I see that there is a lot of chat about ancestry and indigeneity, two complex and profoundly misunderstood concepts. Here’s a thread 1/N - I have written about these ideas extensively, in two books;

Ancestry rapidly becomes a matted web rather than a tree. Claims of ancestral purity are absurd. We are descended from multitudes, and don’t bear DNA from actual ancestors after very few generations. (fig. from @Graham_Coop
With both ancestry and indigeneity, the pertinent question is ‘when?’ If you claim ancestry from a certain group of people, then you are timestamping when you consider these ancestors to be important (to you). 3/N
Similarly, with claims of indigeneity, there is no agreed time when this kicks in.
There are a few places that have been populated by human in recent history, and so logical claims of an indigenous people make more sense, e.g. the Māori of New Zealand were the first humans to live on Aotearoa from the 12th C.
Male Danish and Norwegian Vikings + female Scots/Faroese/Irish women were the first to live permanently on Iceland (there is some evidence that there might’ve been a monk or two there previously, but they left no descendants, on account of them being monks). 6/N
The origins of what we sometimes now call First Nations or Indigenous people of the Americas was the arrival of people across the Bering land mass around 20k years ago, and were isolated in the Americas until Columbus invaded. 7/N
Now, I get a lot of traffic from people (often with middle ages or Anglo Saxon sounding pseudonyms) claiming various things about British indigeneity, but I remain bigly unconvinced, because of this issue of arbitrary timestamps. When do you mean? 8/N
The lands that are now Britain have been occupied by humans for around 900,000 years (the earliest evidence from Happisburgh in Norfolk. But these footprints do not betray what species these people were – it’s certainly earlier than Homo sapiens. 9/N
But we have been invaded, colonised, enjoyed and endured occupation throughout our entire history. The legacies of that can be seen in the finest whispers in our DNA. 10/N
These lands have been occupied fairly continuously for almost a million years, by humans of countless lineages, rendering the concept of indigeneity effectively meaningless.
And yes, Stewart Lee does this brilliantly in his ‘coming over here…’ routine.
https://t.co/7KV5HKnDzD
In many cases, though not all, the claims of British indigeneity are apparently a shallow cover for recent, post-colonial immigration. There’s not much I can say about that view, other than attempting to back it up with historical, ancestral or indigenous claims is folly. 12/N
Claims of for e.g. Celtic ancestry can be muddled, as Celt is more a cultural grouping than a genetic or genealogical one. Celtic means different things to different people, historical Celtic cultures are not necessarily genealogically related (@theAliceRoberts is great on this).
Which brings me to the Great Replacement. This is a conspiracy theory formally described in 2010 by a French writer. It asserts that a global elite is conspiring to replace white Europeans with non Europeans. 14/N
It is, of course, drawn from much older, and predominantly Nazi propaganda, and more recently Enoch Powell’s Rivers of Blood, and the neo-Nazi David Lane’s White Genocide Manifesto; spree killers cite it sometimes. 15/N
As such, the idea of the Great Replacement is riven with antisemitic coded language e.g. ‘global elites’. They are unequivocally paranoid racist conspiracy theories, i.e. not evidence based. And should be regarded as such. That it is entering the mainstream is troubling. 16/N
Its ancestry also included popular eugenics ideas of the early 20th C, such as 'White Suicide'. This features an eternal trope in population control and migration angst, which is the ‘right people’ aren’t having enough babies, and the ‘wrong people’ are having too many. 17/N
Key scientific and political eugenics proponents felt strongly that this was *the* problem: Galton, RA Fisher, Churchill, FDR, and many more expressed profound concern about this essentially Malthusian idea. Invariably, it is a smokescreen for hegemonic power. 18/N
There was in fact a great replacement of the British people, but it happened about 6000 years ago, and has no bearing on the current paranoid racist fantasies. Fascinating paper here by @Boothicus @mt_genes et al.
https://t.co/JSNHGTbVux
Anyway, I’ve run out of steam. Ancestry is complex and poorly understood. Indigeneity is similarly complex and requires nuance and thought. Admixture is the norm, migration is continuous, and no people is pure. 20/N
Anyone who tells you otherwise is selling something.

Science is no ally when claiming ownership of lands, nor separation or superiority of races. These are the facts of biology.

21/21
Apparently I'm a Marxist now, Father.
https://t.co/sWvamDNi62
This tweet is a great example: This guy says 1000 years is the threshold, so presumably would think that America should only be for Nature Americans?

https://t.co/ppO9Z5HF9z
Native, obvs, goddamit. Stupid autofellatio

More from Book

We had a conversation on the podcast about the racialization of dog breeds, where we talked to @BronwenDickey, the author of Pitbull: The Battle Over an American Icon.


In the 1930s, Pitbulls — which, as Bronwen pointed out to me over and over, don’t constitute a dog breed but a shape — used to be seen as the trusty sidekick of the proletariat, the Honda Civic of canines. (Think of “the Little Rascals” dog.)
.

That began changing in the postwar years and the rise of the suburbs. A pedigreed dog became a status symbol for the burgeoning white middle class. And pitbulls got left behind in the cities.

Aside: USians have flitted between different “dangerous” breeds and media-fueled panics around specific dogs. (anti-German xenophobia in the late 1800s fueled extermination programs of the spitz, a little German dog that newspapers said was vicious and spread disease.)

Some previously “dangerous” dogs get rebranded over the years — German shepherds, Dobermans, Rottweilers. But the thing their respective periods of contempt and concern had to do is that they were associated with some contemporarily undesirable group.
Another thread on Whittle as a companion to this thread.


Here Stephen makes an impassioned plea for the rights of trans people not to be sterilised. I agree. Does Stephen know that we are now, effectively, sterilising “transkids”? Is Stephen speaking out about this?


Yes. I agree you have the right to be parents. You know many “transmen” who have given birth. What will happen to the kids put on #PubertyBlockers followed by Cross-sex hormones?


Makes a clear statement activists did not want to campaign on “surgical status”. #LeaveNoOneBehind. Also that they have the right to bodily privacy,
Just trans folks? Do women have the right to bodily privacy?
Is this what passing looks like? Ignoring women?
Congratulations


An impassioned defence of the campaign for Self-Identification. Make no mistake this was a demand that women accept male-bodied women in single sex spaces. That was significant over-reach and a massive blunder. Women only spaces, regardless of surgery, is my stance now.

You May Also Like

🌺कैसे बने गरुड़ भगवान विष्णु के वाहन और क्यों दो भागों में फटी होती है नागों की जिह्वा🌺

महर्षि कश्यप की तेरह पत्नियां थीं।लेकिन विनता व कद्रु नामक अपनी दो पत्नियों से उन्हे विशेष लगाव था।एक दिन महर्षि आनन्दभाव में बैठे थे कि तभी वे दोनों उनके समीप आकर उनके पैर दबाने लगी।


प्रसन्न होकर महर्षि कश्यप बोले,"मुझे तुम दोनों से विशेष लगाव है, इसलिए यदि तुम्हारी कोई विशेष इच्छा हो तो मुझे बताओ। मैं उसे अवश्य पूरा करूंगा ।"

कद्रू बोली,"स्वामी! मेरी इच्छा है कि मैं हज़ार पुत्रों की मां बनूंगी।"
विनता बोली,"स्वामी! मुझे केवल एक पुत्र की मां बनना है जो इतना बलवान हो की कद्रू के हज़ार पुत्रों पर भारी पड़े।"
महर्षि बोले,"शीघ्र ही मैं यज्ञ करूंगा और यज्ञ के उपरांत तुम दोनो की इच्छाएं अवश्य पूर्ण होंगी"।


महर्षि ने यज्ञ किया,विनता व कद्रू को आशीर्वाद देकर तपस्या करने चले गए। कुछ काल पश्चात कद्रू ने हज़ार अंडों से काले सर्पों को जन्म दिया व विनता ने एक अंडे से तेजस्वी बालक को जन्म दिया जिसका नाम गरूड़ रखा।जैसे जैसे समय बीता गरुड़ बलवान होता गया और कद्रू के पुत्रों पर भारी पड़ने लगा


परिणामस्वरूप दिन प्रतिदिन कद्रू व विनता के सम्बंधों में कटुता बढ़ती गयी।एकदिन जब दोनो भ्रमण कर रहीं थी तब कद्रू ने दूर खड़े सफेद घोड़े को देख कर कहा,"बता सकती हो विनता!दूर खड़ा वो घोड़ा किस रंग का है?"
विनता बोली,"सफेद रंग का"।
तो कद्रू बोली,"शर्त लगाती हो? इसकी पूँछ तो काली है"।
Margatha Natarajar murthi - Uthirakosamangai temple near Ramanathapuram,TN
#ArudraDarisanam
Unique Natarajar made of emerlad is abt 6 feet tall.
It is always covered with sandal paste.Only on Thriuvadhirai Star in month Margazhi-Nataraja can be worshipped without sandal paste.


After removing the sandal paste,day long rituals & various abhishekam will be
https://t.co/e1Ye8DrNWb day Maragatha Nataraja sannandhi will be closed after anointing the murthi with fresh sandal paste.Maragatha Natarajar is covered with sandal paste throughout the year


as Emerald has scientific property of its molecules getting disturbed when exposed to light/water/sound.This is an ancient Shiva temple considered to be 3000 years old -believed to be where Bhagwan Shiva gave Veda gyaana to Parvati Devi.This temple has some stunning sculptures.