Future Political Agenda for the Muslims in USA

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
1

Elections 2004 are only few months away. I was interested to know the best possible strategy for the Muslims in USA for these upcoming elections. In addition, I would also like to discuss the future political agenda of Muslims in USA. Guppies can attempt to address the following types of questions:

*Should we support Kerry or Bush?
*Is it permissible for Muslims to participate in politics in America?
*Is it productive for Muslims to participate in politics in America?
*Should we be aligned with a single party?
*Should we be working to put Muslims in political office?
*Should we be working exclusively at one level (national, state, local) or should we divide our efforts?

2

Re: Future Political Agenda for the Muslims in USA

hey phoenixdesi

im not a Muslim in USA anymore, but i was kinda involved with Muslim political activism while in college in the US so this is a topic close to my heart so i'll take the liberty to post a reply in this thread :D maybe jus for old times sake :D hope thats ok :D :)

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by phoenixdesi: *
*Should we support Kerry or Bush?

[/QUOTE]

not really aware of their agendas. not been following the news abt em. so dono.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by phoenixdesi: *
*Is it permissible for Muslims to participate in politics in America?

[/QUOTE]

heck yeah they shud. if they're living there, they shud make their presence/voice heard. not just abt issues related to Muslims/ US foreign policy/ immigrants but abt each n every sphere of life in America

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by phoenixdesi: *
*Is it productive for Muslims to participate in politics in America?

[/QUOTE]

totally. we need Muslims in politics to bring abt favorable change and make the Muslim point of view heard and taken seriously. and just for Muslims to be a part of American society where they r living.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by phoenixdesi: *
*Should we be aligned with a single party?

[/QUOTE]

this is a tricky one. coz shud they otherwise make their own party? like "American Muslims Party" ? thats not gona go down too well in the US

hmmm

but NO. US Muslims should do their own thing and not align themselves with another party UNLESS that party's agenda also coincides with theirs. Allah will grant them success and strength inshallah. even if they start out small. from the very beginning tho they shud stick to the right stand and honorable stand and build their reputation on integrity. i dont believe that Muslims shud make compromises on principle issues just so they can align with a bigger party.

we sided with Bush last time and what did we get? we shudnt make that mistake.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by phoenixdesi: *
*Should we be working to put Muslims in political office?

[/QUOTE]

heck yeah, totally

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by phoenixdesi: *
*Should we be working exclusively at one level (national, state, local) or should we divide our efforts?
[/QUOTE]

efforts should be at ALL levels, wherever possible basically. might not be successful this time, but gotta start sumwhere

3

Get the 'permissibility' thing out of equation first, so we can focus on the rest of the more substantial issues. Otherwise, the issue is dead ab initio.

Muslims in the USA are in a bind right now, and I mean it in all seriousness. Bush is a babbling idiot and it is difficult to support him in light of Iraq and the anti-Muslim policies enforced within US by Ashcroft. At the same time, Kerry is as unconvincing as any on what his plans are for muslim world and for Iraq, and Dems historically have a very pro-Jews agenda. Then again, Dems are much better in terms of civil liberties within the US.

The rest of the answers are pretty straight forward, though interestingly, support by muslims is considered a death warrant in present geo-political situation. Many candidates have returned all donations sent by muslim supporters. Its a political hot potato and no worth while politician at national level can afford to have muslims support him/her. Tough, haan? :)

4

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *

Interestingly, Many candidates have returned all donations sent by muslim supporters. Its a political hot potato and no worth while politician at national level can afford to have muslims support him/her. Tough, haan? :)
[/QUOTE]

really faisal....wow....I did not know abt it.....and if that is the case it is no good for Muslims political future in USA at all...but I also know that shahid ali khan, a very prominent Pakistani- American democrat, was honored at this convention and that he has collected 10 million dollars for kerry....but again Khan’s example could be an exception…

5

Re: Future Political Agenda for the Muslims in USA

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by phoenixdesi: *
Elections 2004 are only few months away. I was interested to know the best possible strategy for the Muslims in USA for these upcoming elections. In addition, I would also like to discuss the future political agenda of Muslims in USA. Guppies can attempt to address the following types of questions:

*Should we support Kerry or Bush?
*Is it permissible for Muslims to participate in politics in America?
*Is it productive for Muslims to participate in politics in America?
*Should we be aligned with a single party?
*Should we be working to put Muslims in political office?
*Should we be working exclusively at one level (national, state, local) or should we divide our efforts?
[/QUOTE]

Phoenix ,
Here is my take on this issue. I am talking from my experience of democracy in India. Mind it, situtation in India is very comparable to USA when it comes to Muslims only thing is that in India number is a bigger. Almost 12-15% of total electorate.

One thing which works most is high participation in the process. Every person must go out and vote. If 90% Muslims can go & vote then everyone will notice simply because population will look twice than the actual population considering that overall poercentage of voting is less than 50% in this country.

Aligning totally with one party doesnt help. Because then the party you are aligned will takes you for a ride and other party doesnt care because they cant get your vote no matter what . Look at position of black in this country. 90% of them voted for Democrat last time inspite of efforts by Repulicans to win them in 2000. Result is , this time Republicans are not even putting an effort to win them over.

Another thing that works is not to vote based on smaller issues.
Think big and look for bigger issue. I remember in 2000 most of muslims didnt vote for democrat just because VP candidate was Jew.Was wondering what would have they done if Naom Chomsky was VP candidate.isnt he a Jew too?

Also be active and politics and be vocal. You need to be visible to be noticed. There are lots of issue on both the sides which intrest the community. On Repulican side Issue like Abortion & Gay-marriage are some issues, muslims feel very strongly about. But then guncontrol, war ,social welfare is another issue on which one can support dems.

6

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by phoenixdesi: *

but I also know that shahid ali khan, a very prominent Pakistani- American democrat, was honored at this convention and that he has collected 10 million dollars for kerry....but again Khan’s example could be an exception…
[/QUOTE]

Is'nt this just typical of capitalism today they say this system of democrohypocrisy is for any man who can be president but in reality its big businesses that call the shots. The kellogs the Chevrons and Texaco they are the ones that make decsions not the average joe!

The one with the most millions wins, how shallow can you get.

7

Muslims can take this as an exercise in self appraisal and find out if they are even capable of getting together for a cause.

Let's see some unity and voting as a 'block'.. and since the two sides of the same coin don't want Muslim money... it'll be better spent on a third party candidate..

8

Last time around (in 2000) muslims did get together (somewhat) and voted Bush. This was based on the notion that Clinton Administration did not support Palestinians all that much and Lieberman is a jew. After 4 years of Bush rule, its clear that while Clinton did made some effort to bring Palestinians and Israelis together on the negotiating table, Bush couldn't care less. While Clinton bombed the Serbs (to protect Albanian and Bosnian muslims), Bush orders hell-fires and bombing to kill thousands of muslims in Iraq.

In hindsight, perhaps some of the muslims feel they made a mistake by voting Bush in 2000. Practically, many of the muslims may again vote Bush in 2004, cz they don't see Kerry as any better.

Though, it is unlikely it will be a bloc voting on the part of muslims. It will be very difficult to convince most muslims to vote one way or the other.

9

Would Muslims gathering and living in a particular state help? Maybe if they increase their concentration in a particular area of the United States, they may be more united and seen as a strong voice. Maybe...just a thought..

10

Well voters in swing states are the most valuable.

[thumb=H]battlegroundstates12080_6349077.JPG[/thumb]

Check out

http://usinfo.state.gov/dhr/democracy/elections/battleground_states.html

11

[QUOTE]
Would Muslims gathering and living in a particular state help? Maybe if they increase their concentration in a particular area of the United States, they may be more united and seen as a strong voice. Maybe...just a thought..
[/QUOTE]

It worked for the church of latter day saints, who I've noticed share many similar traits with Islam btw. The problem is that anytime muslims have done this in other countries it just becomes a matter of time before they want to be independent, governed by Shariah laws. Next thing you know, Osama and company are involved.

12

[QUOTE]
Last time around (in 2000) muslims did get together (somewhat) and voted Bush. This was based on the notion that Clinton Administration did not support Palestinians all that much and Lieberman is a jew.
[/QUOTE]

Does anyone else see the irony in this? The Muslim block could be seen as the critical 1-3% that put the guy who started the war on Islam in the white house, all because they didn't want to vote for a jew.

13

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Stu: *
all because they didn't want to vote for a jew.
[/QUOTE]
I believe this particular aspect of the 2000 election is debated a number of times.

14

The politcal agenda of Muslims is far more complicated than voting as a block for Democrats or Republicans.

The most important part of politics is everyday access and contact with legislative and administrative people. It is getting face time with decsion makers on key legislation, like the Patriot Act for example. Catholics do not vote as a block, Jews do, but not as much as you would think, on social issues Muslims would probably align themselves with the Church of the later Day Saints, and the Religious Right!

15

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *
Last time around (in 2000) muslims did get together (somewhat) and voted Bush. This was based on the notion that Clinton Administration did not support Palestinians all that much and Lieberman is a jew. After 4 years of Bush rule, its clear that while Clinton did made some effort to bring Palestinians and Israelis together on the negotiating table, Bush couldn't care less. While Clinton bombed the Serbs (to protect Albanian and Bosnian muslims), Bush orders hell-fires and bombing to kill thousands of muslims in Iraq.

In hindsight, perhaps some of the muslims feel they made a mistake by voting Bush in 2000. Practically, many of the muslims may again vote Bush in 2004, cz they don't see Kerry as any better.

Though, it is unlikely it will be a bloc voting on the part of muslims. It will be very difficult to convince most muslims to vote one way or the other.
[/QUOTE]

I agree to you, faisal. Last time we Muslims did vote for Bush but now we realize that we made a mistake. But Now lets see what Kerry is saying:

“I want an America that relies on its own ingenuity and innovation – not the Saudi royal family."

No offense intended towards Senator Kerry, but this seemed pretty outrageous. Perhaps I was overanalyzing, but the implication here seemed to be oil = Saudi money = Wahhabism = terrorism. I think I am overstretching it and I also understand that he mentioned Saudi royal family with no direct attack on Islam but still the fact remains that john Kerry did mention Saudi royal family’s name in particular which is not a good sign for Muslims. And the same guy did talk to Sharon yesterday. At least it tells us about his present mind setup. On the other hand, President Bush has certainly never said anything like this. But now we have a clear contrast between the two parties. Republicans think that America's problems in the Middle East come from dictatorial regimes like Iran and Iraq (at least that is what they say on record). Democrats think they come from the Saudi Arabia, which is the centre of our religion. So I guess we Muslims are facing a serious dilemma this time.

16

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by phoenixdesi: *
but the implication here seemed to be oil = Saudi money = Wahhabism = terrorism. I think I am overstretching it and I also understand that he mentioned Saudi royal family with no direct attack on Islam but still the fact remains that john Kerry did mention Saudi royal family’s name in particular which is not a good sign for Muslims.
[/QUOTE]
Personally speaking, I wouldn't lose sleep over Saudi Royal family being linked to terrorism. In my view, they probably are, anyway. If Kerry made that leap, the guy is a genius. Problem is, this will result in colossal problems for rest of the muslim world as not many will or are able to distinguish between the Royals and the rest of the 1.2 billion people around the world. You see some very educated members on Gupshup constantly berating Islam due to actions of 19 people, and to be fair, we see a fair number of muslims on this forum very proud of the actions of those 19 people and promising even more death and destruction.

Bush is only pretending to close his eyes to the problems of Royal Family of KSA (or for that matter the nuclear proliferation from Pak). He is betting that the two respective governments will redeem themselves by capturing terrorists and aiding US in the war on terror. This can change quickly. Whether its Kerry or Bush, the backlash against Saudi government will not be on hold for much longer. If and when it happens, they will not distinguish between wahabbis or shias or sunnis... it will be muslims who are on the chopping block. Far better for us, muslims, to take care of this problem ourselves. Question is, how.