As I’ve been thinking about the democratic front-runners, I’ve been taking note of how different desis have been choosing sides.
Key Clinton advisor Neera Tanden made it clear in the New Yorker Magazine that she thinks Obama is too soft for the dirty work of winning an election:
Advisers to Clinton told me that there is something naïve, even potentially fatal, in Obama’s vision of leading the country out of its current political battles… Obama will be annihilated by what members of the Clinton campaign call “the Republican attack machine.” Neera Tanden, the campaign’s policy director, … cautioned that the general election will be brutal. “You cannot let your guard down with these guys,” she said of right-wing politicians. “They take people’s strengths and make them weaknesses; if you give them an inch, they’ll take a mile. …Both of the Clintons have been through it and won before.” [Link]
From a more parochial perspective, the Clintons have a decades long association with South Asians:
No other candidate has raised more money from the Indian America community than Hillary Clinton. More Americans who trace their roots to India are working for Hillary Clinton. [Link]
<
p>As a young’un 16 years ago I worked a South Asian fund raiser at the Waldorf for the Candidate Bill Clinton (just after the Gennifer Flowers scandal). There’s a reason why Hillary herself cracked:
“I can certainly run for the senate seat in Punjab and win easily,”… [Link]
<
p>
<
p>However, as the primary season (and general election) grew nearer, Hillary distanced herself from public appearances with Sikhs, perhaps to avoid more photos like these. Instead, she cancelled several fundraisers and refused to engage with issues that were important:
She stands up for the Sikh community when politically expedient. On the campaign trail, she made several cancellations to appear with Sikhs in public and refused to join Obama in supporting the Sikh Coalition’s appeal to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to protect turbans from searches at airports. [Link]
In general, Obama has shown more commitment to defending civil-liberties, even when unpopular, than Hillary. According to Gitmo detainee lawyers Gita Gutierrez, Elizabeth Arora, and Varda Hussain:
Senator Obama helped lead the fight in the Senate against the Administration’s efforts in the Fall of 2006 to strip the courts of jurisdiction …Senator Obama worked with us to count the votes, and he personally lobbied colleagues who worried about the political ramifications of voting to preserve habeas corpus for the men held at Guantanamo. He has understood that our strength as a nation stems from our commitment to our core values, and that we are strong enough to protect both our security and those values. [Link, via UB]
<
p>Civil liberties in the US is a brown issue to me because South Asians are far more likely than white Americans to get locked up and forgotten about by the system.
<
p>In terms of race, the Clintons have gone out of their way to point out that Hillary is the white candidate (and is she ever – have you seen her dance?). Obama, on the other hand, comes across as an immigrant. He talks openly about both family in the United States and on the other side of the world, and his own upbringing betwixt and between has helped to shape his outlook on politics:
Senator Obama’s political outlook is shaped by truly having been a citizen of the world. He was born to a black Kenyan father, and a white mother from Kansas. A self-made man, he was raised by his single mother and maternal grandparents in an environment without many material advantages. His paternal African grandmother still lives in a Kenyan hut without running water and electricity…Senator Obama can passionately engage with, actively listen to and respectfully speak with people of all backgrounds and faiths. [Link]
<
p>In this way, Obama comes across as the quintessential second-gen politician and his comfort with his identity stands in sharp contrast to repeated efforts by Jindal to whitewash himself. Whereas Piyush ran as Bobby, Barack did not run as Barry, even though he was once known as such. While Jindal, despite having been the former chancellor of LSU, ran away from the killings at LSU; Obama took time out of his schedule to call politicians in Kenya when election violence began, and has openly remained involved since.
<
p>I suspect that the age-gap amongst Clinton and Obama supporters is replicated in the division between first and second generation brownz. And who better to exemplify 2nd genniness than Mr. Namesake himself?
And while we’ve posted it before, it’s worth nothing that Obama is the only candidate in either party to inspire this sort of creative bolly style adulation:
There are so many things to criticize about Jindal, that it’s unnecessary to constantly bring up his name. It’s also a bit disconcerting. I know Punjabi and Malayalee guys named Bobby. Regarding the latter, at the end of this slippery Piyush-slope is ugliness about how we define who is desi and what hoops, if any, they are to jump through to “prove” themselves– a notion which disgusts me. If Bobby should have ran as Piyush, does Bobby Mathews of Houston, TX need to run by his “home” name, Raju, to prevent hurtful charges of “sell-out”?
“White-washed” offends me the way some here are offended by the use of “Uncle Tom”. We hate on each other enough, epithets about “acting white” are neither productive nor appropriate. “Acting white” is often used to disparage people who don’t conform to a very stupid, suffocating stereotype of “who is authentically desi”, as if anyone has the right to define that for others.
ANNA – Two points. First,
Not to get totally sidetracked on Jindal yet again, but there is a difference between somebody who grew up with the nickname of Bobby and Piyush wanting to rename himself based on the Brady Bunch. By his own description, it was an action of assimilation, an Ellis Island discarding of one name for another, more American one.
By contrast, even though Barack was called Barry growing up, he’s campaigning under his given name. That was struck a chord with me. You wouldn’t believe how many people have asked me if I ever wanted to abandon the name of Ennis for something that sounded more American …
Second, I was disgusted by the fact that Jindal, as former chancellor of LSU, did nothing to reach out to the graduate students who were shot and their families. If you compare Jindal’s silence to the compassion shown by the VA governor, I think the best explanation (although still an inference) is that he wanted to distance himself from the victims because they were desi.
If Piyush/Bobby treats people differently because they’re brown, and acts to separate himself from them, then yes, I’m going to call him whitewashed.
You know I don’t throw that label around lightly, but this time I think it is warranted.
p.s. what else would you call somebody who names his son “Slade”? I mean, that’s whiter than vanilla on bleached rice …
2. Ennis said
I agree, which is why my first sentence was:
And you know I rarely disagree with you so strongly. LSU, yes. Policies, yes. Performance, yes. Names? NO. Sorry but this Indian Christian has had to put up with ENOUGH bullshit about how I’m already white-washed via my birth certificate. It’s unfair and it makes my blood boil.
Again, with names. Remind me to name my kids Pooja and Subhash (to be called Netaji ’round the house, natch), so that if I ever run for office, some blogger won’t snarkily diss my toddler.
You were born ANNA, Piyush discarded the name his parents gave him so that he would sound like somebody from the Brady Bunch. Those are two very different scenarios.
It’s of a piece. He doesn’t want to be seen as desi. Unlike Obama (and you), he doesn’t talk about his family in India, nor does he want to be associated with them.
but if he treats people differently because they’re brown, and acts to separate himself from them, then yes, I’m going to call him whitewashed.
Ennis, you are the man, and terms like whitewash and UT are certainly warranted and applicable in some cases. From a point of view, this country’s history is completely marred with a parade hitlist of immigrants (Irish, Italian, Eastern Euros, Greek, etc..) who came over only to shed their culture (from a day to day practicing point of view) and absolve themselves of any solidarity with more visibly identifiable minorities for the explicit purpose of gaining favor with those in power, many times going against their own self-interest.
5 · HMF said
I should have banned you when you last used Uncle Tom, and I was called out for NOT doing so, as if I were playing favoritesI disagree. Hurtful, unfortunate, inelegant and inapposite for civil discourse. Ennis can be your man, I’m your huckleberry.if i recall, the number one reason for calling jindal an uncle tom, over at the other threads, was his religious conversion (i believe the real reason is his politics, but that’s the stated reason). but how did barck become christian? His mom, 2dads, and sister aren’t christian. wasn’t his response to jena a little lacking? hasn’t andrew young informed us that he hasn’t slept with many black women?
what goes around comes around.
Like ANNA I normally find whitewashed to be an underhanded criticism, as if there is only one way to be desi. I’ve been called a coconut for not blasting Bhangra from my car, which is simply absurd. However, my objection is that the label is misused, not that it never applies. If a figure goes out of his way to adopt white signifiers and distance himself from all things brown, then I think the label fits.
That said, I’m reacting to his LSU actions first, and his name games second (as supportive circumstantial evidence). I don’t count religion in that category. There have been Indian Christians, and Indian Catholics especially for almost a thousand years before there were Indian Sikhs.
I think there is plenty of light and heat to be generated about the democratic primary. Could we leave the Jindal discussion for now and agree to disagree?
Sorry but this Indian Christian has had to put up with ENOUGH bullshit about how I’m already white-washed via my birth certificate.
Again, why take things so personally? No one here (to my knowledge) has assigned that label to you? Certainly not the people you’re arguing with now. At it’s root, the term is inherently about behavior, and not essence of being. So you cannot conflate being called white washed or UT for simply being christian and having a christian name to actual behavior and positions held by people.
I should have banned you when you last used Uncle Tom
But you realized that, in addition, I don’t throw the term out willy nilly and use it, only when I deem it necessary.
Hillary Clinton anybody? Obama? Beuller?
10 · HMF said
The personal is political.
They have, actually…
Yes, that totally takes the sting of it away. The current crop of commenters has not accused me of being an Aunt Thomasina. But you also don’t know who we’ve banned and deleted.
This is like saying it’s okay to call a woman a “bitch” or a “whore” because it’s about behavior, not essence, and really, don’t some women deserve it?
I have been called white-washed simply for being Christian and having a Christian name. By more people than I’d care to recount. That’s why it angers me and THAT is why it IS personal.
Ennis
Could you elaborate why turbans should not be searched in an age of strip searches? (the link to the letter is password protected)
Is carrying a Kirpan allowed? (I know there was a court case about this,but did not see anything about it afterwords)
….by the fact that Jindal, as former chancellor of LSU
Agreed with your sentiment.
He was in fact, even on the top of Chancellor of LSU, he was President of the University of Louisiana System which includes LSU as one of them.
but how did barck become christian? His mom, 2dads, and sister aren’t christian.
Not so fast. Barack did in fact go to a Catholic school. His mother did take him to Church on Christmas etc. and he was mostly raised by his grandparents who were Christian.
Nobody is saying, nor has ever said, that turbans should never be searched. The question is whether turbans should be automatically searched without any cause.
There was a period of time during which the TSA had explicitly given guidance to single out turbans as an example of a type of clothing which might hide an explosive. This was as ridiculous as calling spandex a type of fabric that might hide an explosive – both would reveal any bump underneath.
The TSA has since reconsidered and has issued new guidance saying that, if a screener is suspicious, a swipe of the same sort as is done for laptops should be sufficient for clearing a turbaned passenger. This means they had the technology in place all along, but didn’t really care about using it until Sikh organizations kicked up a fuss.
I was never a huge Bill Clinton fan (that was my Dad’s hobby), but I didn’t mind BC until this campaign. I don’t know if I’ll ever consider him the same way…his behavior was not presidential. Way to drive more people in to the arms of Obama, there.
I watched the Republican debate last night and Mccain cracked on Romney for shifting his position based on what year that it was. I think the same applies with Hillary. She’s a politician running for office and she’s calculating what it takes for her to win the overall vote. I don’t agree with all of Mccain’s policies but I think he has a core set of beliefs that he’ll stand up for and if Obama is willing to step out on the TSA issue it would seem to me that he has a set of core beliefs as well. Can I count on Hillary or Romney to stand up for me, a brown punjabi in america when she’s in office, when the polls say it would be better for them not to so that they could sell other legislation that they really want passed in Congress? Who’s better for America’s core principles and who’s got my back? That’s the question I see.
Thanks for the post, its been something I was waiting for someone to write about. I’ve been trying to decide who I would vote for and support. This particular issue has bothered me a great deal.
BTW, for what it’s worth, Ennis is more amreekan sounding than you think, than say Joginder, Manendar or Dinesh.
Barack went to church as a child, and then, just like W, had an adult experience which led him to become an active Christian.
Not his full name: Some previous politicians who campaigned did nothing to obscure their full names:
George Walker Bush (Dubya) William Jefferson Clinton Hillary Rodham Clinton
In contrast the Barack Obama downplays his middle name. My guess is unlike his middle name , ‘Barak’ is not a political liability, so Obama uses it.
On the other hand, unlike Bobby, Barak does not shy away from his non – US roots.
I disagree. First of all, we don’t go around calling Bill Clinton “William Jefferson Clinton.” We know that’s his name, if we think about it, but that’s not what he’s called, nor how he refers to himself.
Same with Hillary and W. (We do call the latter George W. Bush, but that’s only to distinguish him from G.B. Senior.)
Barack Obama has done nothing to hide his middle name, and, should he be elected, I have no doubt that he will swear in as “I, Barack Hussein Obama…”
They may have changed their names, but shed their culture? You can look at various regions of the country and know which ethnic group settled there just by looking at what foods are popular and what temples and churches are there.
Just because you change your name from Chamoun to Sherman doesn’t mean you no longer acknowledge(being some part of) your heritage or stop making Kibbe.
17 · A N N A said
That right-wing Trotskyist Hitch wrote a recent column on Billary’s long history of Willie Horton style politics, which has been white washed from history by the very people who like to throw terms like “white washed” around.
“I don’t agree with all of Mccain’s policies but I think he has a core set of beliefs that he’ll stand up for..”
didn’t jon stewart poke fun at mcCain for doing an about face on the christian fundamentalist/evangelical base, when he agreed to speak at falwell’s university as the special guest after earlier calling him an “agent of intolerance”? or did mcCain use that speech to drive home his point to falwell? not sure, but don’t think he did. from a naive, outsider’s viewpoint, the clintons, especially bill clinton, seem to have squandered any redemption they built up despite their own greasiness while in power. bill clinton claiming that obama’s tactics are some of the worst he’s seen in several decades, or something like that, seem very disingenuous.
woman a “bitch” or a “whore” because it’s about behavior
The former is only about essence of being, it might be triggered by behavior, but the word itself is an idictment on your being, any attempt to say it’s only about behavior would be wrong.
The latter is a descriptive term based usually on action, and yes it usually refers to behavior (style of dress, propensity to engage in intercourse) but it’s usually an indictment on a behavior. (or it might even be literal, as in you take money for engaging in intercourse)
I have been called white-washed simply for being Christian and having a Christian name.
This is exactly my point, Ennis obviously wasn’t doing that to Mr. BJ, so it makes no sense to conflate it with your personal experience.
but I didn’t mind BC until this campaign. I don’t know if I’ll ever consider him the same way…his behavior was not presidential.
I agree with you here. I think until now, the clintons were the little darlings of the minority community.
HMF, please, can we move on? Let’s just drop this debate otherwise the whole comment thread will be derailed …
I want to know how andrew young was keeping score. Here is what he said.
I don’t agree with all of Mccain’s policies but I think he has a core set of beliefs that he’ll stand up for
HMF, please, can we move on? Let’s just drop this debate otherwise the whole comment thread will be derailed
Sure.
Civil rights is a brown issue. And security isn’t? What is the number of indians/indian americans killed in the twin towers compared to the pakistanispakistani americans that are locked up for attempts at terrorism and ties to world terrorist groups. Can we have an honest discussion of the differences in the worldviews of Indians/Indian americans and pakistanis/pakistani americans.
Everything indicates Obama is obsessed with blackness. Steve Sailer has written about Obama’s unnatural obsession with blackness.
As I’ve written before, locking up Nepali tourists doesn’t help our security. The more time that the FBI spends on ineffective actions like that, the less time they have to do the kind of investigation that keeps people safe. The people I know on the security side hate profiling, it’s security theater done to keep civilians happy.
More generally, I haven’t seen anybody point out a big difference on domestic security between Hillary and Obama. If you’ve seen statements on things like port security, please share them. It is an important part of the debate.
I think the point on how the generational immigrant world view has become more mainstream with ‘younger’ voters is very important.
The trend is that race and color matter less and less. I’m not saying it’s not relevant because obviously it is however the direction seems to point these distinctions are falling by the way side.
In the US, I’m curious how the Latino population will effect the South and West parts of the country.
WGIA,
I do see where Mccain panders from time to time but I do think that he stands firm on some civil liberty issues, like torture of enemy combatants, even if its not the politically acceptable answer. Like I said, I don’t agree with all of his policies and I’m not sure I would vote for him but I am wondering who’s likely to follow through on protecting civil liberties rather than ignore them where it’s politically expedient.
I was a fan of Hillary until SC, when they merged to become Billary and they attempted to paint Obama as the “black” candidate. The news about the Sikh fund-raisers and the TSA does more than raise a few eyebrows. Aren’t I supposed to judge the candidates by what they actually do rather than what they say would do? How does one know where the line in the sand is, when does something so offend their conscience that they (Billary or Romeney) decide to do the “right” thing even if it costs them.
For all the Obama fans out there, if you’re interested in canvassing — going door-to-door and spreading the word about Barack — South Asians for Obama (SAFO) is organizing a group to go to the Edison, NJ area this weekend. The plan is to be there all day Saturday and Sunday morning/early afternoon, but even if you can only spend a few hours, we’d love to have your help. You can help Barack, eat yummy food, and take care of some of your Indian grocery shopping, all at the same time. E-mail me if interested (e-mail should be linked to above).
The trend is that race and color matter less and less.
The evidence is overwhelmingly contrary.
South Carolina primaries showed it clearly. Right now, Obama who is half-white himself has about 10% white support. This will probablly change if he builds a momentum, and is seen as an electable candidate, a future President. I think the point on how the generational immigrant world view has become more mainstream with ‘younger’ voters is very important.
America due to low child birth rate is not a young country (unlike India), so “younger” voters are not that crucial – they will attend Bruce Springsteen concert, but will they vote, and comes the question of impact.
Factually incorrect. In SC Obama got 25% of the white vote. The real difference was in age brackets: he got very few older white oflks, but 50% of under-30 whites.
Nationally, Obama and Clinton are now neck and neck — today’s Gallup poll has Clinton 43, Obama 39. The gap in California has narrowed to about three points too. If Obama were only getting 10% support among white people, these numbers would be mathematically impossible.
Jangali Jaanwar, just to clarity, i wasn’t knocking mccain on his entire platform or set of beliefs. just on that issue, yes, he did pander. to be honest, i haven’t really been following this election cycle (u.s.) that closely, so my comment on mccain was confined to that one instance. i used to before, even as an interested outsider, but after listening to a little bit of the debates this time, i think listening to politicians (anywhere) speak must rank as one of the biggest wastes of one’s valuable time, with rare exceptions. at least if you go back in history, there seemed to be better oratorical skills, even if you didn’t agree with their position. now it’s abysmal. i prefer now to have it distilled via a few minutes of jon stewart, the bbc and pbs and the odd newspaper article.
The other difference was sex. He was virtually tied with Hillary for white men, but fell sharply behind in the race for white women.
35 · Kush Tandon The evidence is overwhelmingly contrary.
Actually the evidence decade by decade shows it’s changing, i.e. generational change. It’s interesting to see the change from that viewpoint.
PAFD,
Maybe I’m too forgiving on Mccain’s pandering and too harsh on Hillary’s own acts or omissions. I tend to look at Mccain as being stuck with the pull of the religious right and thus having to deal with that element. I tend to be harsher on Hillary as she’s allegedly been a friend of South Asians and it seems like, all of a sudden “poof”, missing in action. She’s also in the democratic party which, imo, seems to have a larger tent that would accomodate her standing up for Americans descended from South Asia. If Obama could do it with the TSA, why couldn’t she. If it’s such a taboo topic to touch, why doesn’t Obama fear dealing with it.
Has anyone researched or obtained an answer as to why the stats come out this way? What explains the stats skewing the way they do? Does it have anything to do with the perception that youth tend to be more idealistic and hopeful while the older segment will tolerate more compromise from their candidate? Any theories?
Kush,
Bruce Springsteen? They can’t be THAT young, if that’s the draw 😉
They really wanted to listen to songs from an earlier era, like Candle in the Wind. But the wind was too strong and the candle blew out. Thus they had to be satisfied with dancing in the dark.
33 · Jangali Jaanwar said
JJ, with all respect, this isn’t accurate, per McCain’s own legislation. U.S. civil liberties have nothing to do with how enemy combatants are treated according to the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005. McCain’s legislation went to great pains to not enforce the “torture ban” for “enemy combatants” or more generally, people-the-Executive-does-not-like, such as Nepali tourists.
IMHO and the opinion of jurists with more direct knowledge, the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, and its scrawled in Executive orders, net-net did substantial damage to the cause of prisoner rights, and safeguarding the rights of U.S. armed forces MIA.
i dont want either of them to win.
Here’s an illuminating quote from Jon Hafetz’s piece, to give mutineers a flavor for what McCain’s “principled torture ban” translates to where the rubber meets the road for lawyers and detainees. DTA is the Detainee Treatment Act, CSRT is the Combatant Status Review Tribunal.
Harlem Sun,
No need to use the “all due respect” phrase, 😉 , but it is appreciated. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong, which does happen now and again (every 9 years). 😉 This could be one of those rare occasions. My opinion on Mccain’s opposition to interrogation techniques on enemy combatants was based on articles like these. Thanks for raising it to my attention.
Obama’s not second gen– his mother’s famiy has been here as long as or longer then Dick Cheney’s. OTOH, he was brought up in Indonesia and Hawaii, so he belongs nowhere and everywhere. I think the comfort level is his own, and might have something to do with being hot as well as brill.
To me he acts second gen. He has a funny name, some family abroad and some family here, he grew up in the USA and in places that other people have never heard of, the family abroad could be seen as “embarrassing” if you’re trying to project an all-American image, etc.
There’s no reason he shouldn’t be just as bit as confused as Gogol Ganguli.
2 · Ennis said
I totally thought Ennis was an American name. Never heard it in India. I had a friend in college with the name, and he was/is a cowboy (ok he’s a geologist now, but close enough), and of course there’s the quintessential Marlboro Ennis. I guess I’d agree with ANNA, names are rarely chosen – Piyush’s dad/mom may have foisted Bobby on him – and best taken at face value. Wish I had a 10-syllable south Indian name to bring to public office with me and watch BillO and his ilk struggle…:)
Oops, sorry Ennis, just noticed the name debate was dropped. Feel free to remove my last post so we stay OT.