Basboy’s Weblog

In the days following the U.S. elections, before America woke up hungover to a new day, a lot of family and friends began to rain their negative thoughts of this perceived un-change. Through Facebook, e-mail forwarding, chatting and the like, I began to see a picture of like-minded Arab-Americans bemoaning the continuation of the status quo that the Obama administration is shaping up to be. Some would use his seeming cowardice towards Israel as their reason for not voting, and show writings from Ralph Nader, or background on Rahm Emanuel and his familial history as further backing to that decision; or in some cases, as a way to show their guilt for having voted, apparently, wrongly.

I am not, nor have I ever been, a particularly politically-minded individual. I consume the same media that is available to all, but I dare say that I am able to form my own thoughts and decisions about things and do not simply give in to the hype. I have taken in much of what Mr. Nader puts out in terms of policy discussions and found myself agreeing with his every criticism of American international affiliations and military positions. Like me, he is very much against Israel’s stance on Palestinian rights and their freedom of passage, and critical of what any intelligent, sane person would see as hypocrisy surrounding other nations ill-will towards them- to say nothing about the always present accusation of “anti-semetism” that is leveled at any of its critics. In fact, I realize the amazing courage this takes, as someone whose agenda extends to other forums and issues (his wiki page is full of his many achievements, and there are too many to name here).

In many ways, I am a Naderite, but I have found exception to his opinion of Obama. For example, he states that “to advance change and hope, the presidential persona requires character, courage, integrity– not expediency, accommodation and short-range opportunism”. Great point, except that this is to assume that his abandonment of an issue we hold dear, that of Palestinian rights, is indicative of a lack of character. I have had my ears open during the various campaign speeches, primary and Presidential debates (usually dull though they were), and have seen a man who held close to his true ideals. His platform, supported by his record in the Senate, has been very much about internal American issues (equalization of health-care, fairer taxes, educational reform, etc.), and only went to International affairs when it meant bringing the troops back to America, or to re-focus efforts to find Bin Laden in order to finally close that chapter in America’s past. He rejected the reasoning that they should not have open relations or offer aide to nations that, as McCain put it, “don’t like us too much”, and as a result he has garnered the favor of the likes of Ahmadinejad. This can only make for smoother International Affairs, and a heightened level of security in the U.S. due to the generally higher opinion the world would have of the nation.

My point, then, is this: it is a fallacy to say that one is flawed by way of his or her disagreement with you. And it is with this in mind that I look at his choice of Emanuel indifferently. Here is a former senior adviser to Bill Clinton who was a leading strategist in the unsuccessful White House efforts to institute universal healthcare, and who has a personal stake in Israeli national welfare. At the risk of oversimplifying, are these fact not indicative of a strategy to reassure democrats of the importance of healthcare issues, while ensuring Israeli hardliners don’t take issues with him. On that latter point, I feel that I must say that I do not approve of him as he is toeing the company line for votes. That in mind, you can see political savvy in recognizing a probable right-wing shift in Israeli politics brought on by the scandal-rocked Kadima party, which will most likely bring Netanyahu back in power.

I could probably ramble on and on about how Obama’s victory neither spells our doom nor our salvation, but I fear that I would be doing myself a disservice because I neither have enough evidence to support that assertion nor do I truly believe that he is useless to us. In deed, I feel that his victory is a victory for us, and for the entire nation. It is not by the color of his skin, or his ethnicity, though that fact did mobilize more voters, and more of those of younger age, and generally made for a more exciting race. I say this because if that were an issue I held close to heart, I would have just as likely voted for Nader as an Arab-American as I would for Obama as one whose father may have been Muslim. No, I see him as a smart, focused man who seems to want to put country first, and one whose rule will bring about less underhanded discrimination based on ethnicity and religion that we saw during the past eight years. I see the financial situation improving slowly but surely, as a shift occurs from the heavy military spending of the past to that based on finding alternative fuels and lowering healthcare costs, all the while taxing those that actually have money. This will make way to an America that will be more open to change, and this is all that he has been able promise afterall- not that change would occur with his appointment but that he would help bring about some change- with others’ help.

I actually have felt emboldened to write this after having seen an interview with Egyptian journalist Mohamed Hassanein Heikal on Aljazeera yesterday. It will not say this in the article I linked to, but he ended that interview by stating his belief, as is mine, that the Obama win does not mean a new day for Arabs or Muslims globally, be it in a large or small measure. In deed, the only change that can occur is one that we mobilize and champion. Perhaps we felt small and victimized in the past, but we cannot let that limit us. I believe that under Obama’s administration we, at least, will have a shot, as he is nothing if not a populist. I know it will be increasingly easy to simply blame him for any possible policy blunders or discriminative stances, but we would be only doing ourselves a disservice to not make our voices heard- lobby, write letters, use all media to spread our message. Then, at least, our misery would be earned, though less likely.