right-wing party. There's also the question of German-American responses to the world wars, including all positions from the German-American Bund to General Eisenhower himself. Also, we should have a list of active German-American organizations (I know the Goethe Institute has a US presence, and there are also plenty of more home-grown movements). I'll start adding some material of this sort unless the feedback is negative. QuartierLatin1968 18:33, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

So far as current societies, I only know Texan ones like the German-Texas Heritage Society and various local German language groups, but there's also a good amount of local-level activity. I assume other states like Pennsylvania have similar groups.
A quick google search turned up the German American National Congress/Deutsch Amerikanischer National Kongress amongst others, but I honestly don't know how much these groups do now aside from trying to get German back into schools. --Laura Scudder | Talk 06:25, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Quibble: I don't think the Republican Party was ever truly left-wing. It was founded on the basis of opposition to the expansion of slavery, and contained a handful of radical abolitionists/reconstructionists, but on the whole it was still fairly conservative. (At no point was it aligned with socialism or anarchism.) American politics of the 19th century were not particularly ideologically-charged, aside from the issue of slavery. Funnyhat 05:19, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hyphens

This term should not be hyphenated unless used in adjectival form (e.g., "German-American cuisine"). In noun form, it should be simply German Americans. Funnyhat 04:58, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Not necessarily. See Hyphenated Americans. Rmhermen 17:14, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
In light of the fact that the hyphen is only appropriate in adjective form (if even then), I put a requested move tag here for German American instead. --Laura Scudder | Talk 21:04, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. Article titles should be nouns, not adjectives. — Knowledge Seeker দ 21:11, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • All right, it turns out Chicago (15th ed.) actually recommends open compounds (non-hyphenated) for both the adjective and noun forms, unless the writer prefers it (so it's not a strong recommendation). I'm still sticking with support, unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the hyphenated form is more common. — Knowledge Seeker দ 23:39, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Support for the reason Funnyhat mentions. (Sorry I haven't gotten around to my proposal for expansion yet.) QuartierLatin 1968 02:53, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. This is not an adjective; it is a hypenated noun. This usage is less common recently but an old immigrant group like this is more likely to use the older standard spelling. See [1] for examples. Rmhermen 19:33, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
I'd say that in most writing people don't think too hard about whether they should hyphenate or not, as exemplified by the German American National Congress website, which uses both hyphenated and unhyphenated rather haphazardly between both noun and adjective forms throughout, even alternating the spelling of the name of their organization, but overall seem to favor unhyphenated. --Laura Scudder | Talk 22:17, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. violet/riga (t) 4 July 2005 21:59 (UTC)

[edit] List of German Americans

I'm suprised there's no list of German Americans. Maybe somebody could put it here because Germans are the largest ethnic group.

I've heard that up to 30% of Americans are majority German; it would be almost silly to compile such a list.

[edit] We NEED the List

Is there a List of German Americans?

--Sheynhertzגעשׁ״ך 05:56, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] AFDed redirect

Germans of USA had an AFD debate that agreed to redirect the article here. If there's any salvageable material in the original article, feel free to merge it. Johnleemk | Talk 11:28, 30 November 2005 (UTC) i

I HAVE A QUESTION AND KNOW NO OTHER WAY OF HOW TO EMAIL ON THIS SITE YET OR ANYTHING. HOPEFULLY YOU CAN HELP ME LEARN AND ANSWER MY QUESTION/STATEMENT TO BE ADDED. I HAVE COME ACROSS A SOURCE IN WHICH EISENHOWER IS QUOTED: "God, I hate the Germans..." (Dwight David Eisenhower in a letter to his wife in September, 1944) HIS FATHER WAS A GERMAN JEW. JUST SO YOU KNOW. PLEASE EMAIL ME BACK AND LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU FIND AND MAYBE HOW TO JUST EMAIL THE PAGES KEEPER INSTEAD OF POSTING THIS FOR EVERYONE TO SEE.

THANKS, SARAH T3ACH3SKIDS@MSN.COM

[edit] POV?

Someone edited my contribution and mentioned POV in the edit note. Unfortunately this editor was mistaken. The heavy citations in my contribution support all of the facts I assert. The other editor provided no evidence, apparently failed to read the citations, and in several instances introduced unsourced assertions that are contrary to fact. The most egregious of these is the claim that some World War II detainees had dual German-American citizenship. The United States does not permit dual citizenship with Germany. I am reverting to the earlier version of this section. Please discuss future edits on talk. Durova 02:35, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I've reverted another change by the same editor about World War I. I'll outline some possible counterarguments:
  1. German Americans spoke a wide range of German dialects. When a husband and wife spoke differing types of German but essentially the same dialect of English, it could be simpler to use English in the home.
  2. First and second generation German Americans often remembered language problems from their early years in school. By using only English in the home parents hoped to spare their children from the same stresses.
  3. The German language declined in international importance with the close of World War I. Germany lost its overseas colonies. Reparations hampered economic recovery. This reduced prestige might have influenced parental choices.
  4. There were obvious benefits to ensuring that one's children spoke unaccented American English.

It might be interesting to create a new section to explore these questions although adequate citations may be hard to locate. Since this article does not currently have such a discussion, it is unwise to conclude an analysis of wartime prejudices with an unreferenced assertion on a different subject. Durova 18:13, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

There is a large literature on the question of family and school language usage. Before making up all sorts of hypotheses it would be a good idea to read studies of language loyalty and assimilation--try the Kazal and Tischauser studies cited in the references, as well as Thernstrom's Encyclopedia. A useful online source is [2] It argues "The overwhelming evidence from internal documents of these churches, and particularly their schools, however, indicates that the German-American school was a bilingual one much (perhaps a whole generation or more) earlier than 1917, and that the majority of the pupils may have been English-dominant bilinguals from the early 1880's on.

" Rjensen 18:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

My objection was to an uncited assertion that appeared at the end of a different discussion. This link is a narrow academic study that focuses on a small group of bilingual parochial schools. It has little relevance to the statement, "In general the older generation that wanted to keep the old language lost out to the more Americanized younger generation that did not want it." This might become acceptable if you supplemented it with statistics for enrollment in this type of school and referenced an analysis that noted the children's role in changing school policy. Such decicions usually result from agreement between administrators and parents. An expanded and referenced discussion might make an interesting addition to this article. That would deserve its own section. Durova 08:32, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Wiki is an encycopedia and we are not allowed to do the original research that Durova wants. The article in question was a major summary that covered most German language schools in the USA, based on actual historical documents, not speculation. Dozens of scholars -- Like Tischauser supported the statement that "In general the older generation that wanted to keep the old language lost out to the more Americanized younger generation that did not want it." So as an encyclopedia we must report what the scholars are saying. Rjensen 16:19, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't know about "must," but I think you make a case that it is allowed in the encyclopedia. MPS 18:34, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
by the way there is a large literature on assimilation (see Kazal) and it makes the point that it is almost always the younger generation takes the lead in Americanization, not the older generation. WW1 was a shock that disempowered the elders, giving the younger generation the chance to do what they wanted (switch to English). The reason there was no "going back" in 1920s is that the younger generation did not want to go back. Rjensen 18:42, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

If dozens of scholars have made that statement then it should be easy to provide a relevant line citation. This is the contributor's responsibility. I objected because the statement had the appearance of original research. A statement that holds true for a wide variety of ethnic groups does not necessarily hold true for every group. The link provided on talk in defense of this statement was only tangentially related. In fact, a critical reading could interpret that link as a refutation of that assertion (by claiming that the few parochial schools with German educators abandoned bilingual education with no resistance from parents).

Rjensen mistakes critical commentary for personal opinion. There's a difference between saying, You haven't established this: the same evidence could point to something else, and actually believing the opposite view. Rjensen's edits today attributes Franklin Roosevelt's appointment of German Americans to high military posts to "a deliberate effort" to demonstrate that ordinary German Americans would not face the same discrimination that they had in the previous war. That would be very interesting if it were sourced, which it isn't. What is the evidence that Dwight Eisenhower and Chester Nimitz owed their appointments to anything more than their professional achievements? I don't advocate original research; quite the opposite. The section where I have contributed is the most heavily referenced part of the article.

To be completely candid I should inform other editors of any possible bias. I am a United States citizen of partial German ancestry. I speak the language well enough that I sometimes passed for a native among Germans in Germany. That places me among a very small percentage of German-descended Americans. I have studied modern German history and modern American history at the university level, but not specifically the history of German Americans. Durova 21:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC) Durova 21:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

FDR promised no attacks on German Americans in his famous speech of Oct 12, 1940 at Dayton Ohio. Why did FDR surprise everyone by putting Eisenhower in charge of the invasion instead of Marshall? He never said, of course, but everyone the time commented that German-Americans were heading the war effort in Euope and the Pacific. FDR deliberately reached out to Willkie, the leader of the country's German Americans after the 1940 election. He was doing much the same with the Irish (the other group Wilson had trouble with). Perhaps the best overall sources are Kazal on Philadelphia and The Minds of the West: Ethnocultural Evolution in the Rural Middle West, 1830-1917. by Jon Gjerde (which compares several ethnic groups). Rjensen 22:15, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Additional note: the best study of the language transition is * Carol K. Coburn, Life at Four Corners: Religion, Gender, and Education in a German-Lutheran Community, 1868-1945 (1992), which I added to the readings. Again she emphasizes that the younger generation insisted on the transition toEnglish. Rjensen 22:23, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

This discussion covers several subjects so I'll respond in bullet points:

  • FDR's speech from October 12, 1940 would make a good reference in the World War II section of the article.
  • I suggest citing some of the leading commentators from that period about who was heading the war effort, and toning down this article's editorial description of FDR's motivations. If nothing more tangible has emerged from FDR's private papers or associates' memoirs then the simplest conclusion would be that the German American ethnic group produced generals and admirals because so many Americans had German ancestry.
  • If you have a good source for linguistic transition then cite it. Part of my concern was that roughly half of Germany is Roman Catholic rather than Lutheran and that there are several different Lutheran synods. Parents who enroll their children in bilingual parochial schools are a small and self-selective group.

Regards, Durova 07:37, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Facts to be verified

Can anyone verify any of these facts? More than 1.3 million Germans were living in the United States at the start of the Civil War, and they comprised almost 5 percent of its white population and about 4 percent of its total population of 31.2 million. The large majority of these German immigrants arrived in the U. S. between 1848 and 1860, and came mainly from the western and southwestern areas of Germany. An estimated 4,000 of these German immigrants had participated in the failed German Revolution of 1848 and/or uprisings in 1849, and fled their homelands to escape retribution. These political exiles, known as Forty-Eighters, caused quite a stir in the U.S. because of their highly vocal agitation for changes in American institutions and practices, and their anticlerical sentiments.

In 1860, more than four out of five Germans in the United States were living in the Free States, and two out of three were concentrated in just five states – New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois and Wisconsin. The border states, consisting of Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky and Missouri, contained about 15 percent of the country’s Germans, and the Slave States in the South contained a little over 5 percent. Germans overwhelmingly chose to live in the Free States because they did not have to compete with slave labor, and the Free States were more industrialized, offering better economic opportunities. Germans also disliked the institution of slavery because it was akin to the serf system they detested in their homelands. [3] MPS 18:57, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

The claims seem about right. I would drop the last sentence (serfdom was not an issue), and mention the large German population in Texas, that tended to oppose the Confederacy. See http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/GG/png2.html Note that Missouri Synod Lutherans tended theoretically to endorse slavery (but they rarely owned slaves) Rjensen 19:01, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
The assertion about serfdom might stand if someone finds a reference that links the two concepts. Serfdom still existed east of the Elbe river in early nineteenth century Germany. Without a reference I'd delete it. Durova 22:01, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Encyclopedia must focus on important events -- not millions of petty details

The fact that a handful of Germans came in 1608 is a trivia item. It is not given more space than the millions of germans in and near Chicago! Rjensen 06:38, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Not it is not. They were the first German-Americans. The first of millions, they are special handfull of people. They were the beginning. The English in Jamestown were also only a handful of people-that is all that Jamestown was for that matter. Jamestown in 1608 is the beginning of it all. That is also all there was on the Mayflower: a handful of people-yet look how important the Mayflower legacy is to Americans. Why should we omit the story of the first German-Americans? It is not trivia. Many people don't even know stroy of the first German-Americans. Their story ought to be told here (especially as this article is not anywhere near the size, where we need to worry about it getting to lenghty) Perhaps we ought to expand the section regarding the millions that followed, but omitting the story of the first German-Americans just seem wrong. Regards, SignaturebrendelNow under review! 06:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
The Mayflower set up something new. The Germans at Jamestown simply blended into an English town and seem not to have created anything Germanic at all--they had no influence, lasting or otherwise. No one followed them or emulated them. That makes it a trivia question. Much more important: Name the first Germans in New York, Chicago St Louis. Rjensen 07:17, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Sorry but I disagree. They may not have had the influence later German migrants had, but they were the first. Besides it is just one small paragraph. I'm not saying we shouldn't mention how Germans later on shaped cities like Cincinnati and Chicago (that obviously needs to be mentioned). But we should spare one paragraph for the story of the first Germans in North America. Why can't we tell the story of the first Germans in 1607 and that of "the first Germans in New York, Chicago St Louis?" There is enough room in this article and I think we cannot afford to omit the story of the First German-Americans. That said, I am open to the idea of trimming the paragraph on the first German Americans, so long as we mention them. Regards, SignaturebrendelNow under review! 17:11, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Just for fun

Hi, I just thought it would be neat to have a German-American userbox:

This user is a
German-American.
Dieser Benutzer ist ein Deutsch-Amerikaner.

The mark-up is {{User:BrendelSignature/German-American}}, as I saved it in my userspace according to the new guidelines regarding personal userboxes. Best regards and happy editing! SignaturebrendelNow under review! 04:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reverting vandalism

I'm sorry that I've reverted this article, but the anonymous user 72.200.151.171 severely vandalized this article on October 22, 2006. Nobody paid attention and edits were made on top of the vandalized article. Some paragraphs turned into incomprehensible text and were difficult to fix without removing legit contributions. I ask dedicated editors to examine the vandalized text and integrate valuable contributions made since the vandalization. —☆ CieloEstrellado 05:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eisenhower/Eisenhauer

I'm fairly dubious about the claim that President Eisenhower's "surname was originally spelled Eisenhauer in Germany", as the article asserts. First of all, there is considerable variation in the spelling of German family names, since they predate contemporary orthographic standardizations. Also, according to the article on Eisenhower, his family immigrated in the 17th century, before there even was a Germany. If someone with more time and energy than me could look into this, the article could be improved. Bws2002 22:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

A better way of saying it is that "Eisenhower" is the English way to spell the way "Eisenhauer" is pronounced. It's way outside the realm of possible German spelling variations. — Laura Scudder ☎ 23:10, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] 1921Smith cartoon - UK rather than USA?

Is the cartoon in the page American or English? just curious as the products sold by the "assimilated German grocer" seem to be awfully English - Melton Mowbray pies, ginger beer, York ham, Stilton cheese, Cambridge sausages etc. Several of these foodstuffs are definitely traditional English foodstuffs with specific meanings. A well meaning but wrong illustration? --mgaved 15:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clarification needed

Whenever I see a statistic such as 43 million German Americans, I become very suspicious of how this figure is arrived at, and for what purpose it is being used. The peak period of mass immigration from Europe to the US was around 1865-1914. Fifty years ago it was very common in the north and midwest for a person to be an immigrant from Europe, or to have an immigrant parent or grandparent from Europe. Now the peak immigrant generation and their children have passed away, it is much less common to have an immigrant parent or grandparent. It very common for first and second generation immigrants to marry within their own ethnic community. It is rather less common for subsequent generations. My first immigrant ancestor arrived before 1700. My last immigrant ancestor arrived in 1920. Out of my sixteen great-great grandparents living around 1870 ( not all in the US ), five were Germans, one was a Hungarian German, one was from Latvia and possibly German, four were Irish Catholics, 1 was a Canadian of Scottish descent, one was an Irish Protestant, and three were from apparently of so-called scots-irish stock living in Virginia before 1740. None of the grandparents or one great-grandparent that I knew in my lifetime was an immigrant. I don't know any languages or recipes or dances from my ethnic makeup. So what kind of mongrel do you call me ? My circumstances are hardly unique! Am I being classified as a German American based on a bare plurality of my ancestors ? Can I claim to be an Irish American based on a imperceptibly slighter feeling of cultural influence from those forebears, although less numerous than the Germans. Can I claim to be both ? Do I have to choose, and can I choose whichever I want. Do I count at 1 individual or 7/16 of an individual in that claimed total of 43 million German Americans ? I can see how these labels may have been of importance in the last century, particular in attitudes to the world wars. I don't think they are applicable or relevant any more. It is my assessment that 9 times out of ten when some such statistic is quoted in the media any, it is dubious provenance and inherently POV. If there is some scientific and NPOV demographic defition of some of these issues, then there should be some proper explanation of it here. Eregli bob 04:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

the data comes from the Census which asks people what ethnicity they claim. Rjensen 04:41, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Yeah exactly, and there is no sensible answer for me to give on the Census. Probably seemed like a good question 90 years ago but it is a stupid and unanswerable question for many people now.Eregli bob 05:39, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
The Census Bureau asks people for the ethnicity. After all ethnicity is only a social concept (it's not in your genome- the only thing you're born as is a human being, everything else is taught). This statistics merely means that 48 million Americans seem themselves as being of predominantely German ancestry. Also, you are not being classified. Perhaps you remember the 2000 Census- it asked people as what they see themselves. The Census Bureau is quite simply the most authoritative statistic we have on as what "ethnicity" Americans see themselves. It is the best NPOV "scientific" source. Remember that ethnicity is nothing more than a social constrcut- thus the best source we have is the most inclusive poll: The US Census. Signaturebrendel 06:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Eregli bob, if there "there is no sensible answer" then you can simply mark "American" and commonly you can refuse to answer the question on polls. If you didn't identify as a German-American on the Census, then you are not included in the 43 million figure. Signaturebrendel 06:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../g/e/r/Talk%7EGerman_American_2009.html"