What's wrong with inclusiveness?

Page 4

Last month, dozens of Aboriginal people-including many leaders-used the pages of this publication to express their outrage at the hatred-based statements of David Ahenakew. And we were extremely proud to provide that space.

But let's not be hypocritical, folks. Windspeaker has over the years, and is still, following stories where First Nations leaders don't want Bill C-31s in their communities, and where Metis organizations don't want mixed blood people who aren't linked to the Red River Metis in their groups. In the past we've reported that the Kahnawake Mohawk council only want people who possess a certain amount of Mohawk blood and there have been many other similar examples across this land.

We've seen many Aboriginal leaders and many grassroots people condoning such exclusion, so this isn't going to make us any friends, but we've got to say it: this is racism, plain and simple. It would be hypocritical not to say that after last month's outpouring of anti-racist sentiment on our letters and editorial pages.

This publication has always been an enemy of racism. We've attacked it wherever we found it, including on reserves or in other Aboriginal communities. And we again state, as is always the case, not only is racism evil and hurtful and unfair and destructive, it's stupid.

It's stupid, because, in each of the instances mentioned earlier, it plays into the hands of the federal government. We believe all public governments in this country believe they have an "Indian problem." In most public policy we've seen there is at least a hint of resentment of Aboriginal rights and entitlements. An unspoken aim of most public policy is to reduce the cost of Aboriginal rights and entitlements to the point where one day they disappear. We're convinced of that. So excluding any Aboriginal person from any Aboriginal community is helping that agenda.

We noticed the undisguised tone of glee in all the press releases from all the Aboriginal political organizations that responded to the 2003 census numbers when they were released on Jan. 22. With numbers up 22 per cent since 1996 and the percentage of people in Canada who claim some Aboriginal ancestry now at 4.4 per cent, leaders were feeling that their political clout had risen along with those numbers and they weren't shy about demanding more attention. That's the way things work in a democracy.

Want to make the numbers rise faster and higher? Stop the exclusion.

Exclusion keeps the numbers down in the marginal range. Inclusion could take you into the 10 to 15 per cent range. In case you haven't been following the polls, that would put us in the company of the New Democratic Party, the Canadian Alliance, the Progressive Conservative Party and the Bloc Quebecois.

During an often-repeated public service announcement that was meant to discourage Native kids from committing suicide, Buffy Sainte-Marie years ago concluded "We need all the Indians we can get." She was right.

Excluding people because they are not quite Indian-enough for this group or that is suicide of a different kind- political to say the least.