Lets look at what the definition is on many of the sheets of paper she checked off.
(Note that is Native American Community Recognition, not self identification, it is a legal standard)
While I don’t doubt her qualifications were the primary drivers of her employment, she listed herself as a “Minority” based on these claims from 1986 to 1995.
But she was still claiming to be a minority.
Then after being trolled by Trump she resorted to the (yes racist) DNA claims and actually built a website about it.
The legal indigeneity requirements surrounding tribal affiliations or community recognition are not similar to the typical self identification of other groups. This is directly related to the ongoing cultural cleansing efforts against Native Americans today.
Indigenous people have historicaly been understood to be members of a common ‘race’, but this is a byproduct of colonialism and intentional obscuring of their diversity.
Trying to paint all minorities as having the same issues or barriers or concerns is dehumanizing. Minorities are full human beings like everyone else, and different groups have different challenges related to removing the power imbalance tied to institutional racism.
Note the above claim is still suggesting it is exclusively a white power to decide what challenges there are for black, native an other groups and suggesting they all face the same barriers.
It is still a "racial’ thing despite those differences, you are still using Samuel Morton’s racial categories to maintain the power imbalance. Or in the case of this DNA test, using Samuel Morton’s racial categories to prove something that your post just pointed out isn’t valid, but still claiming that it is due to some perceived biological basis in race.
I thought she’s been self identifying as “white” for a while now.
And at one point she claimed she was Cherokee, but that was a for a cook book so…:shrug:
How far does self identification go? I would think that when companies are trying to get more diversity among their staff, they don’t want, say, a white guy, of white European decent, and whose relatives are all of white European decent, who says he’s black. The black Americans’ experience is different from that of the white Americans’ experience.
Note the title of that form : “Voluntary Self identification” and “we request that you complete this self identification form…” and at that time, she had been told by her family that she did have “origins in any of the original peoples…”.
No where did she claim to be a Legal member of a recognized tribe.
And if you want to base your* self identification* on your DNA test, that’s perfectly OK. Saying otherwise is racist. You can base your self identification on whatever you want to.
And she has every right to * self identify *as a minority, saying she has no right to *self identify *is racist.
There is nothing racist about using a DNA test to base your *self identification *on. Saying otherwise is racist.
Whatever the *legal indigeneity requirements * are, they are legal, and not based on race. You keep ignoring this- *you dont have to have any NA ancestry, and even if you have full NA ancestry, a tribe can still exclude you. *
I am? I am saying you can self identify as anything you want. I used the terms on that form you like to share. If that form is invalid and racist, why do you keep showing it as a example?
Again, there is only one valid determination of race- self identification. You appear to be saying Warrens self identification is invalid- and if so that is being racist. She has every right to choose her own* self identification.* Saying otherwise is racist.
Try re-reading the two part test for checking that box.
You can deny that it exists all you want, but the world is still round.
And yes, the DNA test is still racist too, and scientifically shaky ground as mentioned before:
If for that nation, DNA is not a hard requirement, how would testing Mexican and Central American DNA and concluding she was telling the truth is valid? Note that all genealogical studies failed to find any Native ancestry and she claimed it was closely related, thus her moms lie about sneaking away to get married.
Try reading the general instruction for that form. They override that. And that paragraph does not mention “legal member of a recognized tribe” which is any case, has nothing to do with race.
It is perfectly fine to base your *self identification *on a DNA test or anything, actually.
The fact that " all genealogical studies failed to find any Native ancestry" is meaningless as that is a racist basis. All that is necessary is that she self identifies as NA.
You seem to be clinging to outdated racist qualifiers of race. You are not accepting the only non racist method-self identification .
Her self identification as native American may be suspect, but it has led her to be invested in supporting their interests in congress.
Maybe its just me but if I were a native American and was given the choice of a woman who might be misled about her native American heritage but acts in Congress to support my community, and a old white man who knows he’s of pure European descent and doesn’t know a thing about our issues, I’d choose the former.
As a pro-colonialist you will hand wave away Dr. Kim TallBear’s tweets here, because she is from Canada, but lets try sharing her view on it which is more concise.
Note it is common for some whites, who are seeking connection to an identity outside whiteness, to claim native ancestry.
Many white Americans ignore the complex violent history that accompanied Cherokee history and trivialize the Cherokee history and culture.
Even ignoring Warrens’ connection here is another
A.K.A. the same reason you see so many Confederate flags around the south today.
But I have said over and over again, some people will hold their nose and vote for her, the concern is how many stay home. A lesser of two evils vote typically has low turn out which favors Trump.
and she is dead and completely wrong:"33) But unless you can prove descent from a Cherokee person, or member of any tribe since that tribe began constructing citizenship rolls…
34) no tribe cares if you have Native American DNA. They want to see you’re descended from one of THEIR CITIZENS. Is there a name on a roll?"
She is wrong on both counts-*you dont have to have any NA ancestry, and even if you have full NA ancestry, a tribe can still exclude you. * The racist Cherokee nation, who you like to quote, kicked out all the Black members of their tribe, even tho those people had been “since that tribe began constructing citizenship rolls…”
And, unless you are a racist, if they wish to so self identify, that is their right.
Ah, so it now appears that your desire to call her a racist is based upon the fact that you don’t like her political views. Well, neither do I, but she’s not a racist. Trump is the racist her, not Warren.
So, again- are you still holding to outmoded racist views on race determination, or do you agree that everyone can choose based upon* self identification *?
Then they are making racist claims, since “you dont have to have any NA ancestry, and even if you have full NA ancestry, a tribe can still exclude you”. Racist claims you are supporting. * Self identification *is the only non racist method of determining race. Yes, the various tribes get to determine who is and who is not a legal member of their tribe, but they do not get to determine who is and who is not a Native American.
Ah…because white people are the ones with the power right? Remember just like “Negros” they didn’t choose this label, we did that. Just like those African Americans being racist by getting upset when you wear blackface or use the N word among themselves?
Reverse racism created and used by white people to deny white privilege.
The thing is that there is and Native American equivalent of black face, its called"red face" and its racist as fuck. To say that what Warren did is equivalent to this is an astounding level of false equivalence. If Warren puts on a head dress and announces on the Senate floor “Me seek’em to smoke piece pipe with orange chief who speaks like snake.” then I’ll agree you have something.
As I indicated previously, Warren has been a huge friend the Native American tribes in her time in the senate. To reject her and an anti-Indiginous racist due to this small error in judgement is like a drowning man rejecting a life preserver because it’s the wrong color.
This post makes no sense at all, nor is it in any way a repy to mine.
You keep ignoring the fact the the 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.
I’m not made of straw, so forgive me if i am being racist by using that term, but there seems to be a whole bale of strawmen here.
No one in this thread, or Warren herself, are claiming that indigenous Americans are a race, or that Warren claims to be a member of any tribe, or that eugenics is a good idea, or that colonialism is/was a good thing.
She got a bit too excited about a family story. Is this the windmill you want to tilt against? There is another person who is using the term Pocahontas that would appear to be a better target.
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.
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?
rat avatar, I do appreciate your links in this thread. They have been informative. However, your style is a bit overbearing and your attitude that everyone else is racist is tiresome.
Is the issue of Native American identity theft a real issue? Yes. Does it rise to the level of problem as throwing the term “Pocahontas” around like an epithet? You seem to think so.
Having read through the tracing of her family genealogy, I am of the opinion she was misinformed about her own heritage. It would be better if she had owned up to that instead of turning to a DNA test for something that DNA testing is inadequate to address. She has fallen victim to the misunderstanding of what DNA can and cannot show, that is highly promoted by DNA testing organizations for profit. She was wrong to fall for Trump’s bait and take the test, and more wrong to post the results as if they meant something. This shows a weakness in judgement when it comes to dealing with Trump’s nonsense, and as such should be a consideration for her political future.
That said, she’s still a much better option than Trump, even for Native Americans, even for members of the Cherokee Nation. Trump’s administration is actively pursuing aims that hurt Native Americans. Warren is trying to fight for them.
WTF? This is in response to a statement that advocates that the French should be allowed to determine who has French citizenship and identity. Isn’t that exactly the argument you are making with respect to the Cherokee Nation, that they and only they get to decide who has Cherokee citizenship and identity?
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, 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.
The poster was unwilling to defend their position, my assumptions are probably going to be wrong if they are unwilling to.
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.
