Topic: Lineage

The ADOS hashtag, popularized by Yvette Carnell and Tone Talks, is described as a powerful tool for identifying a specific political lineage and making concrete demands. The hosts suggest this movement effectively derailed Kamala Harris's initial primary run by rejecting her as a "packaged product" forced upon black voters.

A heated exchange between Don Lemon and April Ryan explores whether Kamala Harris should be classified as African American. While Ryan argues that Harris's "blackness" is sufficient, Lemon insists there is a meaningful distinction in lineage that should not be ignored, a stance the hosts find surprisingly authentic for the CNN anchor.

The discussion shifts to the strict class and caste systems in the UK, where social standing is determined by birth rather than wealth. The hosts speculate on conspiracy theories regarding Prince Harry's true parentage and the death of Princess Diana. They suggest that if Harry believed his mother was targeted by the institution, it would provide a logical motive for his desire to see the monarchy's traditional structure dismantled.

Mo identifies as a social conservative, clarifying that he values the "patriarchy" as a system of male responsibility. They play a clip from the show *Billions* featuring a character giving "old school" advice on marriage and family. Mo argues that the destruction of the masculine principle leads to social instability and that lineage is the primary source of self-identity.

Don Lemon criticizes the ADOS (African Descendants of Slaves) movement, suggesting it is influenced by Russian bots and is "discriminatory" for seeking specific benefits for slave descendants. He argues for the "power in numbers" found in the broader "people of color" designation. The hosts accuse Lemon of selling out his own lineage to satisfy corporate and political interests, noting that the distinction of lineage is a common topic in black families.

A past clip shows Don Lemon arguing with April Ryan, where he previously acknowledged a distinction between being "Black" and "African American." In that instance, Lemon noted that Kamala Harris is a woman of color but questioned if she fits the "African American" lineage. The hosts highlight the contradiction between this past stance and his current dismissal of ADOS identity as a "Russian bot" talking point.

The hosts compare the ADOS claim for reparations to a shareholder class action lawsuit against a corporation like Monsanto. They argue that being ADOS is equivalent to holding a share of stock in the United States between 1619 and 1968, entitling the holder to a settlement regardless of how they spend the money. This framework is intended to separate those with a specific lineage of American slavery from other Black immigrants, potentially ending a "victimization mentality" through paperwork and verification.

The concept of "parent privilege"—growing up in a two-parent household—is identified as a more significant factor in success than race alone. The discussion touches on the psychological weight of identity and why individuals like Rachel Dolezal attempt to "pass" into different racial groups. Ultimately, maintaining one's true lineage is presented as a source of personal strength and home.

A donor from Virginia, "Sir Daddio," defends his pride in Southern lineage and the Confederate flag, pushing back against the "terrorist" label. Moe clarifies that he respects lineage but uses the term "terrorist" based on the political right's own definitions of treason. Another donor, Buford Kocik Jr., receives "relationship Mo Karma" during a personal crisis.

A clip from The Karen Hunter Show featuring Nicole Hannah-Jones introduces the criteria for reparations, specifically the "ten-year rule" requiring individuals to have lived as Black for a decade. The hosts explore the complexities of tracing ancestry back to American slavery as defined by economist Sandy Darity. They express a preference for identifying by lineage rather than titles created by external entities.

A tangent explores how other groups, such as Jewish people or Polish immigrants, have historically changed their names to assimilate, referencing a Michael Keaton film. The hosts discuss the emotional weight of a last name as a link to one's ancestors. They also remark on how quickly ancestry research can reveal unexpected roots in places like Ireland or pre-colonial America.

A clip from The Conservative Twins argues that Black Americans should not call themselves "African-American" because they were not born in Africa. While the hosts find the delivery "cringey," they agree with the distinction between nationality and lineage. They discuss the lack of the term "European-American" and why ADOS is a more precise term for their specific historical experience.

The hosts observe that Black American athletes never compete for African national teams in the Olympics or World Cup, reinforcing their American nationality. They criticize "cloaking mechanisms" used to avoid embracing one's true lineage, referencing Elizabeth Warren's past claims. The discussion emphasizes that while nationality is American, lineage remains a vital, separate component of identity.

The ADOS (American Descendants of Slavery) movement is presented as an effort to redefine identity based on lineage rather than a vague racial color. The hosts discuss various terms like "Foundational Black Americans" and "Native Blacks," noting that they all represent a desire to move away from preselected labels. They argue that the term ADOS serves as a "useful code" that immediately establishes a shared historical relationship.

A debate between Don Lemon and April Ryan highlights the distinction between being "black" and "African American" in the context of lineage. Lemon argues that while Harris is a black woman, her Jamaican and Indian heritage means she does not share the specific "African American" experience of descendants of U.S. slaves.

The New York Times article highlights tensions regarding the casting of a British actress to play Harriet Tubman, a move criticized by many Native Black Americans. This serves as a flashpoint for the distinction between "Native Blacks" (those with ancestral links to U.S. slavery) and black immigrants from Africa or the Caribbean. A distinction is made between ADOS as a political group versus ADOS as a specific lineage, with the term "Native Black American" (NBA) or "Foundational Black American" (FBA) used to clarify these identities.

In an interview with VladTV, Lord Jamar discusses his inability to trace his mother's side of the family while knowing his father's side is from Guyana. He suggests that his lack of support for ADOS might stem from the fact that he would not personally benefit from reparations. The hosts criticize this perspective as hypocritical, noting that immigrants often maintain distinct national identities until the topic of specific American lineage arises.

The distinction between ADOS as a biological lineage and ADOS as a political organization is debated. The hosts argue that conflating the two allows leaders to claim authority over an entire ethnic group for political purposes. They express disappointment that the leadership is having these disputes publicly on social media rather than privately, which weakens the movement's leverage.

The ADOS movement focuses on specific lineage tracing back to American chattel slavery and sharecropping rather than broad racial categories. The mantra "cut the check" emphasizes that reparations are a debt for services rendered, not a social program subject to government oversight on how the money is spent. The hashtag #Tangibles2020 represents a growing segment of voters who refuse to participate in elections unless specific, tangible benefits are offered to the ADOS community.