Are Austrians still considered to be Germans?

[John_Mace]

@GermanicPride

I’m sure you could google ethnic group and find out quite easily yourself what an ethnicity of someone is.

Yes, I could, but there is no standard definition. You’re just using the one that conveniently works out the way you want it to.

Answer my earlier question: Are Serbs and Croats the same ethnic group? They are exactly analogous to Germans and Austrians, but they will tell you they are different, ethnically. And they are. It’s self-dentification that is the most important thing, and whether the group considers you part of it. With groups like Germans and Austrians, it can go either way. It needn’t be one way or the other.

[Northern_Piper]

@GermanicPride

Hitler was an Austrian born citizen but he was an ethnic German.
Einstein was a German born citizen but was an ethnic Jew.

Because of course it wouldn’t be possible for a Jew to be an ethnic German as well as a Jew.

@GermanicPride

[QUOTE=Princhester]

You’ll have to do better than that. What is it to be German? I’m looking for a list of objective factors. How can I, knowing nothing of the subject, decide if someone is or is not “German”? Give me some rigour.

Otherwise you’re just shooting the breeze.

Someone of pure ethnic German heritage, regardless of their birthplace.
[/QUOTE]

Ah yes, “purity.” Pity we don’t have a “Seig Heil” smiley.

I hear jackboots.

[Princhester]

@GermanicPride

Someone of pure ethnic German heritage, regardless of their birthplace.

I’ll stop pussyfooting around. Unless you start posting a response to me that has some substance, I think it’s pretty clear that you don’t even know what it means to be German outside of some woolly, airy fairy, muddleheaded notions that you throw about like straw but can’t even assign a clear meaning to. So far, what we’ve got from you amounts to saying that Germans are German if they are German. Get a grip. List out some actual objective features that someone can have or not have from which it can be determined whether someone is German or not. Language might be one. Birthplace might be another.

You have work to do, if you want to be taken seriously.

[John_Mace]

Well, we know they don’t have big noses, like Einstein. That’s a start!

[Acsenray]

I suppose that an objective definition of German ethnicity might be “a person biologically descended from one of the Teutonic tribes that spoke Germanic languages and populated Europe from the Eurasian steppes to the Rhine as of approximately A.D. 400.”

I have some reason to suspect that the OP would have some affinity for this definition. However, there are some complicating factors:

(1) This definition would encompass a much broader group of people than the OP has in mind. There are a lot of Spaniards, French, British, Scandinavian, Italian, and Slavic people who are so descended.

(2) At the same time, this definition would be too narrow to encompass all of the people that the OP would probably like to include.

(3) Language can be transmitted independently of biology. Thus, historically, a lot of people who spoke Germanic languages might not have been biologically related to each other. So, we have some trouble establishing clear identities of groups. Are they German just because they speak a Germanic language? Are people who might be genetically very closely related or identical not German just because they don’t speak German?

(4) These Germanic tribes themselves were highly intermixed with the people around them, be they Slavs or Magyars or Gauls or Latins or other groups. And since, up to the 5th century or so, they were very mobile, they were almost certainly not genetically “pure.”

The notion of ethnicity itself has always been a fluid one globally. Except for isolate groups, identification with and definitions of ethnic groups can change very quickly, even within a generation. It’s just not a category amenable to objective identification, unlike, say, language or location. Ethnicity is most often a matter of self-identification.

Look at a small place like England. Go back to the early first millennium and there are clear ethnic subdivisions: Brigantes, Belgae, Dumnonians, etc. But wait, after the Anglo-Saxon invasions, those ethnicities disappeared, and you have Britons, Angles, Saxons, Jutes, etc. Again, these distinctions soon disappeared in favor of Anglo-Saxon, Danish, Cornish, Welsh, Cumbrian. Now, what do we have in England? Anglo-Saxon, South Asian, West Indian, etc. And already, the English/Anglo-Saxon ethnicity is being subsumed into a British one, one that includes genetic contributions from all over the former Empire. And that one won’t last long before it’s just European.

[Bryan_Ekers]

Let’s assume they are. So?

Now let’s assume they’re not. So?

[John_Mace]

@Bryan_Ekers

Let’s assume they are. So?

Now let’s assume they’re not. So?

Exactly. Could be. Could not be. Who cares? Germany and Austria are two countries with a shared language. Europe is full of such constructs.

[Dissonance]

@GermanicPride

You’ve been brainwashed don’t you realise history is written by the winners and the victors tell the stories - you do realise the original number in Auschwitz alone was 4 million it later then got dropped to 1.5 million… go figure.

Oh goody, holocaust denial. Who could ever have seen that one coming?

Nobody is laughing at all and WW2 was not soly just started by Hitler (I guess who you are referring to as a ‘madman’) and evil is subjective.

This statement is utter bullshit, but I’ll give you a shot: who do you think started WW2 aside from Hitler?

Nobody ever mentions Stalin’s regime, Pol Pot’s regime… and so forth.

Yeah, poor ole Adolf gets picked on so much that nobody ever talks about Stalin or Pol Pot. Oh wait, that’s complete bullshit too.

[GermanicPride]

@Pitchmeister

Oh, only 1.5 million? I guess it was alright then!

Rune was laughing with his line “WW-II and all that silliness” - I wouldn’t say that’s an appropriate description for the horror of that time, even 70 years removed from it.

In Hitler’s case, I would argue evil is pretty damn objective, if we cannot agree on that, I’m afraid we are so far removed that any sort of discussion becomes pointless.

No one mentions Stalin or Pol Pot? Lots of people do, they’re just not very relevant in a discussion about Germany and Hitler.

You will find that Holocaust deniers and their kin are not looked upon favorably around these here parts, and it’s not because all Dopers are brainwashed Germans such as myself.

I didn’t say it was alright at all but you cannot believe everything you are told about the Holocaust, parts of what is told is true, parts what is told is not true, history is written by the winners and the victors tell the stories.

I don’t think Hitler was evil at all, it is subjective.

If he had won the war nobody would be questioning him we would all be hailing him, but he is often used as a punch bag and he can’t defend himself.

@Mosier

It took less than 70 years for American people to go from being British to being not-British. Why should it take more than 70 years for Austrians to become not-Germans?

Austrians don’t deny their German roots, by the way. They just consider the idea of Greater Germany a particularly terrifying anachronism.

How can you change your ethnicity? - Check definition of ethnic groups.

They do, they even deny welcoming the annexing of Austria into the Third Reich but consider themselves ‘victims’.

@Acsenray

Whatever you do, don’t mention the war. I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it.

@Acsenray

FWIW I don’t think “German” is relevant any longer as an ethnic term. It’s a linguistic category and it’s a political (citizenship) category and it’s a geographic category. But it has no meaning as an ethnicity. I don’t think you can really break white Europeans down into very many ethnicities any more. And even from a historic perspective, the French and the Germans amd the Northern Italians can’t logically be cut into neat ethnic groups.

Of course ‘German’ can still be used as an ethnicity.

@Northern_Piper

Because of course it wouldn’t be possible for a Jew to be an ethnic German as well as a Jew.

Ah yes, “purity.” Pity we don’t have a “Seig Heil” smiley.

I hear jackboots.

An ethnic Jew can not be an ethnic German, but an ethnic German who converts to Judaism can be ethnically German and religiously Jewish.

@Princhester

I’ll stop pussyfooting around. Unless you start posting a response to me that has some substance, I think it’s pretty clear that you don’t even know what it means to be German outside of some woolly, airy fairy, muddleheaded notions that you throw about like straw but can’t even assign a clear meaning to. So far, what we’ve got from you amounts to saying that Germans are German if they are German. Get a grip. List out some actual objective features that someone can have or not have from which it can be determined whether someone is German or not. Language might be one. Birthplace might be another.

You have work to do, if you want to be taken seriously.

I told you the simplest way; of German heritage, how else do you want me to define it?

@John_Mace

Well, we know they don’t have big noses, like Einstein. That’s a start!

He was Jewish…

@Bryan_Ekers

Let’s assume they are. So?

Now let’s assume they’re not. So?

Nice flawed input there.

@John_Mace

Exactly. Could be. Could not be. Who cares? Germany and Austria are two countries with a shared language. Europe is full of such constructs.

They have more than a shared language, Austria was the leader of ‘Germany’ until 1866 I’ve said this previously then Prussia became the dominant German state and unified Germany as a nation-state (Little Germany) without Austria as opposed to a Greater Germany (with Austria).

@Dissonance

Oh goody, holocaust denial. Who could ever have seen that one coming?

This statement is utter bullshit, but I’ll give you a shot: who do you think started WW2 aside from Hitler?

Yeah, poor ole Adolf gets picked on so much that nobody ever talks about Stalin or Pol Pot. Oh wait, that’s complete bullshit too.

How am I now automatically considered a Holocaust denier?

I’m stating a fact that the numbers in Auschwitz was lowered by an incredible amount.

Hitler did invade Poland yes but so did the Soviets and Hitler did ask for 3 years for that part of Poland to be handed back over to Germany, the Treaty of Versailles was primarily to blame for WW2.

Hitler does get a lot of unnecessary bashing - he is one of the most understood individuals who has ever lived.

“Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived… he had a mystery about him in the way that he lived and in the manner of his death that will live and grow after him. He had in him the stuff of which legends are made.”

• John F. Kennedy,
  President of the
  United States of America

[Bryan_Ekers]

Well, actually, it’s not denial to say “only” 1.5 million were killed at Auschwitz. Auschwitz is notable for the industrial scale of its operation, a veritable factory of death, but the other 4-5 million murders of Jews were more localized, typically by Germans marching into a town and, with the aid of resident collaborators, herding the Jews into a nearby forested area or gully and shooting them.

@GermanicPride

Nice flawed input there.

I don’t know what this means. I merely pointed out that your premise, true or not, is of debatable significance.

[Pitchmeister]

@GermanicPride

I didn’t say it was alright at all but you cannot believe everything you are told about the Holocaust, parts of what is told is true, parts what is told is not true, history is written by the winners and the victors tell the stories.

Even if I believe 1% of what I learned about the Holocaust, it still stands out as one of the most horrific events in all of human history. Don’t complain you’re being labelled a Holocaust denier, because you are.

@GermanicPride

I don’t think Hitler was evil at all, it is subjective.

Aaaaand were done here.

@GermanicPride

“Hitler will emerge from the hatred that surrounds him now as one of the most significant figures who ever lived… he had a mystery about him in the way that he lived and in the manner of his death that will live and grow after him. He had in him the stuff of which legends are made.”

• John F. Kennedy,
  President of the
  United States of America

It is quite telling that googling this phrase gives you hits to nowhiteguilt.com and stormfront.com on the first page of results - I’m not going to be clicking these links, though.

[Acsenray]

@GermanicPride

How can you change your ethnicity? - Check definition of ethnic groups.

Of course ‘German’ can still be used as an ethnicity.

Would you care to elaborate? Or indeed address any of the issues that I touched on?

I am beginning to doubt that you are German yourself. I suspect that most Germans would be able to pull this kind of thing off with a little more semblance of rationality.

[Tamerlane]

@GermanicPride

If he had won the war nobody would be questioning him we would all be hailing him,

Yeahhhh…

…well…

…huh.

I guess we are done here.

[Pitchmeister]

@Acsenray

I am beginning to doubt that you are German yourself.

I most certainly hope not - we don’t want him! It’s probably some deluded White Power thing, and if Hitler was so awesome and German, wouldn’t you want to be German as well?

@Acsenray

I suspect that most Germans would be able to pull this kind of thing off with a little more semblance of rationality.

Well, the ones that don’t even care, maybe, but I can’t speak too well about the mental capabilities of those that do…

[Donnerwetter]

There was a poll conducted in Austria in 2008 (the 70th anniversary of the “Anschluss”) which asked whether people thought that Austria is a distinct nation.

82 % said yes, 7 % said no.

When the same question was asked in 1956, the result was:

49 % yes, 47 % no

(Source: The leading Austrian newspaper “Der Standard”: derStandard.at )

[Bryan_Ekers]

Well, there you go. The Austrians themselves think they’re distinct, and barring the emergence of some other authority to say otherwise, or to offer up a sufficiently generous definition of “distinct”, I guess that’s that.

[kaylasdad99]

@John_Mace

Yeah, if pigs had wings they could fly.

Not necessarily. Look at Balrogs. They have wings, and they don’t fly; in fact, they plummet like a stone.

[Donnerwetter]

It is noteworthy, though, that this notion of an Austrian nation only evolved as time went by. The article points out that the official name of the country from 1918 until 1919 (i. e. immediately after WW I and the breakup of the Austro-Hungarian empire) was indeed “Deutschösterreich” (German Austria).

Article 2 of the first constitution of Austria (in 1918) read: “German Austria is part of the German Republic”.

At the time (after WW I and the collapse of the monarchies), there was a general feeling that “German Austria” should be part of a greater democratic German state. However, this was specifically prohibited by the treaties of Versailles and St. Germain.

The rest is history.

[John_Mace]

Can someone explain why it matters whether Austrians are “ethnic Germans” or not? If we all agree that they are, what comes next? Anschluss 2.0? I think the only “schluss-ing” we’re going to see in that region is in the Alps during the winter.

Really. Who fucking cares? Are the Walloons ethnically French? Are the Flemish ethnically Dutch? Are the Moldovans ethnically Rumanian? Are the Sicilians ethnically Italian? Are the Catalonians ethnically Spanish?

[Donnerwetter]

Well, these ethnic differences are a factor to be reckoned with, if you like it or not.

Take the example of Yugoslavia: For the longest time, everybody thought that the South Slavs had joined to be one happy nation called Yugoslavia and live together happily ever after.

This is all ended in a bloody mess in the 1990s, as we all know.