What ancestry do most Mexicans have really? (snow, infant, limits)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
whats more laughable is why so many white Americans with miniscule amounts of native american blood claim to be native americans, much less native blood than a typical Mexican
and they still claim to be Cherokee, Lakota, etc
we have lots of blond haired blue eyed native americans in the US
1/64th native american LOL! I think some people are making this stuff up to get benefits or something?
Yeah, very true. I always thought people said this because they just didn't want to be another "boring" white person or something... However, to be considered Native American by the government and receive benefits one has to prove they are at least one quarter Amerindian blood. I think most Native American tribes have similar requirements in order to get tribal money (like from a casino, for example).
Oh my, a European American doesn't think I am pure-blood, whatever shall I do!
Well, I guess I'll just continue to be a Native.
What's up with the White American obsession of this reverse one drop rule anyway?
There is a possibility of me having one european ancestor, but apparently that possibility alone is enough to nullify me from being Native. This is the type of pseudo-intellectualism we should avoid.
"The White American obsession of this reverse one drop rule"?! Are you kidding me?! Where are you getting this stuff??
Quote:
"One drop white = Mestizo (half white and Half Native), no questions asked" seems to be the norm in White American thinking. Never-mind that there hasn't been an actual Mestizo since Europeans and Natives first encountered one another, or that Mestizo has also historically been used in Mexico as a cultural denomination. Ignorance can trump facts, that's the sentiment within white-America. I mean, just look at what you did. You assume I'm not a full blood, so by God it must be true!
I don't believe you are full-blooded Amerindian, because you don't look it. It's that simple. Clearly, you have a significant amount of Amerindian blood, but in your picture your features do not look as strong as one who is full-blooded indio. Sorry. Maybe you have more pictures of yourself, where you actually look like someone who is 100% Amerindian. (Though I'm doubtful.) As I said, I know firsthand what an indio person from Mexico looks like. And you look mestizo (i.e. mixed).
Quote:
Are you implying that Mestizos aren't Natives? I don't even know how to respond to such a foolish implication. This reverse one drop rule stuff is beyond ridiculous. It is deep within the realm of insanity.
I suggest you get a dictionary. Look up the word Mestizo. Then look up the word Insanity.
Quote:
Let us remember in this discussion that whites have never in Mexico's history outnumbered the indigenous people. The last time Mexico had a racial census, which was in 1921, 60% of people were reportedly Mestizo (a Native can be a Mestizo by assimilating to the dominant Amerindian-Spanish mixed culture.), 30% pure Indigenous, 9% white, and 1% other. Let us also remember that so called "Mestizos" are indigenous people, they just have a little tainted blood is all.
"A little tainted blood"??
I suggest you also look up the word Racist.
Quote:
I'll give you the pass on not knowing Mexico's complex history, but do not substitute facts with ignorance. Nothing gets under my skin more than a person not knowing what they're talking about.
Well, you must really get under your own skin then!! It must also really suck to feel that some of your own blood is "tainted" by those "evil" white people. And I have a great grasp of Mexican history, thank you. I read Enrique Krauze and Octavio Paz just for fun. Maybe you should consider doing so yourself.
Yes of course, racial divisions are evident in Mexico, and all parts of the world. But it is not as bad as say, the United States, because of the strong sense of nationalism. Mexico had a black president hundeds of years before the U.S. Mexico abolished slavery way before the United States. Afro Mexicans were able to mix with indigenous Mexicans and was not look down upon like it is in many parts of the United States. I am not saying Mexico is better than the U.S, i am only pointing out the racial dynamics of each country. Here in the United States, you have the liberal youth reject and dislike the United States, even though they don't realize how good we have it. Blacks have been oppressed so much that there is even racism between blacks (light skin vs dark skin). This oppression has spur radical afrocentrist groups that believe the Olmecs, Aztecs, Egyptians, Greeks were black. There are even some that say blacks should not integrate with hispanics and whites because they are not one of the 12 tribes of Israel. I am not going to say anything about this, but you could see some blacks have been oppressed to the point that their psychology has been affected.
That might be why black-Mexicans don't really view themselves as a distinct group in Mexico. Also slavery in Mexico ended before it did in the USA and most of the blacks just became part of the mestiso group.
That you think I would actually believe that you are a full-blooded Amerindian is laughable.
I would also - his hair texture isn't that of a full blooded Indian -- full blooded Indians look a lot more Asian and have very straight hair, thinner lips.
The mixing of African, European, and indigenous has gone on for hundreds of years, and with the big die-out of pure Indians with exposure to Old World diseases, the blood was actually carried on through mixing with those from Europe and Africa.
I think Native MesoAmericans are not from the East Asian Bering sea crosser origin. I think they are from somewhere in the Middle East. They don't look anything like East Asians. The Plains Indians like Geronimo or Sitting Bull clearly have East asian origins. But there is a whole race of people in MesoAmerica who look nothing like East Asians. They have more Greek/Middle Eastern features. Not to mention they built pyramids and use glyphs.
Pakal the Great of Palenque: [url]http://www.chapala.com/chapala/magnifecentmexico/pacal/pakal.jpg[/url
You see these faces in ancient MesoAmerican art everywhere and you meet a lot of people who look like this - not so much in the USA but if you go down to southern Mexico.
What's also interesting is the only written languages in native America are Cherokee and Mayan. The Cherokee have a lost history/legend that they were originated from an ancient expedition from Israel. DNA tests have suggested that their legend is not exactly true - but they do have Euro root not Asian. So the Cherokee did originate from an ancient expedition lost to historical record. I wonder what ancient expedition brought the ancient MesoAmericans - from where and when.
Cherokee script definitely has Euro dna too. Mayan looks a lot more like Egyptian.
But we're not seeing the people from 1400 and before. We're seeing the descendents of them and the Mexican slaves and Spanish -- plus others who have come in and mixed their dna into the pool.
The "Baby-faces" the carvings the Olmecs left behind don't look Asian at all, but African. It's very possible that ships from Africa arrived long before they arrived from Spain. Asians are not known for full-lips and big rounder eyes nor curly or kinky hair. Egyptians generally look like a mix of Caucasian and African.
Well, not exactly. Indigenous history is an important and large part of Mexican history - but it certainly isn't all of it. Mexico would be a radically different country if it weren't for the conquest. Many indigenous people in Mexico have vastly different cultures than the majority of Mexicans. Of course, there is much indio influence in Mexico, but culturally there is at least as much Spanish influence. People in Mexico may all technically live under one flag, but many indios do not even self-identify as "Mexican", but rather they self-identify themselves by the Amerindian nation or tribe that they are from (i.e. Mayan, Tarahumara, Yaqui). They go on living their lives in a manner very similar to the way they did before the conquest. (That the word "Mexico" itself is Nahuatl is irrelevant. Most indios in Mexico are not Aztec and do not speak Nahuatl.)
I think it is great for Mexico's indio population to gain more respect and power in their country, as they have had to suffer a lot.
From all of your statements, I gather that you are probably drinking the radical Kool-Aid of MEChA or something.
I can say with ease that my comment you replied to went over your head, because your entire response is riddled with irrelevancies in regard to what I said, and is based upon the assumption of me being a "radical" follower of MECHA. Understand that I do not want an opinionated conversation.
I did not once discredit the spanish influence on Mexican society, nor did I imply that Mexican history excludes the Mestizo population and culture. What I did was explain as to why indigenismo is necessary for the Mexican identity. The core component to Mexican nationalism is the country's indigenous roots (which is why I made the Aztec/flag and Mexico/nahuatl reference).
There are millions of indigenas that only speak Spanish (conformed to the dominant Mestizo culture), and there are millions of indigenas that speak their languages. Are you seriously implying that one subgroup (the "mestizo conformed indigenas") considers itself more Mexican than the other (the tribal affiliates who carry out their ancient cultures)? Or did you not take that reality into account?
"Indigenous history is Mexican history" isn't an implication that spaniards didn't influence the history or culture of Mexico. Rather, it alludes to the reality that Mexico isn't a country of immigrants. Mestizos are indigenous people. This European-American adoption of the reverse one drop rule, i.e. "one drop white blood makes you non-indigenous", is beyond silly. It is insane.
whats more laughable is why so many white Americans with miniscule amounts of native american blood claim to be native americans, much less native blood than a typical Mexican
and they still claim to be Cherokee, Lakota, etc
we have lots of blond haired blue eyed native americans in the US
1/64th native american LOL! I think some people are making this stuff up to get benefits or something?
the way the US handled Native nations is different than Mexico. Many people in Mexico have Native American ancestry. While the US was more harsh toward Indians and much hostility between both Indians and White's, Mexico and greater Latin American inter-married more frequently with the Indigenous.
That last comment with the 1/64th.....is said out of sheer ignorance. Most federal Indians tribes require a "Blood Quanta" of "TRIBAL" blood usually 1/2 or 1/4. Some tribes go as low as 1/16. The Creek Nation of OK and Cherokee Nation of OK for example, though you need a "degree of Indian blood", that degree is not used for membership. One must show an unbroken lineage to an Indian ancestor noted on Indian rolls (Dawes etc.) That person may not be predominately "Indian" but they are citizens or tribal members based on being a descendant of a Cherokee ancestor per say. This is up to the tribe the degree of tribal blood for registration. People have to show proof of Indian ancestry to be registered tribal members of an American Indian tribe. The ones who make it up cannot prove it.
Contrary to popular belief, there are not as many benefits as people believe.
Last edited by AppalachianGumbo; 12-23-2013 at 11:43 AM..
But we're not seeing the people from 1400 and before. We're seeing the descendents of them and the Mexican slaves and Spanish -- plus others who have come in and mixed their dna into the pool.
The "Baby-faces" the carvings the Olmecs left behind don't look Asian at all, but African. It's very possible that ships from Africa arrived long before they arrived from Spain. Asians are not known for full-lips and big rounder eyes nor curly or kinky hair. Egyptians generally look like a mix of Caucasian and African.
Yes! It's what I think. There is lost history. To just assume every native American came here via the Bering strait is absurd. Pakal doesn't look East Asian at all.
To those saying the Cherokee are not Euro, well you're mistaken. The Cherokee have had in their culture a legend they arrived from an ancient lost to history voyage from Israel. They wanted to find out if there was any truth to it, so they did extensive DNA geneology testing and what they found was they do not actually have Semetic DNA marker but definitely do show Euro markers.
And to the PPs who are suggesting this discussion is some sort of racial superiority rant, well, no it's not. For my part, it is simply an interest in discovering the true origins of native Americans, and in doing so, honoring and celebrating their life stories and achievements.
EDIT: The info above I got from a History Channel special I believe called "America Unearthed". I'll rewatch it. Googling about, I see I may have missed something and/or the History Channel may have missed something. Nonetheless, it is a fascinating mystery unfolding day by day.
Yes! It's what I think. There is lost history. To just assume every native American came here via the Bering strait is absurd. Pakal doesn't look East Asian at all.
To those saying the Cherokee are not Euro, well you're mistaken. The Cherokee have had in their culture a legend they arrived from an ancient lost to history voyage from Israel. They wanted to find out if there was any truth to it, so they did extensive DNA geneology testing and what they found was they do not actually have Semetic DNA marker but definitely do show Euro markers.
I come from the Eastern Band of Cherokee, a federally recognized tribe, we are not Hebrew or Jewish. I have Native American and Asian DNA in my ancestry test from 23andMe. I have no Jewish blood, or middle eastern and nor does my father which my Cherokee comes from.
We are not Jewish Stop with this rubbish. We will tell you what we are. We are Amerindians and all Indigenous are my brethren. From South America to Alaska. The people in that DNA test, were not "Cheorkee" from any tribes that come from documented Indians. There are only three Cheorkee; Keetoowah, Cheorkee Nation and Eastern Band.
while the Jews were lost since 720 BC?, we have been here thousands of years.
History Channel can not be a valid source, as many of their programs lack of scientific rigor and value.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is the type of pseudo-intellectualism we should avoid.
I don't even know how to respond to such a foolish implication. This reverse one drop rule stuff is beyond ridiculous. It is deep within the realm of insanity.
