Barack Obama and Kamala Harris as black

[bilby]

You don't need to go back as much as 1,000 years to find that everyone in Europe is related.

Everyone alive today with a fairly recent European ancestor is almost certainly descended from King John. And it's vanishingly unlikely that they are not descended from Julius Caesar.

https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555

We have shown that typical pairs of individuals drawn from across Europe have a good chance of sharing long stretches of identity by descent, even when they are separated by thousands of kilometers. We can furthermore conclude that pairs of individuals across Europe are reasonably likely to share common genetic ancestors within the last 1,000 years, and are certain to share many within the last 2,500 years. From our numerical results, the average number of genetic common ancestors from the last 1,000 years shared by individuals living at least 2,000 km apart is about 1/32 (and at least 1/80); between 1,000 and 2,000ya they share about one; and between 2,000 and 3,000 ya they share above 10. Since the chance is small that any genetic material has been transmitted along a particular genealogical path from ancestor to descendent more than eight generations deep —about .008 at 240 ya, and 2.5×10⁻⁷ at 480 ya—this implies, conservatively, thousands of shared genealogical ancestors in only the last 1,000 years even between pairs of individuals separated by large geographic distances. At first sight this result seems counterintuitive. However, as 1,000 years is about 33 generations, and 2³³≈10¹⁰ is far larger than the size of the European population, so long as populations have mixed sufficiently, by 1,000 years ago everyone (who left descendants) would be an ancestor of every present-day European. Our results are therefore one of the first genomic demonstrations of the counterintuitive but necessary fact that all Europeans are genealogically related over very short time periods, and lends substantial support to models predicting close and ubiquitous common ancestry of all modern humans.

Everyone with a recent English ancestor is very likely a descendant of every English person (who has left descendants) prior to 1500CE.

 

[Politesse]

I had heard that Van Buren and Jackson were the exceptions, but apparently even that is inaccurate; they've all had a link:

https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2014/01/13/how-all-presidents-are-related-to-king-john/

I looked at the purported genealogies and those genealogies are unsourced. Someone in academia ought to recognize that making far-reaching claims without any real support is a no-no. You also have yet to show that being descended from King John is something special about US presidents, because if everybody with English ancestry is partially descended from King John, then there is nothing special about such descent.

I also have yet to see any evidence of some committee that vets would-be presidential candidates for descent from King John or other British monarchs.

 John, King of England

You're really not understanding the point. There doesn't need to be a committee, this will happen of its own accord.

 

[lpetrich]

I also have yet to see any evidence of some committee that vets would-be presidential candidates for descent from King John or other British monarchs.

 John, King of England

You're really not understanding the point. There doesn't need to be a committee, this will happen of its own accord.

How would that happen? Nobody seems to be interested in that issue.

 

[Politesse]

I also have yet to see any evidence of some committee that vets would-be presidential candidates for descent from King John or other British monarchs.

 John, King of England

You're really not understanding the point. There doesn't need to be a committee, this will happen of its own accord.

How would that happen? Nobody seems to be interested in that issue.

Because class selects its own.

 

[lpetrich]

(Descent from British royalty...)

How would that happen? Nobody seems to be interested in that issue.

Because class selects its own.

Complete with doing genealogy tests?

 

[Politesse]

(Descent from British royalty...)

How would that happen? Nobody seems to be interested in that issue.

Because class selects its own.

Complete with doing genealogy tests?

You don't need to do "Genealogy tests"; if rulers are selected from a small pool of very wealthy families, the odds of their being related to one another are extremely high.

 

[Bomb#20]

Everyone alive today with a fairly recent European ancestor is almost certainly descended from King John. And it's vanishingly unlikely that they are not descended from Julius Caesar.

Do you know something about Julius Caesar having extracurricular activities? His son was murdered at 17 on Augustus' orders; his daughter died in childbirth along with her baby.

 

[bilby]

Everyone alive today with a fairly recent European ancestor is almost certainly descended from King John. And it's vanishingly unlikely that they are not descended from Julius Caesar.

Do you know something about Julius Caesar having extracurricular activities? His son was murdered at 17 on Augustus' orders; his daughter died in childbirth along with her baby.

It would be very unlikely that he had no illegitimate children. He was a very powerful and wealthy man in a time before effective contraception, who spent a lot of time away from home on campaign.

It's possible that he had no descendants, but I certainly wouldn't consider it plausible.

 

[lpetrich]

(Descent from British royalty...)
Complete with doing genealogy tests?

You don't need to do "Genealogy tests"; if rulers are selected from a small pool of very wealthy families, the odds of their being related to one another are extremely high.

Politesse, in this and other recent posts, you seem to be retreating from your claim that most or all US Presidents are descended from British royaity.

As to your most recent claim of presidents being drawn from a small number of long-lived rich families, that should be easy to test. Identify the families, demonstrate their longevity as rich families, and demonstrate that most presidents were selected from them.

I checked the biographies of some recent presidents, and most of them do not fit that model. Most of their fathers are small businessmen and farmers and the like, with very little notable ancestry.

 

[Bomb#20]

I've found this curious article on her: COMMENTARY: Rating Kamala's Blackness by C. Ellen Connally - CoolCleveland

...Compared to Barack Obama who spent part of his youth in Indonesia and the rest with white grandparents in Hawaii and didn’t live on the United States mainland until college, Kamala is a virtual hood rat. But according to her critics, because she is a first-generation American and her great, great, grandparents were not slaves, she’s not black enough.

That is curious. So these people's theory is that Harris's African ancestors emigrated to Jamaica in the 1700s voluntarily? Was it the higher wages that attracted them?

 

[Trausti]

I've found this curious article on her: COMMENTARY: Rating Kamala's Blackness by C. Ellen Connally - CoolCleveland

...Compared to Barack Obama who spent part of his youth in Indonesia and the rest with white grandparents in Hawaii and didn’t live on the United States mainland until college, Kamala is a virtual hood rat. But according to her critics, because she is a first-generation American and her great, great, grandparents were not slaves, she’s not black enough.

That is curious. So these people's theory is that Harris's African ancestors emigrated to Jamaica in the 1700s voluntarily? Was it the higher wages that attracted them?

Jamacia is not the US.

 

[Trausti]

Race is genetic. Most just refuse to accept the science. But ultimately it's who your ancestors were. Who is your extended family? Under that rubric, neither Obama or Harris are Black Americans as understood to be descend from American slaves. But so what? Didn't affect Obama.

Your last sentence contradicts your first.

Race is exactly the craziness that tells everyone that a man with a Kenyan father and an Anglo-Irish mother shares a common cause and identity with people who are the grandchildren of slaves whose ancestors came from West Africa.

It's wrong as often as it's right - so it's a totally valueless hypothesis.

Genetics is genetic. Race isn't about genetics at all. It's about appearances - which are of very little value in assessing genetics.

Genetics is Dunning-Kruger central, particularly for racists. It's all far more complex than most people realise.

Liberal Creationism is still Creationism.

 

[Toni]

That is curious. So these people's theory is that Harris's African ancestors emigrated to Jamaica in the 1700s voluntarily? Was it the higher wages that attracted them?

Jamacia is not the US.

Were there slaves in Jamaica?

 

[Trausti]

That is curious. So these people's theory is that Harris's African ancestors emigrated to Jamaica in the 1700s voluntarily? Was it the higher wages that attracted them?

Jamacia is not the US.

Were there slaves in Jamaica?

But they are not American. This is not my fight. I don’t care. But it’s best to understand a position if you are going to critique it.

 

[Elixir]

I had heard that Van Buren and Jackson were the exceptions, but apparently even that is inaccurate; they've all had a link:

https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2014/01/13/how-all-presidents-are-related-to-king-john/

I looked at the purported genealogies and those genealogies are unsourced. Someone in academia ought to recognize that making far-reaching claims without any real support is a no-no. You also have yet to show that being descended from King John is something special about US presidents, because if everybody with English ancestry is partially descended from King John, then there is nothing special about such descent.

I also have yet to see any evidence of some committee that vets would-be presidential candidates for descent from King John or other British monarchs.

 John, King of England

You're really not understanding the point. There doesn't need to be a committee, this will happen of its own accord.

Yeah well... I propose a requirement that any candidate for President must be of mixed race descent.
That would guarantee at least some minimal level of recognition of the humanity of persons of other races. Plus, it would let me off the hook. As a pure honky, people would stop bugging me to become President.
Alternately, I'd accept a requirement that presidential candidates must demonstrate that they are of at least 50% native American descent. They were here first, after all.

 

[SimpleDon]

Both Barack Obama and Kamala Harris are clearly mixed-race, but they identify as black.

Barack Obama's father, Barack Obama Sr., is from Kenya, while his mother Ann Dunham has mostly British ancestry. He has joked about his mixed parentage. A Mutt Like Me | HuffPost Life quoting Barack Obama as stating that "But obviously, a lot of shelter dogs are mutts like me." He has also jokingly called himself "O'Bama", suggesting Irish ancestry.

Kamala Harris's father Donald Harris is from Jamaica, and he is likely mixed-race. Her mother, Shyamala Gopalan, is from Tamil Nadu, India. KAMALA HARRIS’ JAMAICAN HERITAGE - UPDATED - 14.01.2019 - Jamaica Global Online and also this fun bit: DONALD HARRIS SLAMS HIS DAUGHTER SENATOR KAMALA HARRIS FOR FRAUDULENTLY STEREOTYPING JAMAICANS AND ACCUSES HER OF PLAYING IDENTITY POLITICS - Jamaica Global Online When someone asked her if she smoked marijuana, she responded “Half my family’s from Jamaica. Are you kidding me?” Her father was not very pleased.

If the D.A. Is of Half-Asian Descent, Why Does the Press Label Her 'Black'? - Poynter
Race and the Law Prof Blog

Tiger Woods describes himself as 'Cablinasian' - "a blend of Caucasian, black, Indian and Asian".

Race in a Genetic World | Harvard Magazine

“I am an African American,” says Duana Fullwiley, “but in parts of Africa, I am white.” To do fieldwork as a medical anthropologist in Senegal, she says, “I take a plane to France, a seven- to eight-hour ride. My race changes as I cross the Atlantic. There, I say, ‘Je suis noire,’ and they say, ‘Oh, okay—métisse—you are mixed.’ Then I fly another six to seven hours to Senegal, and I am white. In the space of a day, I can change from African American, to métisse, to tubaab [Wolof for “white/European”]. This is not a joke, or something to laugh at, or to take lightly. It is the kind of social recognition that even two-year-olds who can barely speak understand. ‘Tubaab,’ they say when they greet me.”

So she goes from black to mixed-race to white.

Thus we are again presented with the absurdities of the concept of race.

"Race" poisons everything in the US. As soon as we can rid ourselves of the idea that skin color, the shape of the nose, the presence or lack of eye hoods, etc. tell us anything meaningful about people the sooner we can start working on other social concepts developed to divide us like nationalism, religion, and social class.

There is hope. According to the census bureau, the percentage of married-couple households that are interracial or interethnic across the United States grew by 37%, from 7.4 to 10.2%, from 2000 to 2012-2016.

It is really hard to be a racist when your grandchildren are from a so-called mixed marriage.

 

[lpetrich]

Jamaica had plantation slavery, mostly for growing sugar cane. So KH's black ancestors would have been enslaved ones also. Even so, they formed a community separate from American blacks.

 

[Toni]

Were there slaves in Jamaica?

But they are not American. This is not my fight. I don’t care. But it’s best to understand a position if you are going to critique it.

Both Barack Obama and Kamala Harris are black Americans and both have a parent not born in the US.

Do you dispute the idea that were they not famous (and easily recognizable) during a traffic stop, both would be perceived as black? Or that the birtherism both have been subjected to is not racist?

 

[Bomb#20]

Were there slaves in Jamaica?

But they are not American. This is not my fight. I don’t care. But it’s best to understand a position if you are going to critique it.

So what's the correct understanding of the position? Can you explain why it's supposed to make a darn bit of difference whether the British colonists who enslaved your ancestors were loyal British colonists or rebellious British colonists?

 

[Bomb#20]

Yeah well... I propose a requirement that any candidate for President must be of mixed race descent.
That would guarantee at least some minimal level of recognition of the humanity of persons of other races. Plus, it would let me off the hook. As a pure honky, people would stop bugging me to become President.

Dude, you're screwed. The Caucasoid race formed in the first place from admixture between Asians and more recent emigrants from Africa. To be pure honky is to be mixed race. Now get your lily white ass into the next presidential debate where it belongs!

Alternately, I'd accept a requirement that presidential candidates must demonstrate that they are of at least 50% native American descent. They were here first, after all.

So, no Navajo or Apache need apply? Those guys are native Canadians.