Candidate in trouble over claiming minority status

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Ahtman**

Link

Democratic Candidate Elizabeth Warren says she is 1/32nd Cherokee. Making such a claim isn't her problem. The problem is that she used that to claim minority status in college admittance and on her CV to get jobs, even being advertised as a minority Professor at Harvard Law.

In all fairness she did submit a few recipes to a cookbook called "Pow Wow Chow" back in 1983.

Interview with a Cherokee Genealogist on Real Clear Politics debunking her claim of Cherokee ancestry

**purplefood**

Foolish woman...

**Bromsy**

This reminds me of Mattys recent post about Americans and our nuts ass obsession over our descent. I'm Northern European. Maybe when I get old and lame I'll grow to be interested in my genealogy (happened to my dad).

**purplefood**

Yeah that obsession never made sense to me...

**AustonT**

purplefood wrote:Yeah that obsession never made sense to me...

It's a nation of immigrants, some of which maintain close cultural ties to their old world identities. My mother's family spoke Dutch in the home until my great grandmother died when I was 7. My grandfather and all his siblings spoke the travellers cant and their parents were "traveling musicians" when the state took their kids away. Which was a common euphemism at the time for Gypsies in the US. When my wife and I have children they will have my whole mess plus a maternal family that uniformly speaks Spanish, but not so much English. Ancestry is an important part of heritage but we aren't totally obsessed with it (the Mormons are).

**purplefood**

AustonT wrote:
purplefood wrote:Yeah that obsession never made sense to me...
It's a nation of immigrants, some of which maintain close cultural ties to their old world identities. My mother's family spoke Dutch in the home until my great grandmother died when I was 7. My grandfather and all his siblings spoke the travellers cant and their parents were "traveling musicians" when the state took their kids away. Which was a common euphemism at the time for Gypsies in the US. When my wife and I have children they will have my whole mess plus a maternal family that uniformly speaks Spanish, but not so much English. Ancestry is an important part of heritage but we aren't totally obsessed with it (the Mormons are).

I get that part and I understand that...
What I don't understand is when an 4th/5th generation American claims to be Irish because one of his ancestors was...
That's when it seems weird to me...

**Bromsy**

I can get on board with embracing your roots and all, but anything less than a quarter - shut up about it.

**AustonT**

purplefood wrote:
AustonT wrote:
purplefood wrote:Yeah that obsession never made sense to me...
It's a nation of immigrants, some of which maintain close cultural ties to their old world identities. My mother's family spoke Dutch in the home until my great grandmother died when I was 7. My grandfather and all his siblings spoke the travellers cant and their parents were "traveling musicians" when the state took their kids away. Which was a common euphemism at the time for Gypsies in the US. When my wife and I have children they will have my whole mess plus a maternal family that uniformly speaks Spanish, but not so much English. Ancestry is an important part of heritage but we aren't totally obsessed with it (the Mormons are).

I get that part and I understand that...
What I don't understand is when an 4th/5th generation American claims to be Irish because one of his ancestors was...
That's when it seems weird to me...

Oh...THOSE people. Unfortunatly (for you mostly I suppose) I can relate to that as well. Some of those people are rightfully claiming a heterogeneous Irish heritage. I don't know about places like say Chicago or New York but in Montana there is a town called Butte. It's population is something like 70% Irish if not more. Similarly the valley I am from has two towns with a near uniform Dutch population. The towns are called Manhattan and Amsterdam...When I meet other natives and hear a last name like Shea or Leary...or virtually anything with an O' on the front I can immediately say "Butte huh?" and watch them kick the dirt and nod affirmative. It's harder to spot the Dutch as contrary to popular belief not all Dutch names start with Van, and most are analogous to German names and misspelled via immigration papers. Most of those people have never married outside the Irish, and especially outside the Catholic church. Their claim to being Irish is a passport short of being the same as most people in the Republic. Most of them aren't the plastic paddy Irish you see in movies or TV. I think part of the claim even beyond 4 or 5 generations is roughly like being of Chinese decent the same number of generations...you don't stop being Chinese, or different just because time has passed. That's the reason in big cities there is a China Town, or Little Italy, or Little Haiti. The Irish are somewhat more integrated but still maintain a tie to Ireland...in many ways I think that is also the root cause for the wide support of the IRA.

**Mannahnin**

Speaking of the NA tribes, most of them have formal rules for how to document/declare your ancestry, which generally only mean you have to be a small fraction "by blood" of that tribe to claim membership. The small fractions I understand are in part due to how depleted and small in number many of the tribes are.

Here's one of the first pages that game up with a quick google for claiming tribal membership as a Cherokee:

http://cherokeeregistry.firstlightonline.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14&Itemid=29

I've copied the details below in the spoiler tags, because they're pretty long, with four different groups of people/sets of criteria, but here's category 4:

Category 4.

Information about Indian ancestry of individuals in this category of Cherokees is more difficult to locate. This is primarily because the federal government has never maintained a list of all the persons of Cherokee Indian descent, indicating their tribal affiliation, degree of Indian blood or other data. In order to establish Cherokee ancestry you should use the same methods prescribed in "Indian Ancestry" and "Genealogical Research" material. (Reference directories " INDIAN ANCESTRY" and " GENEALOGICAL RESEARCH")
in North Carolina are the largest. The Oklahoma tribe only requires that you have an ancestor on the Dawes rolls (a census from the early 1900’s) but there is no blood percentage required. The Eastern band requires an ancestor on the Baker roll of 1924 and additionally one sixteenth Eastern Cherokee blood. There is another federally recognized group known as the United Keetoowah Band of the Cherokee Indians. They use the same Dawes roll requirements as the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, but also require one fourth “Keetoowah Cherokee Blood”.
There are also state recognized tribes such as the Georgia Tribe of the Eastern Cherokee. This particular tribe requires applicants to have an ancestor on “one of the many US Government Cherokee Indian Rolls”. Even if you are not able to become a member of a Cherokee tribe doesn’t mean you are not Cherokee. It simply means your ancestors may have avoided being included on those government rolls. In that case you can complete the “Declaration of Cherokee Heritage”on this site and receive a Cherokee Documentation Number (CDN) that references your claim.

Spoiler:

Here's a link to the actual Cherokee Nation page:

http://www.cherokee.org/Services/TribalCitizenship/30869/Information.aspx

**dogma**

Racial jokes are not appropriate for Dakka.-Mannahnin

**mattyrm**

Racial jokes are not appropriate for Dakka. -Mannahnin

**d-usa**

Immigration, assimilation, and cultural heritage is an interesting subject. Me and my younger brother are an interesting example of that.

We moved from Germany to the US in 97, I was 16 and he was 10. I had already established a German identity in my own mind and was proud of my heritage. I learned everything I could about the US, and I have dual citizenship, but to me I was just as German as I was American. I keep German mementos, I speak it at home with family, I cook German things, I do a lot to keep it alive. When we have kids the plan is for me to speak German to them to help them grow up bilingual.

My brother was younger than me and fell into the "I am different and I need to fit in" cycle that is common with 1st generation immigrants. He became very American, and doesn't really have much interest in Germany and German culture. He speaks English only for the most part which makes my mom angry since she tries to speak German to us, although he knows better than to speak English with me. If it was not for his last name, you would not know he is German. He wanted to fit in and I guess he is the model for "become American if you want to live here".

Which to me is kind of sad, because I actually have US citizenship and he doesn't. He only has German citizenship and he doesn't really care about it all. Take pride in who you are now, but also always honor where you came from.

**Ouze**

Man, I've seen some weak sauce political attacks this season, but this is so far the far-and-away winner.

He mother told her she had native ancestry when she was a child, based upon a marriage certificate that showed such from 1890something. An amateur genealogist was unable to locate this 130-odd year old marriage certificate, so she isn't really an Native after all. This is, inexplicably, a scandal of some sort. Perhaps when she identified as a Native in a 1984 cookbook she knew she would apply for Harvard in a decade and it would come in handy.

By the way, how many resumes have you seen that list the applicants ethnicity on them?

**J-Roc77**

She has to be able to trace her lineage back to someone on the Dawes Roll by direct lineage. Either she can or cannot. To claim tribal affiliation and receive benefits (if there is any) the tribe has to recognize you, and you get enrolled with a number tattooed on your inner lip (not really..it is just a card). When claiming tribal affiliation for college or jobs or IHS I have always had to show my ID and I look native. I wonder how people get past that. People claiming native ancestry when they do not is not have any is not new, with the exclusion of an estimated 100k people the Dawes Roll it could be true and just not recognized. The roll is a little better than blood quantum. Lets say I am 1/2 native and my wife is as well but of another tribe, our kid is now 1/4 native because of the Dawes Act. My kid is not any less indoctrinated in our culture as someone with a higher degree of blood quantum. This is an issue for some natives as degrees of blood do not equate to cultural experience.

I thought the interview is odd especially the part where they talk about how she looks. I found it kind of funny how the lady in the interview stated she was angry about Warrens high cheek bones comment then they discussed Warrens features as not looking native but european.

Oh hey Matty and Dogma, replace fire water with watermelon and native with black see if it sounds right.

**Ouze**

J-Roc77 wrote:I thought the interview is odd especially the part where they talk about how she looks. I found it kind of funny how the lady in the interview stated she was angry about Warrens high cheek bones comment then they discussed Warrens features as not looking native but european.

I thinking going by how someone looks is the best way to do determine that; just as it's plain to see who is an African-American:

versus, say, an Englisman:

**AustonT**

J-Roc77 wrote:

Oh hey Matty and Dogma, replace fire water with watermelon and native with black see if it sounds right.

Shuffle it back in the deck.

**Monster Rain**

J-Roc77 wrote:Oh hey Matty and Dogma, replace fire water with watermelon and native with black see if it sounds right.

While I understand where you're coming from, being married to a Native American, I don't perceive matty and dogma as actually engaging in hate speech.

Since you bring it up though, it is interesting to see what types of slurs are allowed and which ones aren't. As you say, if someone had made a similar comment, even in jest, about any number of other groups there would have been quite an uproar.

**Samus_aran115**

That woman is an idiot. Anything less than 1/8 is totally worthless, and she knows it.

**d-usa**

Samus_aran115 wrote:That woman is an idiot. Anything less than 1/8 is totally worthless, and she knows it.

Depends on the tribe. She claimed Cherokee, which actually doesn't have a minimum blood requirement, only a requirement that you can somehow trace your lineage back to a member on the original rolls.

So no, less than 1/8th is not worthless, and she would not be an idiot. But thanks for the meaningful insight

**Samus_aran115**

Oh come on, seriously? If you're 1/32nd cherokee, what are you really contributing to the preservation of your tribe? Nothing, unless you happen to be personally involved in everything that goes on with them and have incredibly extensive knowledge of traditional knowledge and history, which would be lucky.

I don't doubt that these sort of "whitie" indians have contributed a lot to preservation and heritage, but some of them are just posers who cling to their measly heritage to find some sort of belonging, or to escape the stereotypes of their dominant race (ie, "well, my people didn't enslave blacks. They lived off the land hurrdurr").

"My grandmother's dad was japanese! So that means I'm a little bit japanese! I'm studying the language and going to move to kyoto after school! Being Japanese is so great and unique!"

**Mannahnin**

There's a difference between those sorts of people and someone who claims tribal citizenship based on the laws of that tribe. She may have simply been mistaken.

**d-usa**

Samus_aran115 wrote:Oh come on, seriously? If you're 1/32nd cherokee, what are you really contributing to the preservation of your tribe? Nothing, unless you happen to be personally involved in everything that goes on with them and have incredibly extensive knowledge of traditional knowledge and history, which would be lucky.

I don't doubt that these sort of "whitie" indians have contributed a lot to preservation and heritage, but some of them are just posers who cling to their measly heritage to find some sort of belonging, or to escape the stereotypes of their dominant race (ie, "well, my people didn't enslave blacks. They lived off the land hurrdurr").

"My grandmother's dad was japanese! So that means I'm a little bit japanese! I'm studying the language and going to move to kyoto after school! Being Japanese is so great and unique!"

Well, if she would legally be a Cherokee based on the laws of the tribe (which she could have been) then she can vote in their elections and be a part of the tribe in every single legal way.

Sorry if it offends you that somebody could be a member of a tribe even though in your eyes they are not "indian" enough. If the Cherokee tribe didn't want these 'white posers', then I would imagine they would have a law requiring a minimum blood content.

But feel free to rage over 'white people' following the laws of the tribes.

**Samus_aran115**

If she really thinks she has something genuine to contribute to the preservation, then good on her, and I wish her the best... But to accept financial aid based on a loose connection with a highly venerated and respected people is a little sly, and not entirely honest. She could have been possibly taking away an opportunity from someone else who could've used it, simply to save a buck or two.

**J-Roc77**

Monster Rain wrote:
J-Roc77 wrote:Oh hey Matty and Dogma, replace fire water with watermelon and native with black see if it sounds right.

While I understand where you're coming from, being married to a Native American, I don't perceive matty and dogma as actually engaging in hate speech.

Since you bring it up though, it is interesting to see what types of slurs are allowed and which ones aren't. As you say, if someone had made a similar comment, even in jest, about any number of other groups there would have been quite an uproar.

Not only married to a native, I am one although not exactly traditional as my in-laws. In another thread I had a talk with Matty that started with "why do you lads drink so much" to which I replied it was an inaccurate stereo type. I see it continues. I guarantee you someone who approaches the topic in that manner would become silent on the subject if they were seated next to me and my family at a restaurant. If they weren't I would have some words right then about it too. As minorities we often have a hard time defining ourselves as common culture imposes their definitions on us. Here is a common one around native communities that also seems to get shuffled under "nothing wrong with that, we will tell you natives what offends your people" type response. Oh and about your point I agree it is not hate speech, it is unintentional racism. I hope it is unintentional.

d-usa wrote:
Samus_aran115 wrote:That woman is an idiot. Anything less than 1/8 is totally worthless, and she knows it.

Depends on the tribe. She claimed Cherokee, which actually doesn't have a minimum blood requirement, only a requirement that you can somehow trace your lineage back to a member on the original rolls.

So no, less than 1/8th is not worthless, and she would not be an idiot. But thanks for the meaningful insight

I think my post above shows how quantum is a flawed measure. Not saying she was not FAR removed from the culture, just that some people with a lower blood quantum may be misrepresented by the number.

**Ahtman**

d-usa wrote:(which she could have been)

'Could be' and 'are' are two radically different things. I could be the Queen of England, but I probably am not. As it is it would appear that while she could have been, she isn't nor does the evidence suggest that she ever has been.

**AustonT**

J-Roc77 wrote:
Monster Rain wrote:
J-Roc77 wrote:Oh hey Matty and Dogma, replace fire water with watermelon and native with black see if it sounds right.

While I understand where you're coming from, being married to a Native American, I don't perceive matty and dogma as actually engaging in hate speech.

Since you bring it up though, it is interesting to see what types of slurs are allowed and which ones aren't. As you say, if someone had made a similar comment, even in jest, about any number of other groups there would have been quite an uproar.

Not only married to a native, I am one although not exactly traditional as my in-laws. In another thread I had a talk with Matty that started with "why do you lads drink so much" to which I replied it was an inaccurate stereo type. I see it continues. I guarantee you someone who approaches the topic in that manner would become silent on the subject if they were seated next to me and my family at a restaurant. If they weren't I would have some words right then about it too. As minorities we often have a hard time defining ourselves as common culture imposes their definitions on us. Here is a common one around native communities that also seems to get shuffled under "nothing wrong with that, we will tell you natives what offends your people" type response. Oh and about your point I agree it is not hate speech, it is unintentional racism. I hope it is unintentional.

d-usa wrote:
Samus_aran115 wrote:That woman is an idiot. Anything less than 1/8 is totally worthless, and she knows it.

Depends on the tribe. She claimed Cherokee, which actually doesn't have a minimum blood requirement, only a requirement that you can somehow trace your lineage back to a member on the original rolls.

So no, less than 1/8th is not worthless, and she would not be an idiot. But thanks for the meaningful insight

I think my post above shows how quantum is a flawed measure. Not saying she was not FAR removed from the culture, just that some people with a lower blood quantum may be misrepresented by the number.

Its like a broken record, you need new material.

**Kilkrazy**

Samus_aran115 wrote:That woman is an idiot. Anything less than 1/8 is totally worthless, and she knows it.

It depends on who you are and your personal ideas about "racial" identity.

Scientists don't believe there is any link between "race" and behavioural characteristics.

We get ideas about race and ethnicity from our cultural background. In this woman's background, it seems that some importance was attached to a fairly distant ancestor. If she was proud of that, maybe it was good to self-identify with a disadvantaged minority. Surely better to accept some diversity in one's ancestry than to insist one is descended in pure and direct line.

UK television did an interesting programme a couple of years ago in which they did genetic analysis and tracing on volunteers to find out if some clearly "white" "English" people might have what used to be called a touch of the tar brush.

Needless to say, some of the most outspokenly "white, British and proud of it", anti-immigration participants, turned out to have genes found commonly in north African populations, and hilarity ensued.

The message here is that if minor degrees of genetic ethnicity are important to you, they are important to you, but be careful because it can be a double edged blade.

The affair demonstrates that "race" is still a very touchy subject in the USA.

**notprop**

Ahtman wrote:
d-usa wrote:(which she could have been)

'Could be' and 'are' are two radically different things. I could be the Queen of England, but I probably am not...

HRH Ahtman....

Hmmmmm has a certain ring to it don't you think Ma'am?

**J-Roc77**

AustonT wrote:
J-Roc77 wrote:
Monster Rain wrote:
J-Roc77 wrote:Oh hey Matty and Dogma, replace fire water with watermelon and native with black see if it sounds right.

While I understand where you're coming from, being married to a Native American, I don't perceive matty and dogma as actually engaging in hate speech.

Since you bring it up though, it is interesting to see what types of slurs are allowed and which ones aren't. As you say, if someone had made a similar comment, even in jest, about any number of other groups there would have been quite an uproar.

Not only married to a native, I am one although not exactly traditional as my in-laws. In another thread I had a talk with Matty that started with "why do you lads drink so much" to which I replied it was an inaccurate stereo type. I see it continues. I guarantee you someone who approaches the topic in that manner would become silent on the subject if they were seated next to me and my family at a restaurant. If they weren't I would have some words right then about it too. As minorities we often have a hard time defining ourselves as common culture imposes their definitions on us. Here is a common one around native communities that also seems to get shuffled under "nothing wrong with that, we will tell you natives what offends your people" type response. Oh and about your point I agree it is not hate speech, it is unintentional racism. I hope it is unintentional.

d-usa wrote:
Samus_aran115 wrote:That woman is an idiot. Anything less than 1/8 is totally worthless, and she knows it.

Depends on the tribe. She claimed Cherokee, which actually doesn't have a minimum blood requirement, only a requirement that you can somehow trace your lineage back to a member on the original rolls.

So no, less than 1/8th is not worthless, and she would not be an idiot. But thanks for the meaningful insight

I think my post above shows how quantum is a flawed measure. Not saying she was not FAR removed from the culture, just that some people with a lower blood quantum may be misrepresented by the number.

Its like a broken record, you need new material.

Yes pointing out that others often stereotype my people in negative ways when it just happened is me pulling the race card. Any attempt to straighten out misconceptions or falsehoods about my culture apparently should be left to other cultures to decide. And yes me speaking up about it is apparently not what I should do as it may offend dominant culture. Also when Monster rain points out that there are interesting differences in what slurs are allowed and what are not me showing a native take on Chief Wahoo is totally irrelevant and pulling the race card.

Could you outline your position on why I should let others misrepresent me and my people and why I should not further a conversation by providing more examples?

**mattyrm**

Yeah sensitive man is sensitive. I hardly think joking about boozing is hate speech. I mean, the discussion you are referring to was regarding a BBC story about native Americans having a serious problem with booze, is it racist to mention that?

If that's the case, i should be upset every time people mention the light hearted British bad teeth or the similar common Irish drunk stereotype.

There is no need to get so defensive if someone isn't being genuinely rude and aggressive with some light hearted, good humoured stereo typing.

Personally i find political correctness and the desperate desire to be constantly offended all the time about as offensive as genuine bigotry!

I think that people would get along better without both.

Be that as it may, i apologise if i offended your delicate sensibilities, feel free to retort with a light hearted blanket statement about the British, Irish or if you come right down to it, pretty much anyone. I'm sure there's even a Frenchman if you go back far enough.