# Elizabeth Warren Stands by DNA Test. But Around Her, Worries Abound.

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682>\
**Category:** Politics & Elections\
**Created:** [December 6, 2018, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682 "2018-12-06T16:33:19Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 11

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\
**Post date:** [December 16, 2018, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/201 "2018-12-16T20:40:28Z")

</div>

> [@rat\_avatar](#):
>
> Funny how you will enthusiastically argue that _white_ sovereign nations get to decide _who has citizenship and identity_ yet you deny that same right to the various _sovereign nations_ that make up the racial category of “Native American” to decide who can have _citizenship and identity._
> 
> Why are “white people” uniquely empowered to make those decisions? It looks like justifying “prejudice plus power” to me.

You know what’s even funnier? Every single person who disagrees with you is a racist crypto white-supremacist. And on this left leaning board, no one agrees with you. Super duper funny.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\
**Post date:** [December 16, 2018, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/202 "2018-12-16T20:50:31Z")

</div>

oops

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\
**Post date:** [December 16, 2018, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/203 "2018-12-16T20:53:23Z")

</div>

> [@Not\_Carlson](#):
>
> And yet:

Yet in that entire post, you didn’t address the claims of my argument at all 🙂

[DNA Tests Make Native Americans Strangers in Their Own Land -  
Reviving race science plays into centuries of oppression.](https://www.thenation.com/article/dna-tests-elizabeth-warren-native-american-race-science/)

Note she is trying to pivot now but still hasn’t apologized, and her position in the 2020 polls is dropping.

[After the DNA debacle, Elizabeth Warren’s outreach to minority communities makes a pivot](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/12/15/after-dna-debacle-elizabeth-warrens-outreach-minority-communities-makes-pivot/?utm_term=.f1a2a713ba82)

> [@Not\_Carlson](#):
>
> Which is to say, just because you may know the meaning of a word, doesn’t mean you know when and when not to use it.  
> (Say, a word like “racist”.)
> 
> And yes, I feel quite pathetic for having wasted my time pulling all those quotes.

Perhaps if you had attacked my argument, which is what would change my mind, instead of building a tit-for-tat argument it wouldn’t have been as much of a waste.

> [@Not\_Carlson](#):
>
> As to the **OP’s** original question:
> 
> I would not have thought that this rather trivial fiasco would amount to much; let alone that the woman being derided as “Pocahontas” by a blowhard bigot with an extensive track record of highly discriminatory language and action toward Native Americans and other ethnic minorities would somehow end up being the one accused of racism; but here we are going strong on Page 4!
> 
> While it could and should be used as an opportunity to address issues of Native American mistreatment and racial insensitivity, I myself don’t think Warren’s claims to NA heritage and her manner of response to Trump should matter much politically, but it is clear that it matters to _some_ people.  
> Or at least, it is clear that the idea that this _should_ matter to people is something that matters to _certain_ people.
> 
> May I ask you whether _you_ also would _like_ to see this story become a major political talking point?  
> Since you posted in Elections, do you hope it has a negative impact on Warren’s political career?

My point is that it will have a negative impact on Warren’s political career, the fact that you were looking for tit-for-tat wins while ignoring what I was arguing is why you missed that.

> [@](#):
>
> “Having that moment of ignorance — we all do, but we need to address the fact that we were wrong,” he said. “I love the fact that she’s making attempts to make inroads with the African-American community, but her path is very narrow.”

> **[Warren seeks to solidify backing of African Americans](https://apnews.com/united-states-presidential-election-edd60a2bd3c74f85b9ddb7818416a1a4)**
>
> Elizabeth Warren is seeking to solidify her connection with African-American voters as she prepares to launch a potential presidential campaign.

While I fully get you don’t think that this was “racist” I am betting you are not representative of the minority groups that are critical for us winning against Trump.

While I did try to take the time to explain to posters _why_ this is viewed as racist, which it is, my concerns that it would result in a reduced voter turn out which would help trump are being echoed by Democratic strategists.

She needs to make an honest pivot to not just be a white savior, but to honestly give these disenfranchised populations a voice.

To quote from the AP story above.

> [@](#):
>
> Aimee Allison, the founder of She The People, an advocacy group focused on political leadership for women of color, called Warren’s efforts on race “authentic” but _candidly described the DNA test release as “a big stumble,”_ adding that the senator’s challenge going forward is _similar to the one facing other white presidential hopefuls._

How about attacking my argument vs focusing on discrediting the rat hole of trying to explain why the DNA test **is racist** , and realizing white fragility is real, note another quote from that.

> [@](#):
>
> Sharpton said: “I might have fought it differently, but I would have fought it.”

Which is another example of minorities having to treat white people with kid gloves due to this fragility.

All Warren had to do was something similar to “In the 1990s I thought I was being helpful by pointing out that there is more diversity than sometimes meets the eyes, but I was unaware of the challenges around identity and severity for Native Americans, but now I understand why my actions were hurtful and I pledge to move forward in a way that helps Native voices be heard.”

An action like that backed with further actions would have boosted her poll numbers among a portion of those communities, where the DNA test demonstrated she has more in common with Trump than an ally.

As I stated before and you ignored, I fully expect the Republicans to play off this misstep if she does win the nomination. Elizabeth Warren was fully capable of short circuiting this attack but it is becoming more and more clear that she want to play the white savior role and not the ally role which will directly impact her electability.

To quote my cite from the Nation above.

> [@](#):
>
> “No sooner had the Human Genome Project determined that human beings are 99.9 percent alike than many scientists shifted their focus from human genetic commonality to the 0.1 percent of human genetic difference. This difference is increasingly seen as encompassing race.”

And:

> [@](#):
>
> Ancestry tests rely on a fundamental—and racialized—misunderstanding of how ancestry works.

So how about you come back on how this isn’t radicalized, as apparently you have an issue with it being labeled as such.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\
**Post date:** [December 16, 2018, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/204 "2018-12-16T20:59:38Z")

</div>

> [@CarnalK](#):
>
> You know what’s even funnier? Every single person who disagrees with you is a racist crypto white-supremacist. And on this left leaning board, no one agrees with you. Super duper funny.

How about hyperbole, I have tried to target ideas here. If us white progressives were so great about our understanding of racism it wouldn’t still be a problem. Often just like sexism those of us on the left just resort to benevolent forms which are just as dehumanizing and destructive.

But how about giving me proof that DNA tests and heritage aren’t racialized? And how I am wrong?

In this thread the ONLY cite or link you have added was trying to paint the Cherokee Nation as being racist, like the fact that they are racist changes Elizabeth Warren’s actions at all.

[https://www.thenation.com/article/dna-tests-elizabeth-warren-native-american-race-science/](https://www.thenation.com/article/dna-tests-elizabeth-warren-native-american-race-science/)

> [@](#):
>
> So is there really a Sardinian or East Asian gene or genetic variation? Of course not. If there is one fact that we know about human history, it’s that ours is a history of migrations. We all originated in East Africa and populated the planet through ongoing migrations and interactions. None of this has ended (and, in fact, thanks to climate change, it will only increase). Cultures, ethnicities, and settlements can’t be frozen in time. The only thing that is constant is change. The peoples who reside in today’s Sardinia or East Asia are a snapshot that captures only a moment in a history of motion. The DNA industry’s claims about ancestry award that moment a false sense of permanence.

I’m not going to be convinced because you think that if one person is racist it justifies racist acts.

I expect you haven’t provided any cites because Science is not on your side here.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\
**Post date:** [December 16, 2018, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/205 "2018-12-16T21:24:00Z")

</div>

Here are a couple more cites, because I do think it is important to understand this technology.

#1 a blog post from the scientist explaining how using his research to justify _racial realism_ is a wrongheaded perspective that asserts racial categories are genetically determined

[http://www.anthropology-news.org/index.php/2018/07/12/written-in-blood/](http://www.anthropology-news.org/index.php/2018/07/12/written-in-blood/)

Another very long and comprehensive cite that will help explain this more with more cites and explanation.

> **["Plug and Play" Genetics, Racial Migrations and Human History](https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/plug-and-play-genetics-racial-migrations-and-human-history/)**
>
> Genetically profiling individuals is now cheap and easy, but writing our species’ global history still calls for a lot of hard work

I suggest that everyone who thinks of themselves as trying to be _progressive_ read and understand those pages.

Even if you don’t take commercial genetic testing seriously, they risk internalizing the outdated social and scientific assumptions hidden behind these reported results. Remember that it takes active effort to avoid implicit biases from becoming explicit actions. We will probably always have implicit biases too.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\
**Post date:** [December 16, 2018, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/206 "2018-12-16T22:05:27Z")

</div>

I don’t actually think of myself as trying to be progressive, so I’ll just skip that.

At the core though, your whole argument is kinda self contradictory. You’ve expended countless pixels on how useless family tree and DNA is for establishing tribal/racial background and we should just let the tribe decide. But family tree is exactly how the Cherokee Nation decides. You have to be related to someone on the original rolls.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\
**Post date:** [December 16, 2018, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/207 "2018-12-16T22:31:38Z")

</div>

> [@CarnalK](#):
>
> I don’t actually think of myself as trying to be progressive, so I’ll just skip that.
> 
> At the core though, your whole argument is kinda self contradictory. You’ve expended countless pixels on how useless family tree and DNA is for establishing tribal/racial background and we should just let the tribe decide. But family tree is exactly how the Cherokee Nation decides. You have to be related to someone on the original rolls.

DNA doesn’t matter at all, lineage does. The evidence she tried to use has nothing to do with long term lineage unless you subscribe to race realism, which is racism.

That is why I keep using that term. You are conflating two separate subjects and claiming they are the same.

If you actually bothered to read my cites you would know why.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\
**Post date:** [December 16, 2018, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/208 "2018-12-16T22:42:11Z")

</div>

No, you specifically downplayed lineage as well. Remember how everyone is related to Charlemagne? Remember how unimpressed you were with that other Senator’s relationship to Pocahontas?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\
**Post date:** [December 16, 2018, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/209 "2018-12-16T22:46:29Z")

</div>

> [@CarnalK](#):
>
> No, you specifically downplayed lineage as well. Remember how everyone is related to Charlemagne? Remember how unimpressed you were with that other Senator’s relationship to Pocahontas?

Everyone modern European is related to _Charlemagne_, which is exactly why the racist claim that racial categories prove that she is Cherokee is invalid. It directly relates to her claim that she may have shared an common ancestor 15,000 years ago with someone in Peru makes her Native American.

The fact that you refuse to read my cites which explain this indicates you are not a serious poster, so have fun with the last word.

I am no longer going to play “definition” games if you are unwilling to any work to try and justify your _inferred_ claim that race is a biological trait.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\
**Post date:** [December 16, 2018, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/210 "2018-12-16T22:48:35Z")

</div>

No, you just had the last word.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\
**Post date:** [December 16, 2018, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/211 "2018-12-16T23:43:01Z")

</div>

> [@rat\_avatar](#):
>
> Because claiming that because one has a few markers from Central america “proves” they are North American Native American is fundamentally _racist_.
> 
> Lets be clear, there is NO DNA EVIDENCE possible to link Warren to the people who are Cherokee, … …
> 
> Funny how you will enthusiastically argue that _white_ sovereign nations get to decide _who has citizenship and identity_ yet you deny that same right to the various _sovereign nations_ that make up the racial category of “Native American” to decide who can have _citizenship and identity._.

However, one can make that claim on the basis of _self identification_. And if you want to base your _self identification_ on a DNA test or s story your mother told you, or just growing up in that culture- you have every right to. You totally ignore self-identification, you dont seem willing to give Warren the right of _self identification._

Yes, the Indian tribes here in America get to decide who is and who is not a member. They often do this by ancestry. However, as I have now said sixe times and you have ignore six times- t_he Tribes select their legal members by whatever method they choose-you dont have to have any NA ancestry, and even if you have full NA ancestry, a tribe can still exclude you._

And your buddies the Cherokee Nation are well known racists, having kicked out all their black members, for 100% racist reasons. So, yes, the tribes can pick and choose who they want- but we can still say they are racist when they do so for bad reasons.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\
**Post date:** [December 16, 2018, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/212 "2018-12-16T23:45:30Z")

</div>

> [@rat\_avatar](#):
>
> DNA doesn’t matter at all, lineage does. The evidence she tried to use has nothing to do with long term lineage unless you subscribe to race realism, which is racism.  
> .

No, lineage doesn’t matter either. Only\* self identification.\* Claiming that lineage matters leads us to the “one drop” and similar racist methods- it is racist.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Not\_Carlson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/bc79bd/32.png) [@Not\_Carlson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Not_Carlson)\
**Post date:** [December 17, 2018, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/213 "2018-12-17T06:07:47Z")

</div>

> [@rat\_avatar](#):
>
> Yet in that entire post, you didn’t address the claims of my argument at all 🙂

Is it really worth it for me to try responding with anything other than a cowed admission of utter defeat?  
Is it worth responding with a “But…”?  
Is it worth responding with “Well, I understand your point about A, however in regard to B…”?  
Is it worth even responding with “My good sir, you have opened my eyes to many things, for which I thank you, and yet perhaps you might consider. . .”?

Even those posters who have met you half way and thanked you for your contributions have been bludgeoned with your cudgel.

No, my last post did not address your argument. At this point I feel no obligation to do so when you have repeatedly misrepresented every counter-argument and, worse still, every poster who does not agree with you.

My intent was only to point out that while dismissing and deriding other posters for “ad hominem” attacks, you have repeatedly resorted to the same, to a ridiculous\*(ad hominem!)\* extent.  
Which brings us to your repeated cries of _tu quoque!_

My second reply to you, which you branded as **“alt-right style whataboutism tu quoque”** , was simply to suggest you should cut others the same slack you’re willing give yourself when using so-called racial language.  
If _tu quoqe_ is the fallacy of appealing to hypocrisy in order to discredit an argument, well, I was not trying to discredit your argument (that lumping people together under a racial label is wrong … which _I agree with_).  
I was discrediting your outrage.  
To summarize my thoughts on this topic:  
I think Warren made a mistake in claiming Native American heritage based only on family stories.  
I think in doing so she inadvertently trivialized the significance of cultural identity for Cherokee and Delaware peoples.  
I think she made a mistake in taking Trump’s bait.  
I think the DNA test is unhelpful at best and understand how it could be insulting to peoples who have been discriminated against or disenfranchised on the basis of genetics.  
I think Warren has tried, perhaps clumsily, to shine a light on Native American issues.  
As far as I know, Warren has never claimed tribal status, cook books notwithstanding, so I think those shouting “only the tribes get to decided who belongs” are accusing her of something she hasn’t done.  
I don’t know whether this will cost her the nomination in 2020, but if it does, it’s because people are dumb.  
I think Warren is OK.

As to the broader issue of race:  
Despite your apparent assumption that I would never ascribe to something so repugnant as a belief in a  
biological basis for race\* (and I don’t know why you would make that assumption when you’ve already lumped me in with the alt-right) I actually _do_ think there is a biological/genetic basis for race.  
In so far as our genes determine many of our outward traits, and our outward traits have been used to group us, often rather arbitrarily, into “races” or ethnic groups.  
Do I think that genetics _justifies_ the concept of race? No.  
I think the very concept of race is flawed, but for bad or worse, it has shaped the way we see and treat each other, and so it enters into discussions of cultural/ethnic identity and discrimination.  
\*(Post #60. Although really it’s hard to parse whether you were saying you were “betting that it is not [my] intent” to argue for a biological basis for race, or whether you were graciously assuming that it’s wasn’t my intent to “hand wave away” the concerns of minority groups [in which case, thank you?].)

As for ethnic identification, it has been used both to denigrate and oppress people, which is bad, and to unify and protect people, which is good.  
Genetic science has given us insights into the development of our species while providing us with a few useful medical markers along the way. That’s good.  
It’s also been used to push racist agendas. That’s bad.  
And it’s been used by some folks to trace their genetic heritage, which is, … curious? questionable? I’ll go with murky.

> [@Not\_Carlson](#):
>
> As to the **OP’s** original question:
> 
> > [@Dacien](#):
> >
> > Is this a non-issue, being taken more seriously than it should, or was this a catastrophic misstep for Warren that doomed her 2020 chances?..  
> > I dunno if it’s really that big of an issue, but what does everyone else think?
> 
> I would not have thought that this rather trivial fiasco would amount to much; let alone that the woman being derided as “Pocahontas” by a blowhard bigot with an extensive track record of highly discriminatory language and action toward Native Americans and other ethnic minorities would somehow end up being the one accused of racism; but here we are going strong on Page 4!
> 
> While it could and should be used as an opportunity to address issues of Native American mistreatment and racial insensitivity, I myself don’t think Warren’s claims to NA heritage and her manner of response to Trump should matter much politically, but it is clear that it matters to _some_ people.  
> Or at least, it is clear that the idea that this _should_ matter to people is something that matters to _certain_ people.
> 
> May I ask you whether _you_ also would _like_ to see this story become a major political talking point?  
> Since you posted in Elections, do you hope it has a negative impact on Warren’s political career?

> [@rat\_avatar](#):
>
> My point is that it will have a negative impact on Warren’s political career, the fact that you were looking for tit-for-tat wins while ignoring what I was arguing is why you missed that.

That wasn’t addressed to you, but to the **OP** , **Dacien** , who **started** this thread, in **Elections**.  
Perhaps you missed that.

> [@rat\_avatar](#):
>
> As I stated before and you ignored, I fully expect the Republicans to play off this misstep if she does win the nomination.

Noted. But again, that wasn’t addressed to you, but to the **OP** , **Dacien** , who **started** this thread, in **Elections**.

> [@rat\_avatar](#):
>
> So how about you come back on how this isn’t radicalized, as apparently you have an issue with it being labeled as such.

How about I not come back to argue a point I haven’t made about something I don’t have an issue with?  
Assuming you meant “racialized” instead of “radicalized”, if people want to call out the racialized nature of ancestry testing, I have no issue with that at all. So long as they’re only targeting actual racists and not bashing anyone who ever took an ancestry test for any reason whatsoever.

At this point, are you not even beginning to question your ability to understand other people’s opinions?

_Ahem_  
So, **Dacien** , would you care to respond to my previous question?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Not\_Carlson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/bc79bd/32.png) [@Not\_Carlson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Not_Carlson)\
**Post date:** [December 17, 2018, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/214 "2018-12-17T06:22:33Z")

</div>

> [@CarnalK](#):
>
> No, you just had the last word.

Well, that can’t be right.  
He already let you have the last word back on page 3, Post #134.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\
**Post date:** [December 17, 2018, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/215 "2018-12-17T22:52:40Z")

</div>

> [@rat\_avatar](#):
>
> Because claiming that because one has a few markers from Central america “proves” they are North American Native American is fundamentally _racist_.

So there is no role to ethnicity, no genetic content to passing down phenotypes and appearances, and the reason Native Americans are brown is because they choose to be?

> [@](#):
>
> Lets be clear, there is NO DNA EVIDENCE possible to link Warren to the people who are Cherokee, and even if the land-bridge theory was correct (which is not generally accepted now) their most common ancestor would be farther back than when white Europeans even existed. This ignores the sovereign structure of the Cherokee Nation and other federally recognized tribes too.

I’m with you on the fuzziness of DNA testing and how they are stepping beyond science when they do their interpretations. I’m with you that Warren doesn’t appear to have any actual recorded family lineage to any Native Americans. I’m with you that it is poorly understood and given credit how far back the different populations and tribes of Native Americans separated and spread. The fact that their common ancestor is so distant is a solid point in favor of rejecting the DNA testing for worth.

I don’t think it ignores the sovereign structure of the Cherokee Nation or any federally recognized tribe or any non-recognized tribes to point out that people do have a genetic heritage, and that heritage exists whether or not the person is a member of any social group or community built around that heritage.

That doesn’t mean the common understanding of race is real or correct.

> [@](#):
>
> The poster was unwilling to defend their position, my assumptions are probably going to be wrong if they are unwilling to.

Okay, I’m defending that proposition. You seem to be advocating an inherent hypocrisy.

> [@](#):
>
> Funny how you will enthusiastically argue that _white_ sovereign nations get to decide _who has citizenship and identity_ yet you deny that same right to the various _sovereign nations_ that make up the racial category of “Native American” to decide who can have _citizenship and identity._
> 
> Why are “white people” uniquely empowered to make those decisions? It looks like justifying “prejudice plus power” to me.

Where have I argued that Native American tribes don’t have the right to determine who has citizenship?

Identity is a tougher nut to crack. It’s like saying I don’t want Trump to be an atheist because we don’t want him. That does nothing to change whether or not Trump has any actual religious beliefs. Similarly, if someone truly has a Cherokee ancestor, saying they’re not a member of the tribe doesn’t change who the ancestor was.

> [@rat\_avatar](#):
>
> She needs to make an honest pivot to not just be a white savior, but to honestly give these disenfranchised populations a voice.

How does she do that in your opinion?

> [@](#):
>
> All Warren had to do was something similar to “In the 1990s I thought I was being helpful by pointing out that there is more diversity than sometimes meets the eyes, but I was unaware of the challenges around identity and severity for Native Americans, but now I understand why my actions were hurtful and I pledge to move forward in a way that helps Native voices be heard.”

Thank you. Something like that from Warren would be a point in her favor.

> [@](#):
>
> As I stated before and you ignored, I fully expect the Republicans to play off this misstep if she does win the nomination. Elizabeth Warren was fully capable of short circuiting this attack but it is becoming more and more clear that she want to play the white savior role and not the ally role which will directly impact her electability.

I’m unclear on what you mean by white savior role. But you are right that the Right will try to make hay of this, just like Trump will continue to call her Pocahontas while pushing an administration that actively harms Native Americans.

> [@CarnalK](#):
>
> No, you specifically downplayed lineage as well. Remember how everyone is related to Charlemagne? Remember how unimpressed you were with that other Senator’s relationship to Pocahontas?

I think he advocates personal lineage, but it needs verifiable evidence, i.e. names on tribal roles, genealogy, etc. Not just rumors. Also, number of generations plays a role - the further back we go, the more related we all are. Trying to parse those relationships by DNA testing is what is in question, as it doesn’t appear to be a fine-grained enough tool. And is being used by many to support racist ideology.

> [@DrDeth](#):
>
> And your buddies the Cherokee Nation are well known racists, having kicked out all their black members, for 100% racist reasons. So, yes, the tribes can pick and choose who they want- but we can still say they are racist when they do so for bad reasons.

Yes, but that doesn’t change whether or not DNA testing for ethnicity is valid.

> [@DrDeth](#):
>
> No, lineage doesn’t matter either. Only\* self identification.\* Claiming that lineage matters leads us to the “one drop” and similar racist methods- it is racist.

I’m not on board with you here. I think self-identification is important, but there’s also a biological element to our person that we can’t just waive away or wish into existence. Understanding a real concept of ethnicity does not mean we accept the racist purposes that others wish to impose.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Ancient\_Erudite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Ancient\_Erudite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ancient_Erudite)\
**Post date:** [December 24, 2018, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/216 "2018-12-24T17:45:05Z")

</div>

> [@DWMarch](#):
>
> Trump purports to be a President and we let him get away with that.
> 
> The whole “Pocahontas” thing is Trump repeatedly using a racial slur against a political opponent. Yet somehow Elizabeth Warren is the villain for embracing something that may or may not be as big a part of her heritage as she thought.
> 
> It’s an asinine controversy built on the ravings of a racist madman. See also birtherism.

Warren used a lie to help advance her career.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\
**Post date:** [December 24, 2018, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/217 "2018-12-24T17:50:46Z")

</div>

> [@Ancient\_Erudite](#):
>
> Warren used a lie to help advance her career.

You are concerned about this one lie?  
How many times has Trump lied to advance _his_ career? This is akin to having a dozen bulls in your china shop, but you spend all your time fretting about the fly that happens in.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Ancient\_Erudite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Ancient\_Erudite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ancient_Erudite)\
**Post date:** [December 24, 2018, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/218 "2018-12-24T18:38:41Z")

</div>

> [@Czarcasm](#):
>
> You are concerned about this one lie?  
> How many times has Trump lied to advance _his_ career? This is akin to having a dozen bulls in your china shop, but you spend all your time fretting about the fly that happens in.

Don’t you think Trump will destroy her on this false heritage claim if Warren was the Democratic nominee for President?

Trump can have 100 bulls in his china shop. What else is new? When a politician gets thrust into the limelight the initial lie or false claim is a big test. Some can’t overcome it. I think Warren did poorly on this topic.

Whomever the Democrats nominate needs to be transparently clean, otherwise, Trump will drag that person down and beat them with experience.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\
**Post date:** [December 24, 2018, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/219 "2018-12-24T18:49:35Z")

</div>

> [@Ancient\_Erudite](#):
>
> Don’t you think Trump will destroy her on this false heritage claim if Warren was the Democratic nominee for President?
> 
> Trump can have 100 bulls in his china shop. What else is new? When a politician gets thrust into the limelight the initial lie or false claim is a big test. Some can’t overcome it. I think Warren did poorly on this topic.
> 
> Whomever the Democrats nominate needs to be transparently clean, otherwise, Trump will drag that person down and beat them with experience.

Jesus Christ couldn’t stand a chance against Trump when it comes to the Republican vote. If there are absolutely no blemishes on the Democratic candidate then they will be invented and then pushed by the GOP. They will lie about the positions, the background and even the country of origin. The candidate will suddenly become a far left-wing socialist who will either be a dreaded insider that can’t be trusted or a naive outsider that doesn’t know how things work.  
The only thing that matters is that the candidate is not a Republican-all else, whether true or false, is just justification for the hate already felt.  
BTW, you totally misunderstood the “bull in a china shop” analogy-Trump IS the “hundred bulls” in our china shop, and _you_ are the one having a hissy fit over a possible fly wandering in.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Not\_Carlson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/bc79bd/32.png) [@Not\_Carlson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Not_Carlson)\
**Post date:** [December 25, 2018, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682/220 "2018-12-25T23:16:03Z")

</div>

> [@Ancient\_Erudite](#):
>
> Warren used a lie to help advance her career.

That’s news to me.  
In what way?

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682.md?page=10)

[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/elizabeth-warren-stands-by-dna-test-but-around-her-worries-abound/825682.md?page=12)