Many articles have been written in an effort to justify the failure of “illegal immigrants” to assimilate into the American culture. I felt compelled to respond when one writer tried to cite the Pennsylvania German immigrant as an example of a group who had resisted assimilation and loyalty to their new country to justify the Mexican immigrant (legal or illegal) of today insisting that the United States adapt itself to speaking two languages and the assertion that “no one is qualified to serve as governor of Texas unless he is fluent in Spanish”. He alleged that the German immigrant’s “resistance to a commitment to this country bordered on rebellion so set were they in clinging to their heritage”. All my studies indicate otherwise as shown in the quotes from historians as cited in my response. The writer, in his response, gave no credence to my in depth studies or the facts I presented. He chose, instead, to ignore historical data for the sake of bolstering his arguments with unfounded assumptions. [Author]

Senor,
I am so grateful that you condescended to explain to your readers how vehemently my Pennsylvania German ancestors resisted assimilation into their newly adopted nation. In light of the facts that I am a Son of the American Revolution, my original immigrant ancestor learned English within 2 years of his arrival (1743), had one son in the Revolutionary War, and that a school bearing my maternal grandmother’s family name was erected in Dutch Hill Pennsylvania "dedicated to the education of our children in the language of the beloved country kind enough to take us in", I was somewhat nonplussed to learn that, according to you, all I had learned re. German immigration was questionable! This was particularly upsetting since I publish the largest web site in the world devoted to my surname and, to a large degree, the experiences of Pennsylvania German immigrants.

As a result of reading your column of March 1, I was forced to study, once again, the copious notes I have compiled from prominent historians, expert in the German experience in America, to see where they went wrong. So far, I have been unable to find enough evidence to refute their findings, even when I factor in your expert opinion. The only logical conclusion I can garner to support your assertions is that you only studied the experiences of the, relatively small representation, of religious orders such as the Hutterites, Harmonists, Amish, and Mennonites who felt it better, for the sake of "family" unity to maintain their heritage and language. But, even in their case, they were well able to communicate with the English speaking world outside their tight knit communities. That said, to avoid the scourge of my German heritage (rambling on) I list below several quotes from in-depth studies done by far more respected German Immigration scholars and experts than myself. I, respectfully, suggest that you read them. Then, if you still wish to hold to your beliefs re. the German experience, so be it.

By the way, forgive the lack of the tilde over the "n" in Senor. Due to the stigma of being a dumb "Pennsylvania Dutchman", I forgot how to add it on my computer and was too lazy to look it up. Besides, as one of your other columnists put it, computers spell checkers ought to recognize and auto-correct Spanish words, punctuation, and names. I think I’ll wait for that to happen. Maybe then, people will quit pronouncing my name "wolf" "gang" and get it right. Incidentally, if you wish a quick lesson in the correct pronunciation I am at your beck and call. That said, you may now read the attached documentation or, if too intimidated, scroll to the bottom of the page to see who I am.

1. "The German Alliance, founded 1788, encouraged the acquisition of American citizenship and along with that, at least indirectly, the learning of English and the study of the Immigration Commission’s citizenship "catechism." Founded in 1819 as a kind of replacement for the Alliance, the Steuben Society of America accepted into its membership only American citizens, used only English as its official language, and tried to distance itself from the former national organization that had fallen into disrepute for its "unpatriotic" stand encouraging hyphenated Americanism."

2. "German was not able to hold its ground as a language of daily usage even in Pennsylvania, except within small Mennonite, Amish and other sectarian communities. During both the War of Independence and the War of 1812, at times when anti-English feelings were running high, Americans of German descent comprised less than 9% of the total population of the United States. And even in Pennsylvania, where the Germans had settled most densely, they amounted to only a third of the entire population. Colonial Germans, primarily speakers of English fought only for their political independence. They had no stomach for an anti-English language and cultural revolution."

3. "When German-language farmers in Augusta County, Virginia petitioned the U. S. House of Representatives in 1794 for a German translation of the booklet containing the laws and other government regulations — copies of which had been distributed free in the English language — officials simply ignored them. Even the bilingual Speaker of the House of Representatives, Frederick Augustus Conrad Mühlenberg, refused to support their modest request. arguing that the faster the Germans became Americans, the better. In reality, contemporaries were again and again surprised by how swiftly German immigrants and their children were ready and willing to surrender their mother tongue for the sake of the advantages English offered in the social and economic arena. In the little town of Lancaster, Pennsylvania in 1817 you heard "nothing but German," a delegate reported to the Pennsylvania constitutional convention of 1837. "Now, however, you hardly hear a word of it. So, in the town of York, twenty years ago, you would hear nothing but the bauren sprache of the country; but now it has all passed away and you hear nothing but English spoken. The young Germans don’t wish to continue to speak it."

4. "While four out of five children of German-American families were enrolled in a private (meaning German-language) school in 1840, in 1860 four out of five such children were enrolled in a public bilingual school. Rather than enabling those children to retain their German, the bilingual schools apparently did more to accelerate the acquisition of English. Typically, by about 1850, German was no longer used as a primary or co-equal language of instruction in the larger cities. Even in the private schools a minimum of 16 weeks in the school year was now to be dedicated to English-language instruction, and subjects like reading, writing, arithmetic and American history were to be taught wholly in English."

5. "In the words of the state legislature of Nebraska in April 1919: "No person, individually or as a teacher, shall, in any private, denominational, parochial or public school teach any subject to any person in any language other than the English language." One state representative typified the majority opinion when he said: "If these people are Americans, let them speak our language. If they don’t know it, let them learn it. If they don’t like it, let them move. . . .""

6. "author Kurt Vonnegut in his autobiographical Palm Sunday: . . .the anti-Germanism in this country during the First World War so shamed and dismayed my parents that they resolved to raise me without acquainting me with the language or the literature or the music or the oral family histories which my ancestors had loved. They volunteered to make me ignorant and rootless as proof of their patriotism!" [New York: Delacorte Press, 1981, 21].

7. "Only those denominations with a religious order-like membership in their virtually closed sectarian communities, such as the Hutterites, the Harmonists, the Amish and certain Old Order Mennonites, held fast to their German worship language and their everyday German dialects. This residential and linguistic isolation from their English-speaking environment made it almost impossible for their children to leave their hallowed faith. Outside their hallowed religious grounds, even these religious fundamentalist Germans grasped at many an opportunity to assimilate. The Civil War, for example, offered all European immigrants the chance to earn for themselves a place in the new
national community by means of voluntary service in the military. A German-American speaker at a festival gathering in 1882 reminded his audience of Lincoln’s first call to arms, which was answered as much by adoptive citizens as by Anglo-Americans: "In this great moment in the history of the United States there were no Irish, no Germans, no Scandinavians, no aliens, but only Americans. . . . All fought like brothers, shoulder to shoulder, for one holy purpose — the preservation of the Union — and, with it, for the salvation of the last great bastion of freedom and for all the suppressed and the underprivileged of all nations" [See Hense-Jensen / Bruncken (1902), II, 117].

8. "Linguistic and cultural integration for the vast majority of German-Americans was motivated more than anything by their determination to improve their standard of living. Numerous immigrants and their children achieved economic success, which in turn made them very proud of their environment and the social and political community in whose surroundings they had experienced their achievements. Many German-Americans, unlike other immigrants, had little reason to identify with their past and the ethnic community they had left behind when their future belonged so obviously to the thriving supra-ethnic corporate body they had joined. Upward social and economic mobility tended to weaken ethnic ties."

9. "Writing in 1928, the American social critic and grandson of an immigrant, H. L. Mencken, pointed out how swiftly the process of assimilation had been absorbing the German-Americans, even before the First World War: "The melting pot has swallowed up the German-Americans as no other group, not even the Irish."

In conclusion let me add my humble opinion. It is my belief that a functioning society does not come about without the best effort on the part of all concerned. However, the German-American experience and willingness to commit to their adopted nation at the sacrifice of a great deal of their own culture and language can shed some light on the process and help strengthen our rationality in the face of doom prophets and nativistic hate mongers.

Respectfully,
Herr Lee Wolfgang

As a member of the “ignorant masses” who happens to be a Son of the American Revolution, I “step forward” to answer the challenges in an article in your publication. (8/04/05). Your assertions are highlighted, followed by my response.

“Show me anyone who has lost a job to an immigrant.” My son, though more eminently qualified, was passed over for permanent employment in the computer field, losing out to immigrants from India or the far east. An associate of mine was forced to leave his job because he was not bilingual. Prime commission sales hours he worked were given to a part-time employee, also an immigrant.

“Anyone who would deny an immigrant family in need federally funded health care is heartless.” I say a hearty “here I am!” Is one is not compassionate when they are unwilling to have their tax dollars used to benefit a healthy immigrant while, as in my case, their ninety year old mother struggles to pay almost $400 per month for medication on a fixed Social Security income?

"The only jobs taken are those Americans will not do.” The market most heavily saturated with illegals is agriculture at 23% of the work force. Pray tell, who is doing the other 75% of the work, Martians? Besides, any of these jobs would be considerably more attractive to those here legally if promoted as “Moderate salary, free health care, food stamps, education in your native language, assisted housing and, "Oh, I forgot, there is a 90% probability you won’t have to pay taxes!”

“Show me anyone not from some sort of immigration”. My ancestors, upon arrival at the Port of Philadelphia in 1743, were held in detention until they were proven free of disease, showed that they possessed a skill, and could support themselves (without government assistance), or had family here who would meet all their needs until they became productive. They built a school to “educate their children in the language of the beloved country that took them in”. More importantly, each applied for “legal immigrant status” before arrival, waited for years to be accepted, and swore “his solemn oath, administered according to law, that it is his bona fide intention to become a citizen of the United States, and that he doth renounce forever all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, State or sovereignty whatever.”

In other words, they arrived expecting nothing more from those already here except the opportunity to work, provide for themselves and build a future in our great nation forsaking the past. Most importantly, they respected our country enough to endure much hardship in order to come here without violating its laws.

LW

Response to Motley Fool article:

As a 47 year veteran in the men’s tailored clothing business and a former 7 year Men’s Wearhouse manager and current 8 year Dillard’s employee, I think you should do a little more research before publishing assertions that are absolutely false. For one thing Men’s Wearhouse charges hefty prices for "every" alteration including plain bottoms on suit trousers which are un-hemmed making this a must do alteration. As a matter of fact, alteration charges are a major part of their profit structure and employees have been terminated for failure to include them in a sale. Men’s Wearhouse does offer free pressing but, if you have ever stood over a Hoffman press while steam is passing through a soiled trouser, you would, surely, sympathize with their tailors who are forced to inhale the aroma. The only free alteration you get from them is to "re-adjust" a seam that has "already" been altered by them at a premium charge.

As to your totally absurd statement that Dillard’s does not want to play the markdown game I have news for you. The only suit we carry in common with the Men’s Wearhouse and Foley’s is $100 less than Foley’s and $5.00 less than the Men’s Wearhouse at our regular price. Dillard’s conducts two major sales per year in men’s tailored clothing and, between the two, has sale prices a minimum of 24 weeks a year. Twelve of those weeks we are at 50% off an already "guaranteed low price". Hence the suit we carry at a regular price already lower than the Men’s Wearhouse, we sell at HALF their so-called discounted price for three months a year. They now carry a Hart, Schaffner, & Marx product named Krizia with a price tag marked "compare at $500, our price $399. I sold this same product at Dillards for 7 years at a regular retail of $395. Mr. Zimmer’s targeted profit is 50% to 55%. Dillards, in men’s tailored clothing, operates in the 40% to 45% category not taking into consideration our, almost, half year long sales. Incidently, our sales do not exclude manufacturers because of their quality or reputation, we do not charge for alterations on any "quaranteed low regular price" garment, and, on sale, charge fees that are close to half what Men’s Wearhouse charges for the same alteration and we NEVER charge for bottoms, even at 75% off.

Suffice it to say that, at least twice a year, you can purchase a Hart, Schaffner, & Marx or Hickey-Freeman suit from Dillards for a price lower than that of most of Men’s Wearhouse garments many of which have construction that is far inferior to fine men’s clothing standards.

While I am not a big fan of Dillards as an employer and have always maintained that Men’s Wearhouse is the best retailer to work for in the United States, I will ever defend the truth. You would do well to check me out and, after doing so, if you do not decide to purchase your fine tailored clothing from Dillards during their two clearance sales, I would wonder at your financial acumen.

It’s time, once again, for that which we treasure,
A family custom that gives us all pleasure.
‘Tis time to give way the mountain of treats,
That Grandy bought because they were cheap.

Frantic, uncertain many items he gathered,
That no one would want them didn’t really matter.
Indeed he amassed such a huge pile of junk,
That Nanny believed, when he shopped he was drunk.

The huge discounts given though really nice,
Paled in comparison to the regular price.
He little considered the final low fee,
It was originally two hundred or possibly three.

It’s a thousand piece puzzle he adamantly said,
Adding it to the 300 under his bed.
Someone will want them he stubbornly insisted,
Forgetting the ones they returned last Christmas.

He scoured the house up and down,
For gifts that he lost that couldn’t be found.
On top of the table he created huge stacks,
Hoping to discover something somebody lacked.

He examined each piece with the greatest of care,
Making sure that the price tags were really still there.
He picked up the nice ones and chortled with glee,
Nanny hasn’t seen them, I’ll keep them for me!

He wrapped with great care these boxes of gifts,
In hopes no one noticed the seals were ripped.
The ones that he played with he carefully repaired,
The missing directions? He hoped no one cared.

Christmas eve as he stumbled off to bed,
Visions of discounts danced in his head.
The useless gifts left brought him no fear,
He dump them on someone the following year.

These words he did mutter as he drifted off,
Nanny thinks I bought them ‘cause I’m mentally off.
Well the ones they don’t want, I’ll gladly keep,
And with that soothing thought he fell asleep.

Twas the night before Christmas and all through the house,
No family was stirring for they’d all moved out.
My stockings were thrown ‘neath the bed with great care,
In hopes that Nanny wouldn’t see them down there.

The children were scattered at functions unknown,
Leaving their parents and Toto alone.
I in my boxer’s and Mom in her gown,
Got up from our nap to go and lie down.

When out in the laundry there arose such a din,
Turned out to be Bubba who couldn’t get in.
I sprang out of bed as quick as a flash,
Tripped over Toto and fell on my a—-.

Out to the kitchen I moved like a snail,
Let in the cat then stepped on his tail.
He let out a howl like you never heard,
I have to admit, I said a bad word.

From the corner of my eye I saw flashing bright,
That Nanny had forgotten the Christmas tree lights.
I groped to the wall to switch those things off,
As I reached for the plug I suddenly coughed.

When your 60 years old and cough while leaning,
It gives "sense of balance" new special meaning.
This would explain why the gifts you unwrap,
All are in boxes that are curiously flat.

Out on the lawn I saw something flutter,
Santa’s for real I joyfully muttered.
I peeked out the door the fat man to view,
Got hit in the face by the Dallas Morning News.

I yelled Merry Christmas as the paper boy lingered,
He responded in kind then gave me the finger.
I just closed the door and turned with a sigh,
Leaned on the counter with my hand in a pie.

I went back to bed walking with care,
It didn’t matter, I fell over a chair.
As I lay on the floor I felt something wet,
The gift of a hairball from one of my pets.

I stopped at the bathroom, who needs a light,
That’s how I got a wet slipper that night.
As I crawled into bed and let out a yawn,
The sun in the window announced a new dawn.

I turned on my side and covered my ears.
Found that my nose was in Toto’s rear.
I said to myself as I drifted to sleep,
I hope Christmas day can beat Christmas eve.

Those of liberal mind sets and humanist thinking have recently released a torrent of protest regarding the Texas State Board of Education’s ruling concerning the mention of Charles Darwin in our school textbooks. We are led to believe, by their tirade, that the Board has “banned” any mention of Darwin or his theories yet, as their astute and analytical minds should have assimilated, nothing was banned at all. It was only stated that it was not a requirement that Darwin be mentioned in all textbooks. I see no real or implied threat that this ruling could, in any way, mean complete censorship.

Is it also these same people who seem to have no objection whatsoever that our children can attend public school for twelve years without have been exposed to the most widely distributed and universally read work of literature in history, or to the greatest “historical” figure known to man? Are they those who would squirm in anguish at the failure of our schools to make our children aware of Silas Marner, Ivanhoe, Julius Caesar, Wuthering Heights, and other examples of great literature? Those who would chafe in anger were we to ignore men like Plato, Socrates, Lincoln, Einstein, Ghandi, and Darwin? How, then, can they so easily dismiss the widespread effect of such a great work of literature as the Bible, the poetry of Solomon, the writings of St. Paul? How can they blot out the historical significance of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ? Had any other person had such a profound influence on modern man, these same people would be screaming for His name to be mentioned in our schools, His teachings imbedded in the minds of our children, and his historical impact be taught.

Is the Bible “ignored” because of it’s religious foundations or “feared” because of it’s profound truths? Is Jesus Christ treated, in our schools, as if He did not exist because of His religious significance, beliefs, and teachings? Or is it remotely possible that the value of His life to mankind is dismissed because of the reality that He may be exactly who He says He is? If they are so sure that the bible is just a book and Jesus was just a man, what then should they fear?

Two separate articles in our local newspaper suggest that, if the citizens of Dallas and Tarrant Counties, through their taxpayer supported hospitals, refuse to spend “a few dollars” on non-emergency health care for illegal immigrants, we will reap the horrors of tuberculosis, sexually transmitted diseases, and low birth weight infants. Additionally, it is advised that we build, at increased taxpayer expense, six more clinics in the Dallas suburbs.

Would that I had the audacity to conjure up some dreaded disease or social trauma with which to bludgeon and threaten American citizens and taxpayers in order to force them to take over my health care when I lose my insurance coverage in December. Or would my status as a taxpayer and legal resident disqualify me?

Some time back, as a test of the original FDA ban on the controversial abortion drug RU-486, pro-death activists arranged for a California woman to have herself impregnated. She then flew to France and purchased a supply of this banned drug. Her cohorts informed customs agents that she would be trying to bring this drug into the U.S. illegally. The plan was to have the drug seized and then file suit to regain possession in order to get this issue into our court system (hopefully in front of a liberal judge) and, as a result, into the media and the public eye. This diabolical scheme was an organized plot set up from the very beginning to force yet another “easy form” of “birth control” into our social system. A form of birth control which, coincidentally, could be used through the seventh week of pregnancy. A seven week old fetus is a fully formed baby! It was known at the time that to allow this drug to be smuggled in would open the door to doing away with all restrictions on illegal drugs being brought into our country.

Ironically, this was this particular woman’s third pregnancy, the first two already ending in abortions. Since this conception was an experiment to tamper with our judicial system, the plan is to abort this baby also!

Little known fact for the “My body my choice.” believer:
Once the egg is fertilized, a woman’s body produces white blood cells which attempt to rid her body of the “foreign object”. It is attacked in the same way any as other object not part of her normal make up. The only way pregnancy is carried to term is because the “ fetus” is provided with a natural protection against this attempt by the mother’s white blood cells to rid her body of this “separate” being. Most thinking people would consider this evidence that the living being in the womb is not a part of the mother’s body.

The 4^th of July. Let’s see. How shall I spend this holiday celebrating the independence two of my ancestors died to secure?

I know! I think I’ll go to work in a Canadian owned mall selling French designed, Italian wool, Korean made suits, Chinese made shirts, and Sri Lankan made ties to Indian nationals who made their fortunes by employing illegal Mexican immigrants, drove here in Japanese made cars, on British made tires, fueled by Saudi oil and will, most certainly, give me checks drawn on Arab owned banks.  My heritage? I think not!

At one time bemused, then perplexed, and now frustrated. All emotions I have felt in reading several of the hypersensitive articles in regard to cultural sensitivity. The first, I remember, was a tirade about computer spell checkers not recognizing Hispanic names. A, normally astute, person would realize that spell checkers fail to recognize many words especially proper names. However, all have a simple function to “add” any unrecognized word, which will, thereafter, be accepted. Later programs will even spell check in dozens of languages. Also, keyboards can be set up to function in several languages. Now comes a discourse on the insensitivity of those who mispronounce, misspell, or do not recognize the myriad of special characters that affect the pronunciation of Hispanic words. I have news for easily offended Hispanics.

After 255 years of family residency in this country, with service in the Revolutionary, 1812, Civil, 1^st and 2^nd World Wars, many people still misspell or mispronounce my name. Having worked for 40 years surrounded by (should I say Hispanic, Latino, or Mexican) tailors, I can assure them that they make as many, if not more, culturally incorrect mistakes as anyone. They have spelled my name, in written correspondence, nine different ways including Wolfgane, Wulfgang, Woofgane, Woolgan, all incorrect. I can’t even begin to document the various mispronunciations.

Considering that my name is made up of two simple words, wolf and gang, anyone ought to able to figure out that it is pronounced “Vulfe Gong”. My family, long ago, accepted the Americanized pronunciation, just as it is spelled, to make it easier on folks who were struggling to adapt to many new cultures. Very few people are sensitive enough, let alone smart enough, to absorb the proliferation of languages flooding our country today. As my dad used to say, “Call me anything, just don’t forget to call me to supper.” To the culturally correct, I say, give it a rest!

Lee