European settlers to Native people: “Your ancestors came through Asia—so you’re Asian.”
Let’s talk about that.
Geographically, Europe isn’t truly a separate continent. It’s part of Eurasia, a continuous landmass divided only by arbitrary markers like the Ural Mountains and the Caucasus. The idea of Europe as distinct from Asia has no geological or anthropological basis—it’s a cultural and colonial construct, rooted in Greco-Roman worldviews and later reinforced by European imperial ideologies.
Meanwhile, the ancestry of modern European populations is deeply rooted in West and Central Asia. Modern humans migrated out of Africa, passed through Asia tens of thousands of years ago, and entered Europe in multiple waves. The earliest were Paleolithic hunter-gatherers, arriving around 45,000 years ago. Today, their genetic contribution is a minority in most of Europe, though it persists more strongly in isolated regions. Around 9,000 years ago, Anatolian farmers spread into Europe, bringing agriculture and reshaping the continent’s genetic and cultural landscape. Then, around 5,000 years ago, steppe pastoralists from the Pontic-Caspian region—descendants of Central Asian populations—swept into Europe, fundamentally transforming its demography and laying the foundation for many of today’s Indo-European languages.
If ancient migration from Asia makes someone “Asian,” then by that logic, modern Europeans—whose ancestry includes multiple, relatively recent waves from Asia—would certainly qualify.
As for Indigenous peoples of the Americas, their story is older and far more complex than the narratives settlers used to justify colonization. The simplistic Bering Land Bridge theory—that humans crossed into the Americas only around 13,000 years ago and quickly spread south—has been discredited. While Beringia did exist, it was not just a passageway. It was an expansive and ecologically rich region where ancestral Native populations likely lived for thousands of years before moving further into the Americas.
More importantly, archaeological evidence now confirms that humans were present in the Americas much earlier than once believed. Monte Verde in Chile shows signs of human presence around 14,500 years ago. The submerged Page–Ladson site in Florida confirms a similar date. But the most critical evidence comes from White Sands National Park in New Mexico, where fossilized human footprints—dated between 21,000 and 23,000 years ago—have been verified through radiocarbon dating of seeds, stratigraphic analysis, and pollen records. These findings place humans in North America during the Last Glacial Maximum, when traditional models claimed migration was impossible.
At Cooper’s Ferry, Idaho, tools and projectile points dated to 15,000–16,000 years ago suggest established, complex societies long before the so-called “ice-free corridor” opened. This supports the theory of an earlier Pacific coastal migration, likely involving seafaring peoples. Some contested sites—like Chiquihuite Cave in Mexico and Santa Elina in Brazil—even suggest possible human activity as early as 27,000 to 30,000 years ago. While debate continues around these older dates, the overall consensus is clear: humans have been in the Americas far longer than settler narratives allowed.
Inuit and Yupik communities do have more recent genetic links to Siberia, arriving roughly 4,000 to 5,000 years ago. But they are exceptions. The vast majority of Indigenous peoples in the Americas have been genetically and culturally distinct from Asian populations for tens of thousands of years—longer than Europeans have been. Their lineages diverged well before the categories of “Asian” or “European” even existed.
Setters used this ancient migration across Beringia as a tool to delegitimize Indigenous identity—flattening millennia of cultural development into a vague, ahistorical “Asian” label to undermine sovereignty and justify land theft. Meanwhile, those same settlers—whose own ancestors passed through Asia much more recently—are never labeled “Asian.” And if they were, Europeans would contest severely.
Why? Because it was never about consistency or science. It was about power, control, and erasure. Calling Native peoples “Asian” is a rhetorical tool of dispossession. Calling Europeans the same? Apparently unthinkable.
It was not anthropology. It was settler colonial gaslighting.
From my friend Layla, who is Riffian Amazigh.
Geographically, Europe isn’t truly a separate continent. It’s part of Eurasia, a continuous landmass divided only by arbitrary markers like the Ural Mountains and the Caucasus. The idea of Europe as distinct from Asia has no geological or anthropological basis—it’s a cultural and colonial construct, rooted in Greco-Roman worldviews and later reinforced by European imperial ideologies.
Meanwhile, the ancestry of modern European populations is deeply rooted in West and Central Asia. Modern humans migrated out of Africa, passed through Asia tens of thousands of years ago, and entered Europe in multiple waves. The earliest were Paleolithic hunter-gatherers, arriving around 45,000 years ago. Today, their genetic contribution is a minority in most of Europe, though it persists more strongly in isolated regions. Around 9,000 years ago, Anatolian farmers spread into Europe, bringing agriculture and reshaping the continent’s genetic and cultural landscape. Then, around 5,000 years ago, steppe pastoralists from the Pontic-Caspian region—descendants of Central Asian populations—swept into Europe, fundamentally transforming its demography and laying the foundation for many of today’s Indo-European languages.
If ancient migration from Asia makes someone “Asian,” then by that logic, modern Europeans—whose ancestry includes multiple, relatively recent waves from Asia—would certainly qualify.
As for Indigenous peoples of the Americas, their story is older and far more complex than the narratives settlers used to justify colonization. The simplistic Bering Land Bridge theory—that humans crossed into the Americas only around 13,000 years ago and quickly spread south—has been discredited. While Beringia did exist, it was not just a passageway. It was an expansive and ecologically rich region where ancestral Native populations likely lived for thousands of years before moving further into the Americas.
More importantly, archaeological evidence now confirms that humans were present in the Americas much earlier than once believed. Monte Verde in Chile shows signs of human presence around 14,500 years ago. The submerged Page–Ladson site in Florida confirms a similar date. But the most critical evidence comes from White Sands National Park in New Mexico, where fossilized human footprints—dated between 21,000 and 23,000 years ago—have been verified through radiocarbon dating of seeds, stratigraphic analysis, and pollen records. These findings place humans in North America during the Last Glacial Maximum, when traditional models claimed migration was impossible.
At Cooper’s Ferry, Idaho, tools and projectile points dated to 15,000–16,000 years ago suggest established, complex societies long before the so-called “ice-free corridor” opened. This supports the theory of an earlier Pacific coastal migration, likely involving seafaring peoples. Some contested sites—like Chiquihuite Cave in Mexico and Santa Elina in Brazil—even suggest possible human activity as early as 27,000 to 30,000 years ago. While debate continues around these older dates, the overall consensus is clear: humans have been in the Americas far longer than settler narratives allowed.
Inuit and Yupik communities do have more recent genetic links to Siberia, arriving roughly 4,000 to 5,000 years ago. But they are exceptions. The vast majority of Indigenous peoples in the Americas have been genetically and culturally distinct from Asian populations for tens of thousands of years—longer than Europeans have been. Their lineages diverged well before the categories of “Asian” or “European” even existed.
Setters used this ancient migration across Beringia as a tool to delegitimize Indigenous identity—flattening millennia of cultural development into a vague, ahistorical “Asian” label to undermine sovereignty and justify land theft. Meanwhile, those same settlers—whose own ancestors passed through Asia much more recently—are never labeled “Asian.” And if they were, Europeans would contest severely.
Why? Because it was never about consistency or science. It was about power, control, and erasure. Calling Native peoples “Asian” is a rhetorical tool of dispossession. Calling Europeans the same? Apparently unthinkable.
It was not anthropology. It was settler colonial gaslighting.
From my friend Layla, who is Riffian Amazigh.
36-40, M
