Classic EssaysWilliam Pierce

The Question of Whites With Amerindian Ancestry

by Dr. William L. Pierce (pictured)

EDITOR’S NOTE: We’ve all seen White Americans, with no more than an undetectable trace of Amerindian ancestry, wearing Indian feathers on their hats or affixing a “Proud to be Cherokee” sticker on their trucks. This is partly a result of a desperate search for an authentic identity in our junk-consumerist culture among those who viscerally understand that proclaiming one’s White identity results in job loss or ostracism, and partly because it is “trendy” and status-enhancing in our sick society to “discover” that one is truly a “person of color.” But in some cases there is actual admixture. How much should be significant to us, and how little can be considered to be no more important than the variations already found in Europeans? — K.A.S.

WHO CAN SAY that he has no non-White ancestry at all in his family tree? Not I. Most people can say who their parents and grandparents are. Only a few Americans can go back as far as four generations, however. I doubt that as many as one percent of Americans can go back six generations with any degree of certainty. Jews and equalitarians seize on this fact to confuse people with the claim that “we’re all mongrels,” that there is no such thing as a “pure” race, etc. — and therefore, it doesn’t do any good to try to preserve the White race, because it really doesn’t exist.

I’m sure that you are not fooled by that sophistry. We must be practical. We know that there is a White race, and that it is easy to select individuals from that race who constitute a relatively “pure” sub-group. That’s what we try to do in the National Alliance. I’m not an expert on Amerindian ethnology, but I do know that the Indians consisted of many tribes which were racially distinct, ranging from essentially Caucasoid to essentially Mongoloid. So if one has Indian admixture, it depends a lot on what tribe. As a very rough rule, if a person looks White and thinks of himself as White and is the kind of person our other members wouldn’t mind their sisters marrying — and if we know that he’s no more than one-sixteenth non-White, we consider him White.

As I said, that’s a rough rule. A person may believe that one of his grandparents was an Indian, because that grandparent lived on a reservation. But the fact is that many people who consider themselves Indians today and live on reservations are more White than Indian, due to earlier racial mixture between Whites and Indians. — W.L.P.

*   *   *

A related question, sometimes publicized in exaggerated form by our enemies to divide us, is the idea that some subgroups of Whites ought to be written out of the race because of nationality or eye color or the like. This issue was addressed in the following passage by John Young, written for National Vanguard in 2005. — Ed.

Due to the generally deplorable understanding of race, it is necessary for us to emphasize that White people are the descendants of all historically European peoples, including the Irish, Slavs, Spaniards, Italians, Greeks, as well as the Germanic, Scandinavian, and Anglo-Saxon peoples, etc., so long as there is no discernible trace of non-White admixture. National Vanguard celebrates the cultural diversity of the White race. Our beautiful languages, traditions, and cultures are a strength. We are pan-European in our views and stand unconditionally opposed to conflicts between White peoples. Outside forces often exploit one White ethnicity against another. We do not excuse anti-White hatreds or historical “scores,” and will consistently work towards reconciliation and unity in places such as the Balkans and Northern Ireland. Our watchword is no more brothers’ wars.

Previous post

Multiracialists Are Crazy, part 2

Next post

The Id of the Yid

3 Comments

  1. Rob
    21 December, 2011 at 7:29 am — Reply

    I do know that the Indians consisted of many tribes which were racially distinct, ranging from essentially Caucasoid to essentially Mongoloid. So if one has Indian admixture, it depends a lot on what tribe. (quote)

    Which Caucasoid tribes was Dr. Pierce refering to? In reference to Amerinds (ADV, Attack, NV) I´ve only read/heard him saying/writing that they were non-white savages. I´m interested in everything this man wrote/spoke. I thought I read somewhere that if a person says he/she has “some non-white ancestry”, he would take his or her word for it (i.e. barred from NA membership), but I couldn´t verify any sources. I would be very grateful for answers.

    Sincerely,

    Rob

    • Amerikaner
      17 March, 2016 at 7:56 am — Reply

      Rob: I do know that the Cherokee had the lightest skin tone of any of the North American tribes. So I’m sure that Pierce had them in mind when speaking of Amerindians with “degrees of Caucasoid blood” in them. There are well substansiated theories that Whites were in North America way before Columbus, and even in BC times, as the other commenter alluded to. The Cherokee probably were the ones who interbred with these ancient Whites on the American continent. Ancient Whites such as Kennewick Man, and other Caucasoid mummies unearthed in the U.S. during the 1990’s.

  2. Marc
    5 September, 2015 at 5:37 am — Reply

    In all Latin America, there are inumerable legends about blonde-haired, blue-eyed “White Gods”…coming either from the Atlantic Ocean, or even from the Skies(!!), and teachings to the Natives all the basics of Culture and Civilised Life. These legends are SO NUMEROUS, that they CANNOT be only simple “myths”. I firmly believe there is indeed a kernel of Truth behind all these legends! What has been fully confirmed, is that ALL Amerindians, from the poles to the Amazon Basin, have at least between 6 to 10 percent of European genes in their DNA. These White genes are extremely ancient, and do not result from some recent inter-racial mixing.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Slander, crude language, incivility, off-topic drift, or remarks that might harm National Vanguard or its users may be edited or deleted, even if unintentional. Comments may be edited for clarity or usage.