Election
2004 - Milestones of Muslim Activism
By Lisette Poole
CA
Now that the results of an
epic election are in and collective attention
is beginning to move from ‘what’ to
‘why’, the time has come to take stock
of the American Muslim activism which scored several
“Firsts” and has etched an acknowledged,
permanent place for itself in the political arena.
Since 1990, a slowly increasing majority of Muslims
have been concluding that as American citizens
they must participate in the American politics.
This trend has been significantly strengthened
since 9/11. By now an absolute majority of Muslim
Americans holds this view.
This analysis is focused on analyzing milestones
of American Muslim politics during the 2004 election
cycle.
During the 2004 election cycle, there were two
interesting developments: Ideological diversification
of the community, and a fork in the road faced
by the ideologically diverse community and its
representative organizations.
The ideological diversification was evident by
identification of Muslim groups and individuals
with a much larger set of ideas and organizations
including party platforms of Democratic, Republican,
Green, Libertarian, Reform, and Independent parties.
In no time, this led to the formation of “Muslims
for Bush”, “Muslims for Kerry”,
and “Muslims for Nader” websites and
support groups. These three divergent support
groups were started and staffed by American-born
sons and daughters of immigrant Muslims.
The community also witnessed the blossoming of
individual activists who played a useful role
in their respective parties. These included: Dr.
Islam Siddiqui, Usman Siddiq, Shahid Khan, Mukeet
Hussain, and Mahdi Bray in the Democratic Party;
the Hassan family, Zaheeruddin Ahmed, and Dr.
Yahya Basha in the Republican Party, Arif Khan
in the Libertarian Party, and Khusheed Khoja in
the Green Party.
Several Muslims were elected delegates to the
Democratic, Republican, Green, Libertarian, and
Reform party conventions. Under the able leadership
of Ambassador Syed Ahsani, Dr. Inayat Lalani and
Council Member Musroor Khan, the Muslim community
in Texas got an impressive number of their members
elected to DNC Convention in Boston. This year
about 20 Muslim Democrats were elected as delegates
and alternates, roughly one-third from Texas.
Guess who got AMA’s prestigious 2004 Malcolm
X award? Well this year, it was given to three
political parties. Green (received by its co-chair
Jo Chamberlain), Libertarian (received by its
presidential candidate Michael Badnarik), and
the Independents (received by Ralph Nader’s
running mate Peter Camejo).
Contemplate the above-discussed diversification
of the Muslim community and then imagine a loosely
organized coalition, with some of its members
having acquired new proclivities and preferences,
arriving at a fork in the road!
The question that the national organizations had
to answer was: should they strive for another
bloc vote, or divide themselves into several camps
– Democrats, Republicans, Green, etc. –
in keeping with the ideological preferences of
groups and individuals, or should they simply
ask community members to vote any which they like.
Well, on December 14, 2003, they decided to organize
themselves into a largest-ever, national coalition,
and gave it a somewhat longish name: The American
Muslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Elections,
but cleverly abbreviated it as AMT instead of
AMTCRE.
Its mandate came from several sources: 1) members
of member organizations (which include the largest
Muslim organizations in the United States), 2)
town hall meetings, 3) input from Muslim thinkers
and intellectuals, 4) input from distinguished
friends of the Muslim community, 5) community
input solicitation questionnaire, and 6) the resultant
consensual agenda
“What is the most effective way to conceptualize
and organize Muslim politics?” was the question
that the newly formed AMT faced. They decided
to conceptualize Muslim politics around key issues,
later labeled as the “Civil Rights Plus”
agenda. This agenda itself was drawn from a list
of overall objectives, which included the following:
1) becoming full partners in the defense, development
and prosperity of our homeland, the United States,
and 2) defending civil and human rights of all.
The next step was to have this agenda approved
by the American Muslim community, which led the
AMT to hold more than fifty town hall meetings.
"We are going to hold town hall meetings
all over the United States for the community and
for the candidates to engage in a dialogue where
we bring ourselves up to speed on these issues
and create common cause with fellow Americans,"
the AMT Chair Dr. Agha Saeed was quoted by the
Associated Press.
So impressive was the idea of these town hall
meetings – an all inclusive process of building
bottom-up democracy – that the state of
New York-based newspaper Observe-Dispatch editorially
applauded the AMT town hall meetings by writing:
“That's responsible citizenship”.
The same editorial also described Muslim Americans
as a role model for the nonparticipating Americans
to learn from.
The AMT initiated a process of consulting key
Muslim activists and intellectual, writer, thinkers
and poets. More than 100 individuals including
reliable friends of Muslims community such as
Paul Findley and Richard Curtiss were consulted
in person or over the phone.
For the first time 'progressive' Muslim intellectuals
(not those who have started donning this label
since 9/11 but those have a proven track record
of having espoused progressive ideas) were also
brought into the fold. These include Prof. Bashir
Hussain, editor, Encyclopedia of Capitalism and
the dean of Muslim progressives in America, the
working class intellectual Naseem Sarwar, and
the dissident poet Iftikhar Naseem, to name only
a few.
More than 10, 000 people were given a four-page
AMT input questionnaire during 50 plus town hall
meetings held all over the united states. As reported
in the mainstream media, 8, 000 people had participated
in the AMT mains session during the ISNA convention.
By organizing hospitality suites at Democratic,
Republican and Green Party Presidential Conventions,
in Boston, New York, and Milwaukee, respectively,
the AMT maintained vocal and visible presence
of Muslim American at all major power centers
and vigorously highlighted their demands for civil
liberties and social justice for all.
While ambitious individuals have been trying to
build politics of personal access and limit their
interaction with elected officials to their own
homes, the AMT has been conducting its events
and activities in public spaces with free and
open access.
Similarly, while others have been, wittingly or
unwittingly, trying to divide the Muslim vote
along ethnic lines – Pakistani, Iranians,
Turk, Indonesian, etc. – the AMT has been
reuniting the community.
Also, the AMT has played a central role in connecting
Muslim vote with demands for civil liberties and
social justice; it has furnished the contents
of American Muslim politics by holding educational
forum all across the United States.
What if the re-elected Bush Administration decides
to push forward
with the PATRIOT Act II? The AMT Board has already
assembled the core elements of a nationwide civil
rights coalition to create a common cause with
fellow Americans, garner insights from previous
movements and struggles, and to remain seized
of the larger picture.
AMT’s ‘multiparty strategy’
is perhaps the most impressive of all its achievements.
First of all, it does not imply endorsing a third
party. It means working with multiple parties
while staying in the mainstream. This ‘multiparty
strategy’ was clearly reflected in multiparty
endorsements issued by the AMA-PAC a few weeks
ago. The AMA-PAC has endorsed candidates from
all parties who support liberty and justice for
all.
The political setback suffered after 9/11 was
significantly, though not completely, rectified
in 2004. In its soon-to-be-released report, the
American Muslim Alliance (AMA) is expected to
list all the Muslim candidates who ran and won
in this year’s general election. At least
eight Muslim Americans ran for state level offices
in 2004. Many were elected.
It speaks very highly of the Muslim community
and its representative institutions that, despite
principled disagreement on the issue of endorsement,
The Los Angeles-based Muslim Public Affairs Council
(MPAC) continues to be an affiliate member of
AMT. Earlier the MPAC had decided to abstain from
supporting either Bush or Kerry because neither
candidate has publicly committed to support due
process and equal justice.
This unity without conformity testifies to the
fact the Muslim organizations have gained the
capacity to agree to disagree and continue to
work together “without throwing out the
baby with the bath water”.
The AMT succeeded in creating the second Muslim
bloc vote in 2004. The first Muslim bloc vote
took place in 2000. This time 93% Muslims had
voted together for Sen. Kerry to highlight their
demand for civil liberties and social justice.
Pakistan Post, a New York-based newspaper, summed
the impact of AMT’s qualified endorsement
in its headline: “AMT endorsement creates
a wave of joy in the Muslim community”.
(Lisette B. Poole, a freelance journalist based
in the San Francisco Bay area, also lecturers
at CSUH)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
