Apparently, Elizabeth Warren got a DNA test

[conuly]

This, I feel, is at best a waste of money and at worst a complete tactical error.

Obviously the Trumpers don't really care about her DNA. They just want to mock her in the most offensive way possible. They're not going to believe her (or even remember that they didn't bother to believe her) any more than they believed Obama about his birth certificate. Responding to them just lends them credibility and dignity that they thoroughly don't deserve.

Instead, she ought to be focusing on the people who matter, which is, those of us who might ever vote for her. And I don't think any of us care either. A great many people who aren't Native still have some Native American ancestry. Big deal! What she ought to do is mea culpa about calling herself Native American when she isn't tribally enrolled, which would show that she took the time to educate herself, which I think we all do care about, at least a little more than whether or not one of her distant ancestors was maybe Native American or not.

Comments

[redsixwing]

I don't think I got this from you, but it seems up your alley:

What Spotify's DNA-based playlists get wrong. (That is to say, everything about them.)

I'd much rather see her educate herself, and I'm worried about the popularity of these tests engraving bad ideas into even more of the population than currently hold them.

[lydy]

If she is contemplating a presidential run in 2020, as I have heard rumored, it makes sense to just get all this nonsense out of the way now. Much less damaging than when she's on the campaign trail. The mistake, ages ago, of claiming Native American ancestry is one that can't be undone. I would like it if she made a clear statement about not claiming tribal membership, and discussing exactly what that means as distinct from genetic heritage. I still have hopes that she'll actually do that. But I can see why getting this out of the way now might be politically savvy. Or, you know, not.

[conuly]

I'm not sure she is "getting this out of the way".

Again, at best, the people she's trying to convince aren't listening and wouldn't believe her if they did, and the people she ought to be speaking to don't care about the genetics anyway.

At worst, she's just hyping them all up again.

[adrian_turtle]

She's not getting it out of the way. She's doubling down. If she doesn't make that distinction between tribal membership and heritage she's just digging deeper. In some ways, it's not hard to understand. I have Russian ancestors and no claim to Russian citizenship. It only gets tangled up in how many people are invested in not understanding, like they invested their politics in not recognizing Obama's birth certificate.

The only way she can POSSIBLY get it out of the way would be to say, "I apologize for filling out paperwork at Harvard based on my ethnic background rather than citizenship in the Cherokee nation. My great-great-grandmother was Cherokee, but I'm not."

Personally, I would not care if she claimed to be Hitler's illegitimate daughter, raised by werewolves. She's trying to improve health care access and protect people from predatory banks, so she gets my vote.

From the Cherokee Nation

[cactuswatcher]

"A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship. Current DNA tests do not even distinguish whether a person's ancestors were indigenous to North or South America. Sovereign tribal nations set their own legal requirements for citizenship, and while DNA tests can be used to determine lineage, such as paternity to an individual, it is not evidence for tribal affiliation. Using a DNA test to lay claim to any connection to the Cherokee Nation or any tribal nation, even vaguely, is inappropriate and wrong. It makes a mockery out of DNA tests and its legitimate uses while also dishonoring legitimate tribal governments and their citizens, who ancestors are well documented and whose heritage is prove. Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage."

- Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin, Jr.

Re: From the Cherokee Nation

[8hyenas]

I hissed with absolute satisfaction when I read this response. Such an insult for her do to this, for a bet, and using the DNA tests. I'd still vote for her of course, but I disliked her before and loathe her now.

Yet another sickening day in US politics.


(ETA: I'm Native, and vote Democrat, upset by this on a personal level.)

[julian]

Yeah, she did a little mea culpa'ing at an Indian/Native American convention, awhile back, but more would really /really/ not be amiss.

And I completely agree on the tactical error. These are bullies; they don't care about facts.

[landofnowhere]

Here's the speech: the bit about her heritage is right after she retells Pocahontas's story.

(Edited to add) It's a start. She was clearly viewed as white where she grew up, though, or she would have worse stories to tell than her father's family disapproving of her mother, and she should acknowledge this.

[ioplokon]

I think she's trying to just have it dealt w/ now rather than in 2020 & draw attention back to Trump's failure to make promised charitable donations before the midterms. As always seems to be the case, the actual, legitimate concerns of Native Americans don't really seem to be a factor here.

Of course the side-effect that, tbh, i fear neither of them care about (or at least value far less) is the way this adds legitimacy to DNA-based notions of race. There's currently that case of a guy who has "black" DNA trying to get access to minority-targeted business aid, right? So in general, stunts like this lead legitimacy to those kinds of claims (and bring us back to that "one drop" rule, I guess).

However, I do think there are meaningful ways that those of us w/ Native American ancestry can talk about that, despite not being tribally enrolled*, since, you know, most of our family histories are a testament to the cultural genocide enacted against Native American nations (tho idk Warren's case seems a bit far-reaching, since she doesn't appear to have like, specific ancestors in mind).

edt: basically I think that white or mostly white people should focus on actually understanding the historical weight of their Native American heritage rather than on what "claims" it allows them to make, you know?

[conuly]

So in general, stunts like this lead legitimacy to those kinds of claims (and bring us back to that "one drop" rule, I guess).

As I understand it, with blood quantum rules in effect in (some? many?) tribes, there's no "back to" for certain tribes to begin with.

[monanotlisa]

I think she's trying to just have it dealt w/ now rather than in 2020 & draw attention back to Trump's failure to make promised charitable donations before the midterms.

Hmm, that's a thought.

basically I think that white or mostly white people should focus on actually understanding the historical weight of their Native American heritage rather than on what "claims" it allows them to make, you know

Yeah. It's interesting, the attention White Mainstream US society pays to genetics, when so few others do -- not people of color, not other countries' citizens, where culture is the defining factor (too much, at times).

[calimac]

As I understand it, Warren never claimed to "be a Native American." She said that she believed herself to have some Native ancestry, according to family tradition, and what we now learn is that this is true.

Most importantly, she never tried to use this to get any kind of affirmative action benefit in hiring, which is the lie that Trump has been putting about.

[dewline]

Is he trying to use this to move the Overton window on her human rights and her life?

[wpadmirer]

Yep.

[melannen]

It really means absolutely nothing, period, because those DNA tests are notoriously inaccurate when it comes to ethnicity fractions. But also because 8 generations back... 8 generations back *I* very likely have Native American ancestry, because we're talking 17th century at that point, and all we know is that a) several womens' names aren't recorded, and b) there were few enough white women in the area then that if they were white women, we'd probably know which ones, so probably at least a couple were either Indian or Black.

But. We're talking 1/512 at that point. Even if the commercial DNA tests could actually capture that (they can't), it would mean literally nothing about who I am now. Everyone whose ancestors were mostly in the US that far back probably has at least one NA ancestor.

I think it really is mostly a "gotcha" at Trump. (Possibly also usable later as a dig at the fact that his family are recent immigrants...)

[alexseanchai]

I know for facts I have Native ancestry. Got the genealogical records to prove it. (Or rather, my dad does.)

...the most recent fully Native person in my ancestry was contemporary with Pocahontas.

And yeah. Everything you said.

[shadowkat]

Having done the whole DNA analysis thing myself -- this is just hilarious.
Also my sister-in-law did it -- and allegedly tracked herself back to Clovis Man.

Truth of the matter? They can't trace American Indian Tribes and most minorities, because the DNA wasn't collected and many geneological records have been lost or deliberately destroyed. (See the American Indian Wars as to why these records don't exist.)

The same problem exists for German lineage due to WWII, along with a lot of other regions. Scotland has the best records as does England. I was able to trace my Scottish, Irish, Welsh, and English roots all the way back to the 1600s for example. But I ran into a brick wall with the French, German, Scandinavian, and other roots.

I'm not sure why it matters at this stage. A co-worker, who is African-American and part Native American - loves to crack jokes about it at work.
As does my cousin who is part Sioux (her mother was half-Sioux).

[conuly]

Also my sister-in-law did it -- and allegedly tracked herself back to Clovis Man.

LOL.

[archangelbeth]

*smashes the "like" button on this*

[rhoda_rants]

Much facepalming on my end. So much facepalming.

Here's what makes me nervous though: If she does wind up running in 2020, I really hope the liberal/progressive corner that tends to throw people in the trash for every transgression no matter how small won't do that with her. I still think Warren is a net positive for the country and I want her in a higher office. That's one of the biggest problems with our current situation I think: Democrats tend to demand absolute moral purity or else, Republicans tend to sweep even the most grievous of errors under the rug. I just don't want that to happen here.

I hope this makes sense. I'm pre-coffee right now.

[conuly]

At this point, my bar for "anybody but Trump" is extremely low.

[thornsilver]

I would like to think she has an actual useful reason to take that test, but I can't come up with one.

[l33tminion]

It's not just Trump, she's in the middle of a senate campaign where her current opponents are running racist attack ads against her. Warren isn't claiming tribal membership, and she was explicit about that in her speech (as in the past). She's just saying she wasn't lying about her family history. Which she wasn't!

The comparison to the Obama birth certificate stuff seems like a reasonable analogy. But the polling numbers on doubt about Obama's birthplace decreased substantially over time spanning Obama's release of the long-form birth certificate and other corroborating evidence, and it's reasonable to infer that Obama's actions were a substantial cause of that change. Providing additional evidence in the face of unreasonable doubt provides unreasonable doubters with a face-saving reason to change their minds.

Furthermore, if you're worried about playing into your opponents frame, I think, "I've realized that on some higher level what I said was dishonest," is a much worse response to "you were lying for personal gain" than, "I wasn't lying and here's some evidence to back that up."

I'm really dismayed to see the circular firing squad come out on this one. There's a lot of nuance to be had here, but if Republicans making racist accusations that progressives think are bald lies nonetheless lowers progressives' opinions of Warren, something has gone wrong.

[thewayne]

I think it was a no-win situation. She would have continued to be hounded by Trumpers if she hadn't taken the test, so at least it's done.

[conuly]

But they're not going to stop anyway.

Well ...

[ysabetwordsmith]

I will never criticize anyone for choosing not to participate in the institutionalized racism of tribal enrollment. Native isn't just about genetics, and it certainly isn't about a card issued by white people. It's culture and craft and language, but most of all, a way of looking at the world that's just very different from how most mainstream Americans see it. And that? She has it. She's one of the very few public figures who does.

I still think it's fucking hilarious that he thinks calling her by the name of a famous historic figure is somehow an insult.

[spikethemuffin]

I've written elsewhere, I'm suspicious on the timing of this. Coupled with the "Hillary Clinton said something mind-numbingly tone-deaf in what was probably three hours of stuff that also mattered desperately and was relevant to her politics and would be if she were male," it feels like sowing dissent, a devil's bargain of "accept problematic behavior from our leaders (and look like hypocritical assholes) or remain pure and lose all semblance of the voice of decency in our government."

[gwydion]

The specific reason I haven't commented, beyond posting what I feel like I absolutely have to by way of links is that I'm a white person and the issue of who is and isn't Native is an issue for the Tribes, not for me as a white person.

My job in situations like this is to listen to what Indigenous people have to say and go with that.

I had meant to post an interview I saw with a Cherokee Spokesman and spaced it what with all the health and sleep stuff. Thank you for reminding me to dig it up and/or grab the official statement.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

It's true the Trump chumps don't really care about her DNA, but since Trump has chosen to make such an issue about it, AND said on that video (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/elizabeth-warren-dna-test-results_us_5bc4648ce4b040bb4e840fd6) "I will give you a million dollars - to your favorite charity - paid for by Trump - if you take the test and it shows you're an Indian" I say she did exactly right in taking the test and calling his bluff. Those tests are not that expensive anyway.

"What she ought to do is mea culpa about calling herself Native American when she isn't tribally enrolled, which would show that she took the time to educate herself"

Whoa whoa whoa whoa. You need to take the time to educate yourself about the fucked-up BIA politics around being 'tribally enrolled' before you say any such thing. All my own genes come from the far north-western corner of Europe, so I scrupulously keep my lily-white nose out of tribal business, but a number of my friends-and-relations here are First Nations - some with BIA cards, some without - and I have heard no end of tales of utter bullshit.

The question to be asking here is: by what right does it fall to the white-guy government to determine who is or is not 'legitimately' First Nations, after having subjected the First Nations to several centuries of genocide?

[mme-n-b.livejournal.com]

Seriously, this is nonsense. It's entirely possible for an American to say: "I'm French-Irish on my mother's side and German on my father's" or "My family is Dutch and Polish" without anyone thinking that they are a EU citizen. Similarly, there's absolutely nothing wrong with saying "I'm Native American (on my mom's side, five generations back, partly, on Mondays only)" - it is not a claim of tribal citizenship.

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

This.