The
Impact of 11/2 on Muslim Americans
By Dr Muqtedar Khan
Chair, Political Science Department
Adrian College, US
In an unexpected
turn of events, incumbent George W. Bush by getting
re-elected has orchestrated a revolution under
the cover of elections.
His reelection and the gains made by the Republican
Party in the two houses of the Congress have made
Washington a bastion of American conservatism.
Adding insult to injury the Democrats senate leader
Tom Daschle was defeated signaling the absolute
hold of the Republicans in the American government.
The victory was comprehensive. It leaves those
who reflect upon the nature of America and its
future with a very profound and serious question.
Are these results indicative of a fundamental
change in American political culture or are they
merely the consequence of transitory factors such
as the war on terror, a weak Democratic candidate
and the manipulative skills of a Machiavellian
genius - Karl Rove - the political strategist
behind the Bush campaign?
If this was a fluke then the liberals and progressive
elements in the country must prepare to launch
a better campaign in 2008 with a powerful candidate.
Time to search for a Clinton clone, politically
capable of running from the center with confidence
and culturally acceptable to the Deep South.
There is no doubt that John Kerry in spite of
his extraordinary performance in the debates and
his remarkable recovery in the last week was inherently
weak on the electability scale. The fact that
he was the most electable of all Democratic candidates
does not bode well for the party. John Kerry is
a liberal democrat from Massachusetts, the Mecca
of American liberalism, a “believing”,
Catholic and a Senator. According to a Pew Survey,
only 20% of the American population is liberal
and 34% is conservative. According to The New
Republic 29% of the voting electorate in 2000
was conservative but in 2004 the conservative
constituted 34% of the electorate. This demographic
edge forces Democrats to run from a position much
to their right, while the Republicans have to
make fewer adjustments.
Increasingly analysts all over are converging
on the singular role of evangelical Christian
turnout at the polls to explain the election outcome.
They argue that George W. Bush managed to preserve
his formidable Christian coalition, even added
to it, and thereby regained the White House on
the strength of the “Christian Vote. In
spite of losing the debates, scoring consistently
around only 50% on job approval ratings for months,
clearly appearing to have lost control on his
most important project, Iraq, failing to bring
Bin Laden to justice and while presiding over
a very troublesome economy, George W. Bush managed
to carve out a major historic victory. It cannot
be a fluke; there is more to this than meets the
eye.
Many analysts argue that Karl Rove was able to
mobilize and expand the Christian vote bloc by
manipulating wedge issues such as gay marriage
and abortion. Does this mean that the Christian
vote bloc will vote for its candidate regardless
of his or her effectiveness? Certainly not.
The Christian Bloc Vote
It is my contention that in the last three years,
since the attacks of September 11th, deeply religious
Americans have experienced an existential anxiety
that is translating into a political backlash
that is threatening American secularism, American
democracy and America’s traditional respect
for international law and international public
opinion.
Unlike Europe, American has always been a religious
nation. Alexis Tocqueville in 1831 claimed that
religion was the first political institution of
American democracy. On November 2 saw this first
political institution unleash a backlash against
the assault on Christianity from Muslims; therefore
the support for Bush’s irrational and bloody
foreign policy, therefore the across the board
support for ban on gay marriage. Oklahoma, Arkansas,
Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana,
North Dakota, Ohio, Utah and Oregon passed constitutional
amendments banning gay marriages. A large number
of voters, nearly 25%, said that the primary issue
for them was “moral values”. Moral
values are being widely understood as the Christian
conservative opposition to gay marriage and abortion
rights. But I suspect there is more to it.
The rise of political Christianity, a coalition
of white born again Christians, conservative Catholics,
conservative African Americans and conservative
Hispanics, is concerned with more than gay marriages
and abortion rights. Political Christianity seeks
to breach the wall of separation between the Church
and State and wishes to make this country a Christian
nation.
America has been experiencing nativist resurgence
along with the rise of a form of Christianity
- evangelical - that is both self righteous and
“untraditional”. It is unwilling to
compromise and is uncomfortable with enduring
American traditions of religious tolerance, freedom
of conscience, fundamental equality of all and
appreciation for diversity. This nativism can
be heard in the calls for restoring America’s
moral values and in political works of scholars
such as Sam Huntington who ask, “Who are
we?” or in the fears of Pat Buchanan who
declares “The Death of the West”.
George W. Bush has returned to the White House
on these nativist fears. He is probably convinced
that God is firmly in his corner and his mission
to “save America” is indeed divine.
He is going to charge into battle against dragons
overseas and wrestle monsters at home.
On November 2nd political Christianity captured
the White House, the Senate, the House in Congress
and the Supreme Court. Bush is expected to appoint
anywhere between 2-4 Supreme Court judges which
already enjoys a 5-4 conservative edge. With every
branch of the government under control - effectively
neutralizing the much-touted divisions of power
in the American constitution - political Christianity
has taken American democracy hostage.
It is time for American Muslims, American Jews,
American Hindus and Buddhists, American Christians
who are moderate, secular and liberal, to come
together to form a moderate and pragmatic center,
eschewing the aggressive anti-religiosity of the
extreme left, respecting the religiosity of the
right, to restore balance, and preserve American
democracy and its traditionally balanced relationship
with its first institution - religion.
For American Muslims the comprehensive victory
of political Christianity in the American elections
holds many lessons if only they are willing to
learn.
For months our leaders and organizations have
bragged as to how American Muslims were going
to vote for Kerry in large numbers refusing to
acknowledge that there is a constituency for Bush
in the Muslim community. Thus alienating not only
George Bush and his millions of supporters but
also those Muslims who support Bush. I had consistently
argued against any endorsement, but our wise leaders
chose to issue a strangely worded “qualified”
endorsement of John Kerry which was welcomed by
neither camp and much pilloried by moderate Muslims.
American Muslims who have less than 2 million
votes [six million Muslims are not all adults
and citizens] seem to be under the illusion that
they are the only people who have understood and
discovered the power of bloc voting. The Christian
bloc has sent them a message that they can ignore
only at their peril.
The analysis of leading Muslim organizations was
very weak, only party centered and focused only
on issues that concern American Muslims or Muslims
abroad.
American Muslims cannot become effective players
if they do not immerse themselves into the politics
of this country and engage with it as an inside
player and not as an outsider manipulating it
for partisan gain.
The American identity is gradually changing. What
we saw on 11/2 was just the tip of the iceberg.
American Muslims have to think hard about what
position they wish to occupy in the New Republic
and fight even harder to get it. American Muslims
must respect the diversity within the community
and use it as a strategic asset rather than trying
to impose a false unity that will crack under
pressure.
American Muslims will likely face a tough future.
President Bush has clearly conveyed that he sees
his electoral victory as an endorsement of his
agenda. He will renew the Patriot Act and may
even expand it. He will continue to seek regime
change overseas with increased vigor. Some of
our homelands may have to contend with the enhanced
energy in the White House.
Recommendations for the American Muslim Community
We cannot fight this agenda on all its fronts.
We must prioritize and throw all our energies
behind the key issues. My recommendations to Muslims
is to dump ideology, specially the Islamist ideology
which is the mirror image of political Christianity,
and adopt a pragmatic approach designed to protect
the American Muslim community and work towards
integrating it with American mainstream. Forget
foreign policy [unless you teach foreign policy
for a living] focus on local issues. Build local
bridges, local relationships.
Most importantly launch joint projects with local
churches and synagogues and I do not mean “dialogues”,
engage in civic and social projects. Nothing integrates
more than doing things together, fighting battles
together.
Teach our children to be proud Americans and proud
of Islam, curb the anti-
American discourse. Community leaders must learn
to be able to distinguish between criticisms of
government policies - this is healthy and necessary
- and simple anti-Americanism - this is dangerous
and will undermine the community.
We must learn about American history and American
present. It is important to know and understand
what is happening in this country of ours. American
Muslims have tried to cerate a sophisticated and
a rich Islamic ghetto in America, engaging with
America only on our terms, it is time to come
out of this ghetto and meet America on its terms.
There is a battle raging for the soul of America,
let’s partake in it and leave our mark on
what America becomes.
(M. A. Muqtedar Khan is Chair of the Political
Science Department at Adrian College and a Nonresident
Fellow of the Brookings Institution. His website
is www.ijtihad.org. This study was sponsored by
the Institute of Social Policy and Understanding
(www.ispu.us).
