What do you feel is the minimum percentage for Pride in heritage?

[Peterski]

Because my ancestors that came to New Netherlands were all Frisian.

So you have colonial ancestry from New Netherlands? I have a match on GEDmatch with a Quackenbush, I checked his GEDCOM and lots of his ancestry is colonial from New Netherlands. Perhaps you also have a match with him.

[Senpai]

So you have colonial ancestry from New Netherlands? I have a match on GEDmatch with a Quackenbush, I checked his GEDCOM and lots of his ancestry is colonial from New Netherlands. Perhaps you also have a match with him.

Yes, I do. My direct paternal ancestor was a New Netherlander from East Frisia. Perhaps I am.
Van Hoorn/Horn, Baerts, Dircks, Struddles, Van Zandt, Claessen among others.

[Senpai]

So you have colonial ancestry from New Netherlands? I have a match on GEDmatch with a Quackenbush, I checked his GEDCOM and lots of his ancestry is colonial from New Netherlands. Perhaps you also have a match with him.

I will check!

[Congolese Rice]

For me 2 be feel connected 2 a part of my heritage it should be higher than 10% otherwise it's nonexistant 2 me, except for my native american which is 2.30% but it's there so i guess i'm proud of that

[Leto]

To me if you are 3/4 X, you are basically fully X in the general sense. Of course, one may argue that such a person is still genetically 'not fully X', but IRL few people would pay attention to such nuances. Culturally such a person is definitely 100% X. However, nowadays there are people who would deliberately focus on a small 'exotic' part of their ancestry in order to belong to some kind of 'minority'. Hey, I'm 1/8 Jamaican, I'm not really English, white people oppress my people! That's just preposterous.
I would say that you need to have a least one grandparent of a certain ethnicity to really be connected to that ethnicity. Anything below 25% is too small to identify with seriously.

[Bobby Martnen]

To me if you are 3/4 X, you are basically fully X in the general sense. Of course, one may argue that such a person is still genetically 'not fully X', but IRL few people would pay attention to such nuances. Culturally such a person is definitely 100% X. However, nowadays there are people who would deliberately focus on a small 'exotic' part of their ancestry in order to belong to some kind of 'minority'. Hey, I'm 1/8 Jamaican, I'm not really English, white people oppress my people! That's just preposterous.
I would say that you need to have a least one grandparent of a certain ethnicity to really be connected to that ethnicity. Anything below 25% is too small to identify with seriously.

Someone who is 3/4 German and 1/4 Nigerian will never look fully German

[Senpai]

1/8 or higher, unless it's your direct paternal (surname) line, in which case it lasts forever.

Someone 1/64 Chinese with the last name Rankin is no different than any other White person.

Someone 1/64 Chinese with the last name Chong still has a tie to their Chinese heritage

Morrissey is not my last name. My last name is van Horn

[Blanka]

People should take pride in personal achievements, while heritage is rather something to cherish than to take pride in. And one should cherish all of their heritage that they are aware of or that affects them, so there is no lower limit.

This. I don't have any ethnicity above 1/3 - the rest is not even above 20% - because my parents are so mixed up themselves. I'm really just made up of quite many pie slices of various ethnicities. I find that rather interesting, but it comes with one "problem". I don't fit anywhere. I can claim no nation as mine if DNA is taken into account.

I didn't grow up in Finland from where I have my biggest share, which is at some 28-33%, depending on who you ask. I don't speak the language (or languages, since part of that heritage is Lantalaiset/Kveeni/Meänmaalaiset, and they speak their own Finnic language). It's a country/region that I've been cut off from and I have very little in common with them in general. But my native language and the country I grew up in isn't even in the top three ethnicities. Some around here would not even recognise it as an ethnicity I have any "right" to.

The common denominator is that everyone in my family as far back as the paper trail takes me has been very poor, some also belonging to groups that back when were stigmatised, which is why they even tried to hide who they were to their children, changed names and languages. They all tried to outrun poverty by moving someplace else to change things around. They knew no borders, nor other barriers.

On occasion I feel a bit rootless, but TBH I think it's a lot more interesting to have all these threads to pull on than if I didn't have such a mixed heritage. It's fun, and I cherish it, but it's not a whole lot to feel any pride about, because I didn't have anything to do with it. It was all just passed on to me. I thank all my ancestors for being in the right place at the right time. Without them I would not exist.

[dperucca]

I think that you can have pride in whatever you want. If you are >5% something though it starts it get silly.

[cosmoo]

Taking pride in being a mutt is beyond retarded. The first thing coming to my mind after reading this are Yankshits who are dominantly Limey, but with dozens of different ancestries down the line, taking pride in history of Europe as a whole, despite them being descended from the lowest gutter trash Europe had to offer.

The way I see it, you can not take pride even in your national history if your own ancestors by direct paternal lineages that you know of did not prove themselves with deeds and live up to the standards of those you deem great, and if you yourself do not uphold those same ideals with your own demeanor.