A Muslim-American Perspective On the GOP And Ron Paul
- Omar Shaukat
- in
- Politics,
- Elections
- Follow this Topic
- 1 month ago
Like most Americans, I began thinking about presidential candidates by determining their views on the issues that I cared about the most. Due to my immigrant Muslim-American identity, I was chiefly concerned with social values and foreign policy. But I found it increasingly difficult to choose between the Republicans and the Democrats.
Insofar as the Republicans championed conservative social values, I was attracted to their leadership, and, insofar as the Democrats challenged a hawkish foreign policy, I gravitated towards them. However, when I thought primarily as an American, rather than a Muslim or a humanitarian, I turned Republican because the party represented the moral hope for America, the country where I would like to raise a family. But then I witnessed the rise of Islamophobia through the Republican ranks just prior to the 2008 elections. Colin Powell’s denunciation of this sentiment convinced me that as a Muslim-American I should favor the Democrats. My desires for a traditionally religious America were outweighed by the threats and insults I feared as a Muslim-American.
Unfortunately, the Islamophobia continues to grow. Not only has the political culture turned more Islamophobic, it is now expected that the candidates opine on “Sharia.” The problem is not that they are not equipped to discuss Sharia, rather that their analyses seem intentionally simplistic and hateful. The two Republican candidates who best capture this tendency are Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum. along with being foreign policy hawks, they also cast undue suspicion on Muslim-Americans, presumably thinking that it will get them more votes. Whether their assumption is true or not, I feel so alienated from their platforms that, despite some congruence over issues of public morality, any reconciliation will not be likely in the immediate future.
In this environment some prominent Muslim-Americans have considered supporting a different brand of American conservatism, what Hamza Yusuf has called the “progressive Right.” And given the trajectory of my political sympathies, I think I can appreciate their thinking. Let me try to explain.
First, divide American conservatism into these ideal-types; paleo-conservatives, with their emphasis on limited government; neo-conservatives, with their emphasis on an aggressive foreign policy; and social-conservatives, with their emphasis on traditional values.
Neo-conservatism is unattractive to me for the obvious reasons. Social-conservatism is distasteful insofar as it is colored by Islamophobia. Santorum, the leading representative of social-conservatives, is probably the most Islamophobic of all the candidates. Not only is he woefully ignorant, but also very bellicose. Though he is not alone in being a “buffoon” or a “fear monger,” he is possibly doing the most to alienate Muslim-Americans from the socially conservative section of the GOP.
Thus, what I am left with are the paleo-conservatives, and their candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas).
I assume most Muslim-Americans will support Paul because of his foreign policy views on Iran, Afghanistan and war. But more crucially, I am attracted to his paleo-conservative tendencies, even if his radical libertarianism might give me some pause. Not guilty of Islamophobia, a non-interventionist, defending civil liberties, consistently pro-life, not willing to subsidize abortion, and uninterested in regulating sexual behavior without abandoning a traditional view of marriage, I think Paul’s nuanced message on the relation between law and morality should resonate with many Muslim-Americans.
In sum, most versions of conservatism, because they are not hostile to religiosity, are, in my opinion, compatible with the ethical worldview of many religious Muslim-Americans. The only obstacles that personally keep me from becoming an enthusiastic Republican are the party’s idolatrous and jingoistic tendency to turn interventionist and Islamophobic. Whether Paul gets nominated or not, I hope the Republicans are able to return to their original paleo-conservative roots.
Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore
Sign up to join the discussion
Omar Shaukat
I was born and raised in Karachi. Moved to the US for college in 1999. And currently a PhD candidate in Religious Studies at the University of Vi...
Most Mic'd Responses
Featured Stories
-
Supreme Court Could Rule That Using Race As a Factor in School Admissions is Unconstitutional
-
Can Mitt Romney Fend Off Rick Santorum? What to Expect At the CNN Arizona Republican Debate
-
Millennials Look for SNL and Comedy Central-Style Humor in Their President, and Neither Mitt Romney Nor Barack Obama Has It
-
Unlike with SOPA and PIPA, Americans Will Not Protest Against Drones As an Invasion of Privacy
-
India’s Infrastructure is at Risk to Cyber Attacks
The Discussion
Close All ThreadsI'm surprised Muslim-Americans are opposed to interventionalism in the Mid-East. No Muslim-American I've ever met ever favored Saddam or Qaddafi. In fact, many came to America to escape those regimes. Iran is far more threatening to the Muslim countries around it than it is to the US. Why then would Muslim-American immigrants with probable roots in one of those directly threatened countries, oppose curbing Iranian power? This had never made sense to me, especially since many Muslim countries, particularly Saudi Arabia have asked us directly for help in keeping stability in the region. The Gulf War, for instance was fought in direct partnership with Saudi Arabia. Libya intervention had the support of the Arab league.
2 Replies
1 Replies
Omar,
I find it curious that you denounce Rick Santorum. One of the reasons he is an Islamaphobe is he does not believe that Muslim tradition/values are congruent with those of Christianity. Also, he loves Jesus so much that he sees any other religion as false and a threat.
Why should your "traditional views" be chosen over his.
Point: You and Santorum are both guilty of a desire to infringe on other citizen's liberty. Do you see the irony?
12 Replies
2 Replies
1 Replies
8 Replies
7 Replies
Fantastic and fascinating article. It is great to get a perspective different than my own on the shifting Republican landscape, and how it can alienate some traditional GOP supporters.
While I don't see eye to eye with Mr. Paul on his stance of extremely limiting government (the system is too big and too many people rely on it now to shut it down completely), I do think that he has, somehow, come across as one of the more moderate Republicans in this debate. I can absolutely see how he would appeal to a voter with the sensibilities you described in the above article.
Mr. Shaukat, what is your opinion on the front-runner--Mitt Romney? Into which of the three conservative categories would he fall?
1 Replies
Hoping the GOP stops being homophobic, biggoted, racist, and exclusionary? Good luck with that.
2 Replies
1 Replies
You can be R and blessings to you--but you'll be as effective as the LCRs, AARs, and HispanicRs in changing the jingoistic, racists and xenophobic Rs. Paleocons are opposed to open immigration by non-Europeans; that would be you. They also oppose religious pluralism and support orthodoxy of the doctrine within the respective denominations. They stress the importance of the need of America to return to its christian heritage; that's not you!
Limited government is nonsense. The more budgets get cut and taxes go up, the weaker economies become. Here are two equations in economics:
Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings (Cut deficits and you cut savings.)
Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption + Net exports (Cut federal spending and you reduce GDP)
The author should try to learn Monetary Sovereignty (www.nofica.com)
10 Replies
5 Replies
4 Replies
3 Replies
2 Replies
This is an interesting and surprising article. I did not have the impression that Muslims opposed abortion and called such opposition "pro-life", as the evangelical Christians do. Ron Paul isn't in the running, so I'd say his popularity w/Muslims is irrelevant.
1 Replies
Well, Paul may get the Muslim vote but he's not going to get the Republican nod to run against Obama. And you told us why: "I am attracted to his paleo-conservative tendencies, even if his radical libertarianism might give me some pause." Trouble is, his radicalism gives mainstream Americans more than pause. Romney is the Republicans' man and he's not going to defeat Obama. Well, unless the EU folds like a cheap suit and Israel attacks Iran. Then, all bets are off.
1 Replies
Thanks for the links outlining how once again this government is more concerned about pleasing every group that comes to this nation than its own original goal of 'one nation'. America was given the name Melting Pot because when the first immigrants came to this nation they melted into a new nation. Today, it appear immigrants come here for our freedoms and benefit but have no intention of abiding and embracing our culture and our laws. How many nations and cultures are we expected to please on individual levels to keep our Melting Pot simmering?
7 Replies
1 Replies
4 Replies
3 Replies
A very interesting perspective. How American Muslims vote may not decide the election; who they support as a voting block could sway voters away from that candidate - Islamophobia, if Muslims support that shows the candidate supports Muslims. I have thoughts on how Islamic leaders could defuse Islamophobia, but that's not the thesis of this article so I won't add those here.
6 Replies
5 Replies
3 Replies
Let's take a look. Gingrich has compared muslims to nazis, Santorum has stated he wants to target all muslims at security checkpoints, Perry cannot say anything without mentioning his faith.
Romney, well, he's Romney, neutral on every issue known to man. A smart muslim would know that a Romney presidency would be the continuation of the status quo.
So this article's title is not too far off at all. No empiric study necessary.
No one has the right to speak for me, and there are millions like me who if possible for them, they would say the same thing to you!!!.
No one ever has the right to claim what I believe or not, or what is my opinion about issues or groups! Humans are not bound by grouping ropes!
Some individuals claim what their religion is or is not, not knowing what their own religion is about. How they can speak about other religions?
Thanks Hamrick
I appreciate your title "A Muslim-American Perspective on the GOP..." because it implies the plurality of political opinions among Muslim Americans. While I share your views on Islamaphobia and foreign policy, I am pro-choice and support same-sex marriages, which influence my party choice.
5 Replies
1 Replies
1 Replies
An interesting article. I'd like to poke at one inconsistency. Pro-life attitudes are primarily anchored in religious justifications. If you're going to support that kind of intrusion of religion into legislation, isn't anti-Sharia legislation the other side of the same coin?
15 Replies
9 Replies
5 Replies
2 Replies
4 Replies
3 Replies
Most Muslims would gravitate to the GOP if not for the jingoism and bigotry in certain of its wings. Nice article.
The above opinion is that of the writer of the article. I hope, it is clear that one opinion does not represent all -- regardless of spiritual/ religious believes !
I also firmly believe that no one has the right to generalize opinion of one person and patch it to group(s) of people who right or wrong are considered to believe in certain ways. I would not claim that all democrats or all republicans, or all independents are moral or immoral.
Here we go again with another Muslim perspective that IGNORES the culpability of Muslims in the reason why America is suddenly "Islamophobic." While I agree that historically all religions are "drenched in innocent blood," it is only Islam that finds that blood still flowing at a shocking rate. The other major religions' blood dried and blew away long ago. Before you go blaming the GOP for being evil against poor, innocent Islam, perhaps looking internally and helping to STOP Muslims from murdering everyone that disagrees with them is a good idea? As to Ron Paul, his day is done. I would not waste much time worrying about him. Finally, your "Islamophobia" is sort of a ruse, anyway. FBI hate crime stats show Muslims barely register as a blip
18 Replies
8 Replies
7 Replies
7 Replies
6 Replies
I appreciate how you show us your thought process and the many complexities of creating a political identity in this country. Great article.
I haven't heard Romney or Gingrich talk in Islamophobic terms, unless you equate opposition to Iran's nuclear threat to be anti-Islamic, which is quite a stretch of logic. Even the people of Iran don't like their government, so it's hardly representative of Islam.
Many American's don't know Paul. Most get their information from MSM which slams Paul with slants and "he is unelectable" as though they decide for all. Paul is not racist, weak on defense or a warmonger
Though I speak out warning of radical ideology within Islam. I do not speak that Islam itself is evil. Yet, Islam, Christianity, and Judaism's history is drenched in innocent blood. But a group or nation is not a religion. Any one is not all.
Peace is not a do nothing proposition. Discernment of understanding and knowledge with dialogue leads to peace just as fear mongering and incitement to violence preying on ignorance to war.
Always be circumspect and let no man deceive you. Study the budget & growing debt, actions of BO & vote Paul
4 Replies
3 Replies
I don't know if anyone else feels this way, but I don't see the facts to support the main assertion of this article. From a purely rhetorical point of view, Mr. Paul seems like someone who could appeal to Muslim-Americans, but where are the statistics to support this assertion. Where's the quantitative support?
1 Replies
Great article! What's ironic is that neo-conservatism, and even to an extent social conservatism, has its roots in trotskyism. The warhawks and gay haters aren't the limited government warriors they pretend to be, they want government that pursues their own ends to engineer society as they see fit.
Remember, the term "American exceptionalism" was coined by the leader of the American Communist party in the 1920s.
12 Replies
5 Replies
3 Replies
4 Replies
2 Replies