American political Scene and Muslims

Madina Archives


Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board

American political Scene and Muslims
Saleema
10/24/00 at 23:53:04
American Political Scene

 and Muslim Americans

 By M. Amir Ali


 This is written in response to questions asked of me regarding Muslim
 participation in the political system of the United States. Immigrant
Muslims at large remain uninformed about the political structure and
mechanisms and
 as a result, they shy away from participation. The Muslim population in the
 U.S. is estimated to be between six to seven million individuals. That
figure translates into approximately four million eligible voters. A recent
survey
 published by Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), dated October 18,
 2000 indicates that 40% of the Muslims are leaning towards George W. Bush,
 26% towards Ralph Nader (or the fourth party candidate) and 24% towards Al
 Gore. In a straw poll conducted during a Muslim leadership meeting in
Chicago on October 17, 2000, an audience of two-hundred persons responded as
follows:
 69% were for Bush, 12% for Gore and 16% for a third or fourth party
 candidate. This author thought that a comprehensive but brief article might
 contribute to the political education of t
 he American Muslims.


 Secularism: The United States of America, commonly dubbed as "America", is a
 secular country like most of the West. Secularism, in reality, is rooted in
 rejection or rather, banishment of religion from the political, economic,
and social life of the country and its people. Secularism tries to minimize
the
 impact of religion even on family life by the use of legal interference, the
 media, entertainment, social pressures and, if possible, the welfare system
 of the government. The "Great Society" program of Lyndon Johnson was a
 disastrous innovation that used government money to move people away from
the religious dictates of morality, marriage and divorce. Bill Clinton is a
big
 hero, worthy of the Nobel Prize, for he made adultery an acceptable
 triviality. He will not receive a Nobel for adultery but they may give it to
 him under some other pretext; but adultery, as an acceptable norm, is his
 greatest contribution to secularism.


 Branches of Secularism: Secularism has two branches: (a) Secular Humanism,
 and (b) Secular Nationalism. Both types of secularism have opposite impacts
 on the lives of people, not just American, but worldwide.


 Secular humanism appears to be concerned with the welfare of humanity at
 large. The policies of secular humanists are designed to benefit mankind, in
 general. A humanist thinks that what is good for the world is good for his
 people in his country. If mankind, in general, benefits, it will benefit his
 people eventually, directly or indirectly. Naturally, such policies dictate
 open trade without tariff barriers and open migration (immigration) of the
 people across the borders with the fewest possible restrictions on foreign
 import of products and services.


 Secular nationalism appears to be concerned with a nation and its people –
 their benefit first. Policies of secular humanists are designed to benefit a
 people living within a political national boundary. A nationalist thinks
that what is good for his people is his priority even if it is at the expense
of
 people living in other countries. Naturally, such policies dictate close
 borders with very limited and restricted migration (immigration) and high
 tariff barriers on imports of foreign products and services.


 Muslims in America must learn to thrive under secularism, use the tools of
 secular democracy but not abuse them in order to bring Allah’s sovereignty
in the lives of Muslim and demolish all opposition to it. This will be
possible
 only when Muslims have a good understanding of the system and know the ways
 to use it. Let us examine the two major political parties in light of these
 two branches of secularism.


 The Democratic Party has all the attributes of secular nationalists. This
 party always tries to put barriers on foreign imports and place as many
 obstacles as possible in the way of immigration. The worst immigration law
 amendments were passed in 1996 by the Democrats, including the Secret
 Evidence Law designed against the Muslims. Democrats are very protective of
 the American labor unions and see immigration as a threat to the power of
 labor unions. In addition, Democrats see foreign imports as a threat to the
 jobs of American labor union members. On the other hand, To further their
 national interest, Democrats put pressure on other countries to have open
 trade policies towards American products irrespective of how it may impede
 the progress of target countries. Democrats may allow grudgingly the
 immigration of the best and the brightest from foreign countries but will
 impede the immigration of labor possessing ordinary skill levels.


 The Republican Party has all the attributes of secular humanists. This party
 fights to keep foreign trade open and borders open for immigration. It is,
 therefore natural that Republicans are unpopular among organized labor.
There are a few politicians on each side who do not agree on some issues and
vote
 with the other side. This party is not anti-labor but it does not desire to
 give too much power to the labor because it will undermine efficiency
 increasing the cost of production. From Republican point of view, as this
 author understands it, foreign labor brings competition and efficiency
 lowering the cost of production. When efficiency of the labor increases,
cost of production decreases benefiting domestic and foreign consumers
bringing
 more dollars to America through increased exports. Increased export always
 translates into more jobs.


 Policies on Select Issues. There are a variety of issues which these parties
 view differently and for which they put forth different solutions.


 Welfare: Democrats on this issue appear to be more humanitarian than
 Republicans. However, this appearance is superficial. Democrats created a
 welfare system to use it as a tool to promote atheism and agnosticism by
 promoting immorality and irreligious life-styles. For example, government is
 paying more money to two unmarried individuals separately under welfare than
 what they would receive as a family, if they were married. Then, there is
the famous marriage tax as part of the Federal income tax code, which
requires that a married couple pay more income tax when filing jointly than
when
 filing separately with the same income, creating an incentive for
 shacking-up. Single mothers who have given birth to children out of wedlock
 receiving welfare money are not questioned about marriage or the father of
 the child. Therefore, the government is involved in subsidizing the
 performance of anti-religion things, which in this case, living in
 fornication and adultery thus rewarding this behavior. Islam supports a welf
 are system without promoting indecency, sin, transgression, injustice,
 begging, laziness, and parasitism.


 Republicans see all these wrongs but cannot talk of the real evils of the
 welfare system because it will appear that they are in support of religion
 and religious values – the greatest sin under secularism. Rejection of God
 and the divine values given by Him is a necessary condition to be a secular
 person. Accordingly, all Christian and Jewish clergy who support secular
 values or a valueless society look like hypocrites. The Republican Party,
 therefore, has taken a stand against all the evils created by the welfare
 system of the Democrats. However, the Republicans have not been able to
 present their ideas in a coherent way without looking hard-hearted. A good
 welfare system is supported by Islam but its use to promote immorality is
not condoned. In this area Muslims may support the Republicans in reforming
the
 welfare system so that it becomes a tool of bringing decency,
 God-consciousness and morality in the society.


 Women’s Rights on their own Bodies: This is the issue of abortion hotly
 supported by Democrats. This is the most blatant disobedience of God. All
 religions in the world value the sanctity of the life of the fetus
 Secularists want to strike hard on that value and Democrats are the most
 committed Fundamentalist Secularists. Republicans have some religiosity left
 in them and desire to remove senseless abortion from the society. Islam
 teaches against abortion. Any exception may be judged on case by case basis
 and no generalization can be spelled out here. Women have a right to control
 their own bodies in regard to engaging in sexual intercourse as well as a
 choice to live in cohabitation or not. This lifestyle is a choice because
God has given humanity free will. Once women have agreed to have intercourse
they
 have given up their rights in favor of God and must suffer or enjoy the
 consequences. It is like agreeing to a surgery; when you allow the
 administration of anesthesia, you have given up your rights on yo
 ur body in favor of the surgeon.


 Homosexuality: This is another hot issue for the Democrats, another laugh at
 God, implying that He can keep His commandments to Himself. Republicans have
 been pushed into a corner to give lukewarm support to some of the homosexual
 (my term is heterophobe) causes. If Republicans were assured of help in the
 elections, they would take a better stand against homosexuality
 (heterophobia, a fear of the opposite gender). Heterophobes are less than 1%
 of the population but they enjoy wide support because of the successes
gained by anti-religion forces who want to mock at religious values.


 School Vouchers: Secular Fundamentalists have worked hard for decades to
 remove any traces of divine moral values from the public school system
 through one court case after another. They want to raise generations of
 people without any divine moral values. Religious (parochial) schools have
 been bringing out school graduates inculcated with some moral values and
that hurts the Democrats. Now, Republicans want to give school vouchers, a
return
 of the taxpayer’s money for the education of moral values. If Republicans
 succeed, secularists see their defeat because they will never be able to
 eliminate the teachings of divine moral values; their three hundred years of
 work will go down the drain (and it should). Anti-Islam forces are
 particularly afraid of Islamic schools, which will gain government support
 through school vouchers but they cannot talk openly against Islamic schools
 without looking like bigots. It appears that Republicans are in support of
 religious schools and the teaching of divine morality; indee
 d therein lies the solution of crime and valueless norms in the contemporary
 society worldwide.


 School Prayer: School prayer is a wonderful thing that instills a reminder
of God and accountability to Him in young people. Secular Fundamentalists,
 represented by Democrats, see this as a threat to their movement to get rid
 of religion from the society. They are out to banish God from every aspect
of human life. Republicans see this as a right of the people to practice in
the
 schools. Muslim students would not like to sing Christian hymns but they
 would surely like to gather in a room and recite Surat al-Fatiha before
going to the classroom in the morning. This is their right and they should
have it.


 Entertainment Industry: Secular forces have used movies, TV, and music to
the fullest extent to remove religiosity from the society. Democrats are very
 pleased with the results and they continue to support the entertainment
 industry unobtrusively. They object to violence but not when immorality,
 homosexuality, fornication, pornography, and adultery are promoted. In fact,
 Democrats are rewarded by members of the entertainment industry through
 generous donations to politicians who support them. The entertainment
 industry culture has no room for religiosity and those who may like to
remain strictly religious, may not get the top roles. Republicans would like
to
 reform the industry but they also do not have an agenda. This is a weak side
 of the Republicans.


 Taxes: Secular Fundamentalists want to control people’s lives from the
cradle to the grave through taxation and a huge welfare system. Democrats are
 standard bearers of secularism in this area. Here lies the contrast between
 Democrats and Republicans. Republican policy is to minimize taxation,
 minimize the size of the government, and let people decide for themselves.
If there is a good school system where divine morality is taught whereby the
 people will respect themselves and other people’s lives and property, then
 all can live happily. When people behave responsibly there is no need for a
 large police force or a large government. This would be compatible with
 Islamic teachings. A just tax system is extremely important for justice and
 equity in the society.


 The tax cutting formula of Gore is extremely complicated and impractical.
The Bush formula is simple and it is fair to return the taxes to those who
paid
 them. However, Islam teaches to take money from the rich and give it to the
 poor. It means that the return of taxes cannot be equal but tilted in favor
 of the poor members of the society. American Muslims can contribute to this
 country by bringing the Islamic system of taxation to light. According to
 Islamic teachings, the national debt must be paid and the nation must be
 relieved of interest payments, which is amounting to almost one-third of the
 national budget. The Republican side should know Muslim concerns in this
 area.

 Environment: Democrats, being secular nationalists, desire to do what is
good for America even if it is at the expense of other countries. They do not
want
 more drilling for gas and oil in the U.S. because they want to preserve
 underground resources until everybody else in the world runs out. The
 Americans would then be able to control the world energy source by providing
 it at the highest prices. Republicans see the problem differently.
 Republicans see that in time, alternate renewable energy sources will be
 developed and underground oil and gas sources will be virtually worthless.
 Therefore, they would like to allow entrepreneurs to make some money now.
 Other environmental issues like saving birds, animals, and forests are not
 really contested issues. Air pollution is contested but there is extremism
on both sides.


 Racism and Bigotry: This is a very sensitive issue to many. Four hundred
 years of abuse cannot be eliminated easily nor treated in one or two
 generations in the absence of divine teachings. Islam offers total equality
 among all people irrespective of race, color, country of birth, gender, and
 religion. Racists are found in both parties but the perception is that
 Republicans have more racists among them than the Democrats. Thanks to the
 contribution of Islam, racism is on its way out. The Republican Party is
 feeling pressures of the race issue and is reforming itself. Some recent
 examples of this change in attitude have been seen in Governor Bush’s public
 support for the revocation of the Secret Evidence Law as well as his more
 moderate stance in wanting to establish friendly ties to Middle Eastern
 countries. In addition, Bush has lined up members of the minority people for
 appointments should he win this election. If he wins with the help of
Muslims they would surely gain some appointments and that will be a
  step forward.


 Religious Right: This is a code word for the rise of Christian
Fundamentalism in the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century. It
appears very
 suspicious that the rise of Zionism coincides with the rise of Christian
 Fundamentalism. Is it possible that Zionism is the mother and Christianity
is the father of the Christian Fundamentalist movement that made it more
Zionist
 than the Jewish Zionists themselves? The Religious Right is led by the
 Zionist demagogues of "Born Again" Christians and Evangelicals like Pat
 Robertson, Billy Graham and his son. The Republican Party has become a
 hostage of the Religious Right by default. Until and unless Republicans
widen their base they will remain hostages of the Religious Right. Muslims
may be
 able to play a role in freeing the Republican Party from their clutches.


 Although the Religious Right is committed to Zionism, Muslims do have a lot
 in common with them. On the issues of abortion, heterophobia
(homosexuality), school vouchers, moral values, abortion, school prayer,
pornography, and a
 valueless entertainment industry, Muslims can see eye to eye with them and
 agree on most of these issues. Using the Qur’anic teachings of cooperating
in the good and God-consciousness, Muslims should develop bridges to the
 Religious Right. Christian Fundamentalists are some of the most
 self-righteous, arrogant people in the world and it is not easy to speak
with them. They only want to talk you down but do not want to listen to
anyone else. From their point of view, no one is right but them. Many active
 Muslims, including this writer, have had a lot of interaction with Christian
 Fundamentalists. Therefore, I speak based on experience.


 Supreme Court: The President nominates and the Senate confirms appointments
 to the Supreme Court. These are the Grand Muftis of Secularism. If these
 people have some religious values, they would be expected to uphold
religious values in the society. If these people are committed Secular
Fundamentalists,
 they will throw out any vestiges of religious morality from the society. It
 is, therefore, necessary to nominate such people who respect religion and
 moral value systems. Democrats are going to nominate persons who have no
 respect for religion and who will disregard all divine value systems.
 Republicans, on the other hand, will look for persons who will respect
 religious values in the society. American constitution talks against
 government sponsorship of a religion but it is not anti-religion. Secular
 Fundamentalist justices of the Supreme Court have interpreted a religion
 neutral constitution into an anti-religion document. It is never too late to
 reverse interpretations of the constitution and make it again
  religion neutral. The next president will play a key role in this area.
Gore is expected to appoint justices who will be more anti-religion whereas
Bush
 is expected to nominate justices who will be religion neutral.


 Israel: In the early 1970s the Israeli government passed a resolution not to
 allow any Arab (Muslim majority) country or their combination thereof to
 become stronger than Israel. This resolution was immediately adopted as
drawn by the Democratic Party. A few years later the Republican Party also
adopted
 a weaker version of the same resolution. What we learn is that both major
 political parties of the U.S. are not only committed to keeping Israel
strong but keeping Muslim countries individually and jointly weaker than
Israel. By
 "weaker", they mean not just militarily but also politically,
 economically, educationally, technologically, and every other way possible.
 This explains why the American CIA is very active in supporting
dictatorships in the Muslim world and in preventing the formation of
people-supported
 government, commonly known as democracy. If a people-supported government
 (democracy) comes into power in the Muslim countries or if there is any
 possibility of such a government being established, the
  CIA either interferes and turns the tables or attempts reverse the
situation so that a dictatorship as a client or a puppet of the West comes
into power.
 The CIA’s covert policy toward Muslim-majority countries is in direct
 contradiction to the renowned public rhetoric spewed by the U.S. government
 around the world. This point is made to uncover their hypocrisy and not to
 state that Islam endorses western-style democracy. The term democracy may be
 used in two ways: (a) Democracy as an ideology, meaning that the sovereignty
 belongs to man and is rejected by Islam and (b) Democracy as a methodology
to bring a people-elected government to run the affairs of the state under
the sovereignty of Allah is in accordance with Islam.


 In the current situation Al Gore is totally and very happily in the pocket
of Israel; he sees nothing else. George W. Bush, under the pressure of the
 Religious Right, must support Israel blindly, whether he likes it or not.
 However, he is trying to stick his head out of the pocket of Israel and is
 looking around for alternatives. Here is one party: Al Gore and his father,
 former Senator Al Gore Sr., have lifelong histories of anti-Islam, anti-Arab
 activism in support of Israel. Al Gore was groomed in the pocket of Israel.
 The other one: George W. Bush is a businessman turned politician. He is the
 son of former President George H. Bush, who was hated by the Zionists due to
 his lukewarm support of Israel. The Zionists engineered the failure of
George H. Bush’s bid for the second term of the presidency in 1992. It is
ironic
 that in 1992 Zionists and Muslims voted on the same side, that is, for
 Clinton. It is hard for Muslims to forget the destruction of a
 Muslim-majority nation, Iraq, and ruin of the economies
 of many others by the hand of a Bush. Muslim Americans must choose in the
 year 2000 the lesser of the two evils. This choice should not be based on
the emotion of hate for George H. Bush, the former president but on
pragmatism.
 The son does not carry burdens of his father nor the father carries burdens
 of his son. In a separate article I will try to clarify the politics and
 economics of the Gulf war.


 Foreign Policy: With respect to Muslim-majority countries both parties are
 evil and both candidates are evil. However, Gore is expected to rigorously
 implement the Israeli resolution of keeping the Muslim countries weak. We
 will see a lot more political instability, economic regression, and
 increasing backwardness through terrorism (almost all terrorism in the
Muslim world is inspired, technically directed, and funded by the CIA and
Israeli
 Mossad; sometimes joined by Indian espionage agencies). If Gore is elected
 President, we will see that under puppet dictators in the Muslim countries,
 there will be even more killing, more jailing, more torture, and more
 repression of Muslims. Under Gore there is no hope of forming a
 people-supported government in any of the Muslim countries. Whereas with
Bush as President, Muslims may expect a little less of everything because he
is
 not a hard-core, committed, anti-Islam person although he will probably do
 some evil to please his constituency of the Religious Right. In a
  tightly contested election, if Muslims support Bush and if he wins, he will
 have to think twice before harming Muslims at home or abroad. Muslims have a
 duty to come up with a vision and a long-term strategy to change the
 political environment in this country.


 How to make a choice? It is recommended that every Muslim American not make
 an individual choice but rather to leave it to politically-educated leaders.
 The American Muslim Political Coordination Council (AMPCC) has been formed
 and is composed of AMC, CAIR, AMPAC, MPAC, AMA, UMAA, and other political
 organizations of Muslims. Dr. Agha Saeed, Professor of Political Science in
 Berkley, CA, and Founder/President of the AMA, has been elected as its
 Chairman. All members of this council are mature, very well-educated, and
 sincere Muslims. This council has surveyed Muslim opinion about the choice
of a candidate and entered into negotiation with candidates for the benefit
of the Muslims worldwide. On October 23, 2000, the AMPCC will announce its
 recommendation in a press conference in Washington, D.C.


 How to vote? Muslim Americans must vote as a block following the
 recommendation of the AMPCC. If the Muslims cast a block vote you can be
sure that two years and four years from now, candidates will seek us out and
will
 ask us what they can do for us in order to get our vote. By this path
Muslims have a potential of gaining more power than the one currently enjoyed
by the
 Zionists. For more on this point see this author’s article CAMPAIGN 2000 on
 www.iiie.net. This and more articles will be posted on this web site soon,
 Insha-Allah.


 Are Muslims allowed to participate politically under secularism? The answer
 is a very emphatic yes. See the Fatwa by an eminent scholar Dr. Taha Jaber
 Al-Alwani on www.amconline.org. The Prophet (S) instructed us to help a
 transgressor as well the one who is transgressed. How does one help a
 transgressor? One helps the transgressor by holding his hand from
 transgression. Antagonism, war, and fighting are not always the solutions.
We know that Islam means peace. If friendship and mutual understanding can
solve
 our problems, let us try them first. Unless we are close to a transgressor,
 we will not be able to hold his hand from transgression. Muslims need not
 beg; Muslims are beginning to gain some power, which they must learn to use
 constructively with far-sighted vision.


 It is a Sunnah of the Prophet (S) to get involved to eliminate oppression,
 injustice, and inequity and replace it with opportunity, justice, and
equity. If we do not get involved, we will convey the message that we do not
care and
 we are allowing the powers of oppression to be loose. Let us take the lead
 from the AMPAC, MPAC, AMC, CAIR, UMAA, and AMPCC and follow it for the
 benefit of us all. Isn’t it wonderful that all these politically-oriented
 organizations of Muslims have united under the AMPCC? We cry for unity but
 when the opportunity arises we go in different ways. Let us shed our
personal emotions, our whims, and submit our wisdom to the decision of our
collective
 leadership, at least in one area. Let it be a beginning of unity of the
Ummah in U.S. Are you going to be a part of the solution or part of the
problem?
 You, only you, must decide and seek help from Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala.


 For more information see another article related to the same theme by the
 same author, titled, "THE DREAMS OF ANTI-ISLAM FORCES". After reading this
 article ask yourself:

 "Do I want anti-Islam forces to realize their dreams or do I want to shatter
 their dreams?"


 This is not an endorsement of any candidate but a personal analysis, from
one Muslim’s point of view, of the philosophies of the two major political
 parties and their candidates in the U.S. It is recommended that all Muslims
 follow the recommendation of AMPCC and her component organizations


Individual posts do not necessarily reflect the views of Jannah.org, Islam, or all Muslims. All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster and may not be used without consent of the author.
The rest © Jannah.Org