Why should that be disturbing to some people? I think the vast majority of people, at least in America, have no idea where their ancestors came from. Is the usu

Why should that be disturbing to some people? I think the vast majority of people, at least in America, have no idea where their ancestors came from. Is the usual "I'm part Irish part German part Cherokee" meaningfully more satisfying than "I'm west African?" I don't think it's a good thing for people to attempt to derive any aspect of their identity from their genealogical ancestry, it has no bearing on who you are as a person, and has the potential for great harm. I've seen it used to give people a false sense of culture and belonging to a community that they previously had nothing to do with. If you felt a connection to a particular culture or identity, should we really be telling people that their genome is responsible for determining whether or not they can associate parts of those cultures with themselves? Racism results from a failure to separate identity from genome. If you listen to the dogma of a white supremacist, it's heavily predicated on associating the accomplishments of their "European" forefathers with themselves. If you listen to the dogma of a black supremacist, it's heavily predicated on assuming the identity of the Egyptians or Israelites and associating their accomplishments with themselves. I really think that if an individual is truly "disturbed" by not knowing the precise nature of their lineage, that is an individual in search of an identity on a plate, and therefore highly corruptible. The motivation to learn more about one's ancestry should ideally not surpass the level of an intellectual curiosity.