Abu Jimmy is just a memory
STAR LEDGER, Monday, April 03, 2006
BY GEORGE AJJAN
The recent political lynching by Passaic County Democrats of Sami
Merhi has created a nationwide stir among Arab- Americans. Merhi, a
longtime Democratic activist and fundraiser, won the backing of local
party bosses to run for countywide office, only to have it yanked a week
later. This betrayal by the Democrats has considerable repercussions for
both
political parties, especially in New Jersey, as they court
the increasingly important Arab-American voting constituency.
But do Arab-Americans vote primarily Republican or Democrat, anyway?
It's a complex question, and the answer begins with the name "Abu
Jimmy."
Such a name is a kunya: an Arab custom of honor, addressing a man
with the name of his eldest son. For example, we frequently hear
politicians indicate respect by calling Palestinian President Mahmoud
Abbas, Abu Mazen or "the father of Mazen." In a slightly different
context, however, using the son's nickname in dicates familiarity and
fondness -- such as my great-grandfather, whose eldest son was Yacoub.
He cherished the moniker "Abu Jack" among his pals on Paterson's Mill
Street during the glory days of Silk City.
Interestingly, this tradition also sheds historical light on the
political leanings of the earliest Arab-Americans. Truly, many from that
initial generation warmly referred to Democratic President Franklin
Roosevelt, whose eldest son was named James, as "Abu Jimmy," as if he
were their chum. They loved FDR with fervor. Indeed, like many other
Depression-era working- class immigrant groups, including
Italian-Americans and Eastern European Jews, a large number of
Arab-Americans found a natural home in the Democratic Party under the
leadership of "Abu Jimmy."
As these communities began to prosper, their political leanings
changed. As their standard of living rose, they associated more with
Republican values.
In that era, Arab-Americans assimilated straightforwardly and
determined their political orientation on the same mainstream concerns
relevant to other emerg ing ethnic groups. As time passed, however,
unique political issues arose for the growing community, especially
concerning Middle East turmoil and the wholesale association of Arabs
with terrorism. These calamities significantly affected their parti san
preferences. For example, Walter Mondale's rejection of campaign
contributions by Americans with Arabic surnames in the 1984
presidential campaign made many Arab-Americans Republicans for life.
On the other hand, Jesse Jackson's sympa thetic attitude toward the
suffer ing of Palestinians and the catastrophe of the Lebanese
civil war during his presidential bid recruited many to the
Democratic side.
Furthermore, the increase in immigrants who practiced Islam
rigorously, consequently encountering difficulty blending into American
society, led many Arab- Americans to seek cover with other
"disenfranchised minorities" in the Democratic Party. A greater number
of devout Mus lims, however, who hold similar disdain for decadent
Hollywood culture as conservative Christians, found a natural home among
family-values champions in the GOP. Ultimately, the community split
about evenly along partisan lines. But approaching the 2000 election,
the balance tipped heavily in favor of the Republicans, thanks to the
skill of George W. Bush in reaching out to Arab-Americans with
unprecedented vigor. First of all, Bush broke the mold in valuing
American Muslims as fully integrated citizens. He forever changed the
script of the standard presidential stump speech to read, "churches,
synagogues and mosques." His campaign aggressively courted socially
conservative Arab-American voters, both Christian and Muslim, like never
before.
He also outflanked his Democratic opponent, Al Gore, on
civil rights. No Arab-American will ever forget the second 2000
presidential debate in which Bush forcefully condemned the use of secret
evidence against Arab- Americans while just minutes earlier Gore had
launched a bizarre, superfluous attack on the Arab nation of Syria. The
debate marked a turning point in the political disposition of
Arab-Americans: That November, they gave Bush a decisive edge in states
like Ohio and, most important, Florida, arguably propelling him into the
White House.
America's tense political atmosphere following Sept. 11, 2001,
however, swung the pendulum in the opposite direction. Arab-Americans
felt unfairly mistrusted in their own country, fearing hawkish laws
somehow reminiscent of the undemocratic regimes from which many sought
refuge here. Furthermore, their cynical discernment of the war on terror
as a war on Arabs, coupled with Bush's closeness to former Israeli Prime
Minister Ariel Sha ron, immensely unpopular with Arab-Americans, soured
the community toward the GOP.
Republican activists valiantly challenged such misgivings and
delicately attempted to clarify the policies but with little suc cess.
These were the perceptions, and perceptions are reality. Not
surprisingly, in 2004 the Arab- American community flip-flopped,
delivering John Kerry close to two-thirds of their ballots in a
principally emotional anti-Bush vote. But recent events, especially the
treachery of the Democrats toward an impeccably loyal 26-year devotee in
Merhi, will cer tainly swing the pendulum back to the right. This
watershed inci dent compounds the shameful manner in which Democratic
officials across the country, but most dramatically in New Jersey,
handled the Dubai Ports issue, involving a firm from the United Arab
Emirates. While President Bush defended the Arab company, saying, "I am
trying to conduct foreign policy now by saying to the people of the
world, 'We'll treat you fairly'," his Democratic detractors, led by
Sens. Robert Menendez and Frank Lauten berg, engaged in reprehensible
demagoguery. Lautenberg de serves particular scorn for comparing Dubai
to the devil. What he actually meant to say does not matter. Just as
with Arab-American suspicions regarding the Patriot Act, perception is
reality.
Can Democrats recover and keep the community on their side as they
did in 2004? Unlikely. Arab-Americans had irrationally swung to the left
out of frustration with Bush's policies, not out of love for Kerry,
Menendez, Jon Corzine or Lautenberg. Those Democrats may think the Arab-
American community supports them unflinchingly, but none of them even
approaches the es teem of "Abu Jimmy." Quite the contrary; the Democrats
are showing some very ugly colors at the moment by bluntly assailing the
dignity of Arab-Americans. If there is one paragon virtue in the Arab
culture, it is dignity. For that, they will pay handsomely.
The Democrats have become smug. They seem to treat Arab- Americans as
playthings to use and abuse. They are dreadfully mistaken. The community
will in deed question its political alignment once again because of
Dubai, the mistreatment of Sami Merhi and more. By 2008, irrita tion
with Bush's lightning-rod policies will dissipate and successive
candidates will invoke a fresh, healthy debate on the is sues again.
With a well-constructed message targeting socially conservative
Arab-Americans that astutely appeals to their sense of dignity, the
Republican platform will be tough to beat. Unfortunately for the
Democrats, there is no "Abu Jimmy" in sight. If they do not find one
soon, in all likelihood, the Arab- American community will again come
home to roost in the GOP as it did in 2000. I say, ahlan wa sahlan. You
are most welcome.
George Ajjan, a former Republican candidate for Congress from the 8th
District in New Jersey, may be reached at george@ajjan.com. |
