Copyright © 1998 NLThomas
All Rights Reserved

Cherokee Press Association
Copyright © 1998 CPA
All Rights Reserved

Cherokee Chief Joe Byrd says his tribe needs to heal the division created by a year-old constitutional crisis. But if Byrd is serious about healing, he needs to make sure his words foster that goal.

Unfortunately, in a recent interview with the Tulsa World, Byrd found the last rhetorical refuge of a scoundrel. When you can’t explain your own actions, attack the motives of your critics with the nuclear weapon of social discourse: Call them racists.

In the interview, Byrd posed the question that the criticism of his administration had something to do with he color of his skin and the fact he is a full-blood Cherokee.

This is considered healing?

We’re sure a tiny few would collapse for racial motives. But the vast majority of Byrd’s critics are themselves Native American or people who simply think he is hurting his tribe. In 1995, we applauded Byrd’s election as a first start for a tribe beset by political strife. But Byrd’s actions and words over the last year have shown he is too willing to put his personal political fortunes above his tribe’s. Many tribal members have come to a similar conclusion.

To imply a racial motive is behind such criticism is simply wrong, and horribly divisive.

It is possible to oppose Byrd and not be anti-Cherokee, just as it is possible to support the chief and advocate change within the tribe’s government.

Such debate is the cornerstone of democracy. It is healthy, necessary -- and has nothing to do with race.