Admixture in "White Africaners"

Angela

Angela

Elite member
Messages
21,823
Reaction score
12,329
Points
113
Ethnic group
Italian
I actually expected even more, but, anyway, for those who were or are so obsessed about racial purity and about exclusive and artificially strict distinctions between races, this result must be a scandal ready to be properly hidden. I expected even larger proportions due to the initial decades of colonization when the Afrikaner community wasn't still as well defined as a distinct ethnicity. In Brazil, where interbreeding and intermarriage has always been much more common, it's not even very surprising when, sometimes, genetic results include light-eyed, pale-skinned individuals with as much as 20-25% of non-European admixture.
 
Angela said:
Oh, the irony.

In American, going by the "one drop" rule, they would all have been relegated to the "back of the bus".
Click to expand...

Even more irony, is that some of the people that wrote those laws might not be able to pass it themselves.

Researchers reportedly examined the genetic records of 145,000 people who submitted saliva samples -- where DNA sequence variations are found -- to 23andMe, a California-based private company that provides ancestry-related genetic reports. From the data, researchers determined that people especially from the South have at least 1 percent of African ancestry. The study also found that states with the highest levels of African ancestry, such as South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, “are not those with the highest proportions of African Americans.”

http://www.ibtimes.com/white-southe...e-black-dna-whites-elsewhere-us-study-1765498
Click to expand...


That 1% SSA would most likely come from the very early days of colonization, between mixing of non-anglo European indentured servants and slaves as I mentioned in this post.


Not to mention the nature of the French colonies prior to being adsorbed into the United States. They were willing to mix with native Americans. Which is probably where some of the traces of Native American comes from in some DNA results.

https://books.google.com/books?id=H...ists mixed with native american tribe&f=false
 
15 Afrikaners found on Gedmatch. Their results in Eurogenes K36 which help differentiate many specific non-Euro admixtures
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pygmy in K36 is sign of Khoisan admixture (pure San from HGDP have 70%).
san.jpg
 
mlukas said:
15 Afrikaners found on Gedmatch. Their results in Eurogenes K36 which help differentiate many specific non-Euro admixtures
Click to expand...

Who gave you permission to post the results of named people on the internet? Unless you obtained their permission, remove the names.
 
Last edited:
elghund said:
White South Afrikaners are relegated to far worse than the back of the bus these days. There is a genocide occurring there.
Click to expand...

And the brutality against black Americans during slavery and later was far worse than going to the back of the bus, as was the treatment of black South Africans under the Afrikaner regime, yes?

My point had to do with the fact that it isn't rare that people who are mixed to some degree are often the most rabid racists. After all, the laws were promulgated at a time when some rumors must still have been current. Another piece of evidence is that instead of using a genetic or genealogical measure, they based legal distinctions solely on appearance until very late in the history of the regime. The psychology is interesting.

Of course, no matter what treatment the blacks received, it wouldn't justify the murder of white South Africans.

I would also be careful with the use of the word "genocide". It's disrespectful to people like Jews and Armenians who actually did suffer a genocide.

Btw, along these lines there's the case of the black looking daughter of two "white" Afrikaners, who was re-classified and relegated to "Coloured" or black society. The reclassification was based solely on her appearance. I remember reading that there was all sorts of swill peddled about how the mother must have had an affair with a black man. Much later a paternity test was administered, and other dna testing, and it was proved she was the biological daughter of her legal parents. They eventually changed the law to say the biological child of two white parents could not be re-classified, but what difference would it have made. She would still have been an outcast, as the parents were, as if this possibility was catching, like a cold or a virus. Poor people.

Sandra Laing:
sandralaing.jpg


https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2003/mar/17/features11.g2
 
Angela said:
And the brutality against black Americans during slavery and later was far worse than going to the back of the bus, as was the treatment of black South Africans under the Afrikaner regime, yes?

My point had to do with the fact that it isn't rare that people who are mixed to some degree are often the most rabid racists. After all, the laws were promulgated at a time when some rumors must still have been current. Another piece of evidence is that instead of using a genetic or genealogical measure, they based legal distinctions solely on appearance until very late in the history of the regime. The psychology is interesting.

Of course, no matter what treatment the blacks received, it wouldn't justify the murder of white South Africans.

I would also be careful with the use of the word "genocide". It's disrespectful to people like Jews and Armenians who actually did suffer a genocide.

Btw, along these lines there's the case of the black looking daughter of two "white" Afrikaners, who was re-classified and relegated to "Coloured" or black society. The reclassification was based solely on her appearance. I remember reading that there was all sorts of swill peddled about how the mother must have had an affair with a black man. Much later a paternity test was administered, and other dna testing, and it was proved she was the biological daughter of her legal parents. They eventually changed the law to say the biological child of two white parents could not be re-classified, but what difference would it have made. She would still have been an outcast, as the parents were, as if this possibility was catching, like a cold or a virus. Poor people.

Sandra Laing:


https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2003/mar/17/features11.g2
Click to expand...

I know what the term genocide means and I was careful in my use of it. White South Afrikaners are experiencing a genocide and it is disrespectful to them to deny it. You stated, "Oh, the irony. In America, going by the "one drop" rule, they would all have been relegated to the 'back of the bus.'" My response was to that statement, not to the point that you subsequently said you were trying to make, that "people who are mixed to some degree are often the most rabid racist," which is another view I don't share as I think it's an overgeneralization.
 
elghund said:
I know what the term genocide means and I was careful in my use of it. White South Afrikaners are experiencing a genocide and it is disrespectful to them to deny it.
Click to expand...

Nonsense and hyperbole. There is no indication of a genocide. Stop reading neo-nazi twaddle. What may happen in the future is another story.
 
Angela said:
Nonsense and hyperbole. There is no indication of a genocide. Stop reading neo-nazi twaddle. What may happen in the future is another story.
Click to expand...

In South Africa people try to forget the past and move along knowing they need the know-how brought in by the colonisers.
South Africa is plagued by heavy corruption under president Zuma though and ANC is losing all its credit because of this.
I hope there will be no irregularities during next elections.

What happened in Zimbabwe is ethnic cleansing of the white people.
As a consequence Zimbabwe is in big disaster. Some white people were killed, most white people left the country leaving all their properties behind, and some very few wealthy white people are still supporting and profiting of the corrupt regime. Many black tribes which are not linked to president Mugabe are fleeing into South Africa. This country is bankrupt because of greed and racism to the white people.
 
bicicleur said:
In South Africa people try to forget the past and move along knowing they need the know-how brought in by the colonisers.
South Africa is plagued by heavy corruption under president Zuma though and ANC is losing all its credit because of this.
I hope there will be no irregularities during next elections.

What happened in Zimbabwe is ethnic cleansing of the white people.
As a consequence Zimbabwe is in big disaster. Some white people were killed, most white people left the country leaving all their properties behind, and some very few wealthy white people are still supporting and profiting of the corrupt regime. Many black tribes which are not linked to president Mugabe are fleeing into South Africa. This country is bankrupt because of greed and racism to the white people.
Click to expand...


Yes, that's a much clearer description of the situation.

I don't know how much of it is actual "racism" and how much revenge, but it doesn't matter. It's all terrible

Actually, I was surprised that South Africa wasn't engulfed in a blood bath given what went on before. Not that it would have been justified I hasten to add, but people have exterminated other groups of people with far less reason.
 
Apartheid was installed by a mojority of impoverished Afrikaner people.
The Afrikaner developped the land, but many became impoverished under British rule.
The British were not interested in land development, only in gold and diamonds and other ores.

Also bear in mind, South Africa has 17 official languages, English, Afirkaans and 15 tribal black languages.
If you put 2 random black South Africans face to face, they'll communicate in Afrikaans or English because they don't understand each others tribal language.

Most areas are still exclusively white or black, there are not many mixed places.
The Afrikaner people are still white, tall, blond and blue-eyed. They look more European than present day Dutch people.

I have visited South Africa twice.
There are a few danger zones, but there is no hatred. I have never met such nice and genuinly friendly people anywhere in the world.
It's a fantastic country. If you ever have the opportunity to visit it, you should do so.
 
bicicleur said:
The Afrikaner people are still white, tall, blond and blue-eyed. They look more European than present day Dutch people.
Click to expand...
So you tell it as a Flemish so I believe you:)
It's interesting because they have large portion of French ancestry (mostly form south and central France so rather on brunet side). And don't forget those few percents Non-Caucasoid admixture.
 
Angela said:
Who gave you permission to post the results of named people on the internet? Unless you obtained their permission, remove the names.
Click to expand...

I removed Gedmathc numbers. But names are helpful to prove they are Afrikaners. And surnames like Kruger, de Klerk or De Wet in South Africa are so popular like Smith or Johnson in USA...
 
mlukas said:
So you tell it as a Flemish so I believe you:)
It's interesting because they have large portion of French ancestry (mostly form south and central France so rather on brunet side). And don't forget those few percents Non-Caucasoid admixture.
Click to expand...

The French ancestry probably comes from the Hugenotes who brought wine culture to South Africa.
They should be concentrated in the southwestern area.
 
We white South Africans come from different European backgrounds.

the 1% African DNA could be Spanish ancestry.

My ancestors came from Denmark & Germany so I doubt I have any African genes in me.

Seeing that all my family members have blue eyes , I'm pretty sure I'm 100% European.
 
As the previous charts showed, the African is Pygmy related, Southern SSA related, among other things, so it's not from Spain. You can have quite a bit of SSA ancestry and still be blonde and blue-eyed. Phenotype can be misleading.

Of course, the percentages are averages. You may be someone who has no non-European ancestry, but the only way to know for sure is to test, since it is so widely diffused throughout the white population. It is the same scenario in much of Latin America. White Hispanics have also discovered this trace of non-European ancestry. In their case it comes along with very high levels of Native American and sometimes SSA mtDna. It would be interesting to know how many white South Africans carry this non-European mtDna, and if any non-European y shows up. That would indicate how much was male vs. female mediated.
 
Razib Khan has two threads up about it.

https://gnxp.nofe.me/2017/09/22/the-non-european-ancestry-of-afrikaners/

https://gnxp.nofe.me/2017/09/23/no-afrikaners-do-not-have-british-or-english-ancestry/


The second post has to do with the fact that he believes that the reported "British" ancestry in the results are not accurate. I totally agree. In 23andme and a lot of commercial tests it's very difficult to tell apart the Dutch from the British alleles. Khan does experiments of his own to quantify that.

I don't understand why he got annoyed with the following post. It just explains why people of mixed Afrikaner/British ancestry usually self-identify as British and so their results wouldn't be skewing the data. Also, I found some of the information interesting.

"I don’t think the question is well framed to begin with. There are of course a huge number of white South Africans who are Afrikaner/English crosses, or Afrikaner/Irish crosses (like myself). But because of the importance of identification and ascription, many such will self-identify as English, even when they have 50% Afrikaans ancestry, and be thought as such. More rarely, they will cluster as Afrikaans: English South Africans have higher income, a few points higher mean IQ and have had generally higher social status for most of the last 200 years. If you grow up there you can recognize this immediately: Van der Byl is an Afrikaans name but many of them are ascriptively (and self-identify as) English. This is more prevalent in the Cape. They grow up speaking English, they do not go to the Afrikaans churches, they do not usually eat pap (though they might eat wors), they do not learn those silly dances, they are politically liberal etc. etc. Conversely you will find more than a few Afrikaners called Roberts or Smith, descended from British soldiers not that long ago.So if you are surveying Afrikaners, the group is already preselected, both by self-identification and ascription, for ancestry. The English admixture mostly skims off in this way. A good example is JM Coetzee, often called an Afrikaner by people who don’t know any better, and he certainly has major Afrikaner ancestry, but he is culturally and socially 100% English (and now an Australian). Or, to take another writer, Herman Charles Bosman, who spoke Afrikaans rather badly and wrote almost entirely in English."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 38822 times.

Back
Top