|
The Nation - March 17, 2008 issue
Obama, being called a Muslim is not a smear
by Naomi Klein
Hillary Clinton denied leaking the photo of Barack Obama wearing a turban, but her campaign manager says that even if she had, it would be no big deal. "Hillary Clinton has worn the traditional clothing of countries she has visited and had those photos published widely."
Sure she did. And George W. Bush put on a fetching Chamato poncho in Santiago, while Paul Wolfowitz burned up YouTube with his antimalarial African dance routines when he was World Bank prez. The obvious difference is this: when white politicians go ethnic, they just look funny. When a black presidential contender does it, he looks foreign. And when the ethnic apparel in question is vaguely reminiscent of the clothing worn by Iraqi and Afghan fighters (at least to many Fox viewers, who think any headdress other than a baseball cap is a declaration of war on America), the image is downright frightening.
The turban "scandal" is all part of what is being referred to as "the Muslim smear." It includes everything from exaggerated enunciations of Obama's middle name to the online whisper campaign that Obama attended a fundamentalist madrassa in Indonesia (a lie), was sworn in on a Koran (another lie) and if elected would attach RadioShack speakers to the White House to broadcast the Muslim call to prayer (I made that one up).
So far, Obama's campaign has responded with aggressive corrections that tout his Christian faith, attack the attackers and channel a cooperative witness before the House Un-American Activities Committee. "Barack has never been a Muslim or practiced any other faith besides Christianity," states one fact sheet. "I'm not and never have been of the Muslim faith," Obama told a Christian News reporter.
Of course Obama must correct the record, but he doesn't have to stop there. What is disturbing about the campaign's response is that it leaves unchallenged the disgraceful and racist premise behind the entire "Muslim smear": that being Muslim is de facto a source of shame. Obama's supporters often say they are being "Swiftboated," casually accepting the idea that being accused of Muslimhood is tantamount to being accused of treason.
Substitute another faith or ethnicity, and you'd expect a very different response. Consider a report from the archives of this magazine. Thirteen years ago, Daniel Singer, The Nation's late, much-missed Europe correspondent, went to Poland to cover a hotly contested presidential election. He reported that the race had descended into an ugly debate over whether one of the candidates, Aleksander Kwasniewski, was a closet Jew. The press claimed his mother had been buried in a Jewish cemetery (she was still alive), and a popular TV show aired a skit featuring the Christian candidate dressed as a Hasidic Jew. "What perturbed me," Singer wryly observed, "was that Kwasniewski's lawyers threatened to sue for slander rather than press for an indictment under the law condemning racist propaganda."
We should expect no less of the Obama campaign. When asked during the Ohio debate about Louis Farrakhan's support for his candidacy, Obama did not hesitate to call Farrakhan's anti-Semitic comments "unacceptable and reprehensible." When the turban photo flap came up in the same debate, he used the occasion to say nothing at all.
Farrakhan's infamous comments about Jews took place twenty-four years ago. The orgy of hate that is "the Muslim smear" is unfolding in real time, and it promises to greatly intensify in a general election. These attacks do not simply "smear Barack's Christian faith," as John Kerry claimed in a campaign mailing. They are an attack on all Muslims, some of whom actually do exercise their rights to cover their heads and send their kids to religious school. Thousands even have the very common name Hussein. All are watching their culture used as a crude bludgeon against Obama, while the candidate who is the symbol of racial harmony fails to defend them. This at a time when US Muslims are bearing the brunt of the Bush Administration's assaults on civil liberties, including dragnet wiretapping, and are facing a documented spike in hate crimes.
Occasionally, though not nearly enough, Obama says that Muslims are "deserving of respect and dignity." What he has never done is what Singer called for in Poland: denounce the attacks themselves as racist propaganda, in this case against Muslims.
The core of Obama's candidacy is that he alone--who lived in Indonesia as a boy and has an African grandmother--can "repair the world" after the Bush wrecking ball. That repair job begins with the 1.4 billion Muslims around the world, many of whom are convinced that the United States has been waging a war against their faith. This perception is based on facts, among them the fact that Muslim civilians are not counted among the dead in Iraq and Afghanistan; that Islam has been desecrated in US-run prisons; that voting for an Islamic party resulted in collective punishment in Gaza. It is also fueled by the rise of a virulent strain of Islamophobia in Europe and North America.
As the most visible target of this rising racism, Obama has the power to be more than its victim. He can use the attacks to begin the very process of global repair that is the most seductive promise of his campaign. The next time he's asked about his alleged Muslimness, Obama can respond not just by clarifying the facts but by turning the tables. He can state clearly that while a liaison with a pharmaceutical lobbyist may be worthy of scandalized exposure, being a Muslim is not. Changing the terms of the debate this way is not only morally just but tactically smart--it's the one response that could defuse these hateful attacks. The best part is this: unlike ending the Iraq War and closing Guantánamo, standing up to Islamophobia doesn't need to wait until after the election. Obama can use his campaign to start now. Let the repairing begin.
Postscript: Ari Melber criticized this column, citing a video the Obama campaign has been circulating featuring a minister of Obama's church who makes it clear that while Obama is not a Muslim, there would be nothing wrong with it if he was. I had the same clip sent to me directly from the Obama campaign and wrote this in response: "What I am suggesting needs to be said can only be said by the man himself, just as he has taken brave stances against racism directed at Latinos under the guise of fighting illegal immigration. Do not underestimate the message that his silence is sending, not just in the U.S. but around the world."………
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080317/klein
=============================
Why the Muslim smear is bigger than Islam...
The right wing smear campaign against Barack Obama is intensifying, with false claims that the Christian, patriotic Senator actually harbors a secret Muslim history and hates America so much he won't even say the pledge of allegiance. The effort has morphed from Internet rumblings and chain emails, as The Nation reported in October, to high profile attacks from the G.O.P. this month -- before Obama has even locked up the nomination.
In the past week, a state Republican Party used the smear in a press release titled "Anti-Semites for Obama" – which it later revised; a radio host raised the innuendo while speaking at a John McCain rally -- McCain swiftly apologized for the remark; and Republican Congressman Jack Kingston went on national television to falsely claim that Obama "would not say the pledge of allegiance." Kingston also whined that Obama does not wear an American flag pin, drawing an MSNBC anchor to note Kingston was also pin-less. "I will wear one and I have worn one!" Kingston retorted.
So far, the Obama Campaign has effectively battled the multi-pronged smear with several tacks. Obama often prebuts the charges in campaign speeches; his aides circulate fact sheets and ply voters with letters from clergy and generals; and his Internet team bought Google ads targeting smear searches, in order to draw the curious to a fact page with videos of Obama reciting the pledge on the Senate floor. The campaign's anti-propaganda ranges from the comically blunt, like a November announcement that "Obama Is a Patriot Who Loves His Flag and His Country," to fairly thoughtful offerings, like a video message from a minister at Obama's church, sharing her experience with confusion about his faith. The minister, Jane Fisler Hoffman, explains how she truth-squaded a woman who told a Muslim man that Obama was also Muslim:
"We overheard it and jumped in and said two things: First of all, there's absolutely nothing wrong with being Muslim. But second of all, Senator Obama does not happen to be Muslim. He's a Christian and he's a member of our church."
The "Fact Check" video drew over 55,000 views on YouTube, since the campaign promoted it last month. Hoffman closes by noting one predicament of rebutting the lies about Obama's religion: "We don't want to go around saying, ‘heck no he's not a Muslim!' -- as if that was a bad thing. It's not a bad thing. There are great Muslim people, but he doesn't happen to be – he's a Christian." And apart from the smear, Obama also speaks out on bigotry against a range of groups, including Muslims and immigrants. In a major speech this month, for example, Obama criticized the exploitation of fear to "turn" people against each other. "Fear can cloud our judgment. And suddenly we start scapegoating gay people, or immigrants, or people who don't look like us, or Muslims -- because our own lives aren't going well," he said, urging the audience to change that climate by standing up for higher principles.
Thus it was surprising to read Naomi Klein's argument in the new Nation:
So far, Obama's campaign has responded with aggressive corrections that tout his Christian faith, attack the attackers and channel a cooperative witness before the House Un-American Activities Committee. "Barack has never been a Muslim or practiced any other faith besides Christianity," states one fact sheet. "I'm not and never have been of the Muslim faith," Obama told a Christian News reporter. Of course Obama must correct the record, but he doesn't have to stop there. What is disturbing about the campaign's response is that it leaves unchallenged the disgraceful and racist premise behind the entire "Muslim smear": that being Muslim is de facto a source of shame. Obama's supporters often say they are being "Swiftboated," casually accepting the idea that being accused of Muslimhood is tantamount to being accused of treason.
True, they have aggressively corrected the record. But as the above links demonstrate, from the candidate on down, this campaign has also emphasized that there is nothing wrong with being a Muslim.
Yet Klein believes Obama must go further. "What he has never done," she writes, is "denounce the attacks themselves as racist propaganda, in this case against Muslims." The smears are clearly bigoted and offensive, to Muslims and others, and I think the campaign has denounced them as racist propaganda. But even if people expect more, in good faith outrage, let's remember that this is also bigger than Islam.
Like other right wing character assassination, the smear campaign is not simply aimed at the portion of the public exercised about Islam or the pledge of allegiance, anymore than swiftboating was only for the Vietnam generation. (About half of Americans do say they would be "less likely" to back a Muslim for president -- a summer poll showed 7% think Obama is Muslim -- while half say the same about a candidate over 70.) But the larger imperative is to undermine the character, credibility and honesty of the candidate, developing a resilient narrative to poison media coverage and stoke fundamental doubts about anything the candidate says. Just as Gore was attacked as a "serial exaggerator" and Kerry was presented as a man who "misrepresents" his record, this smear suggests that Obama has something to hide. Just listen to the smear operatives. Long after CNN debunked a false story about Obama attending a Muslim school from Insightmag.com, a right wing website, its editor told The Washington Post that "Muslim heritage" was "not so much" the issue. The real issue, he claimed, was Obama's supposed "concealment and deception" about his youth. Obviously the editor, Jeffrey Kuhner, has no credibility, but the response previews the playbook here. In this context, it is understandable that the Obama Campaign is focused on responding as bluntly and unambiguously as possible.
Posted by Ari Melber
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?bid=45&pid=292542
|
