Why it matters that Ward Churchill is/is not of indigenous extraction

[MarxSchmarx]

Does it matter if Ward Churchill "really is" an American indian or not?

American academic Ward Churchill stirred up quite a bit of controversy in the US by comparing some 9/11 victims to Eichmann of holocaust fame.

He's been in the news a lot lately b/c he was fired from his job in an investigation that resulted from his 9/11 claims. Although he wasn't technically fired for his comparisons about 9/11, one issue that came up during the investigation was whether Ward Churchill "really is" native American (i.e., has indigenous ancestors).

In America, the one-drop theory predominates among the governing white elite. These people historically considered anyone "contaminated" with Indian blood, however minor, to be Indian. To rectify this error, many government instutitions, including the state run university of colorado where Churchill worked, allegedly preferentially hired people with even " a drop" of aboriginal ancestry.

Churchill claims to be 1/16 aboriginal (i.e., he had a great-great(!)-grand parent that was pure aboriginal) but the geneological record doesn't support this, and it's not entirely clear whether his family upbringing considered this a major part of their identity.

Even some in the pretty bona fide American Indian Movement have trouble with his claims to being native American:

http://aimgrandgovcouncil.blogspot.com/2007/07/ward-churchill-academic-literary-and.html

and references therein.

However, suppose CHurchill had, say, no native extraction. I'm torn about how concerned we should be about Churcill's stance claiming to be "indigenous". On one hand, I think a spokesperson for minority rights is valuable. On the other hand, I understand that if he is a "white imposter" then one wonders if he's not usurping a place at the table from somebody that really suffered discrimination of aboriginals growing up.

But this reasoning is problematic. It would suggest that being 15/16 white also basically means one is treated as white their whole lives and therefore doesn't know what it means to be 100% or even 1/2 indigenous.

Hence, on some levels, even if taken at face value CHurchill's "indigenous-ness" was questionable because the 1 drop theory itself is questionable and no longer really the social norm. Moreover, Churchill's family's self understanding as indigenous, if true, probably did impact their economic prospects and, to some extent, the values he holds.

Nevertheless, one comes away with the uncomfortable feeling that Churchill is milking the 1 drop theory for his own benefit rather than denouncing it.

[scarletghoul]

Well if he wasn't at all raised as native american and only has a tiny bit of ancestry that is of no relevence, then hes not really any more suitable than a pure-blood white person for being a minority rights activist.

The one drop theory is hilarious anyway. Like, most people have some non-white in them

[yuon]

I don't know anything really of this "Ward Churchhill" person. I'm just here to comment on the absurdity of saying that a person is of a particular race because they have a "drop of blood". To claim to be Native American when 15/16 of your great-great-grandparents were not, well that's just stupid. (Especially if you weren't raised in the culture.)

I have the same problem with people considering Obama (and all the rest) to be "black" because he has one "black" parent. Why not "white", his other parent was "white"? (Oh, except I know the reason, racism and oppression. Regardless of the facts, idiots will still be racist.)

Ward Churchill doesn't have the same claim, no one is going to think of him as "Indian" just by looking at him.

Anyway, why does it matter if Ward Churchill is or is not of "indigenous extraction"? I didn't understand that from the first post. Is it because he's claiming a legacy that he doesn't have for his own gain? Was that the point?

[FreeFocus]

Coming from a (brown-skinned) Native, I consider Ward Churchill to be a valuable activist in the Native community and, even if he is just 1/16, he's done a lot more than some full bloods have in our community. The significant thing is his political orientation, which is at least closer to be correct than that of most in our community (there's a big problem with the flag-waving vet types). Moreover, he identifies culturally as a Native.

Additionally, the one-drop rule was more so applied to whites with African-American ancestry. Historically it may have been relevant in the NDN community, but not so much nowadays. In fact, the one-drop rule runs very much so counter to American policy: for "enrollment" in a "nation," you have to meet various requirements - 1/8, 1/4, 1/2, for your Native ancestry. So what you have is, as our population dwindles in terms of ancestral background (intermarriage with non-Natives, which occurs with over 50% of Natives), enrollment grows smaller and smaller.

I don't consider him a "white impostor," although if he was a right-winger who disavowed his culture either directly or in effect by supporting right-wing policies, I pretty much would.


I have the same problem with people considering Obama (and all the rest) to be "black" because he has one "black" parent. Why not "white", his other parent was "white"? (Oh, except I know the reason, racism and oppression. Regardless of the facts, idiots will still be racist.)

Obama actually has brown skin, therefore he can't possibly be considered "white." Still, he's bourgeois, and obviously was never poor. Obama did not live in a ghetto and can't identify with that reality.

[jake williams]

Ward Churchill is awesome for a lot of reasons, but he's sort of a wavering primmie. I'm much more concerned about that than I am about his ethnicity, his proclaimed ethnicity, etc. I mean, okay, it looks like he hasn't been totally consistent about his past or his family or whatever, but really I don't care. It still doesn't seem like something that relevant. He's extremely important in expressing outrage about things that even many leftists aren't too concerned about, but I'm kind of uncomfortable with a lot of his actual proposed political programme. I have a lot of mixed feelings about him. I'm glad he's around.



[Obama rant]

About Obama, apropos I was watching something the other day about African Americans who go "back" to Ghana (I can't totally say "back", but I'm uncomfortable with the quotes too, y'all know what I mean). Despite hugely varying skin colours, they're all called "whites".

I don't like the absolutist "race means nothing" position - you can look at two concrete realities, ethnocultural and genetic histories of people, and the consequences of the social construction of "race". However both of these realities are extremely complex. Obama is white in most meaningful senses, really. He has dark skin, which means he's less likely than I to get skin cancer and it means in a number of social contexts he'll be treated differently than I do. He also talks, not like MLK as a usually-sane teacher of mine insultingly suggested, but like yet another Harvard brat. That also means he'll be treated differently than I do, not just in narrow social contexts but in the whole political-economic world we live in.

Some cab drivers are prejudiced? Fuck off. That's not a real problem. Ghettos are real problems. Prisons are real problems. Racist cops are real problems, but not really for black Harvard profs with "drivers" (really? he had a driver? does he get to call his driver "boy"?) and lawyer/president friends. I think Obama is a fantastic example, if it can be explained properly, of the obscenity of liberal "anti-racism". Nobody likes, say, racist cab drivers, but they're not the real problem for most black people, or white people, or anyone else (except the irritated newly augmented bourgoisie, however hardfought the creation of a multiracial capitalist class may have been). Obama is a real problem for black people and white people and everyone else, because he's the president of the capitalist empire.

[/Obama rant]

I still have a lot of unresolved discomfort involving Obama, friends going gaga over him, the horrifically sexy way he makes me think that he understands even my position about things, in my little political-ideological corner of the world, etc. While I'm pushing the limits of forum ethics, I may as well mention that over the weekend at a music festival I witnessed kind of a strange event. A lifesize cardboard cutout picture of Obama got passed around in the crowd, but as soon as it got to folks' hands it got shredded. I'm pretty sure it's a case of everyone wanting to touch even the effigy, but it did look surreally violent.

[yuon]

Whoops, sorry to make this more than just Ward...

Obama actually has brown skin, therefore he can't possibly be considered "white." Still, he's bourgeois, and obviously was never poor. Obama did not live in a ghetto and can't identify with that reality.

Funny thing about race, a lot of people coming to Australia after World War Two had quite dark skin (particularly from the Mediterranean area of Europe), yet they were still considered "white".

Obama is just as much "white" as he is "black", because he has a parent of each "colour", the fact that his skin is somewhere in between his parents doesn't mean that he is magically "black" and not "white".

And, the point is, it isn't just about Obama, it's about the whole fucking idea that "half-breeds" are "black" rather than "white". Racists are just so fucking stupid, it shouldn't fucking matter! Gah!!!!

Sorry.:(

[Guerrilla22]

It has pretty much been well established by anyone with any common sense that he is in fact of indigeneous heritage. I had him for a prof, one look at the guy and u can tell. He could prove his lineage, but he refuses to submit to a blood quantum test, which is how the US government legally recognizes one as an American Indian in the US. Ward doesn't believe he needs the US government to recognize the fact that he is an indigeneous person. It's really a racist practice, its the same way dog breeders determine the lineage of dogs.

Most of this "he's not really a Native American" hoopla was drummed up by political opponents to try to discredit him and drive him from his position at the university of Colorado, along with numerous other things: he's a plagarist, supports terrorism, ect. As far as the AIM Grand Council goes, their claims aren't really valid either as Ward is a member of AIM Colorado, a split form the Grand Governing Council. The two groups are political rivals basically. It's just another attempt to discredit him politically by a political rival.

[bricolage]

Obama is just as much "white" as he is "black", because he has a parent of each "colour", the fact that his skin is somewhere in between his parents doesn't mean that he is magically "black" and not "white".

I see it as relevant to talk about Obama as black in a social sense that he would have been discriminated against as black under US segregation and is now President, I'm not really bothered by in depth genealogical discussion.

[jake williams]

I see it as relevant to talk about Obama as black in a social sense that he would have been discriminated against as black under US segregation and is now President, I'm not really bothered by in depth genealogical discussion.
But again (and I think it's at least sort of on topic), he's not black in the social sense in which for the most part race is still correlative and even symbolic of class. His life is nothing like that of most black people. Most of the problems that blacks have because of racism are actually political economic problems, and Obama doesn't have those.

[Hiero]

American academic Ward Churchill stirred up quite a bit of controversy in the US by comparing some 9/11 victims to Eichmann of holocaust fame.

He called them little Eichmanns, he didn't compare them to Eichmann.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

Forgive me if I sound like an incredibly naive liberal here, but surely we should judge him by what he actually says, rather than by who his grandparents were? If he's talking shit, then it doesn't suddenly become sensible just by virtue of him being Native American; if he's actually saying something worthwhile, then I don't think him being white makes what he's saying less important.
And I'm Jewish, so if you disagree with me about this, then you're automatically an anti-semite. ;)

[MarxSchmarx]

Forgive me if I sound like an incredibly naive liberal here, but surely we should judge him by what he actually says, rather than by who his grandparents were? If he's talking shit, then it doesn't suddenly become sensible just by virtue of him being Native American; if he's actually saying something worthwhile, then I don't think him being white makes what he's saying less important.

Well sure, but the thing is he's going around saying "I as an aboriginal person ..." which in the minds of some lends credence to his arguments. Hence the question.

[The Situationist]

Ward Churchills book "A Little Matter of Genocide" is an eye opening read.

+ I liked his book "Marxism and Native Americans".

[kalu]

Well, the question is, is he also tackling or at least mentioning his whiteness? Philip Deloria is also "mostly white," but he came and spoke at my school and I think he did a wonderful job interrogating his indigenous/white identity. I don't think Ward Churchill has ever said anything about his own privilege, so yeah, probably a bit disturbing that he only calls himself indigenous.


But again (and I think it's at least sort of on topic), he's not black in the social sense in which for the most part race is still correlative and even symbolic of class. His life is nothing like that of most black people. Most of the problems that blacks have because of racism are actually political economic problems, and Obama doesn't have those.

Race is linked to class, but cannot be reduced to it. For that matter, most "biracial" Black people, though perhaps benefiting from skin privilege, are considered Black, given the history of racism in America ("white purity," the one drop rule). Obama can, and still, suffers discrimination based on his race, and I don't say that from an empirical but a theoretical standpoint. I'm not going to go ahead and review his life to prove that he doesn't, but the point is that while class offers a serious set of benefits, it doesn't "cancel out" race in some bizarre equation.