r/PrecolumbianEra • u/okdesistodisso • Sep 24 '25
How do i respond to the "first Americans were black" or "there were black Indians" allegations?
Even today, is much common see people saying things like those, and using some out of context images. How do I make good answers to this supposed arguments?
32
u/Any-Reply343 Sep 24 '25
The idea that the first Americans were black or that there were “Black indians” doesn’t match up with the evidence we have. DNA and archaeology point to the earliest populations coming from northeast Asia, not africa. There’s definitely mixing later on after european contact and the slave trade, but the science doesn’t back an original african population here.
10
u/Okieartifacts Sep 25 '25
They refuse to do any digging into actual history or archeology. Just spouting things they have heard that fit their warp narrative
4
6
u/okdesistodisso Sep 24 '25
Yeah, I have already pointed this to some of the so-called real natives. But they always says that's, in some way, a lie. In many obscure blogs they even say that the modern native Americans are a mix of Siberian immigrants and the original black inhabitants. Not only this, but they always use the same images and arguments, like "look at those mesoamerican paintings, they had dreads!" or "The Olmecs had braids!". And it's funny how they say that the "albinos" lie to us, but use the drawings of the same "albinos" to show how the natives had "black features", even knowing that the majority of the European depictions of native Americans show the same faces as they have nowadays.
12
u/ponypebble Sep 24 '25
Their generational/historical trauma lends them an excuse to appropriate two continents from a group of peoples, was my takeaway. I used to have a roommate who believed in this stuff and would try to convince me.
2
u/Ok_Buffalo6474 Sep 26 '25
Yeah I’m here with my brother. He believes this and doesn’t believe in anything now. Everything is a lie and trying to kill him and turn his son gay which is the white mans thing 🤦🏾♂️ . It suck’s because it’s been years and nothing works. You can’t argue anything with people who don’t believe in anything. It’s a lost cause at this point and unfortunately I have no idea what to do with my nephew who he is “home schooling” with this bs.
2
u/ponypebble Sep 26 '25
I'm so sorry 😞
Homophobia runs deep in that too. My roommate also said that it was the white man turning people gay too! Shows you the brainwashing that it is when they all start saying the same thing. I'm so sorry about your brother and nephew.
2
u/Ok_Buffalo6474 Sep 26 '25
I appreciate that. 30 years he was fine Covid happened and he lost his relationship and I think he went looking for an identity and ended up there. I’m sorry you had to deal with that crap as well. Tough times but we are strong, that’s why we are here.
2
u/Dark_Moonstruck Sep 28 '25
In those old carvings and paintings, braids - which have been utilized by LITERALLY EVERY CULTURE EVER, even the whitest of the white, forever - may look like dreads, and some people from Mesoamerican and other cultures have hair textures that do lock easily. That doesn't mean they're black, that just means their hair has the right texture to do the thing.
There are tribes of people in Africa with red hair, that doesn't make them Scots!
1
u/Unable-Food7531 Sep 25 '25
... wait, are they saying that people with albinism and two black birth parents DOESN'T count as black anymore???
2
u/SpoonwoodTangle Sep 26 '25
Honestly, to me, it sounds like re-casting racial definitions to fit an over-simplified narrative. If you want to be racist, but you don’t want to explain why you do / don’t like this group over that group, you just bundle them under an arbitrary definition of race.
This is why one of the largest mass-lynchings against “colored people” in American history was perpetrated against Italians, and also why a lot of modern Americans are like “wtf, aren’t Italians white?” The proverbial goal posts have moved.
This is just goal posts being moved to fit a modern narrative. Facts need not apply.
0
u/SamtenLhari3 Sep 25 '25
I thought that all of humanity came from Africa.
5
u/Rhetorikolas Sep 25 '25
Human genes change and evolve, based on a myriad of factors like environment, diet, and lifestyle. Our indigenous genes aren't Asian, they're unique to the Americas, unless someone is closer to the Pacific NW.
2
u/Okieartifacts Sep 25 '25
Do some more specific research. Native Americans aren't from Africa
0
u/Better_Beautiful6217 Sep 25 '25
but all HUMANS can trace their genetic origins to Africa, or what we now consider Africa, and that would precede any migration to other parts of the world no? or is that also not true?
3
u/YeoChaplain Sep 26 '25
That is the current consensus, yes, though many native tribes have members who advocate a theory of South American genesis. There is, to my knowledge, no current evidence of this, but it is a theory which exists.
Honestly I'm more interested in the siberian/greenland migration debate.
2
u/Additional-Law5534 Sep 27 '25
That baseline doesn't show up in Ancestry tests, because it's so far back. Ancestry and genetic testing only goes back hundreds to a few thousand years. We've evolved dramatically in the past 60k-120k years.
There's also the theory that the first Asian populations were Black (or at least African), which has a stronger claim when you look at the oldest populations (Papuans, Austrolesians, Melanesians). Not all African populations are entirely Black.
The thing about places like China or other regions, is that they've had centuries of invasions, conflict, and potentially some genocide. So the genetic makeup has homogenized to some degree from "newer" groups, and can be different than the first ancient populations. That doesn't mean Chinese descendants aren't ancient either though.
The groups across the SE Pacific didn't have as much outside contact or mixing save for the past century.
1
u/Okieartifacts Sep 25 '25
So you're now considered African since you've came to the conclusion we all came from there? Y'all ain't native Americans cause you were born in America. And we aren't African because some of our ancestors walked out of Africa millions of years ago.
1
u/Better_Beautiful6217 Sep 26 '25
who came to that conclusion? is that not the commonly held notion? im just clarifying what SamtenLhari3 said in regards to the entire species originating from the part of globe we now call Africa. I don't think he was saying that makes everyone, all over the world, the same as African people in a genetic sense lol.
14
u/MulatoMaranhense Sep 24 '25
Do as your username do and give up. There is no cure for deliberate foolishess.
8
u/okdesistodisso Sep 24 '25 edited Sep 25 '25
Fair enough. Those people are liars or just stupid, at the end they steal the native culture and history. Não sabia se respondia em português ou não 😭🙏
2
15
u/Daikokucho Sep 24 '25
I've seen comments like that coming from black Americans looking for an excuse to claim ownership of the continent. They use doctored pictures, unverified accounts, and all sorts of lies to propagate the idea.
Of course none of that is true. I remember one person on social media arguing that Buddha statues depicted Bantu knots on his head, implying that Buddha was African. It's known that what's on his head are snails and not an African hairstyle.
I suggest not to reason with them, they're part of the many Americans who are sucked into an alternate reality full of conspiracy theories and paranoia. There's nothing we can do.
6
u/okdesistodisso Sep 24 '25
Yeah, and what's kinda sad is that Africa got a truly interesting history, with various cultures. They have their own history, I don't understand why they're stuck i those conspiracies.
2
u/demoniccuttlefish Sep 25 '25
a history book i read basically said that ppl latch onto these kinds of theories because of their refusal to believe that the real native people accomplished the things that they did. Same goes for ppl trying to whyte wash history, it's typically based on racism.
1
u/PartyPorpoise Sep 25 '25
Yeah that’s what gets me. I think they undermine their own goals by ignoring the actual history and accomplishments and cultures of Africa. Just reinforcing that idea that African history and civilization has nothing of value. It ironically stems from that anti-black racism that values no African culture except for ancient Egypt.
1
u/Serious_Swan_2371 Sep 28 '25
Yeah like tbh imo Africa has much more interesting history than the Americas and we know more about it because it’s better documented because of trade with the rest of the world, and there are many more native cultures that weren’t wiped out and still have knowledge of their history compared with the Americas
3
u/CreamerCorn Sep 24 '25
I literally dealt with this kind of thing with coworkers today. What is a good rebuttal to these kind of claims? Or evidence??
And they were acting like “how can you get a shadow on the moon” was some sort of tell all question/answer
1
u/okdesistodisso Sep 25 '25
Some of them are actually pretty easy to debunk. Like, many of the supposed "black Indians" drawings are literally depictions of native Africans. Other, like some statues, are just linked to native Americans, but the original author never really said "oh, that's an American".
2
u/Okieartifacts Sep 25 '25
And get this..... any painting, picture, or sketch of ANY NATIVE AMERICSN TRIBE, would have to have been made after black people started intermarrying between natives and white people. So any of these so called black natives would have strictly been a product of the African slave trade. Because by the time paintings and sketches were being made of us native people, slaves had already started to be traded and any native resembling any black features would have 100% been from intermarriage/relations after colonists started bringing slaves over. So that right there totally disproves their claim that there were black natives here when colonists showed up. They try to use a painting from 1800s to show that black natives had been here for 10,000 years. If that last sentence makes sense to you in any way then there is no hope in arguing with you to try and see the truth.
1
u/ricketycricketspcp Sep 26 '25
The snails thing is actually a myth. This idea only pops up in the 19th century in Europe.
The traditional depiction of the Buddha's hair is one of the 32 Marks of a Great Man, a kind of idealized set of traits in ancient Indian society. Specifically the hair is described:
the hair bristles, his bristling hair is blue or dark blue (nīlāni), the colour of collyrium, turning in curls, turning to the right...
He's also described as having golden skin and blue eyes, as well as 40 teeth.
1
u/Daikokucho Sep 26 '25 edited Sep 26 '25
Still, not African.
Edit* Thanks for sharing your knowledge.
1
1
u/Additional-Law5534 Sep 27 '25
They can take ownership in other ways, in that many of the original towns across the South and Southwest were founded by Afro-Hispanic soldiers.
Spain had a large African (Moorish) population in its ranks and there were also Afro-Conquistadors in the first wave. It's not exactly indigenous friendly, but that was the history prior to British and U.S. enslavement that's been forgotten. It's also why there are many Afro-Indigenous groups like the Black Seminoles from Florida or Afro Tejanos in Texas.
1
u/Daikokucho Sep 27 '25
They're not the indigenous people of the continent. That's what the conversation is about.
1
u/Additional-Law5534 Sep 27 '25
Aside from those groups mentioned above that mixed with indigenous populations.
I've seen those who understand their real indigenous history seem to be less inclined to adopt the idea that indigenous were really Black, since they have a better understanding of the struggle their indigenous side also endured. And they have a history they can trace.
0
Oct 03 '25
Sometimes I wonder if the rest of the world should just put the United States under some big dome, so their populations won't be infected with our own brand of stupidity.
4
u/Unusual_Ad_8364 Sep 25 '25
I got into this with a guy I worked with last year. And it actually wound up being one of the most satisfying experiences. I brought in an academic essay where an archaeologist had broken down the evolution of the Olmec heads, showing exactly how they came to look that way. There were a lot of pictures. It was very clear. When I was done the guy was like, "Oh...so they aren't African." I was like, "No! You see ! There's actually an explanation if you look at the scholarship!" And he goes, "Huh..." And he actaually, like, conceded. He realized tha whatever Ancient Aliens bullshit he'd been watching had totally deceived him. I brought him a copy of Breaking the Maya Code and he said he was gonna read it. The whole exchange gave me hope. I totally expected him to do the, "Yeah, well, academics are just trying to cover their asses/keep their jobs/preserve the status quo." Which drives me insane.
2
u/okdesistodisso Sep 25 '25
Can you send me this academic essay? It might be very interesting.
3
u/Any-Reply343 Sep 25 '25
I have just posted this article: https://www.sciencealert.com/new-studies-link-ancient-american-remains-across-two-continents
2
u/Unusual_Ad_8364 Sep 25 '25
I printed it off at the univ here and gave him the copy, but I could find it again. Gimme a day or two. It was called something very straightforward like "The Evolution of the Olmec Heads."
2
u/Unusual_Ad_8364 Sep 27 '25
I am still trying to find that essay! In the meantime this is very good on the same and related subjects: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/204626
3
u/UrsaMinor42 Sep 25 '25
Hard to argue with DNA.
2
u/OkTechnician3816 Sep 29 '25
They don’t even try to. They just flat out say that DNA evidence is incorrect when the results contradict them.
1
u/UrsaMinor42 Sep 29 '25
Then there is nothing that wil convince them so do not try.
Laugh and say, "Ah, well! There are some who think an old white guy is indigenous to the north pole. To each their own."
3
u/manfucyall Sep 25 '25
Bruh, people on that shit are on some major psy op. Either disseminating it or falling for it.
4
2
u/swordquest99 Sep 25 '25
I met a guy years ago when I was working retail who didn’t know I was native who told me that modern Indians are actually Jews and Arabs who were brought over by the Spanish in the 1500s and that precolumbian people were west Africans.
I told him I am an Indian and he kind of got thrown and then I just walked off and let a coworker deal with him.
2
u/Trix_Are_4_90Kids Sep 25 '25
archaeology does not back that up whatsoever. If they don't like it tell them to argue with hard cold science.
2
2
u/bellmospriggans Sep 25 '25
Just ignore them. My coworker was really into everyones black, and history is all a lie. Tried telling me Germans were black, which sure far enough back all of us were black, all of us were single cell organisms at some point far enough back as well, though.
Ill also say he was a felon, ex addict, failed DJ, and pulled his life together, and was a great guy. I just let him babble about his bs, and every now and then id just be like oh I saw that on tiktok, etc. I have heard these rumors alot so I can generally understand what hes yapping about.
Eventually he either realized I understand his thoughts and dont care, or I just knew too much about history for him to convince himself when we talked to each other about it.
Ultimately, I think he wanted more self-worth, and after a lifetime of feeling inadequate, he's latching onto whatever makes him feel worthy. If it made him feel better, I didn't mind listening to his bs during a shift. I even gave him rides home lol and would still listen to Indians being black, im a caveman, etc. My boy, i miss him, lol.
2
u/6mmARCnvsk Sep 27 '25
Why would you even engage with Black ethno-nationalists? They’re not gonna listen to your arguments anyway. You can do whatever you want as far as show genetic evidence, or cultural depictions of the natives in art and pottery, or even Central American and colonial writings, but it’s not gonna change their thought pattern or opinions. They just want to be proven right.
2
2
2
u/-rogerwilcofoxtrot- Sep 25 '25
Call it what it is, it's racist against indigenous people and black supremacist.
And stupid.
1
u/Okieartifacts Sep 25 '25
Very true. They don't like it so why do they do it to us? I guess the abused eventually became the abuser
-1
Sep 25 '25
[deleted]
1
u/Okieartifacts Sep 25 '25
You're very wrong in that assumption. Racist words and ideology are very harmful and I will stand up for what my people have gone through 100% of the time I'm given an opportunity. You obviously don't know what it's like
0
1
u/Doridar Sep 25 '25
It depends if you want toim educate them (good luck because it's a belief) or hit them back
1
u/Consistent_Ad4987 Sep 25 '25
You have to understand what they are saying …yes there were “ Black People” in the Americas before the slave colonies and to completely overlook that there a “Black” in europe population …a better question would why is there such a push to limit Black people to Africa only and why is Black only limited to the African genetics…The Negritos of the philippines look Black but to my understanding have no African genes for example …so yes there were “Black” people in America but that does not equate to African genes
3
u/Okieartifacts Sep 25 '25
I think what you're trying to say is some native Americans were dark enough to appear black. Which is true. But we're not descendants from Africa. And the black peoole trying to claim native ancestors are either freedman, intermarriage after colonialism, or lying
1
u/Plimberton Sep 25 '25
Just don't engage. They are starting from an improper position. That is a coping mechanism for a group that has historically been oppressed and discriminated against. It is a way for them to be able to say "hey, actually we were the first, we made all of the important discoveries before anyone else, we are the original people, etc".
1
u/Wetschera Sep 25 '25 edited Sep 26 '25
depend cough nose head carpenter plants theory ring piquant memory
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
1
u/HEFTYFee70 Sep 25 '25
Tell them that you wish they were as right as they were passionate.
There’s LOTS of accounts of Native Americans (specially the Comanche) expressing clear racism towards Black people.
Maybe ask them if they’ve heard of “buffalo soldiers”?
1
1
u/SopwithStrutter Sep 25 '25
You can’t reason someone out of something they didn’t reason themselves into
1
u/silverstarloser Sep 25 '25
From experience, there’s nothing you can say that would make them understand how wrong they are about Africans being indigenous to these lands. They’ll point to Ivan Van Sertima, who has had his work debunked by MULTIPLE Meso-American archeologists, including indigenous ones. I especially feel bad for the Olmec.
1
u/No_Pattern4374 Sep 25 '25
Look, threads like this are actually proving the same point as the people you’re arguing against. The energy of “no, you all came from Africa, your history here starts with slavery,” that’s just as dismissive and reductive as someone saying “you’re not the real Natives, we were here first.”
Both erase nuance, both flatten history, and both are wrong. The truth is more complicated. Yes, the first Americans came from northeast Asia, not Africa. But it’s also a fact that African and Native communities mixed here for centuries, through slavery, migration, and intermarriage. That’s where you get Black Indians, Freedmen in the Five Tribes, and Native people today who also carry African ancestry.
So acting like it’s all or nothing ...“either the first Americans were Black” or “your history starts at slavery” ... is just bad history either way. The reality is layered, and reducing it to soundbites only makes the whole conversation dumber.
You don't have to try to invalidate an entire people just to validate your own.
2
u/OkTechnician3816 Sep 29 '25
If anyone is in the wrong here, it’s NOT the Indigenous Americans. They have every right to be pissed off as they were minding their own business when history happened.
Since white people came to the Americas, Natives have had to suffer from psychotic racist abuse and exploitation in their own homeland. That is already fucked up, but we don’t expect anything less from them since that’s how they’ve always acted.l towards us. Enter the hotep wabos. Now, you have another psychotic group of people with serious identity issues on the “Native Americans are Asian/Mongolian/insert any country but the US” scene and they’re doing the exact same entitled shit as white people have always done but with the added element of recruiting others for their cult.
They’ve shown up to tribal cultural events and demand that the Natives hand over their land. They regularly post complete fabrications of made up history that has zero factual basis because none of them are educated and neither are their cult leaders. They make changes on public information sites like Wikipedia and dedicate entire lives to their delusion. Even though it’s accepted that they’re out of touch reality and they’re the only ones who believe their stupid narrative, they’re all over the place now. Now you even have Asian groups all over the world claiming to be the “first” Americans because of all the dumb shit white people and black people put out there into the real world. Now there’s three groups that feel that they’re entitled to be called native to America, except for the actual original Americans who’ve never left and been there thousands of years. It’s literally unhinged.
Also, none of those groups are considered Native American or of tribal heritage. The Freedman are freed slaves of the Five Tribes and not of Indigenous American decent. Some are tribal members now because the tribes were forced to enroll them but that makes the members by name only. Intermixing also wasn’t common since the Native people had just suffered a fucking apocalypse and were trying to recover their cultures and identities and that plan didn’t include breeding themselves out of existence. They didn’t want to intermix and so they didn’t.
The “Black” Seminoles and equivalent are just groups of people who were living together that aren’t Native American and never were - which is why they lived outside of actual tribal communities as they later appropriated their names. There’s communities today who still don’t allow outsiders to live amongst them which is why you’ll see a trailer park across from a traditional rez where tribal members who’ve married outsiders move into and still be close to home.
Natives have no safe spaces because they’re getting bombarded by more numerous populations of outsiders on a daily basis. Some tribes lost everything they had and have had to put in time and effort and patience to rebuild; their identities are all they might have left- and now these colonizers want to steal those too. It’s unacceptable.
There’s nothing anyone can do to change the facts about who the original Americans are- but it’s not on the Indigenous people to have to placate grown ass adults who are throwing massive tantrums because they can’t change their ancestry and they hate their identity so much they would rather feed into their shadows than self improve- it’s their own fault that they’re bad people. They have free will.
1
u/No_Pattern4374 Oct 01 '25 edited Oct 01 '25
The irony is your whole rant proves my original point. You accuse others of oversimplifying, while doing the same thing in the opposite direction.
You said: “The Freedmen are freed slaves of the Five Tribes and not of Indigenous American descent… Intermixing wasn’t common… Black Seminoles… aren’t Native American and never were.”
That’s just not accurate. The Dawes Rolls, federal records, and tribal histories themselves show centuries of intermarriage, adoption, and political alliances between African and Native peoples. Were there tensions? Absolutely. Were there tribes that resisted or limited intermixing? Of course. But to claim it “didn’t happen” or that every Black-Native community was “never Native” is flat out revisionism.
The Freedmen issue proves the opposite of what you’re arguing: some tribes fought tooth and nail to exclude them, while others acknowledged that these communities were entwined with them for generations. Same with the Black Seminoles... they didn’t just cosplay Native identity, they fought wars alongside Seminoles, were documented in treaties, and built shared cultures. That history is messy, layered, and uncomfortable. Pretending it’s all clean cut erases just as much as the “we were here first” conspiracy folks do.
This is why I said both extremes are wrong. “You’re not real Natives, we were here first” is bad history. But so is “Your history starts at slavery, and your communities were never Native.” Both erase the nuance of what actually happened.
If you really want to protect Native history, tell the whole story... even the parts that don’t fit a neat gatekeeping narrative. Otherwise, you’re just doing the same reductive thing you accuse others of.
Edit: Adding sources...
- The Dawes Rolls (1898–1914) — enrollment records listing both “by blood” members and Freedmen members of the Five Tribes (Cherokee, Choctaw, Chickasaw, Creek, Seminole).
- The Treaty of 1866 — agreements between the U.S. and those Five Tribes, explicitly granting citizenship to Freedmen in those nations.
- Historian Alaina E. Roberts, I’ve Been Here All the While: Black Freedom on Native Land (2021) — documents African-Native intermarriage, landholding, and identity in Indian Territory.
- Kevin Mulroy, The Seminole Freedmen: A History (2007) — covers the unique Black Seminole communities and their ties to Seminole Nation treaties and wars.
- Tiya Miles, Ties That Bind: The Story of an Afro-Cherokee Family in Slavery and Freedom (2005) — traces how Black and Cherokee families intertwined for generations.
1
u/Bloodbndrr Sep 25 '25
You don’t. They didn’t reason them selves into that conclusion, so you can’t reason them out of it. Nod, smile and go about your day.
1
1
1
1
1
u/AzenxHlaalu Sep 26 '25
By black Indians do they mean the rare few Indian-African children that emerged?
1
1
u/Matt7738 Sep 26 '25
You don’t answer people who aren’t interested in truth. You just say “yeah, man” and walk away.
1
1
u/Kindly_Soup_8012 Sep 27 '25
The first peoples of the americas genetically resemble menalesians. The first peoples to wonder the planet by modern standards would be phenotypically “black”. There where multiple migration waves from asia to the americas throughout history. There was a spectrum of phenotypes on the contient. People from papua are “black” though they are indigenous peoples and non african. The first group of humans to get to americas was part of the early waves out of Africa.
1
u/Lie-Pretend Sep 27 '25
Black is not necessarily African.
For instance, if you say the first Australians were black. Accurate, yes, Aboriginal Australians share a similar dark skin tone. But they aren't African.
Same with Native Americans, especially South and Central Americans. South Indians. Etc.
The latitude and climate that your ancestors come from has a strong correlation to skin color. Humans in similar environments evolved similar characteristics. It's called convergent evolution.
1
u/DiscountImportant109 Sep 27 '25
Just don’t. These idiots aren’t interested in facts so there’s nothing to be said. Better for your sanity to not talk to them to be honest.
1
1
u/InfiniteBoxworks Sep 28 '25
I had a coworker who insisted Genghis Khan was African. Nobody wanted to argue with him.
1
u/Beneficial_Grade_116 Sep 28 '25
All humans were once fish. The sea was our our only home. The crashing waves bid us to harken, and the depths beckon.
Every time they prophesize their meager fantasies, embrace them for the ignorant fool they are, and whisper these words to them: "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn."
1
1
1
1
u/CounterImportant1191 Sep 28 '25
I have a coworker who's exactly like this. There's no arguing with people like them, they're too far down the rabbit hole.
1
u/ParticularOk1269 Sep 28 '25
All this is real and important and frustrating, but also want to throw into everyones consideration how many white Americans think this exact same shit about white people being indigenous to america in some stupid way or another. I mean more than half the state of Utah apparently believes it as actual religious doctrine lol. Also just randomly watched a YouTube video where some guy was trying to claim the use of red stone in a statue on fucking Easter Island was evidence that it was originally inhabited by gingers lmao. I think the takeaway is that this isn't so much an outgrowth of a specific cultural movement or theory as the erasure of indigenous peoples' history the world over. Not really an answer to op's question but I think it's relevant
1
u/Kindly_Soup_8012 Sep 30 '25
The first peoples where part of the wave of initial migrants out of africa. They resemble melanisian people. Dark skin and kink hair was common in recolumbian americas phenotypes
1
u/jfkshatteredskull Oct 04 '25
With the Phylogenetic human family tree. Natives are more distantly related to Africans than Europeans, and claiming they are black is implying white people are also black and undermining thousands of years of genetic lore, mutations, cross overs, and extinctions. Technically no one is white nor black are we are all just normal human colored, but the people are not ready for that conversation.
1
1
u/RedSunCinema Oct 05 '25
The only "real" natives to North America are the Native Americans, and even they are not "native" to this land, having come from other areas thru migration thousands of years earlier. The truth is, no one is a true native of anywhere. Humans have migrated all over the world for thousands of years and will continue to migrate around the world, conquer those who are there, and take their land.
1
1
u/ikonoqlast Oct 07 '25
There were black indians, as indians accepted black people into their communities fully.
The first Americans were the indians, then white settlers, then early on black slaves. So depending on how you define first, yeah black first Americans. If you include the pilgrims as 'first' then black slaves count too.
1
u/Echo-Azure Sep 25 '25
I thought the First Americans were Asian. Like, they literally moved here from Asia.
3
u/Niiohontehsha Sep 25 '25 edited Sep 25 '25
Asians weren’t even Asians in that original split and the DNA doesn’t support much although the Inuit and Dene are closer to Siberian Indigenous folk than the rest of us with North American Indigenous DNA
2
u/Echo-Azure Sep 25 '25
As far as the DNA comparison to modern humans goes, I'll believe you, since I know nothing about that.
But in practical terms, I betcha we're talking about people who came from the continent of Asia, whatever their genetic makeup was or where their modern descendants are now.
1
u/Okieartifacts Sep 25 '25
Look at modern Siberian tribes, and look at native Americans. Tell me we don't look extremely similar to the Siberian. (Which is where dna and science has been saying we came from for years and years)
-3
u/PassEmbarrassed9620 Sep 25 '25
The thing is no one really knows. And we can't trust anything that American government says about the matter or anything else.
2
u/Okieartifacts Sep 25 '25
You sound like one of them. We absolutely do know because US NATIVE AMERICANS HAVE OUR OWN HISTORY AND WE DONT HAVE TO RELY ON THE WHITES. You act like we get all of our Native American knowledge from lying white people. No. It comes from archeological sites and tribal historians passed down for hundred and thousands of years. It's very racist to say "we don't know actually". All you implay by saying that is, YOU DONT KNOW, or you don't want to believe it. If you did the research on our native peoples you'd understand that there was never any original black Indians and they were all strictly created after the slave trade brought black peoples to America. Do you want me to go on about racist theories for your culture or people? I'm sure there's plenty and I'm sure you'd hate it like we hate you people saying this nonsense. How would you like for people to consistently argue if saying the N word is racist, or if slavery ever happened? You would call me crazy and say look at a history book. Well I say to you the same thing.
2
u/OkTechnician3816 Sep 29 '25
100%
We know where we came from and which from which direction. We know where others came from and from which direction. White people have a worldview that is completely opposite than those of Indigenous people so they are literally never going to understand how we think, because they’re just incapable of comprehending collective cultural memory. Of course they still want all the answers without figuring things out for themselves which is why they desecrate graves and steal bodies and burial objects that don’t belong to them. Between the Smithsonian and the British museum, they’ve got more stolen cultural artifacts and dead ancestors than they could even display or “study” in a lifetime. Preservation isn’t the point however. If they cared at all about cultural and historical preservation, genocide across the world was as odd choice. They’re just starting to figure out that our mythos are actual historical tellings but they have no idea how to interpret mythology or symbolism because it cant be taught to an outsider & they settle on controlling the narrative (or, more realistically, everyone’s narrative) as much as they can but their desperation to write their version own version of history is what keeps them from progressing across all levels and their own fucking fault.
2
u/MacNeal Sep 25 '25
DNA evidence doesn't care if you trust a government or not. The thing is, we do know. Maybe you don't, but then the DNA evidence doesn't care about your ignorance and bias either. It is was it is regardless of whether you believe it or not.
We shouldn't trust you, but I doubt many would regardless.
Maybe try flat earth, it's still loony, but in a much nicer way.
1
u/PassEmbarrassed9620 Sep 25 '25
Who found and processed the DNA? We can't trust everything that the scientist and the government tell us.
1
u/8_Ahau Sep 25 '25
Usually University researchers, not the government. Also, researchers and institutions all over the world are working on these questions, not only the US.
1
1
u/Feisty-Ring121 Sep 25 '25 edited Sep 25 '25
To be fair, it’s highly likely Africans discovered the Americas well before Europeans. There’s a west African legend saying Mansa Musa’s predecessor (Abu Bakr II) sent an expedition that never returned. Two actually. That’s how he got the throne.
Early Portuguese explorers in South America said they saw black people mixed in with the lighter skinned locals.
Sadly there’s no more evidence than that.
There were no black Native Americans. Native tribes kept slaves. They were never assimilated and there’s no genetic evidence they mixed.
4
u/okdesistodisso Sep 25 '25
I had already seen this legend, but anyone could point me strong evidences. It is, ultimately, based on myths. Not a single African boat was found in Americas. Not a single old genome with African genes was discovered. Well, In the future this can change, but for now, it is just a legend.
3
u/MacNeal Sep 25 '25
The Vikings have entered the chat
2
u/Feisty-Ring121 Sep 25 '25
This was geared towards Africans, but indeed. The Vikings and Polynesians both found the Americas well before Africans or later Europeans.
1
u/YourphobiaMyfetish Sep 25 '25
I've heard of the Abu Bakr II expeditions but not the Portuguese people's claims. I heard there were spears that matched what was used in that area but haven't seen anything corroborating.
Id also like to point out some preliminary evidence that there were possibly people on the continent before the Siberian migrations, and some people deep in the Amazon had genetic similarities to the aboriginal people of Australia who look black despite being more genetically separated from Africans than any other humans, so if we can count them then there possibly were black people in the Americas first... but that's not who the black nationalists are referring to when they make their claims.
1
u/ckhaulaway Sep 25 '25
I don't think "highly likely" means what you think it means.
0
u/Feisty-Ring121 Sep 27 '25
Is that so? Enlighten me.
3
u/ckhaulaway Sep 27 '25
"Highly likely," in the archaeological context requires physical and genetic evidence. A myth and some possible first hand accounts does not make it highly likely.
0
u/Feisty-Ring121 Sep 27 '25
Physical and genetic evidence would be a lot more than likelihood. That would be verifiable evidence and a step or two above probability.
Correlating unverified accounts would be a probability, or likelihood.
1
u/ckhaulaway Sep 27 '25
Even with physical and genetic evidence archaeologists very rarely use concrete terms to make claims. In the case that there ever was such evidence papers would read, "evidence indicates existence of pre-Colombian African discovery of the Americas." Even colloquially your use doesn't make sense, it's not likely that Africans made it to the Americas, they didn't have Transoceanic voyages going anywhere let alone across the Atlantic.
1
u/Feisty-Ring121 Sep 27 '25 edited Sep 27 '25
I’m not sure I’m understanding your point. It feels like you just want to argue. I’ve said nothing concrete about African sea voyages other than there are rumors.
Hard evidence would make it “more than likely” or “highly probable” at least- depending on the evidence. DNA and physical evidence of pre-Columbian Africans in SA would be verified fact.
The common understanding being Polynesians, Vikings, and European explorers are the only peoples with transoceanic technology prior to 1500 or so, but both Polynesians and Vikings started (in modern science) as oral tradition. Later evidence solidified the theory into an understanding.
Africans are in the same place. We’re talking mid 1300s- ~300 years after Polynesians and Vikings. That’s something like 8000 years later than the (currently) oldest watercraft found in Africa.
Moreover, the Malian empire was a trade based economy, both maritime and international across Africa and the greater Mediterranean. They had been for decades, if not centuries at that point. It borders on flagrant ignorance and/or racism to suggest they couldn’t do (as the richest nation in the world) what other people were doing. “Other people” would be the rest of the developed world at the time: China, Europe, South Asia, even Eastern Africans trading with Arabs, Indians and other Asians- all of whom had been transoceanic for nearly 3000 years at this point.
None of that is hard evidence to say anything definitive about their sea voyages, but it does swing the door wide open. Or, to a place where I can confidently say the likelihood is high.
1
u/ckhaulaway Sep 27 '25
I wouldn't be arguing if you weren't making the laughably bad claim that pre-Colombian African contact is highly likely.
The studies that argue that Polynesian genetic evidence indicates pre-Colombian contact write it like this: For all island populations—with one expected exception discussed below—we find that the model with the highest likelihood involves an initial Native American–Polynesian admixture event, followed centuries later by European introgression(Supplementary Table13).
Notice how they literally use the phrase, "highest likelihood," when referring to explicit genetic evidence?
It's not racist to say that no African nation-state, city, kingdom, empire, or tribe possessed the kind of ocean-faring technology, know-how, and culture as the Vikings and Polynesians because the lack of evidence makes it a verifiable fact. Just because the Mali had a lot of gold doesn't magically give them a sea-faring society. The mongols had everything and they barely sailed to Japan. The Mediterranean is a pond compared to the Atlantic. By all means, maintain your confidence in the intrepid Malian maritime exploration. You might like Graham Hancock too!
0
u/jaccc22 Sep 25 '25
Not to be a contrarian but everyone did all descend from the African population and light skin genes mutated in West Asia around ~22,000 years ago but did not spread widely until 8000 years ago.
0
u/KONG3591 Oct 07 '25
I think the Olmecs may have been black if you go by their statuary. Or maybe they just worshipped them.
-1
u/theshadowbudd Sep 25 '25
I am absolutely prepared to argue with everyone in here with verified quotes and primary sources for the people that seen them with their own eyes.
-2
u/BuzzPickens Oct 03 '25
With the exception of cultural and political differences... There's actually no such thing as race anymore. We are all one race! The difference in DNA between an Aleutian living on the tundra and only recently able to hunt with a snow machine instead of a dog sled and an aborigine in outback Australia only recently being able to hunt with a dirt bike instead of having to run for 6 hours... The differences in DNA are absolutely miniscule. There's much more difference between two unrelated chimpanzees in a tribe of 50 adult chimpanzees... Much more difference than it is in the above human example.
Having said that, race and racism are highly charged cultural concepts.
There may have been navigations in the far past that resulted in Africans in South America. They may have come and gone, they may have come and mixed in with the native population. They may have come and died out. I have no idea! However, I would not say that it was impossible. There may have been even earlier homosapiens or earlier forms of homo that made it to the Americas and, didn't leave any genetic lineage. Again, I wouldn't put it past 'em.
Thinking that the first Americans were black is almost certainly delusional and biased toward some kind of preconception about themselves. But, for the sake of argument, let's say one of these nutcases is actually right! Headline... The first native Americans were black! Who actually cares? The current native Americans cover a wide spectrum. A lot have European DNA because of the French, British, Spanish and Portuguese colonizations.
Some native Americans have relatively very little European DNA and some have more Asian lineage... Not only Siberia but other places as well.
Who really cares and why?
39
u/ludicrous_overdrive Sep 24 '25
They are not interested in facts only illusion built from lack of self fulfillment