Question

HELP please.. I'm really stuck on this assignment.
You will use your knowledge of the treatment of minority groups in the United States during World War I and your familiarity with social media such as Facebook and Twitter to complete the assignment for this lesson.

Please review the sample Social Media Page. Use the Native American postings as an example to create two posts from the perspective of each of the following groups:

German Americans
German Americans
Jewish Americans
Asian Americans
Hispanic Americans
Women
Dissenters

Answer 1

Your posts should address the following questions:

How was this group treated by the U.S government during World War I?
How was this group treated by other Americans during World War I?
What was the reaction of the group to the way they were treated?
How did World War I change the way these groups live in the United States?

Answer 2

I know German Americans where treated poorly because everyone thought they where spying, and also because i mean the Germans where the biggest part in world war 1 so Americans didnt like Germans.

Answer 3

That helps with that question, thanks :) I'm familiar with the German questions, just stuck on the others

Answer 4

Americans didn't like the Asian Americans because they took people's jobs and were also paid alot less than Americans got paid so Asians were more likely to get a job

Answer 5

Thanks! Do you happen to know anything about the hispanic or jewish during that time?

Answer 6

Sorry but no I took this lesson a couple weeks ago but I forgot most of it haha, but if you google Hispanic or Jewish Americans during the time im sure you could write something up.

Answer 7

Okay, thank you

Answer 8

No problem :)

Answer 9

@missiadams
Is this the post?

Answer 10

Yeah this is it @Sofitina

Answer 11

Okay, sum this up for me because I don't understand what you need help with, haha.

Answer 12

I just need help with figuring out what to do for each of the races that it shows up there, (hispanic, german, jewish, ect.) I need to answer the questions i posted for each of the races.

Answer 13

How was this group treated by the U.S government during World War I?
How was this group treated by other Americans during World War I?
What was the reaction of the group to the way they were treated?
How did World War I change the way these groups live in the United States?

Answer 14

Hispanics:
1-4 (If missing any info, tell me, but it shouldn't) . Although a lack of records makes it difficult to precisely measure the role of Latinos in the U.S. military during World War I, documentation demonstrates their important, though largely unrecognized, contribution to the war effort. Many Latinos from states such as Texas and New Mexico served during World War I.

Because the United States was largely unprepared for war, the military had to induct and train soldiers quickly. Many of the new recruits spoke little or no English, including some Latinos. At first, these men were sent to development battalions at military training camps, where they were given little attention. Sometimes ridiculed by English-speaking soldiers, many Latinos and other ethnic minorities wanted to leave the military. In response, the military developed the Camp Gordon Plan, in which soldiers were separated into language groups with officers who spoke the language of the soldiers. Once this communications gap was bridged, their military training then continued in their native language. Most of the Latinos who received such training were at the Camp Cody, New Mexico, training camp.At the same time, for many Latinos in Texas and other states, World War I represented their first experience with assimilation into mainstream U.S. society. For the first time, the government and society in general sought active involvement of Latinos in national life. Although some Latinos refused to register for the draft to protest being treated as second-class citizens, others hoped that active participation in the war effort would increase opportunities for them. Much discrimination remained, and Hispanic participation in World War I can be seen as the start of a struggle for equal rights in the twentieth century.

Answer 15

Wow, thank you!

Answer 16

How about women or dissenters?

Answer 17

Women: One immediate result of the war's outbreak was the rise in female unemployment, especially among the servants, whose jobs were lost to the middle-classes' wish to economise.

However, it was soon seen that the only option to replace the volunteers gone to the front was employing women in the jobs they had left behind; conscription only made this need even more urgent as had the Munitions of Work Act 1915 by which munitions factories had fallen under the sole control of the Government.The Government, besides, combined a welfare policy offering subsidies to families with husbands at the front with increasing female work in order to conscript skilled workers formerly regarded as indispensable to the war effort. To make up for the loss in the skilled workforce the entry of women in factories was often facilitated by 'dilution', that is to say, the breaking down of complex tasks into simpler activities that non-skilled women workers could easily carry out.In general, women did very well, surprising men with their ability to undertake heavy work and with their efficiency. By the middle of the war they were already regarded as a force to be proud of, part of the glory of Britain. However, their entrance into the workforce was initially greeted with hostility for the usual sexist reasons and also because male workers worried that women's willingness to work for lower wages would put them out of work.

Answer 18

Germans: Though Germany turned out to be the Central Power most involved in the war, there is little or no evidence that the Germans had planned for war. There are several fundamental causes that had brought the world to the brink of war: nationalism, imperialist competition, militarism, and the build up of pre-war alliances. These growing appearance of these factors perhaps inevitably led to what was called the Great War, World War One.The Serbian government was implicated as being involved in the plot and naturally the Austrians grew angry with them. Austria declared that they would go to war against Yugoslavia, but they were hesitant to do so because Yugoslavia held a defensive treaty with Russia. Germany had made a defensive treaty with Austria, so they promised that if Austria went ahead and made a move against Yugoslavia, Germany would defend them from Russia. Germany then told Austria to begin the war, and if it evolved into a larger conflict, Germany would support them.

Germany had a variety of reasons for being willing to be involved in this war. One of these reasons was that the assassination was an example of the Hapsburg's loss of control and if Austria were to decline to Germany's offer, Germany would be completely surrounded by enemies.1 The German government also knew that Russia would lose a major base in Europe if they were to lose Yugoslavia. An annexation of Yugoslavia would also leave Greece and Bulgaria open to attack. Germany believed that Russia would back down like they had in 1908, when Austria had annexed parts of Serbia.

The only difference from the earlier conflict was that in 1908 Russia was also suffering from a revolution, but by 1914 Russia had not only stopped the revolution, but they also had recovered enough to fight against Germany or Austria. Aside from that though, Germany had recently made an alliance with Turkey, and that made them confident that they could defeat any European country. Another benefit that Germany had was that England would not enter the war if Russia were the aggressor. Little did Germany know that the general consensus around Europe was that even if Serbia had been involved in the assassination it was not grounds to conquer it.


JEWISH: The war on the eastern front between Russia and the Central Powers (Germany and Austria) was conducted on territories that were home to almost four million Jews. In the autumn of 1914 and the winter of 1915, Russian forces occupied Austrian Galicia, and in the spring and summer of 1915, Germany and Austria conquered Congress Poland (the duchy annexed by Russia according to the treaties of 1815), Volhynia, Lithua­nia, and western Belorussia. Under Russian rule, the Jews were suspected of collaboration with the enemy, and 600,000 of them were banished from the front by the czarist army, a traumatic experience and aneconomic catastrophe that was still felt long after the war. To aid their displaced and impoverished brethren, Jews around the world established welfare organizations on a scale previously unknown.

At the outbreak of the war, the Jews, eager to demonstrate their loyalty to their respective countries, rallied to the war effort. Initially the Jews in Russia were no exception, but when the policy of deportation was implemented, many Jews began to pray for the victory of the Central Powers. Nevertheless, about half a million Jews donned Russian uniforms. On the opposite side, almost 100,000 Jews were serving in the German army. Yet despite this massive enlistment, accusations of evasion and of profiteer­ing were brought against the Jews in both countries, and official investi­gations were instigated. Although the conclusions of these inquiries were never published, the statistics indicate that the percentage of Jewish losses was in no way smaller than that of the non‑Jewish population. Suspicions concerning their loyalty were even voiced in England and the United States, since the Jews did not hide their hostility toward the oppressive Russian autocracy, the ally of the two powers; and indeed, there were those among the recently‑arrived immigrants from Russia who refused to enlist. In both countries, Jews of German origin were requiredto sign humiliating public declarations of loyalty.

Answer 19

dissent: to differ in thought or opinion, refuse to conform, or accept an established way of thinking or behaving.

World War One pitted England, France and Russia against Germany and the Austro-Hungarian Empire. It was difficult, at the beginning of the war, to determine who was the worst of the warring paries, and Americans faced the conflict with divided loyalties. For many Americans of English descent, England seemed like our natural ally. Many American political leaders, most prominently Woodrow Wilson, felt a strong sense of "anglophilia," or love of England. But Germans and Irish were the two largest immigrant groups to the United States in 1917. Irish immigrants carried bitter memories of English oppression, while German Americans, not surprisingly, tended to favor their homeland, or at least not to regard it as an enemy.

Wilson worried about this division and regarded it as dangerous. Regarding Italian-Americans, German-American, Irish-Americans as suspect, he once declared "Any man who caries a hyphen around with him carries a dagger that he is ready to plunge into the vitals of the republic." Along with this anti German hysteria, Congress passed several measures designed to supress any criticism of the war The Espionage Act, passed in June 1917, specified a fine of $10,000 or twenty years in prison for, among other things, "whoever, when the United States is at war, shall willfully obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, and whoever, when the United States is at war, shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States, or the military or naval forces of the United States, or the flag." The act also targeted anyone who shall "urge, incite, or advocate any curtailment of the production in this country of any thing or things necessary or essential to the conduct of the war." Nor, under the act, was it legal to teach, suggest, defend, or advocate any of the criticisms or positions described above. This remarkable act made it virtually illegal to criticize the war or the government in any way.

This act quickly came under fire as unconstitutional. But the Supreme Court supported it, arguing the government had the right to repress free speech in time of "national emergency."

Answer 20

Done. Any others? c:

Answer 21

No, i got it! You helped me out a lot, thank you i really appreciate it! :)

Answer 22

No problem, sweetie! <3

Answer 23

<3!

Answer 24

uggg yall dont have the answer I want...noooooooooooooooooo