NON EUROPEAN BLOOD IN 'WHITE' AMERICANS...

[Human]

as a matter of fact, the most I read the most I come to conclude 'white' north americans are amongst the most concerned with race people in the Western World.

they generally behave as if they were genuine Northern Europeans, whiter even then very typical European countries such as France, Italy, Spain or Greece. All the Hollywood talk weve discussed so many times here gravitates around this white north american mental construct.

however, as ive read time and again, including most recent DNA test data, 'white' north americans are no so white as they think.

most can trace a fairly recent native american great grandparent or great great grandparent whose background is native american. it may look like a little, but in a 100 years back that means a whole tribe of cherokee, sioux or whatever. native americans have a considerable time difference from europeans. on this respect, some people from asia (like Jews, Turks, Lebanese, Syrians) are closer to Europeans than Native Americans.

What do you think?

How many North Americans here can trace back a full blown Indian or an Afro man?

Ive read even amongst the first settlers of South Africa, the most racist, admittedly (as they lived in a predominant non westernized black world), had some earlier infusion of Black Blood.

I wanna about the 'White' north americans who also have negro admixture. There are many. Maybe in the closet. But still.

Canada and Argentina may be the only countries where a 'white' man of old white lineage can almost be certain of not finding an afro man skeleton at his closet. Maybe there are some native american too, and thats why I would choose Australia as the European colonized country with the most genuine white folks, if we may say so. They had no plantations, their colonizations was fairly recent, and fairly homogeneous. New Zealand may have had Maori admixture.

So many 'white' north americans point out some obviously mixed countries colonized by the Spaniard (people many of them, in blatant ignorance, dont consider proper white) and time and again call them mestizo, or something, even inventing a brand new race 'hispanic', when in fact they are mestizo and mulatto too, in different proportions and in a lesser extent (which may be greater depending on each case).

Let us group the new recent DNA study on 'white' North Americans and determine their true 'whiteness', if we may say so.

I have to say Im impartial.

What lead me to this thread was realizing how many 'white' North Americans (and on this respect I point the media, the culture, everything) behave as if they were as white as an Irishmen or as white as German. They choose the darkest Spaniards or Italians to represent genuine European countries. They choose the most mongoloid Russians to portray Russians. Etc.

I mean, Ireland has a population of around 3.5 to 4.0 million people. How can all white north americans seemingly claim Irish ancestry??? Where can the numbers fit such claimings? ?

ERNEST HEMINGWAY, the great north american Writer, refused to be called European or English, and he only accepted being called American. However white he was I think his behaviour was insightful.

[Human]

i have to add that modern Anthropology Teachers in the United States invite their 'white' north americans students (and mostly the racist ones) to take DNA tests and discover their Non European blood lineages and encourage them to come to terms with it, realizing theyre not the 'all white' as previously thought.

[buddyrydell]

Human, I have to agree with your points here. Many American whites do sometimes think of themselves as northern Europeans when many of them do in fact have Native American and/or African admixture. Perhaps the historically most racist region of the U.S., the South, has the most admixture. Ironic isn't it?

[BadMan]

Hmmm
Well, I live in Canada, and I’m pretty certain that most "white" Canadians are "pure" or at least as pure as Europeans get. By most I mean like 70% or so, or at least the ones I’ve come into contact with. Why do I say this? Well, first of all, most people that I’ve met had Grandparents that were all from the old country. Even the ones that have been in Canada for like 6 generations are still able to date their family lineage back to Europe. But, I have noticed that a good portion of these long time Canadians do have some native ancestry, but it is usually not sizeable; usually between 1/16 and 1/32. another thing that really shows this immigrant mentality is still strong is that people will always ask "what nationality are you" and expect you to answer with something like "Greek" or "Dutch". If you answer with "Canadian" they will always respond with "what are you really."


I would also like to point out, at least from my observations, that most of the people I’ve come across that are of mixed race ancestry are recent mixes. I have not met many people that are 1/4 Chinese, or 1/16 (east) Indian or 1/32 african. In other words, the people I’ve met that are a mix between different races are usually a product of recent admixtures (with two parents of different race).

P.S. The reason why so many Americans may claim to be Irish is because they are of Irish ancestry. Someone who is 1/2 Irish still has Irish Ancestry. So if every Irish man or woman marries someone from another ethnic background and has 2 kids, they would have just doubled their numbers (and we all know Irish Catholics do have a tendency of having many children). Also, know that with the potato famines and the treatment the Irish received from the English, many Irish people were forced to leave Ireland and settled in the Americas. (mainly north America)

[Anja]

over a million irish settled in the U.S. in the 1800s.

i agree with much of what you say, but sometimes i think the admixture thing is a little overblown, not that i care. i would be ecstatic to find a native american or african-american, etc, in my background. it's just when i do genealogy stuff, there's more people looking for non-white ancestry than those that actually have it. unfortunately many of us will never know if we have any. my only possible non-white ancestries were in the 1600s and 1700s, quite difficult to prove.

[buddyrydell]

Anja said:

over a million irish settled in the U.S. in the 1800s.

i agree with much of what you say, but sometimes i think the admixture thing is a little overblown, not that i care. i would be ecstatic to find a native american or african-american, etc, in my background. it's just when i do genealogy stuff, there's more people looking for non-white ancestry than those that actually have it. unfortunately many of us will never know if we have any. my only possible non-white ancestries were in the 1600s and 1700s, quite difficult to prove.

Yes, tons of Irish immigrated to the U.S. during the potato famine of the 19th century, and some continued to come into the early 20th century. Also don't forget that many Scotch-Irish people settled here earlier in the colonial days throughout the 18th century. Many folks in the Appalachians are descended from these Scotch-Irish immigrants. So 50 million or so Americans claiming to be of Irish ancestry is not at all far-fetched taking all of this into account plus the multiplying of the Irish population in the U.S. over time through growth and intermarriage. Keep in mind many, if not most of these "Irish-Americans," are only part Irish, it probably includes many who are just 1/4 or so Irish but just identify with Irish ethnicity. As I've said many times, most Euro-Americans are an amalgamation of various European ethnicities.

Let me give an example of a friend of mine: He's 1/4 French, 1/4 Irish, 1/8 Russian, 1/8 German, 1/8 Lithuanian, 1/16 English and 1/16 Native American.

Another of my good friends is 1/4 English, 1/4 Irish, 1/4 German, and 1/4 Polish.

Both of my friends could be considered Irish-American if they wanted to because they both have some Irish ancestry (they don't really consider themselves anything but my 1/4 Polish friend often says he's Polish).

The point of all that was that ethnic identity for European-Americans is largely a matter of choice anymore (especially so among younger generations).

[Anja]

yeah, i was going to mention the scots-irish, but i didn't have any figures on them, so i just kind of forgot. thanks for including that.

and yes, it's funny...if i wanted to i could be irish-american, scottish-american, etc, etc, but i guess i identify with the pommern/german the most. there are those people who have one irish ancestor from the 1700s, and they consider themselves part irish.

[Human]

Sociologist and anthropologist Robert Stuckert examined census and fertility data to estimate how many blacks in America had passed as white, and how many whites had African ancestry as a result. His statistical tables showed that during the 1940s, 15,550 light-skinned blacks per year crossed over to live as whites, for a total of about 155,500 for the decade. Based on these figures, he determined that by 1950, some 21% of whites (about 28 million people then) had black ancestry within the last four generations, and he predicted that this number would only grow in the decades to come.

(Robert Stuckert, Ohio Journal of Science, 1958)

from racial reality.

[Springa]

Black meaning people who were considered black because of the one drop rule. Therefore this 21% didn't really have recent "black ancestry", but in fact recent ancestry of part blacks who were socially identified as black.
I mean, if someone's white looking enough to "pass" (s)he could be only 25% black or even less, and most likely more European than African genetically. But still "socially" black according to the U.S. conventions of the time.

Human said:

Based on these figures, he determined that by 1950, some 21% of whites (about 28 million people then) had black ancestry within the last four generations, and he predicted that this number would only grow in the decades to come.

[Evan1211]

Yup. In my rural area of PA, I would say that around 60% of the people in my school can trace a NA in their family. My take on this is that in rural areas, it is the old wave of american settlers (1600-1700s) so they had more time to mix before the Amerindians were sent West, and thats why alot of city dwellers who claim white ancestry would have less admixture (as I have noticed with the recent "immigrants" to my neighborhood). They came in the 1800s wave, after the Indians were pushed out West by the crazy government.

[murphee]

It doesn't surprise me. Many of the Whites around here have some NA ancestry. There is a large White family I know, half are blondes with green eyes and the other half look Med with brown hair and brown eyes, and they have a Black ancestor, a great-great-grandparent.
I found out recently that my brother's Jewish wife also has an NA ancestor. It surprised me, but not really: she and most of her children and siblings do not look much like most Jews, and they have high cheekbones and noses which seem unusual for Jews.

[slick]

Personally I think that at least a third of all 'whites' in the US have some black ancestry, even if it was 1/64 or 1/128. I also believe that more than half of the white population have some Amerind or Asian (mainly Chinese, Japanese, Thai, Vietnamese, Korean, or Phillipino) ancestry. It is sad that we as Americans actually have more in common than we are taught or conditioned to believe. African ancestry was considered a bad thing and those with mostly African ancestry were considered inferior for centuries. Sadly that is why so many 'whites' do not know that they are not really 100% 'white'. Human, that is a great post. It is interesting to note that in the South, 'black' and 'white' cultures have many similarities and ancestry despite the years of oppression, especially since the 'black' population in much of the South is so large (at least 25-40%).

[IfTheLightTakesUs]

I think part of being an American is being able to trace back a NA ancestor. I remember seeing a graph somewhere that showed DNA of white and blacks, then DNA from Nigerians, it showed how the white and black sort of clustered together while the Nigerian stayed at one side. I have it on my other computer, I'll post it tomorrow.

[buddyrydell]

Evan1211 said:

Yup. In my rural area of PA, I would say that around 60% of the people in my school can trace a NA in their family. My take on this is that in rural areas, it is the old wave of american settlers (1600-1700s) so they had more time to mix before the Amerindians were sent West, and thats why alot of city dwellers who claim white ancestry would have less admixture (as I have noticed with the recent "immigrants" to my neighborhood). They came in the 1800s wave, after the Indians were pushed out West by the crazy government.

Yes I definitely agree. The rural inhabitants of the nation are comprised of people whose ancestors have been here since often times the colonial days, and thus, there could easily be some NA ancestry in many of them. I'm also from PA (a suburban rather than rural area) but even there, a good number of people can trace a NA ancestor.

Would anybody happen to know what percentage of white Americans can trace a NA ancestor? I'm sure it'd be considerably larger than the number (about 1/3) who can trace an African ancestor.

[captainusa1]

I don't know. Black Americans and White Americans often go out of their way to talk about their Native American ancestry. I don't get the sense that anyone is trying to hide their NA heritage. It's not like the 1800's; it's a badge of honor now.

Americans With NA Ancestry:
Elvis Presley
Jimi Hendrix
Hank Williams
Wayne Newton
Burt Reynolds
Johnny Depp
Heather Locklear
Farrah Fawcett
Tommy Tune
Will Rogers