American Democracy And Comparative Ethnic Performance: Muslims, Blacks And Jews
By Ali A. Mazrui

Muslims in the United States face three cultural crises relevant to their roles as citizens – the crisis of identity, the crisis of participation and the crisis of values and code of conduct.

The crisis of identity involves their determining who they are and how to reconcile their multiple allegiances.  The crisis of participation involves decisions about how far to be active in community life and public affairs.  The third crisis of values concerns a general code of ethical conduct and of policy preferences – ranging from Muslim attitudes to abortion to Muslim concerns about homosexuality.  We plan to take each of these three crises in turn, but bearing in mind that in real life they are inter-related and intertwined.

In relation to these three concerns of identity, participation and code of conduct, American Muslims are best studied comparatively.[1]  As identities, Jews and Muslims are mutually exclusive categories.  One cannot be both a Muslim and a Jew.  On the other hand, Blacks and Muslims are overlapping identities.  Indeed, up to a third of the population of Muslims in the United States are either African American or African.[2]

As U.S. Muslims struggle to define themselves in America, they may have lessons to learn from both the Black experience and Jewish self-definitions.

On the issue of political participation, Jews and Blacks in the United States are contrasting paradigms.  American Jews may well be the most active participants of all major groups in the American political process.  Jews participate not merely in the final voting, but also in the choice of candidates for the primaries, in the debates of the issues, and in making political financial contributions to the candidates or parties of their choice.  Between elections Jews are also exceptionally participatory in trying to influence policy-options in Congress, the White House and in State legislatures.[3]

On the other hand, African Americans are among the least participatory of all American voters.  The majority of them do not have faith in the electoral process or in the political system as a whole.  A large proportion of African Americans are also too poor to read newspapers, follow political trends, or have the time to be politically active citizens.[4]  American Muslims are caught between these two paradigms of massive Jewish engagement and substantial Black disengagement from the political process.

The most emotional issues for Jews and Muslims have in the past been related to foreign policy.  Jews vote in American elections partly on the basis of which candidate is more committed to the state of Israel.[5]  American Muslims are emotionally involved in such foreign policy issues as Palestine, Kashmir, Iran, Afghanistan and Iraq.[6]

African Americans, on the other hand, are much more concerned with such domestic issues as affirmative action, vouchers for schools, the politics of urban renewal, from welfare to workfare, and racial discrimination in such fields as law enforcement and the judicial process.[7]

Jews and Muslims in the United States are therefore divided mainly on foreign policy issues.  They are certainly on opposing sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  African Americans and Muslims are united mainly on race and civil liberties.  Since September 11, 2001, the prejudices of “driving while black” have been compounded by the bigotry of “flying while Muslim”.[8]

                Because of their well-earned success, U.S. Jews are a powerful minority in the American political process.  Because of their history as a disadvantaged racial group, African Americans are a relatively marginalized minority in the American political order.  U.S. Muslims would like to be like the Jews in level of success (vertical admiration) but are not keen to be integrated with them (horizontal empathy).

                In the American system African Americans are not a collective role-model (because of vertical marginalization).  But U.S. Muslims and African Americans have been exploring ways of solidarity (horizontal Afro-Islamic inter-linkage).  Let us explore more fully the relationships between Islam and the Black experience, on the one hand, and Islam and the Jewish experience, on the other hand.

Comparative Identity and the Jewish Question

Muslims in the United States have begun to outnumber Jews in the twenty-first century.[9]  The two groups were already numerically neck-and-neck (about 6 million each) in the year 2000.   However, contemporary Muslim influence on U.S. foreign and domestic programs continues to be only a fraction of the influence exercised by Jewish Americans.  This is partly because Jewish identity is consolidated enough to be focused and probably because Jewish Americans are more strategically placed in the economy, in the media, in institutions of higher learning, and in the political process.[10]

From the point of view of response to public affairs, Muslims in the United States respond to four principal identities in themselves.  Muslims respond to the emotional pulls and sentiments of their own national origins (e.g. as Pakistanis, Indonesians, Iranians, Somali, or Egyptians.)[11]

Second, Muslims also act in response to their racial identities, given the race-conscious nature of American society.  Among U.S. Muslims the racial factor has historically been particularly immediate among African Americans, who currently constitute more than thirty percent of the Muslim population of the United States.   Third, U.S. Muslims try to influence policy as Muslims per se - such as the former activities of the American Muslim Council, which is based in Washington, DC.[12]  The Council once served as a lobby on both the Congress and the Federal Government on issues which have ranged from Bosnia to the Anti-Terrorism Act or the Patriot Act and their implications for civil liberties.   Since September 11, 2001, U.S. Muslims have also felt exposed to new kinds of Islamophobia.[13]

 Fourth, American Muslims may also act, quite simply, as Americans.  As concerned or patriotic U.S. citizens, they may take positions on the size of the federal budget, or on how to deal with the trade imbalance with China, or on the future role of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or how to deal with large-scale corporate corruption.

In all these four identities (national origins, race, religion, and U.S. citizenship), American Muslims have become more organized and less inhibited since the last quarter of the twentieth century than they ever were before - with the possible exception of the followers of the Nation of Islam who have never been politically inhibited since they first came into being in the 1930s.  Even the impact of September 11, 2001, has not forced U.S. Muslims back into a low-profile national role.

As U.S. Muslims face a crisis of identity partly based on their countries of origin, let us bear in mind estimates of such origins.  According to some estimates, U.S. Muslims are about a third Black, a third South Asian (Pakistan, India and Bangladesh), a quarter Arab and the rest other groups.

                Other estimates put the African American Muslim component as high as 42%, but this is strongly contested.

As U.S. Muslims face a crisis of participation, they see Jews as exceptionally participatory, and American Blacks as reluctant participants.  According to some estimates, Jewish voters have a continuing record of 80% turnout.

On the other hand, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, African American voting participation in Congressional elections in 1998 was 40%, half that of the Jews put a 3% increase from 1994.

In the 2000 Presidential elections, African American participation was exceptionally high, but it was still below the overall national level of all groups, and certainly well below the level of Jewish participation.

The Muslim dilemma continues to be a dilemma between the Jewish model and the Black experience.  Muslims would like to be similar to the Jews in performance, but would not seek Jewish partnership for now.  A Muslim “yes” to Jewish performance; but a Muslim “no” to Jewish partnership for now.

Muslim attitudes to African Americans is the reverse.  They would like a partnership with Blacks but not the performance of Blacks to date.  A Muslim “no” to Black performance to date, but a Muslim “yes” to Black partnership as soon as possible.

What about the attitude of African American Muslims to the comparison between Jews and other African Americans?  It would be unnatural if any African American (Muslim or non-Muslim) did not wish for the Black race a level of worldly achievement attained by the Jews, provided it was not at the cost of other people.  But what is the scale of Jewish achievement in the United States?

It has been estimated that as the twentieth century was coming to a close, Jews in the U.S.A.  made up 50% of the top two hundred intellectuals, 20% of professors at the top universities, 40% of partners in leading law firms in New York and Washington, D.C., and nearly 60% of the directors, writers, and producers of the 50 top-grossing pictures from the 1960s to 1980s, and 58% of directors, writers and producers in some major primetime television series.  This is a performance which U.S. Muslims could not but envy.  It is also well above the performance of white gentiles.

On the other hand, according to the African American scholar, Manning Marable of Columbia University, African Americans only comprise 6.1 percent of all U.S. faculty in 2001, and even that figure could include adjuncts and part-timers.  In the highest ranking research institutions, African Americans have comprised only 3.6%.  As for the most prestigious American Academy of Arts and Science, African Americans comprise only 1.6%.  If Barack Obama, the Kenyan-American, is elected to the United States Senate in 2004, he will be only the third Black to serve in the U.S. Senate since Reconstruction, and only the fifth ever.

In contrast, Jews in the U.S. Senate are not only always there, but are often a tenth of the total Senate membership (ten  out of 100 Senators).

And yet Jews are a mere 2% of the population of the United States, while African Americans are some 12%.  Indeed, the population of African Americans is more than twice the population of the Jews of the whole world, including Israel.

It is, therefore, not surprising that Muslims in the United States [including African American Muslims] should wish for a Jewish level of performance without necessarily seeking, for the time being, Jewish bonds of partnership.  Most Muslims (including Black Muslims) would say “yes” to Jewish performance and “no” to Jewish partnership for the time being.

On the other hand, U.S. Muslims aspire to forge a partnership with African Americans as soon as possible, but are not yet inspired by Black success in using the American system to Black advantage.  The dilemma persists for American Muslims (including African American Muslims).  The overwhelming Muslim answer is “yes” to Black partnership, but “no” to Black performance in the U.S. system so far.

We know that as long as the Israeli-Palestinian problem persists, a sensible partnership between Muslims and Jews is bound to be elusive.  What is less well known is that the Israeli-Palestinian bloody stalemate is also a threat to a partnership between Muslims and African Americans.  Too close an alliance between African Americans and Muslim Americans is regarded as a threat by Jewish Americans.  As Lisa Richardson observed in the Los Angeles Times:

The success of Jewish groups in helping to defeat two longtime African American members of Congress has further frayed the damaged relationship between leaders of Black and Jewish organizations.  In the wake of [the 2002] ousting of Representative Cynthia A. McKinney in a Georgia Democratic Primary, some African American political activists and leaders are expressing outrage at Jewish organizations that targeted McKinney because she expressed pro-Palestinian sentiments about the Middle East crisis.  McKinney lost to Denise Majette, a former state judge, who is also Black but benefited from out-of-state contributions from Jewish groups and crossover voting by republicans.  Also [in 2002] another Black member of Congress, Representative Earl F. Hilliard of Alabama, who had pro-Arab support, was defeated by Arthur Davis, who was funded by backers of Israel.[14]

For as long as the Israeli-Palestinian problem is unresolved, African American leaders are expected to be pro-Israel or lose their offices.  A partnership between African Americans and Muslim Americans arouses defensive reactions from Jewish Americans.

                Muslims in the United States also face a crisis of values.  Among immigrant Americans the social values they espouse resemble closely the social values of Republicans – often the less liberal Republicans.

Muslim support for the death penalty is 68%, opposition to the sale of pornography 65%, opposition to physician assisted suicide 61%, support for making abortion less easily available 57%, support for vouchers to send children to private schools 68%, support for prayer in schools 53%, support for displaying the Ten Commandments in schools 59%.

African American Muslim values are closer to the values of other African Americans – with greater emphasis on issues like job opportunities, affirmative action, reform of the judicial system – all of them more liberal than the social values of immigrant Muslims.

  American Islam:  Immigrant and Home-Grown

In places like Britain, France and Germany both Islam as a civilization and local Muslims as residents are widely regarded as foreign even when the Euro-Muslims are citizens of the European countries.  In the United States, on the other hand, half the Muslim population will soon consist of descendants of families who have been Americans for hundreds of years.  A third of Muslims in the United States are already African Americans.  This creates a different situation from that of Europe.

In Europe both Islam and Muslims may be regarded as foreign; but in the United States such an equation is increasingly difficult.  Islam may be new, but its followers will include millions who have been part of American history for two or three hundred years.  African-American Muslim population is expanding significantly.

But even the immigrant half of the Muslim population of the United States is operating in a country of immigrants any how - unlike the immigrant Muslims of France, Britain and Germany.

In the United States it has been possible for an immigrant with a heavy foreign accent to become the most outstanding non-presidential American statesman of the second half of the 20th century - Henry Kissinger, the brilliant Jewish Secretary of State.

So even the immigrant Muslims in the USA are, in that special American sense, less foreign than the Muslim immigrants in Europe.  But there is no doubt of the reality that the United States faces a TALE OF TWO ISLAMS.

We define "indigenous" in the United States in this article as people who have been American for at least two centuries.  We might therefore conclude that indigenous American Muslims are mainly African Americans, with a small percentage of white Americans.

We regard immigrant Americans in this essay as those who have been part of American society for less than a century.  Immigrant American Muslims are mainly from Asia, the Middle East and Africa in recent times.  Some are from Muslim Europe.

While indigenous American Muslims are highly sensitive to issues of domestic policy in the United States, immigrant American Muslims are more sensitive to the foreign policy of the United States.

The problem of low income families among indigenous Muslims may be above the national average - this is to say, there are too many poor families.  On the other hand, the proportion of families in the professional class among immigrant Muslims (teachers, lawyers, corporate managers, doctors, engineers and others) may be above the national average.

Indigenous Muslims (especially African Americans) tend to rebel against the mythology of the American dream as a pursuit of personal advancement in conditions of economic rivalry.  Immigrant Muslims, on the other hand, seem to be like Jewish Americans -- disproportionately persuaded that there is more opportunity than oppression in capitalism.

Indigenous American Muslims are new to Islam but old to America (though Islam did once arrive in the Americas with enslaved Africans in chains).  Today African American Muslims are fully Americanized but not always fully Islamized.   Warath Deen Mohammed is among those who are both fully American and fully Muslim.

With immigrant Muslims the situation is the reverse.  They are old to Islam but new to America.  They are often substantially Islamized but not yet fully Americanized.

Indigenous American Muslims are overwhelmingly unilingual - speaking only English (standard or dialect or both) though they often learn some modest Arabic for purposes of Islamic ritual.  Immigrant Muslims are often bilingual and even trilingual.  At home they may even speak more than one European language.  Lebanese Americans may speak French, Arabic as well as English.

Indigenous American Muslims are weak economically, but as African Americans they have considerable potential political leverage.  After all, the population of African Americans generally is much larger than the population of the Jews of the whole world added together.  And yet at the moment the influence of African Americans on US foreign policy is only a fraction of the influence of Jewish Americans.  Will the difference in leverage narrow in the 21st century?  Will African-American influence reflect the political importance of Islam among American Blacks?

If indigenous Americans are currently economically weak but potentially strong politically, the immigrant Muslims may be in the reverse predicament.  They may be politically weak but with considerable potential for economic and professional leverage.

The population of indigenous Muslims may expand as a result of the new Republican attacks on welfare, Medicaid, and on the safety nets which had once been provided for the Black poor.  More poor Blacks may turn to Islam.  On the other hand, the population of immigrant Muslims may decline as a result of more strict laws against immigration from all parts of the world.  Muslim immigration may also suffer from how the new anti-terrorist legislation is actually implemented on the ground.  Individual immigration officers might be encouraged to be particularly harsh to visa candidates from the Muslim world in the aftermath of September 11, 2001.[15]

But when all is said and done, the two sets of Muslims in the United States (indigenous and immigrant) are in the process of being forged into the largest Muslim nation in the Western hemisphere of Christopher Columbus, the Americas.  In 1492 the Islamic presence in Spain was ended.  In 1492 Christopher Columbus opened up the Americas for the West.  Five hundred years later an Islamic presence was trying to establish itself in the lands which Columbus helped to open up for Spain and the West.  Was history indulging her ironic sense of humour all over again?  The heirs of the Hijrah became simultaneously heirs to the Mayflower.

In foreign policy the four identities of U.S. Muslims play their part.  The issue of national origins, the membership of a racial group, the power of religious affiliation, and the moral concerns of U.S. Muslims as ordinary Americans - such a confluence of identities is part of the politics of pluralism, part of policy-formation in a liberal democratic order.

But in the final analysis the cultural dimension of the American Muslim experience is not simply this crisis of identity. It is also the simultaneous and interrelated crises of participation and code of conduct.  It still remains a drama in three Acts.  First Act:  Am I an American first or a Muslim first?  Which comes first - and under what circumstances?   Second Act:  Do I accept to be a participant in the American constitutional process?  Third Act: Is my code of conduct as a Muslim compatible with my code of conduct as an American?  The heritage of the Hijrah and the legacy of the Mayflower are in search of a moral synthesis.

We have sought to demonstrate in this essay that one approach towards understanding Muslims in the American public space is to view Muslims comparatively.  The Muslim predicament in America is caught between the lessons of the Black experience and the power of the Jewish example.

Jews are the America of achievement.  Blacks are the America of potential.  Muslims are caught between the pursuit of their potential and the lure of ultimate achievement.  The struggle for readjustment continues.

ENDNOTES

I am indebted to Dr. Thomas Uthup and Dr. Amadu Jacky Kaba for bibliographical guidance.

ENDNOTESS
I am indebted to Dr. Thomas Uthup and Dr. Amadu Jacky Kaba for bibliographical guidance.