Definitions and Being Indigenous

In the Indian Country Today article, Schilling (2018) quoted Chuck Hoskin, Jr., Cherokee Nation Secretary of State, as saying the following.

“A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship. Current DNA tests do not even distinguish whether a person’s ancestors were indigenous to North or South America," Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin Jr. said. "Sovereign tribal nations set their own legal requirements for citizenship, and while DNA tests can be used to determine lineage, such as paternity, to an individual it is not evidence for tribal affiliation. Using a DNA test to lay claim to any connection to the Cherokee Nation or any tribal nation, even vaguely, is inappropriate and wrong. It makes a mockery out of DNA tests and its legitimate uses while also dishonoring legitimate tribal governments and their citizens whose ancestors are well documented and whose heritage is proven. Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage."

Newly elected U.S. Representative, Deb Haaland (Laguna Pueblo citizen) (D-AZ) has been criticized by some for her support of Senator Warren in a tweet which said, “Senator Elizabeth Warren’s DNA test confirms the family history she has long shared with the world, and I acknowledge her Native ancestry as testament to who we are as Americans.”

I think it is important to recognize and validate the distinction Deb Haaland is making and should be made in this instance.  Senator Warren has asserted that she is of Indigenous heritage based on family history, and that her heritage is Cherokee.  Being of Indigenous by blood and being a tribal citizen are two very different things.  The distinction in conversation is often made is “I am Cherokee” or “I am a member of the Cherokee Nation” is the same as saying, “I am a British national” or “I am English”.  Sadly, due to politics, there are lots of card-carrying Indians (tribal citizens) who are not Indians in any other sense of the word.

The question becomes, what does it mean exactly to be Indigenous?  What does it mean to be American, Italian, Australian, etc.?  Is the biology, blood, and DNA of any such group different from any of the others (the fundamental premise of the concept of race)?  Is it a political definition?  Is it ethnic and cultural?  

It is well-proven that there is no fundamental biological difference between humans – there are no human races.  My blood as a Lakota man is no different from the blood of a Japanese man or an Ethiopian man.  There are, however, adaptive differences based on the environment in which the human lives.  Creator made each group of humans perfect for the particular natural environment in which the group was placed.  An adherence to the concept of race to divide different humans demonstrates ignorance and prejudice.  An excellent review is found here in Templeton (2013). 

Additionally, it is critical to consider the whole DNA-says-so argument.  To me, having a DNA test say "s/he is Indigenous/German/Australian/etc" is full of problems. 

1. DNA testing to establish a child's parents is well-established but not 100% accurate.  Even going just one generation back, using it to establish a child’s grandparents, becomes far more tenuous.  If DNA testing is not reliable going back one generation, how can we possibly expect it to be reliable going back even farther?  
2. 2.    Since there is no biological basis to the concept of race, then using DNA to establish racial heritage is based on a very poor and unscientific initial premise.  This is a gross misapplication of a technology at the least.
3. 3.    Then, there is the science itself.  DNA testing is based on sampling and the results and trends indicated by it.  Yes, lots of sampling has occurred, but we are talking about the entire human species over hundreds of thousands of years.  We certainly don't and can’t have extensive sampling of blood over that long. 

So, if there is no race, is legal citizenship of a country (or tribe) what determines who is what on a human, biological level?  Can’t a human being become a legal citizen of another country?  Is a “naturalized American” any less American than one without that adjective preceding the word, American?   If the answer is yes to that question, then there is a responsibility to explain how they are different.  Additionally, who is allowed to become a citizen of another country is an entirely political decision fraught with individual and group bias.  Look at today’s news to see how the whims and beliefs of the political machine can decide that.

The only true and verifiable difference between humans is ethnic.  The cultural mores, beliefs, behaviors, and language to which a given human adheres is the only set of criteria that is valid at the most fundamental level.  Everyone will readily accept that what distinguishes me at the most fundamental level from a Japanese or Ethiopian or Cherokee or Mayan is my Lakota way of being, my beliefs, my language, my lifeways – not my blood and not my political status.

Ho, héčetu weló!

References Cited

Schilling, V., 2018, Strike Against Sovereignty? Sen. Warren asserts Native American ancestry via DNA: Indian Country Today, October 15, 2018, https://newsmaven.io/indiancountrytoday/news/strike-against-sovereignty-sen-warren-asserts-native-american-ancestry-via-dna-5mJJTl_79ESAQLX8hCckZA/, accessed 20 October 2018.

Templeton, A.R., 2013, Biological races in humans: Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, v. 44, no. 3 (September 2013), pp. 262-271, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3737365/, accessed 14 December 2018.