What precisely do you mean by “invented” the idea of introducing that phrase into the conversation?
1 Like
You really want to do this?
5 Likes
Oh I know what you meant.
I have seen some of these anti-Enlightenment asshats arguing that slavery was a good thing because the alternative would have been worse for everyone, bluntly ignoring the overwhelming evidence that slavery and serfdom are a drain on economic growth and only benefit the jailers at the top of the pyramid. The level of stupidity some of these sullen little braindead rejects bring to the table is mind-boggling. /mini-rant-concluded
7 Likes
No one would sensibly say they are “Native American” based on this.
Plus, she doesn’t have grandparents or great grandparents who are Indigenous, and many Indigenous communities themselves use “blood quantum” to determine heritage (which has a troubling history all it’s own; if memory serves, this was originally conceptualised by white Europeans).
But it’s common sense – I have been told that somewhere some generations back, that I have Irish ancestry. I would never call myself “part Irish” on this basis, and I would not dare to use this politically, unless I could speak with certainty on the matter.
She went out and told the public that her parents eloped because their grandparents disapproved of her mother’s “native ancestry” – that may well be family lore, but that turns out not to be a true story, and before you wade into the waters of making claims for political gain, you should really do your homework to make sure they are true.
But this just smacks of more white European appropriation, and it really bugs me that we can’t level criticism in two directions at once – Trump was playing to his racist supports by calling her “Pocahontas” and she was cynically uncaring and inconsiderate of the fact that most people with common sense would see her as having a privileged white European upbringing, and not accept her claims of ancestry as sufficient enough to warrant a position as a “minority educator” – that position is for actual minority educators!
4 Likes
I’d love for such gentlepersons to come to my neighborhood and share such interesting sentiments out loud.
7 Likes
She didn’t.
She isn’t seeking membership to a tribe. She isn’t seeking the benefits of being one, either.
She didn’t use it politically. Racist assholes tried to use it against her, politically.
Please check your “facts” before you try to pass them off here. None of what you have written about Warren is true.She shared stories that had been passed down in her family. She might have maybe filled in a survey entry for Native American ancestry when she joined the faculty at Harvard. She was not taking up a “minority” position at Harvard. Moreover, as the test results show, she is correct.
19 Likes
Here’s the thing…Warren never used her claim of Native American heritage for political gain. The accusations originated from her opponent Scott Brown during their 2012 Senate contest. He’s the one who ginned up the controversy and Trump picked it up from there by calling her ‘Pocahontas’.
https://www.cnn.com/2016/06/29/politics/elizabeth-warren-native-american-pocahontas/index.html
How did this become a political issue?
It began during Warren’s 2012 Senate run, when her opponent, Brown, accused her of lying to get a leg up in her academic career.
“Professor Warren claimed that she was a Native American, a person of color,” he said during a debate. “And as you can see, she’s not.”
Warren shot back that she had not gained any “advantage” – a claim that has proven impossible to fact check – and in a subsequent ad again cited family lore.
“As a kid, I never asked my mom for documentation when she talked about our Native American heritage. What kid would? But I knew my father’s family didn’t like that she was part Cherokee and part Delaware, so my parents had to elope,” she said.
Their quarrel took a nasty turn around this time, when Brown’s staffers were filmed doing “war whoops” and “tomahawk chops” during an outdoor rally.
15 Likes
Even the pull-quote from the article you linked gives the lie to your claim.
11 Likes
Like anything, this is a complex issue, so I agree that people have picked up this topic to also attack her politically.
But she clearly leveraged her claimed heritage, as she was a “minority professor” for several years, and this was part of her brand for many years.
She also stated that her grandparents objected to her parents marriage because of this ancestral claim, and yes, she may well have believed the “family lore” but she then used it to political advantage as part of her brand. This is pretty insensitive stuff if you’re not actually an active member of the community… it’s why people were so frustrated with Rachel Dolezal, for example.
1 Like
She was a “minority professor” at a university, and has leveraged her ancestral claims as part of her brand.
If she never claimed to be “sufficiently Native American” by your definition, then how did she can this “minority” position (which, by the way, should have gone to someone who was from an actual minority community…)?
She would have done better to actually seek admission into a tribe or some Indigenous community (they have rituals and procedures that allow this), that would have at least signalled a genuine interest in her supposed heritage.
Instead, this is cynical cultural appropriation of the worst kind.
Her claim was that one her grandparents was Native American – she has repeated this story publicly, so you can look it up for yourself if you like.
That’s a hell of a claim to make if you haven’t verified that, and we also know that she did use this in applications, so we know what is more likely to have happened.
This is just another example of insensitive cultural appropriation, where white Europeans feel they can borrow an identity to obfuscate their own privilege. She could easily have sought membership in a tribe and gone through the appropriate steps to show a genuine interest in her ancestry, but she never has. And since that time, it has become part of her political brand.
Trump is a lying turd, but that fact doesn’t wipe away Warren’s conduct in this matter.
I’m cynical enough to expect better of her too.
1 Like
Gotcha, but that’s not really what I’m arguing – as I understand it, Harvard (and other schools) seek to improve diversity.
If you claim to have Native American ancestry, it will likely be noted (and hence, why Warren was listed as a “minority professor”) –
Look, all I’m saying is that this DNA test is just another example of what seems to be me to a longstanding tradition for Warren – to play “activist” but in a very cynical and insulting way.
(posted this elsewhere, but this basically what my sense of it is, and you can apply it retroactively to her behavior of mentioning her ancestry both during interviews for jobs and afterward as part of her political brand: https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/national/cherokee-nation-issues-statement-on-sen-elizabeth-warren-s-dna)
Nope. Warren said she grew up with family stories about both grandparents on her mother’s side having SOME Cherokee or Delaware blood, which in no way contradicts the results of this recent DNA test. There is zero evidence that she ever invoked minority status on on any job application. Warren also said she was unaware that Harvard had used her heritage as proof of diversity until she read it in the news. Believe her or not, your handwringing is based entirely on bad intel and conjecture.
11 Likes
She said that her parents weren’t permitted to marry because her mother was of Native American ancestry – the implication was that some grandparent, or recent relative, was Native American.
It’s also public record that she stated her ancestral claim during a job application, but her camp claims this was “not used to get her the job”.
I don’t buy it – and as for proof, you think they just guessed at her ancestral heritage and listed her in a directory? That’s absurd, especially given that she still uses her claim to heritage (which, by the way, Cherokee Nation has now responded to) as part of her political brand.
“The listings were based on professors reporting that they were members of a minority group, the directory says.”
Well it certainly gets us into very troubling territory, since we have not only issues of the accuracy of these tests, but also you get into very “eugenics-neighboring” territory… it’s problematic to say the least…
And then, there’s also not much respect for the traditional means by which various groups grant admission into the family/community/tribe. As far as I can tell, not a single Indigenous group uses DNA…
“Native American ancestry” does not imply “close relative who is a full-blooded Native American”. We know that one can appear to be from a certain genetic background many generations after those particular genetic traits have been passed down. Ever heard of a red-headed stepchild? If the job application says she stated her race as “white”, I couldn’t care less what she shared in an interview as long as it was true, which it appears that it was based on DNA testing. You’ve got nothing concrete, other than a woman with a now proven heritage talking about that heritage. Are you suggesting we should all just keep our traps shut about where we believe we come from? I honestly don’t get it, it seems like you have an axe to grind.
5 Likes
I guess the real question we have to ask ourselves is does it really matter that Warren claims Native American ancestry or not? It has no bearing on her abilities or position and the only people who have a problem with it are her political opponents trying to make an issue of it.
And what issue exactly does it reflect? That’s she’s not honest or trustworthy? Well shit, look at the current occupant of the White House to see that honesty and integrity are not virtues in politics anymore.
Those who are willing to look past Kavanaugh’s transgressions as a youth have no moral ground to try and point to her proclaimed ethnic status at Harvard.
I see no attempt at cultural appropriation by Warren either intentionally or accidental. Basically somebody else called her a name and for whatever reason it’s stuck to her. It’s the other side who are being gross and racist with the name calling and accusations.
8 Likes
I think the question has quickly become, “Why did she decide to open this can of worms again?”
Oh, because she wanted to fire a shot across the bow at Trump? Because she’s thinking of running in 2020, and wants to get her name out there with this harpoon in Moby Dick’s side?
If so, that doesn’t appear to be coming across well to all that many Native Americans. Especially considering how little concern she’s expressed otherwise for today’s Native Americans.
I think this whole thing might capsize her newly crafted ship of state-craft. (Okay, I think I just broke my own metaphor.)
8 Likes
You keep saying that, like it’s a position or a naval rank. It’s not a thing. Harvard just used it to promote their diversity. It had nothing to do with her being hired or retaining that position. Saying that the only way she got the job (and thus displacing some minority) is false.
9 Likes
Part of taking the air out of the GOP sails (I sense a naval theme going on here) is to “own” it and try to expose how silly the controversy has become. Like Obama did with his birth certificate sometimes you have to play the bully’s game in order to get past it and on to more pressing matters.
It’s not like Trump and his cult will suddenly accept any evidence as proof and let the matter die. Rational people know just how stupid this whole thing is.
She’s poking the bear and gaining attention to her eventual 2020 run. Now let’s see how she uses this to pivot to her campaign issues.
2 Likes
