Both of his birth parents are listed as white on the 1930 census, as are all of his other known ancestors on previous censuses and other official documents.”

I got this from wikipedia and i think we can all that wikipedia exist.
In the second paragraph it is interesting because his parents are considered white. My own birth certificate say that I am white. If you looked at me you would most likely agree. But my grandfather on my moms side 1/4 Hawaiian, 1/4 Chinese and 1/2 Portuguese. So if i read
mooduh’s post correctly by the standards of the US gov my mom is not Native nor am I. which intern means my offspring could not prove any kind of native claim even though
they are connected to the bloodline of native people. Kinda of a clerical error.

Another interesting example of our predisposition to race is a guy i worked with at Mc Donalds many many years ago named Martin he was born and raised in Mexico city and immigrated to the US. I had alway thought that he was Mexican but as it turned out he’s 100% French. Yet he felt he was more Mexican than French because that is what he knew now what if he applied for a position at a company and got it due to affermitive action would that be a scandle?

My mom has a friend that was born in French speaking Africa (don’t remember the county) but he was of European dissent and had been exposed to mostly French culture so he considers himself French but as it turned out he was 100% Portuguese

so maybe we are so indoctrinated with fixed ideas of blood lines and heritage created by kings an tyrants to keep themselves in power and to keep peasants and slaves in chains no longer apply to our world due to the continuing self emancipation of those kept out of power combined with the rapid transfer of information and the relative ease of immigration.

*except maybe when it come to Karate.

I think the piece Derek linked to really offers some perspective that we are missing here, regardless of whether it’s cited or not.

Discussing his ancestry is totally buying into the terms the media has set forth in discussing this issue. As far as i understand it (which isn’t far to be honest), Ward Churchill was fired for making unpopular statements, under the guise of supposed academic misconduct.

That is what this is about. Speculating about his ancestry only serves to cloud the issue at hand.

To save time and counter an anticipated attack on my ability to ‘think for myself’, I am not agreeing with Derek because he has an official looking logo accompanying his comments. The man is fucking smart and generally spot on with his analysis. And I agree this time. So there!

Venting anger & outrage through artistic expression is one thing, but to froth and foam while pleading your case before the court of public opinion is another. Check out the vid posted by Mark above. That’s how he has generally behaved throughout the ordeal. He approaches discourse in the same bullying tone as that fuck Bill O’Reilly. It’s hard to gain sympathy or care what happens to a person like that. When Michael Moore gets worked up he just seems like a concerned & passionate dude. Ward came off like a hate-filled cocksucker. Of course this is all subjective, but it is also the perception most people i know have of him.

When dealing personally w/ people you always catch more flys with honey than vinegar, y’know?

Ward didn’t deserve to be fired. But in many ways he buried his own self.

Hahaha … well it was squarely directed at people like you!

You obviously have no fucking clue what you’re talking about. Ward’s ethnicity is part of the controversy because throughout his career as a scholar/historian/activist he has always made prominent that he is a native american–with native blood–and that he brings the native perspective to his work.

Doubts about his ethnicity became widely known due to a bullshit witch hunt, but that is not an excuse.

So the questions are is Churchill an indian and if not is it acceptable for him as a public figure to say he is, especially considering he is a scholar.

I say no on both counts.

Whew .. it was really hard to control myself on that one!!

For christ sakes, think for yourselves. Just cuz you adopt the opinions of Chris Hannah or Ward Churchill doesn’t mean you’re thinking for yourselves”
Thats gotta be the most condescending thing I’ve read on this here blog. Heres a POINT for you, Rush Limbaugh isn’t in a similar predicament. We could talk about hypothetical situations til the cows come home(I’m sure you could). You seem to be the only person on here who has such a problem with Wards ethnicity. I thought this debate was supposed to be looking at the reasons behind his firing, and the whole idea of free speech being quashed. Your picking at the guy about his fuckin sunglasses. I mean come on. Think about these things for a second before you type. Your bringing his dress sense/style into a debate and you somehow think you have the moral high ground?
As for being cantankerous, well so is/was Chuck D, or Michael Moore, or Propagandhi, or any other liberal thinker trying to make headway in the valley of deushes. Go take a shower boi!

No, but i am saying he got his professorship ship under unusual circumstances.

Or that he falsified an identity as a Native American in order to receive professorship?

Given all that has transpired i believe that his claims of native ancestry are fraudlent. I don’t pretend to know what motivated him.

Do you think a “family tree” done by three people - none of whom are genealogists, and two of whom are professedly anti-Churchill - holds water?

It doesn’t matter what their motivations are, he has yet to disprove them.

You don’t think he should wear sunglasses?

No. But he does seem to wear them more than most people, especially when indoors, which kinda reminds me of Kim Jong Il, not in terms of thirst for blood but in creating a public image. I was totally speculating though, and never claimed otherwise.

When an argument contains spurious claims and statements like this, you have to wonder if one is trying to cram as much as possible into an argument in an attempt to make it bear more weight.

What? That statement bears no weight.

Do you think a “family tree” done by three people - none of whom are genealogists, and two of whom are professedly anti-Churchill - holds water?

You don’t think he should wear sunglasses?

When an argument contains spurious claims and statements like this, you have to wonder if one is trying to cram as much as possible into an argument in an attempt to make it bear more weight.