SuddenWorld.com

The America I look forward to living in is a nation where having “Hussein” as part of one’s name, regardless of whether you are the guy living next door or the guy in contention to be the next President of the United States, becomes a non-issue. No, let me rephrase that. “Non-issue” implies a lack of active engagement or understanding with matters that might fall outside our localized experiences, so how about I say instead, “I look forward to the day when we as Americans are able to look at ourselves, in all our cultural pluralism, with a true sense of enlightened context.”

I say this in response to the disappointing and, frankly, offensive tirade that has gotten a lot of press coverage recently by conservative radio talk show host Bill Cunningham (I’m sure to the secret glee of Mr. Cunningham whose bread and butter, so typical of vocally radical media pundits, comes from the manipulation of hyperbole), who had opened for the Republican presidential candidate John McCain at a Cincinnati rally. You can see a clip of his rhetoric in the clip below.

What’s so objectionable to me is not Mr. Cunningham’s political attacks questioning his record (an almost inevitable facet to most heated election campaigns)–I’ll let Senator Obama’s campaign managers and the media sort out the relative mendacity or veracity of his allegations–but the subtext applied to his rhetoric that essentially channels his inner-bigot.

And yes, Senator Obama’s full name is indeed Barack Hussein Obama. But faulting him for his name would be like like faulting by association anybody who happened to share the name “John” with John Wilkes Booth, the man who had assassinated President Abraham Lincoln. And like “John,” “Hussein” is not that uncommon a name, just not in our neck of the woods. We only happen to be familiar with the name due to the unfortunate infamy of an erstwhile Iraqi dictator.

Mr. Cunningham has made a most disingenuous protestation in a subsequent interview on the Fox network’s program “Hannity and Colmes” that he sees no problem in using Senator Obama’s middle name, going so far as to suggest he is honoring him with the gravitas that a full name affords such noted Presidents as Franklin Delano Roosevelt or John Fitzerald Kennedy.

Were it true, it would be quite the magnanimous but perhaps bipolar gesture from an individual–at a Republican rally mind you–who in the same breath called Democratic presidential candidate Senator Obama “a hack Chicago, Daley-style politician who is picturing himself as change.” Honestly, whose intelligence does he think he’s trying to insult?

Mr. Cunningham’s form of incipient racism is the kind that can be the most frustrating to contemplate for any minority. In America, at least a minority knows where he or she can stand in relation to the more overt expressions of racism, such as spray-painted swastikas or hanging nooses. Such clearly manifest forms of ethnic hatred are easy to identify and, being criminal acts, allow minorities to find, along with perfectly righteous indignation, appropriate legal recourse.

But in a way, the most difficult form of racism to deal with is the kind that is dealt by subterfuge and suggestion. A victim of these more subtle forms of racism can make accusations, but a perpetrator can hide behind false intentions to the point of making the victim appear to be overreacting, or even worse, to appear to be race-baiting.

This is precisely the form of insidious racism that Mr. Cunningham is using. He has made the argument that people who take issue with use of the name “Hussein” are the ones that are actually the bigots. The sad truth of the matter is, there is some validity to his statement…but I’ll speak to that later on. The matter at hand is Mr. Cunningham’s particular brand of racism.

Regardless of the reasoning behind why some object to hearing Senator Obama’s middle name used, it still doesn’t make him any less complicit in his own unacknowledged bigotry. A closet bigot’s classic technique is borrowed straight from the magician’s handbook regarding the art of misdirection, i.e. drawing the audience’s attention to one action while the real action is going on elsewhere.

Let’s look at how Mr. Cunningham accomplishes this:

1. He, being a media person, would be savvy to the marketing power of names in the public arena; and knowing that names do not occur in a vacuum, he would know how appeal to the xenophobia of the less enlightened members of his audience regarding Senator Obama’s full name.
2. He would know that the name “Hussein,” besides having a negative association with the former Iraqi dictator Sadam Hussein, is of Arabic origin and thus also carries unfortunate negative connotations across America due to the myopic coverage by mainstream media of radical Islam.
3. He would know there are certain political realities, for better or for worse, needed to become an elected official in the United States, e.g., U.S. politicians have predominantly Christian affiliations; so the more he can ramp up apocryphal allegations of Muslim ties to Senator Obama’s campaign, the better to galvanize Obama’s opponents. For the record, Senator Obama is Christian.
4. He would know that emphasizing his middle name (even going so far as to engage in further hyperbole by having called him “Barack Mohammed Hussein Obama” on his own radio show, even though Mohammed is not part of his name) and coyly placing such references as “the great prophet” to falsely create a Muslim subtext.
5. He would also know that since “Hussein” is Senator Obama’s legal middle name, he would gain an inoculation against most accusations of bigotry. Thus he would be free to conduct a campaign of what amounts to guerrilla racism.

Continue Reading »

Does Senator Barack Obama’s win in the Iowa caucuses represent a historical sea change in American politics regarding the matter of ethnic identity? That incredible speech he gave following his victory, taking first while Senator John Edwards and Senator Hillary Clinton took second and third respectively, was-dare I say-reaching the transcendent. I think he may have even been channeling a little bit of the Reverend Martin Luther King that night. See Obama’s victory speech in Iowa.

His win in Iowa may indeed mark the beginning of something momentous (aside from the milestone of being the first African American to win an Iowa caucus), but I would qualify its characterization differently from the way the media seems geared up to portray it. Media declarations of his being the first “African American” presidential candidate to win in the Iowa caucuses makes for compelling headlines (especially since Iowa’s constituency is predominantly white), but the label strikes me as a tad simplistic when one thinks about his background.

When you look at Senator Obama’s upbringing, his ethnic identity seems to embody the hybrid nature of America itself. Offspring to a white mother from Kansas and a black father from Kenya, he was raised in Hawaii by his white grandparents and lived a few years in Indonesia with his Indonesian stepfather.

In a limited way, it reminds me of the case of celebrity golfing pro Tiger Woods, particularly when he was first gaining attention on the national scene. There was and continues to be an insistent effort on the part of media to find out where he stood in terms of his ethnic identity. Certain ethnic-based interest groups also vied to claim him as a native son.

However, Mr. Woods has consistently resisted identifying himself with a specific ethnic identity. This doubtless has come as a disappointment to those who were hoping to find a marquis minority spokesperson in this well known sports figure.

According to a 2002 article entitled “Will Tiger Ever Show the Color of His Stripes?” by Greg Garber of ESPN, he is one-quarter Thai, one-quarter Chinese, one-quarter Caucasian, one-eighth African-American and one-eighth Native American. So his reluctance to “endorse” a specific ethnic identity is understandable given that the “one size fits all” paradigm doesn’t reflect his unique background, although I personally think it’s somewhat regrettable that he hasn’t done more to champion his status as a multiethnic minority success story in mainstream America.

But unlike Mr. Woods, Senator Obama has rested his ethnic identity comfortably in one camp-that of the African-American citizen. And so the media and the rest of the nation, for the most part, have obliged him in his self-designation. However, this tacit agreement points to a problem of our complicity in the historically problematic definitions that have informed our history about who is considered black. I recommend reading “Who Is Black? One Nation’s Definition” by F. James Davis for PBS’s Frontline.

Of course, who am I to tell Senator Obama where he can place himself if he says he’s African American? The statement is not a falsehood when one considers the perception of anybody having a hint of black ancestry, known as the “one-drop rule.” No other ethnic group has quite the same stringent “credentialing.” And frankly, I think we still live in a society where appearance, for good or for ill, derives overriding precedence in establishing one’s ethnic identity. A fourth generation Japanese American living in Hawaii will still likely be identified as a person of Japanese descent before being called an out-and-out American…even if his or her ancestral language and customs may have faded with each successive generation from the originating immigrant family.

Furthermore, we have a penchant as human beings to seek tidy categories. But I hope we can one day reach a point where we can intelligently acknowledge the ethnic complexity of our nation, which is increasingly being embodied (quite literally) in a growing number of its individual denizens. Yes, Obama is black, but he is also white. Yes, he’s a junior US senator from Illinois, but grew up in both Hawaii and Indonesia. There were certain groups, taking exception to his mantle of being African American, who have invested into pointing out his multiethnic background, but not for what I would call the right reasons.

Before the Iowa caucus (although it’s a good guess his victory there has changed quite a few minds), there was actually skepticism from some parts of the African American community who did not quite believe Senator Obama reflected their particular black American experience. He was, after all-to their minds-half white, and his black ancestry spoke to an immigrant experience rather that one of slavery and Jim Crow segregation. Obama himself had to delicately place himself so as not to alienate either ethnic group.

White conservatives also seem eager to dispute his claim to an African American heritage for their own agenda of divide and conquer. A man relegated to ethnic limbo has little chance of creating universal appeal for himself (in the world of politics, anyway, if not the world of professional golf).

There is no doubt in my mind that seeing Barack Obama make a viable run for the presidency would have symbolic resonance for not just blacks, but all minorities and all whites, because when it comes down to it, Obama’s multiethnic heritage legitimizes him as the kind of minority that could only be made possible in the United States (okay, maybe also Brazil). A gallery of Presidential portraits that could display Obama’s visage would show an obvious shift from the status quo, but I’m not sure we are properly recognizing what that shift is by merely indicating that he is African American.

Of course, Iowa is only one state with forty nine primaries/caucuses to go, and then there’s still the matter of the general election against the Republican nominee. And while Obama may have proven in stunning fashion his electability, the ability to run a good campaign does not necessarily translate into the craft of governance. Time will tell what Obama will accomplish, but let me dream that little dream on that one night, when-not a black man-but a man for all minorities won the Iowa caucus. What say you New Hampshire?

Who Is That Guy?

On an mild afternoon in mid-November, a man stands near the corner of 37^th Avenue and 78^th Street, across from P.S. 69, in Jackson Heights, NY. It’s a particular block where residents wouldn’t usually see vendors or solicitors set up shop.

He has set up a small, modest table featuring a poster for Senator Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign along with stacks of literature conveying his policies on education. Wearing the theme-appropriate blue of the Democratic party by way of a baseball cap and windbreaker, he maintains a clipboard to petition passing pedestrians for signatures.

I often wonder about those individuals who still choose to volunteer in an election campaign, even though they may not necessarily be a part of a given candidate’s inner strategic circle (arguably where the source of potential power resides in terms of choice future appointments), i.e., what’s in it for the “little guy”?

Upon reflection, a case could be made that it is one of the purest forms of volunteerism. I know, the words “purity” and “politics” could hardly seem like complementary concepts to some people’s way of thinking, including my own often times, but bear with me on this.

There’s the obvious aspect of most campaign volunteers receiving little to no financial compensation for their time and effort. Indeed, volunteers sometimes even incur expenses that come right out of their own pockets.

Furthermore, when it comes down to it, promoting someone else for a leadership role is in some measure an act of self-sacrifice in terms of personal ego, a kind of self-effacement for the sake of a perceived community unified under the banner of a designated leader.

And after all that’s said and done, there is still no guarantee that a volunteer’s efforts will bear fruit in terms of a successful election bid for his or her candidate of choice. However, even if the volunteer’s chosen candidate becomes elected, there is no commensurate reciprocity except the hope of validation in the volunteer’s expectations for the candidate in his or her new political role. Even then, there is always the chance that the candidate could disappoint in that capacity.

Nonetheless, there are people still willing to endeavor with the highest hopes for a campaign. It’s an impressive level of dedication, especially against the usual complaints of voter apathy that tend to make the round table discussions during major elections. Although in regards to voter turnout, The Washington Post has an informative article from 2006 entitled “5 Myths About Turning Out the Vote” which may upend certain readers’ preconceptions.

Still, according to the U.S. Census Bureau Reports, U.S. voter turnout for the 2004 presidential elections was 64 percent among U.S. citizens ages 18 and older. The turnout rate by ethnicity was as follows:

• non-Hispanic whites: 67%
• blacks: 60%
• Hispanics: 46%
• Asians: 44%

From the previous presidential election in 2000, the vote increased by 5 percent for non-Hispanic whites and by 3 percentage points for blacks. There was no change in rate for Hispanics or Asians.

Getting to Know the Campaign Volunteer Who’s Getting to Know the Candidate

So who exactly is “the little guy” that still steps forth to volunteer in the face of all those issues? That individual might be someone like Professor Carrington Ward, a resident of Jackson Heights and volunteer for Queens County for Obama, a grassroots organization that supports the junior Senator from Illinois in his bid for the Presidency.

I had a chance to sit down with him in late November at Lety Café and Bakery in Jackson Heights. He stresses at the onset of the interview that he speaks strictly in the capacity of a volunteer whose personal views do not necessarily represent the campaign at large.

Standing, our representative “little guy” suggests the verticalness of a basketball player with a Hoosier-esque crew cut of sandy blond hair to match, while his wire-framed glasses and congenial baritone voice reflect an alternately scholarly background.

He and his wife, whom he met at the University of Chicago, moved from Chicago to New York City after he completed his Ph.D. in history, and also so his wife could complete her medical residency at nearby Elmhurst Hospital and Mt. Sinai Hospital in Manhattan.

Speaking in admiration of Jackson Heights, he comments, “It’s a great neighborhood just in terms of the value and the kind of character…extremely interesting.” He quips, “It’s a pretty good place to be a Manhattan refugee.”

He adds as a point of comparison, “As one friend of mine [remarked], who lived up to one of his dreams, which was to live in Greenwich Village, ‘It’s like this place [Greenwich Village] is a little bit too much like Epcot.’”

While at the University of Chicago, Professor Ward had first become aware of Barack Obama and learned more about him through Obama’s 2004 senate race in Illinois. Of the senator, Professor Ward remarks, “One of the things that is very clear is that he’s an extremely sharp, extremely intelligent politician and pretty down to earth.”

He continues, “And I think the thing that sealed the deal for me was actually his exchange-which he was supposed to have gotten the worse of-with [Hillary] Clinton [during the July 2007 Democratic debate] about diplomacy and whether to negotiate with enemies.”

“One of the things I found particularly impressive was essentially that he was returning to a much more sensible realism about the world: both an acceptance and an attempt to move strategically within a world that is not just about us.”

Professor Ward feels that Senator Barack Obama represents “a generational shift away from a Cold War mentality, away from our post-Cold War muddle.” He jokes wryly, “I keep waiting for the peace dividend to show up…it’s been a long time! I hope it’s been invested well.”

He also discusses the other factor that “latched” him on to Senator Obama was his book Dream from my Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance, which he called an impressive meditation on what it means to be American and “what it means to negotiate an identity in a country where identities are very much in flux.”

From the book, he infers that Senator Obama’s multicultural/international upbringing with “street-level” access has helped inform his views in a meaningful way, a perspective that other individuals who travel within the “tourist/diplomatic bubble” may not necessarily achieve.

He states, “I think it’s a hugely important insight that frankly I haven’t seen many of the other candidates display.” For Professor Ward, this is an essential criterion given the reduced expectation of presidential candidates to have military service from which they would have formerly gained their global experiences.

From Admirer to Volunteer for the Obama Campaign

Having established some of the reasons Professor Ward came to admire Senator Obama, I go on to ask about the events leading up to his volunteering for the Obama campaign.

After seeing Senator Obama at a New York fundraiser in May 2007, he met another attendee on the subway ride home to Jackson Heights. This individual suggested a meeting in Brooklyn where he could become more involved. Professor Ward decided to attend the meeting, which turned out to be a citywide strategy meeting for the Obama campaign.

The facilitators asked if there were anybody from Queens; Professor Ward raised his hand and realized his hand was the only one up. Although the volunteer campaign presence was strong in Brooklyn, he soon realized there would be a vacuum to fill in terms of covering the sizable borough of Queens, i.e., he would have to convince people there was an established campaign organization in Queens to keep things running.

I conjecture in our discussion about the critical mass of volunteers one would need for effective mobilization, to which he replies half-jokingly, “My experience is that the critical mass is…about two. Once you know that someone else is depending on you to do it, you actually do ‘do it.’ It’s about that time when you ‘hive’ off into groups of two in various areas that things start moving.”

Readers may wonder about the supposed futility of Obama campaigners working in New York state, since Hillary Clinton has the home court advantage as New York state’s junior senator. Professor Ward points out that not many people realize that in the New York primary for the Democratic nomination, unlike the Electoral College in presidential elections, the scenario is not winner-takes-all.

Each candidate may accumulate delegates (New York state has 232 “pledged” delegates and 46 “unpledged” delgates) within each state towards the ultimate goal of achieving the Democratic nomination on a national level.

“Unpledged” delegates consist of party leaders and elected officials who are free to choose their candidate. In this case, Senator Clinton would in all probability have the advantage given New York is her power base. However, “pledged” delegates must choose a candidate according to whom their local constituencies vote, so those delegates are up for grabs, so to speak.

These are the votes that Obama volunteers like Professor Ward petition for in the Democratic nomination. You can follow this link to the New York Times to see the 2008 Democratic Primary schedule.

Notes from the Field

Professor Ward has met a diverse group of people on the streets of Queens in his capacity as a volunteer, particularly in his canvassing duties, so I ask what insights he has gained regarding people’s perception of Obama’s cultural background, in particular the African-American community’s.

He notes, which he believes applies in particular to the Eastern urban areas, “the splits between African Americans and people of African descent,” i.e., native-born African Americans versus recent immigrants of African heritage. He finds that West Indians and Africans were often much more enthusiastic about Obama’s presidential candidacy than African Americans, “partially because of the conjunction of the racial and the immigrant experience that they found resonant.”

Citing an experience of those ethnic politics coming into play, Professor Ward recalls an episode in Far Rockaway, an area with a substantial African American population. He was canvassing at the time with a fellow volunteer who was a Nigerian immigrant, very much interested in American politics. Professor Ward himself is white.

“The funny thing is we would talk to African Americans about issues of interest to them and they would complain to me about immigrants and they would complain to him about white people. And then we’d kind of look at each other and it’s like, ‘You heard that, didn’t you?’ I think we were both trying to make the pretense of being out of earshot of each other.”

For Professor Ward, it raises the challenging issue of how Americans find “common ground, common languages, and common practices” in the face of ongoing immigration. He also worries about the possibility of a slow drift towards an apartheid system where those in power profit from the labor of the disenfranchised.

Final Words on Obama and on Volunteering

To a final question about the appeal of Senator Obama relative to the other presidential candidates, Professor Ward answers, “I think the crucial appeal is one of change. I think this showed up in the questions about diplomacy. It shows up in his focus on a grassroots organization, a grassroots campaign. And it shows up in the degree to which he encourages an active politics, street-level politics.”

“One of the problems that I see is that we don’t discuss politics as people on the street all that much. It’s kind of a spectator sport. And it is a real problem that we are going through of…I guess you would term it an ‘auto-disenfranchisement.’ We’re kind of losing our own voice.”

“And this is a point that many of the candidates have brought up, which is that Washington is not functioning particularly well. It’s gotten very comfortable with itself and not too comfortable with us.”

He goes on to say that the criticism about Obama’s ostensible lack of experience relative to some of the other candidates at the national level, to his mind, is actually a virtue in terms of being an agent for change, given the problematic “professionalizing” of politics that creates out-of-touch Washington insiders.

Reflecting on his experiences thus far as a volunteer, Professor Ward concludes, “It has been a fascinating experience in terms of going to places in Queens I wouldn’t go on my own. And that’s actually one of the wonderful things about politics is pushing yourself to leave your own comfort zone. Pushing yourself to encounter other people you wouldn’t otherwise encounter.”