The claim of Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) being part Native American surfaced again during last year’s election cycle due to Donald Trump using the epithet, “Pocahontas,” in regards to her. One of my favorite Trump moments came when in a press conference in May 2016, while in North Dakota, a reporter asked a question regarding something Sen. Warren had said. He asked, “Pocahontas? When the reporter did not reply, he again asked, “Pocahontas?’ Another reporter retorted, “That’s very offensive,” to which he just shrugged. During Warren’s successful bid for the Senate in 2012, against the sitting Republican, Scott Brown, it was disclosed that she had applied for a teaching post at Harvard through Affirmative Action by claiming to be 1/32nd Cherokee Indian. Since then she’s been derisively called both #Fauxcahontas and #Pocahontas on social media because people don’t believe her claim of being part native. She got that job at Harvard, and she’s been condemned by some for having “stolen” the job from a true “person of color”. She’s, I would guess, a “White person of color”- as George Zimmerman, the man who shot Barack Obama’s “could’ve been son”, Trayvon Martin, was called a “White Hispanic”, a description, up to then, unheard of. Stealing from the “colored” people is considered a major sin in the Identity Politics and race, class, and gender riddled world of Democrat political correctness. Character doesn’t define you in that world, as Heraclitus would have thought, nor Biology, as Freud would have though. Virtue signaling does; however, Warren suffered no serious fallout for the alleged sin. Pas d’enemies dans la Gauche, after all. (There is one question that is never asked of her defenders, though. Why is “Pocahontas” seen as a pejorative by this pro-women of color, pro-Native women cabal? If #GrrlPower rules, certainly, Pocahontas would qualify as a heroine).
Matoaka (c-1597-1617) was the daughter of Chief Powhatan (1545-1618, formally known as Wahunsenacawh, leader of the Algonquian alliance known as Tsenacommacah) and earned the nickname, Pocahontas- meaning naughty or spoiled girl. It was this spirit that compelled her to stand in front of Captain John Smith (1580-1631), leader of the Jamestown colony, who was captured and about to be put to death by her father in 1609, and plead for his life to be spared, thus saving not only the life of the good Captain, but arguably, also saving the cause of English settlement in the New world, which was then being tentatively investigated as a viability by England via private companies. She was but 11 years old at the time of her stand. It’s this spirit and courage that has kept her name alive these four centuries since.
America has done an 180 with its relationship with Natives. For a long time, it was considered shameful to have Native “blood” in you, however minuscule. Today because of the advancement of the rights of minorities, and also because of the above-mentioned Identity Politics, it is our Europeanness that is seen as shameful and loathed. Natives are now honored. Two centuries after Pocahontas’ death, the Democrats, under Andrew Jackson, paid back her goodness with the Indian Removal Act of 1830. All Indians in the South, east of the Mississippi River, were rounded up and forcibly, as we would say now, “re-accommodated” into reservations in the West, along a route to be called later “The Trail of Tears” for all those that perished along the way. Senator Warren’s family is indeed from the area, so there is a chance that the stories told her about having Native ancestors could be true. So why doesn’t she take one of those on-line DNA tests? My guess is that if indeed she isn’t Native, she’s afraid that her application via Affirmative Action for Harvard would be considered fraud ( since lying on a government application is a big no-no, just ask President Obama, who was de-barred for lying that he had never gone under another assumed name [Barry Soetoro]) Still, I doubt ( as the case of, again, President Obama’s applying to Occidental College, Columbia University, and Harvard Law School as a “foreign student”) anything would be done about it. Some of her defenders claim that taking such a DNA test would be meaningless since said tests can’t tell you if you are indeed a member of a specific Native tribe. Scientists tell us that using our DNA they can trace our ancestry back to “Lucy”, our 3.2 million-year-old Australopithecus Afarensis “Eve”, but in this case, Warren’s defenders are correct…the on-line DNA tests aren’t sophisticated enough to distinguish the DNA between tribes. Be you from Prudhoe Bay, Alaska to Tierra del Fuego, Chile, the results would say, “Native American”.
This does lead to an interesting question though…why can these tests differentiate between a Frenchman and a Spaniard but not between an Eskimo in the Yukon and a Venezuelan or Amazonian Yanomami? I would assume since there have been a succession of migratory waves into Europe, and much intermingling, a person of a certain region’s DNA would be different than another’s; whereas, in the Americas, there was just the one migration of peoples from East Asia over the Bering Strait land-bridge, that stopped millennia ago. So essentially, all the tribes in North, Central, and South America are the same. The difference between the various “nations” is cultural and linguistic, not genetic. As in Europe, they are different culturally from their brothers, but, in America, not ethnically. It wasn’t until Columbus came to the Americas, that a new migratory wave arrived here: English, Spanish, African, and later Asian. All races and ethnicities have since intermixed with natives so that someone like Sen. Warren can say she’s 1/32nd Cherokee. I believe I’m about 40% Native. My parents being from Nicaragua, the tribe would be one from there. At about .40%, I’m about 4x’s more “native” than Warren (.125%).
I remember in a documentary on PBS many years ago about some archeological digs in western China that they were miraculously finding tombs whose skeletal remains had remnants of reddish hair on their skulls and were laid to rest in tartan dress. No one believed that there would have been any Celtic people in that part of the world at the time estimated that these tombs were made ( about 4-5,000 years ago). The disturbing part of this show was what happened on the next excavation. They dug up the tomb, removed the tartan-clad remains but found that there wasn’t a head. This person had been buried beheaded. Or so it seemed. The archeologists suspected that the Chinese authorities had found a tomb, dug it up, removed the probably red headed skull, and reburied the remains to be “found” by the unsuspecting archeologists later on. The red haired occupants of these “Chinese” tombs were disrupting the narrative that this was Chinese history, not a Celtic history. When your “claim to fame”, so to speak, is, “We were here first,” and that is your only claim to fame, it then becomes tenuous at best, even compromised when remains of other ethnic groups begin to appear when and where none but that of the natives should be. The Native American authorities are wary of their narrative being disrupted, too. More and more often than not, bones found to be thousands of years old turn out not to be Native, but Caucasian.
Our Natives aren’t the only ones with a revanchist program…so too do the extremists in the racist organization, La Raza (the Race), which got much unwanted negative publicity during the election cycle, when Trump criticized the presiding judge in the case against him and Trump University, Mexican-American Gonzalo Curiel, was found to be an avid supporter. This so-called civil rights organization has as it’s aim, la Reconquista- reconquering- of “their” lost land in the American south-west, in the name of Aztlan, the homeland of the Aztecs ( No comment available from the Kiowas, Pimas, Comanches, Apaches, Mojaves, Navajos, Utes, or Paiutes. The geographically and historically challenged “Chicanos” are, of course, conflating the Aztec Empire in south-central Mexico with the Spanish, Nueva España, that Americans “manifest-destined” and won in the Mexican-American War in the 19th century).
Yet the claim by these reconquistadores is on even more flimsier grounds than their American brothers’. What many may not know, from the Aztecs’ own legends, or history (from the 14th century to 1521 A.D.), is that they say they took the land they called “Aztlan” from white-skinned, bearded men. As these fled, they vowed to return and wreak vengeance upon the Aztecs. These bearded men then got onto boats and sailed across the sea. Our good friends in La Raza, of course, don’t believe this to be true; the Aztecs, however, did. So much so, that as with most primitive people, they prayed to their gods to keep them safe from their conquered’s vengeance. Their main god was “Quetzalcoatl” (god of the wind, wisdom, and knowledge, giver of life, creator of the World)- a feathered, white-skinned god. To escape, or to delay as long as possible, the return of the bearded, white-skinned men, the Aztecs did what all superstitious people do, they began to try to appease and placate their gods with sacrifices of the human variety. It’s difficult to say exactly how many humans were sacrificed to sate “Q”, but the estimates range from the (unlikely) high, of 250,000, to the (more likely) low of 20,000 per year ( the latter would mean about 55 people a day or about 2 an hour). The name “Aztlan” is said to mean. “Land of the Heron” but also, “Land of Whiteness” supposedly because Herons are white, but maybe it was so called because of the original owners’ skin color. One can never know. Nor can we know, but only imagine, what the reaction of Montezuma and his coterie was when they heard the reports of bearded, white-skinned men disembarking from ships on the coast…returning, just like they said they would. Maybe, they resigned themselves to defeat? Obviously, their implacable gods had different plans for them, other than continuing to reign in Tenochtitlan. What we do know is that in five months, Cortez and his 500 were able to defeat the mighty Aztec Empire that had ruled for 200 years.
When I was in high school, the Christian Brothers invited a fellow Brother from Mexico to the school. I remember he talked to us about some of the histories of the Olmecs who lived in south-central Mexico between 1200B.C. to 400B.C. They were famous for having sculpted huge spherical heads. He told us that the facial characteristics of these heads were “African”, which led archaeologists to the conclusion that the sculptures depicted Africans or descendants of Africans,, because of the big lips and nose shapes were like those of Africans. He ended the talk by saying that when the Spanish came to the New World, they brought with them a “drop of blood” from Africa, due to the colonization of the Iberian Peninsula by the Muslims for 700 years. This “African characteristics” theory has been debunked. Archaeologists now say that the heads depict Natives, not Africans. However, what is most interesting about the fields where Olmec heads have been found are the other statues that have been found intermingled with them. The ones no one wishes to speak of. These are short (about 4’ in height, compared to the heads that range from 5’ to 15’ in diameter) rectangular sculptures of men, not realistic as the spheres, but stylized. Stylized sculptures of men…bearded men. Now, there’s one thing you can say about Native men, they may favor having long, long hair, but none of them have beards. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Who does have beards? Wait for it…Caucasians. I believe in this case we should follow the dictate of the mono-cultural-multi-culturalists that Natives’ cultures are superior to Western culture and must not be criticized and everything they claim must be regarded as true. They certainly wouldn’t be lying about something like this. Remember, honesty is the best policy, and, besides, it’d be racist to disagree with them. If the Olmecs left evidence of the Caucasians being in the Americas long before Columbus, let’s accept it as true. The science is settled.