Trump Thread

[Husar]

You mean, instead of bickering here WE (I and Montmorency and Rory and others) should form an investigating body, assume some legal status and start our investigation? You might as well offer Pannonian to start his own negotiations with the EU as for Brexit.

And, if you have failed to observe, these boards are all about bickering.

Since you appear to know that starting your own investigation is a bit far-fetched, you might have failed to observe that that can't have been my point.
I don't even read your long posts about the woman anymore because I don't care what some manly man dude in medieval Ukraine thinks about her trustworthiness.

[Gilrandir]

I don't even read your long posts about the woman anymore because I don't care what some manly man dude in medieval Ukraine thinks about her trustworthiness.

Now I really see that you don't read my posts. It wasn't her trustworthiness that I questioned.

[Strike For The South]

Elizabeth Warren would have been better off ignoring Trump. This may have single handedly torpedoed her 2020 chances.

So there are many Native nations and varying rules regarding who is or can be a part of them. Some require a blood relative, some require a direct link to a person (think the Dawes roles), others may require something else. No matter what the requirement the core issue at stake is the Tribes sovereignty against the United States government.

Not only does Warrens blood ancestry fall very much in line with the wider white population but the way she uses said ancestry perpetuates a kind of "Native as an aesthetic" that is harmful. In Delorias "Playing Indian" he argues that Native culture was used to mold American identity, this is important distinction because it forces inclusion.

Warren is essentially trying to force in inclusion where many people want to retain their own exclusion. She has no ties to the Cherokee nation (beyond her "high cheekbones" and "Pow Wow Chow"). The Chrokee nation has asked her to stop claiming them. She has essientaly backtracked and said "Well it's in my blood, I'm not a member of the nation". She fails to realize her blood has nothing to do with it.

It is a breathtaking ignorance. A lot of white families in Oklahoma have some type of Native ancestor story (Delorias book talks about this too). For years she has used this family myth as cudgel against wider white society, while ignoring what Native peoples were actually saying. She isn't Cherokee not because she is "white", She isn't Cherokee because she has no ties to them as a people. (As an aside this is why the reclamation of Native children through adoption is a major issue, but thats another topic.)

It is why the resisters are screaming about elections while Native people are screaming about erasure. Native nations get to decide who is a part of them. Being a Native is not an accessory. Being Native is not about blood. It is insulting to Native peoples to reduce their culture to a small part of a white womans aesthetic

Also if anyone gets a chance, please read that book. It is not an understatement to say that it changed the way I think. Easily one of the top 5 books I have ever read.

[Strike For The South]

as an addendum, this in no way exonerates Trump. He was being racist. There really isn't much to say there, par for the course.

[Csargo]

Elizabeth Warren would have been better off ignoring Trump. This may have single handedly torpedoed her 2020 chances.

So there are many Native nations and varying rules regarding who is or can be a part of them. Some require a blood relative, some require a direct link to a person (think the Dawes roles), others may require something else. No matter what the requirement the core issue at stake is the Tribes sovereignty against the United States government.

Not only does Warrens blood ancestry fall very much in line with the wider white population but the way she uses said ancestry perpetuates a kind of "Native as an aesthetic" that is harmful. In Delorias "Playing Indian" he argues that Native culture was used to mold American identity, this is important distinction because it forces inclusion.

Warren is essentially trying to force in inclusion where many people want to retain their own exclusion. She has no ties to the Cherokee nation (beyond her "high cheekbones" and "Pow Wow Chow"). The Chrokee nation has asked her to stop claiming them. She has essientaly backtracked and said "Well it's in my blood, I'm not a member of the nation". She fails to realize her blood has nothing to do with it.

It is a breathtaking ignorance. A lot of white families in Oklahoma have some type of Native ancestor story (Delorias book talks about this too). For years she has used this family myth as cudgel against wider white society, while ignoring what Native peoples were actually saying. She isn't Cherokee not because she is "white", She isn't Cherokee because she has no ties to them as a people. (As an aside this is why the reclamation of Native children through adoption is a major issue, but thats another topic.)

It is why the resisters are screaming about elections while Native people are screaming about erasure. Native nations get to decide who is a part of them. Being a Native is not an accessory. Being Native is not about blood. It is insulting to Native peoples to reduce their culture to a small part of a white womans aesthetic

Also if anyone gets a chance, please read that book. It is not an understatement to say that it changed the way I think. Easily one of the top 5 books I have ever read.

I'm not sure when people will learn not to get dragged down in these frivolous debates with Trump.

It's a cultural thing vs genetic thing, no? She genetically has an ancestor 100-200 years?(6-10 generations I'm not sure what the equivalent would be) ago that was a Native American. Culturally, she's a middle class woman from Oklahoma City with no affiliation to any tribe. This is a pretty common American thing to do, or at least I've experienced it with a lot of people, saying I'm part x-nationality on x-parent's side, etc. Could you expand on this: " In Delorias "Playing Indian" he argues that Native culture was used to mold American identity, this is important distinction because it forces inclusion. "

Is is stripping Native American culture to force them to conform to American society, or was it American society assimilating Native culture? I'd like to understand the argument here if you could expand further on it. Where does the line get drawn then in regards to this? Is it at if you're not a part of a tribe then you have no claim to being Native American?

[rory_20_uk]

There is a massive misconception what these genetic tests do.

They do NOT show what ethnicity you have in the past. They show what percentage similarity you have to their database of what genes certain ethnicities have. And in some cases their database is very small.

So merely having a small percentage that corresponds to an ethnicity in fact means close to nothing.

[Csargo]

There is a massive misconception what these genetic tests do.

They do NOT show what ethnicity you have in the past. They show what percentage similarity you have to their database of what genes certain ethnicities have. And in some cases their database is very small.

So merely having a small percentage that corresponds to an ethnicity in fact means close to nothing.

So they're effectively worthless in this scenario?

[Montmorency]

Elizabeth Warren would have been better off ignoring Trump. This may have single handedly torpedoed her 2020 chances.

So there are many Native nations and varying rules regarding who is or can be a part of them. Some require a blood relative, some require a direct link to a person (think the Dawes roles), others may require something else. No matter what the requirement the core issue at stake is the Tribes sovereignty against the United States government.

Not only does Warrens blood ancestry fall very much in line with the wider white population but the way she uses said ancestry perpetuates a kind of "Native as an aesthetic" that is harmful. In Delorias "Playing Indian" he argues that Native culture was used to mold American identity, this is important distinction because it forces inclusion.

Warren is essentially trying to force in inclusion where many people want to retain their own exclusion. She has no ties to the Cherokee nation (beyond her "high cheekbones" and "Pow Wow Chow"). The Chrokee nation has asked her to stop claiming them. She has essientaly backtracked and said "Well it's in my blood, I'm not a member of the nation". She fails to realize her blood has nothing to do with it.

It is a breathtaking ignorance. A lot of white families in Oklahoma have some type of Native ancestor story (Delorias book talks about this too). For years she has used this family myth as cudgel against wider white society, while ignoring what Native peoples were actually saying. She isn't Cherokee not because she is "white", She isn't Cherokee because she has no ties to them as a people. (As an aside this is why the reclamation of Native children through adoption is a major issue, but thats another topic.)

It is why the resisters are screaming about elections while Native people are screaming about erasure. Native nations get to decide who is a part of them. Being a Native is not an accessory. Being Native is not about blood. It is insulting to Native peoples to reduce their culture to a small part of a white womans aesthetic

Also if anyone gets a chance, please read that book. It is not an understatement to say that it changed the way I think. Easily one of the top 5 books I have ever read.

Well, it's the technocratic aspect of the party as well.

She "technically" has ancestry that refutes Trump's attacks on her (separate from the question of ethnicity), but that wasn't what Trump was guffawing about in the first place. So it's like fact-checking the bully punching you, "False, I am actually not hitting myself!"

(Separately, I'm not sure how much I value the right of tribes to enforce racial rules. Ethnostates everywhere probably have to be dismantled.)