2008 Electorate: European Americans - Tribal Politics Persist

by: dreaminonempty

Tue Nov 10, 2009 at 08:00


Take a look at the map below and see if you can figure out what the circled counties have in common:

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us
Click to enlarge.

If you think these counties each had the best showing for McCain in their respective states, you're darn close, but not exactly right.  Here's a hint: this diary is about the politics of European Americans - that is, those who identified a specific European ancestry in the 2000 census.

Answer on the flip.

dreaminonempty :: 2008 Electorate: European Americans - Tribal Politics Persist
Ten Second Summary

Those who identify their ancestry as European are a diverse group, too.  Even after generations, ethnic identity is related to politics in ethnic enclaves at least.

The Answer

Each county circled above has the highest percentage of those with Dutch ancestry (first listed ancestry) in its state.  Here's a map of Dutch ancestry to compare to the electoral results:

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us
Click to enlarge.

Turns out this is a pretty heavily Republican demographic - about 10-20% support for Obama.  This leaves heavily Dutch counties in the Midwest looking a fair bit redder than their neighbors.  And it's not because there's large differences in other demographic variables, such as race, income, or education.  

These communities have maintained the culture of the original immigrants to at least some extent as Dutch ethnic enclaves.  In 1847, two conservative Reformed pastors founded Holland, Michigan and Pella, Iowa.  The percent of residents who are Reformed adherents (map) is pretty close to the percent who describe their ancestry as Dutch, indicating a substantial amount of cultural continuity.  Holland, Michigan, for example, appears to take great pride in its Dutch heritage.

Not all people who indicate a European ancestry in the census may be as affected (politically) by their cultural heritage as those in these Dutch communities.  There's bound to be a spectrum, from those who have a profound identification with the culture, language, religion, and values of their ancestors to those who only dimly recall their ancestors' origins.

European Americans - The Results

Here's the voting preferences of various groups of European ancestry, estimated from the November election results and census data:

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us
Click to enlarge.

Broadly speaking, there's some tribal divisions to be seen here: Nordic descendants were more likely to support Obama, while other Germanic descendants were more likely to support McCain.  Slavic descendants and immigrants also were likely to support Obama.  

We Are Not All of Us Alike.  Yet Again.

Of course, just as with other (typically more recent) immigrant groups, we would not expect all communities with origins in one country to have similar political tendencies.  I would suspect recent immigrants from the Netherlands, for instance, would be more likely to vote for Obama than McCain, given that the Netherlands was the most pro-Obama European country (6th in the world), with 74% preferring Obama and 10% preferring McCain in a Gallup poll.

We see this above for those of Swedish heritage.  In Minnesota, I estimate strong support for Obama among those of Swedish heritage; in Wisconsin, somewhat less, although it's hard to tell; but in Kansas, support is low, and similar to other Kansans.  We can also see this to a lesser extent for those of German heritage, where support for Obama is higher in Wisconsin than in other states.  And, we can see a role for religion, with those in Utah of English origin - which in that state is correlated to the percent of adherents to the Mormon religion - less likely to support Obama than those of English ancestry in New England.  Perhaps the biggest differences are seen between those in the Northeast with French ancestry, and those in Louisiana with Cajun or French ancestry.  In this case, the differing historical journeys of these two populations is quite clear, despite the common French thread.

We can also see strong differences between ethnic groups within a state - in North Dakota and Minnesota, for instance, there's a large difference in support between those of German and Norwegian ancestry that shows up in the election results map:

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.usFree Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.usFree Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us
Click to enlarge.

Sometimes We Are Alike.  Coincidence?

One intriguing finding is that seven different Polish-American communities (Sherman County, NE and Morrison and Lincoln County, MN not shown) all showed similar (and strong) support for Obama.  Here's a few more details on four of these communities; census data from 2000:

Greenpoint, Brooklyn, NY:  Population 37,000.  Urban working class community; Polish immigration from the 1890s to present day.  17,000 list first ancestry as Polish; 15,000 speak Polish (2000 under age 18) and 14,000 were born in Poland.  

Cook County, IL:  Population 5,000,000.  The largest Polish community in the nation, urban and suburban, continuing immigration.  425,000 list first ancestry as Polish; 160,000 speak Polish (23,000 under age 18) and 121,000 were born in Poland.  The census tracts used to estimate support for Obama were suburban, and around half to two-thirds of those with Polish ancestry were born in Poland.  

Portage County, WI:  Population 67,000.  Rural communities, settled partly by Polish farmers starting in the 1850s.  About 19,000 list first ancestry as Polish; 1,000 speak Polish (40 under age 18) and only 80 were born in Poland.

Luzerne County, PA:  Population 303,000.  An old industrial and mining center with a strong union history.  The only county where a plurality of residents has Polish ancestry; immigration began 150 years ago.  60,000 list first ancestry as Polish; 2700 speak Polish (200 under age 18) and 400 were born in Poland.

Urban, suburban, and rural; recent immigrants, or longstanding American families; agricultural or industrial:  were these communities all strongly supportive of Obama for different reasons or because of cultural similarities?

Ethnic Whites

I heard a lot about the Ethnic White vote during the 2008 election.  A brief search does not yield a clear definition, but a look at immigration patterns might help:

Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us
Click to enlarge.

Until the late 19th century, voluntary immigration to this country was almost entirely from Germanic Northern European countries, with the major exception of Ireland.  Then there was a large influx from Southern and Eastern Europe, and plenty of social strife to go with it.  In 1924, immigration quotas shut down immigration from these areas (and others).

So let's tentatively define "Ethnic White" as Eastern and Southern European, plus Irish (Catholic).  This is essentially the upper half of the chart shown in the Results section above.  

One thing stands out immediately: ethnic whites are not a monolithic group at all.  Nationwide, as a group, it's quite likely that they tilt towards Republicans a bit, although remember that estimates from one geographic area aren't necessarily representative of a nationwide sample.  However, there is a large amount of variation, from a generally strong support for Obama among Polish Americans to very low support among Italian Americans in portions of New York City and New Jersey.

Warning

These results are all from areas with high concentrations of people identifying with a particular ancestry - ethnic enclaves.  Just as with other groups we've seen, it would be reasonable to assume those identifying with a European ancestry probably vote in a more uniform manner living within an ethnic enclave than outside of one.    

________________________________________________
This diary is the eleventh in a series taking a close look at the 2008 electorate and exploring three themes: diversity within demographics, progressive feedback loops, and demographic change.  

Previous diaries:

Looking Back
Alternate History
Why Republicans Should Be Really Scared
African-Americans - We Are Not All of Us Alike
East and South Asian Americans - Diverse and Growing
West Asian Americans - Rapid Change
Native Americans - Increasing Participation
Islander Americans - In Need of More Representation
Alaskan Natives - An Economic Factor?
Latino Americans - Increasing Influence

Tomorrow: The 'American' American Electorate: You Might Be Surprised

Cross posted at DailyKos.


Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Another Excellent Diary (4.00 / 3)
Which also reminds us how rarely "white" gets broken down, examined, or even thought about, really.  As the American default, it just "is" (though not where I come from, the southern part of LA County, which is minority majority.)

Obviously a lot of work went into this.  I just have one niggle.  This statement: "Until about 1900, voluntary immigration to this country was almost entirely from Germanic Northern European countries, with the major exception of Ireland." is poorly phrased, as can be seen in the chart just above it, which shows Germanic immigration declining rapidly, and around 1890 intersecting with Russia, Italy and Austria-Hungary all sharply on the rise.  I guess I'm a bit sensitive, since my folks were part of this cohort, which really started rising in the mid-1870s.  But "Until the late 19th Century" or "Until the 1890s" would be more accurate.

I know it seems relatively minor, but the trajectory of that immigration had a lot to do with political developments at the time, particularly the intersection of rising Catholic & Jewish immigration with the Panic of 1893, whose impact lingered throughout most of the decade.

One more point.  Note the acceleration in the German immigration rate just before 1850, followed by the peak?  I know that a lot of Germans involved in the 1848 Revolution emigrated to America.  They were known as the 1848ers. But that was only a few thousand.  The chart seems to show that there was a broader impact touching others less overtly involved.  But the sharp drop after 1850 is something I didn't know about before.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


Another thank you. (4.00 / 4)
The phrasing you point out is from the perspective of a viewer glancing at the chart, which has an x-axis marked only every 50 years.  More specific phrasing certainly won't hurt.

I love it when you just have one niggle.  It means I haven't missed something major and glaringly obvious!


[ Parent ]
Quite True! (0.00 / 0)
I love it when you just have one niggle.  It means I haven't missed something major and glaringly obvious!

Any thoughts about the Germans?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
Nothing rooting in sound research (0.00 / 0)
First, just to clarify in case it's not obvious, the data are for decades.  The peak is for 1850-1859.  

This peak could reflect not the actual people involved in the 1848 turmoil, but rather a broader section of the population unhappy with the resolution of the turmoil.  But, according to wiki, "Gradually Bismarck won over the middle class, reacting to the revolutionary sentiments expressed in 1848 by providing them with the economic opportunities for which the urban middle sectors had been fighting."  I don't know how accurate that is but it could explain an eventual decrease in migration.


[ Parent ]
Ah! (0.00 / 0)
I didn't realize it was decadal.  In that case, the next decade was the Civil War.  Easy to see why immigration would decline. I thought it was declining before the Civil War.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
Except from the UK (0.00 / 0)
People from the UK kept coming during the Civil War, apparently!

[ Parent ]
Several possible reasons (0.00 / 0)
a) If the UK includes Northern Ireland in those figures, that's unsurprising. When you're a second class citizen, emigration always makes sense. If I remember correctly, the 1860s and 1870s also saw a large Irish influx into Argentina.

b) Some of those numbers may include people who stopped off in Britain. I don't mean those who caught the train from Hull to Liverpool. I mean those who stayed for a few years. That's a not inconsiderable number. I know several Americans whose ancestors settled down in London or Newcastle or wherever for a few years before moving on again.

My Swedish great-great-grandfather arrived in Britain c. 1885. When his widow and some of his children emigrated c. 1920 they identified as British, but I suspect they told enough stories to their kids that their descendants identify as Swedish-American (not that I know - I'm not in contact with that branch of the family). Conversely, my girlfriend's family never made it across the Atlantic. They finally made it as far as Donegal, but (until around 1980) none of them got any further.

Those anecdotes aren't directly relevant, but they do show that migration could be slow, and that ethnic identities could mutate in the meantime. That might explain some of the English peak.

c) The Industrial revolution was up and running in Britain by the 1860s, and had been for two decades. These industrial headstart didn't exactly help the working classes, so America acted as an escape valve there too.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog


[ Parent ]
Hmm (0.00 / 0)
I'd bet on c) - I just checked the footnotes, and Northern Ireland was not included in UK numbers prior to 1926.

[ Parent ]
Yeah, I'd bet on c) too (0.00 / 0)
But b) is more interesting, and a) makes a kind of sense - without any of Ireland, it's not really the UK at all, merely Great Britain - so I thought I'd throw them in there to see if anybody wanted to run with them.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

[ Parent ]
Potato disease (0.00 / 0)
Those immigrant peaks have almost nothing to do with political or religious turmoil. It's a result of the famine and poverty that ravaged rural aereas in Europe caused by the potato blight. Especially rural aereas that have a heavy potato depency. For the Dutch, that is people from the provinces in Groningen, Drenthe, Gelderland, Brabant and Zeeland: roughly the South and the East of the Netherlands. All these Dutch enclaves you speak off come from these - still conservative - regions

The potato blight started in 1845 in Ireland and spread to the European mainland in the years after that.
Those enclaves you mentioned are mainly populated by economic refugees with agricultural backgrounds.

I live in the Netherlands and have done some genealogical research so my focus is on this aspect. The European Potato Famine (of which Irish and the Scottish Famines are the most famous) affected a huge region. Not as bad as in Ireland and Scotland, but when your local community/region/county/province was largely potato dependent, the effects were still devastating and cause for emigration.

Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...


[ Parent ]
Thank you for the link (0.00 / 0)
I had no idea the potato blight had such a large effect over such a large area!

[ Parent ]
European subsistence crisis of 1845-1850 (0.00 / 0)
You're welcome. Also check that article used as reference: Eric Vanhaute, et al., The European subsistence crisis of 1845-1850: a comparative perspective

[ Parent ]
It is shocking dutch immigrants are so republican (0.00 / 0)
given the fact that communities like Pella have benefited from companies that were loyal to the community and didn't outsource to Mexico or Asia.  Companies like Pella Windows and Vermeer!

I know Pella fought very hard to keep out Walmart.  Ofcoarse your map doesn't actually show that the county where Pella is located voted overwhelmingly republican.  It is only pinkish.  Pella is south of Des Moines.  NOt northwest.

My blog  


Pella does have a Wal-Mart now (0.00 / 0)
but they still have quite a few locally owned stores on the town's main square as well.

Although Pella is SE of Des Moines, it is culturally much like NW Iowa.

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.


[ Parent ]
I don't know (4.00 / 1)
Assuming a community has been voting Republican for decades, I don't think the fact that other companies are outsourcing jobs while their companies are not would have too much impact on voting behavior.  Because it's simply the status quo.  If Pella started outsourcing, maybe that would get political attention.  Not sure.

[ Parent ]
Sioux County, Iowa (0.00 / 0)
is one of only two counties in the country that's more than 50 percent Dutch Reformed (the other one is in SD). It went 85 percent for Bush in 2004 and 81 percent for McCain in 2008. In fact, the PVI of Sioux County is R+32.

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.

Sticks out like a sore thumb. (0.00 / 0)
Douglas County, SD voted 75% for McCain...

[ Parent ]
Martin Van Buren - A dutchman, & father of the Democratic Party (0.00 / 0)
MVB isn't remembered for a lot.  1 term president.  That's about all anyone knows.  But he was in the Senate a really long time, and was a big player in North East politics.  

MVB was essentially the man who pulled the coalitions together to form the original Democratic party, and in the process got Jackson elected.  

MVB is also remembered as being the first president who was born in America, after it had become "the United States."  The first "American President."  

But, while that's true, he grew up speaking dutch at home.  His family had lived in the same area (in New York) for nearly 200 years!, but they still spoke dutch and considered themselves Dutch first and foremost.  

Anyway, that's my historical context comment for the day.  



Wow! (0.00 / 0)
That is cultural continuity, speaking Dutch 200 years after immigrating.

I am very curious what the political preferences of descendents of Dutch colonists are.  There's still plenty in New York and Pennsylvania, but not enough to run any calculations.

I wonder if people called Van Buren 'not American enough' when he was campaigning because he spoke Dutch.


[ Parent ]
Theodore Roosevelt's grandfather spoke Dutch (0.00 / 0)
Some of the old NY Dutch were powerful and wealthy, and they formed a bloc. Usually immigrant groups start at the bottom and often tehy're dispersed, but the Dutch controlled their area.

Herman Melville's mother was from the rich Dutch "patroon" class.


[ Parent ]
I missed this one when it came out (0.00 / 0)
In Minnesota and Iowa it can get down to very fine theological points. The Michigan and Iowa Dutch communities were organized colonies of a specific religious tendency, the "Separatists". Scandinavian immigration from four different nations was more diverse, but there were Haugean and Gruntsvigean areas in addition to orthodox Lutherans. Finns divided between church Finns (White, conservative) and non-church Finns (Red, radical), but the non-church Finns still sometimes opened meetings with prayers. And so on.

In Minnesota the Farmer Labor Party was the left party 1920-1945 and Democrats were a conservative, mostly Irish and German Catholics, which did not always support FDR. The left tended toward prohibitionism, which was poison to the Catholic vote. Even after prohibition wasn't an issue, effects lingered.


After reading the comments (0.00 / 0)
My guess is that there is very little in common between old NY Dutch and Iowa-Michigan Dutch.

The radical Farmer-Labor Party was more ex-Republican than ex-Democrat, simply because the Democratic Party was feeble in Minnesota because it was identified with the Confederacy. This prejudice was still an occasional factor into the early 20th century.

Before Roosevelt the Democrats were not necessarily more liberal by our standards than the Republicans. Furthermore, the West and farmers generally were ignored and betrayed by both parties from 1890 on, so that a lot of their representatives were dissidents and mavericks.


[ Parent ]
Thanks for the comments (0.00 / 0)
Very interesting.

[ Parent ]
Who identifies as what? (0.00 / 0)
I'm not terribly knowledgeable about US ethnic politics - my Scandinavian expertise is much more rooted in the twelfth century than the nineteenth. However, I know a few people teaching Old Norse at US universities, who inform me that Norwegian ancestry is much more likely to be claimed than, for example, Swedish, even though the extent of immigration wasn't wildly dissimilar. A great-grandfather from Sognefjorden makes you Norwegian-American, a granddad from Gavle doesn't make you Swedish-American.

I wonder how this fits into the wider picture. How much of the figures from areas where 10% or so claim an ethnicity are just noise, and how much do factors that also impinge on politics affect ethnic identity? When people identify as Norwegian, is it because everybody knows Norwegians went to Minnesota? Is it because Norway is particularly exotic or the poor condition of the soil there feeds into a self-reliance myth? Because they liked their grandmother's folktales?

I'm sure there are a multiplicity of explanations, but if anybody has any ideas I'd love to hear them.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog


Several competing tendencies (0.00 / 0)
And no rules, really.  

For example, if your mother's parents came from Sweden, and your father's parents came from Norway, but you live in a town in Minnesota where about a third are German Catholic descent, a third Norwegian Lutheran, and a third something else - well, chances are you'll go to a Lutheran church with a strong Norwegian identity, and be more likely to identify as Norwegian culturally (after American).  It can be about cultural exposure as well as actual ancestry.  


[ Parent ]
For areas where it's a common ethnicity, sure (0.00 / 0)
You haven't explained why Norwegian identity persisted more than Swedish identity, and given nineteenth century Norway's decidedly confused dialects, I've always found that puzzling. But that's not my main issue.

I'm not really talking about the areas with 30% identifying as Norwegian-American. More the areas where 5-10% do. That's a tangent, admittedly, because you can't get too much out of the numbers when they're that small a proportion of the population, but I suspect there the cultural influences are as much about ideology and folk myth as they are about exposure.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog


[ Parent ]
Possible reason (0.00 / 0)
I've read one explanation that Norwegians were more likely to settle in rural areas, and Swedes were more likely to settle in urban areas.  The Swedish descendants were subsequently more likely to move to another state, marry outside Germanic ethnicities, etc.  This would result in actually more people having Swedish ancestry, but at a more diluted level, and therefore less likely to identify it on the census form.  I haven't seen the data so I can't vouch for it.  It's a possibility though.

As far as the broader question, ideology and folk myth can still influence political behavior, I would argue.  But the point that the actual cultural influence is rather weak is probably quite true across much of the country, in the vast majority of cases.  Still, it is fairly easy to find a thriving cultural community at the 10-20% level maintaining ties to the 'old country', religion, and even language after many generations in this country.  


[ Parent ]
Swedes were a major factor in Chicago (0.00 / 0)
Notably Carl Sandburg, the official Chicago poet. I think that it's just easier to stay ethnic in rural areas.

Churches often reinforce ethnicity.

Even a century later people around here maintain contact with Scandinavia. One guy went to Denmark on an exchange program, married a Danish woman, and now sends his kids to Denmark on exchange programs. He's an exceptional guy but milder versions of that are common.


[ Parent ]
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox