Massachusetts
In reply to the discussion: Can someone explain the whole Warren Indian thing to me? [View all]pixierigby
(0 posts)Actually, the response to the issue from the Warren campaign is problematic on a variety of levels. The Republicans have certainly leveraged it to their advantage in the race, and the right media has taken the opportunity to parody the story via disconcertingly racist puns, but those facts don't negate the unsettling conduct on the part of Warren herself.
1. In April, the Boston Herald discovered that Harvard Law had responded to criticism about its lack of faculty diversity in the late '90s by touting Warren as a "woman of color" and "Native American" who added multiculturalism to their institution in articles published by the Fordham Law Review and the Harvard Crimson.
2. Warren said she had never listed herself as a Native American in a professional context.
3. The Herald discovered that Warren began to self-identify as a racial "minority" in Association of American Law School directories from 1986-1995 after previously self-identifying during her academic and fledgling professorial career as white. Warren amended her previous statement, and said she meant that she had never listed herself as NA on a job application. She released her University of Texas and Rutgers applications, but declined to release the Upenn or Harvard ones.
4. She said she had listed herself in the AALS directories as an ethnic minority in the hopes of being invited to Native American luncheones. However, the directories only allowed one to distinguish oneself as a minority, but not to specify which kind.
5. At this point, she had no idea what ancestor might have originally been the link to a Native background; what blood quantum she was; or anything about Cherokee enrollment, customs, traditions, etc. It was established she had never reached out to the Native community in Cambridge.
6. Her campaign hired a genealogist to research her past. He found a reference to a great-great-great grandmother in a family newsletter, but no primary evidence like a marriage certificate, etc.
7. It was reported, and subsequently retracted, that Warren was 1/32 Cherokee on the basis of the genealogist's discoveries. However, the NEHGS conceded that no evidence exists to substantiate that claim other than hearsay.
8. The Herald discovered that Harvard Law had claimed Warren as a Native American during her visiting tenure in the early 90s, as well as from 1995-2001, and as recently as last year, in diversity statistics compiled to comply with Department of Labor mandates. The administrator in charge of this process said he always relied on faculty members' self-identification to file his reports.
9. However, Warren does not meet the standard "tribal affiliation or community recognition" for the defintion of Native American delineated by Harvard or the government.
10. Warren amended her previous position on the issue, and admitted she had told Harvard of her "background," but only after she was hired.
11. Four Cherokee women who were troubled by Warren's conduct traveled to Boston to meet with her. She agreed to do so, but then, once they were there, refused to engage with them and contended that they were right-wing operatives supported by Republican money. There was no evidence to support this, other than the fact that one of the women had provided official replies to conservative blogs who asked her about her opposition to Warren.
12. Warren has declined to grant interviews to Native newspapers or media outlets, even while consenting to speak with the Globe and the Times.
13. A number of Native delegates to the Dem convention have extended an invite to attend their meeting in NC to address concerns they have about her history of self-identification and her campaign's response to the story.
Essentially, Warren facilitated Harvard's promotion of her as someone who exemplified the dearth of a diversity problem in Cambridge, so I don't see how it's unreasonable to ask, "well, how did you contribute a perspective influenced by your belief in this Native heritage to the Harvard community?" So far, she's said that her parents had to elope because of her paternal grandparents' disapproval, and that she has "high cheekbones. . . likes all the Indians do."
She's also remarking that she will be the first Senator from Massachusetts with a Native background in interviews, so the topic seems legitimate since she's publicizing it while stonewalling Native media.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):![](du4img/smicon-reply-new.gif)