October 19, 2007
Torn About Bobby JindalPolitics
I have a slightly different take on Bobby Jindal from some of my co-bloggers here at the Mutiny: I know, if I lived in Louisiana, that I wouldn’t vote for him. I just disagree with him too strongly on the social issues — intelligent design and abortion rights, for starters — to let my sense of ethnic loyalty get the better of me.
But I can’t help but be somewhat torn when I see photos like this:
The rest of the very interesting New York Times profile explains what this represents: Jindal is slowly winning over the rural white voters in northern Louisiana, staunch Republicans (can anyone say David Duke?) who couldn’t bring themselves to vote for him when he ran for governor four years ago. He’s also learning how to avoid giving the impression that he is an overachieving policy wonk (which he undoubtedly is), so as to better connect with ordinary Louisianans.
For me, Jindal’s growing success at this (again, encapsulated in the photo above) taps into an anxiety I myself have had as a child of immigrants — who became the first (and only) person in my extended family to earn a Ph.D. Even if your tastes and cultural values are profoundly “Americanized,” as mine are, there remains a sense that you don’t quite “fit,” which tends to be exacerbated (for me, especially) every time some a-hole on South Street (in Philly) mutters something about “there goes Bin Laden” when I walk down the street. Part of the anxiety comes from the ignorance and xenophobia of some Americans, but a good part of it comes from myself, an internalized sense of remaining not-quite-pukka despite everything.
If Jindal wins, his victory will suggest to me he’s somehow overcome both sides of the immigrant’s anxiety syndrome: the part that comes from others’ mistrust, and also the part that comes from himself — his own sense of being something different, something other than a “normal” American, or in this case, a representative Louisianan. If he wins, I won’t cheer, but I will, I expect, quietly feel a certain sense of pride at his accomplishment despite my strong disagreement with his kind of politics. Not just because he’s a fellow desi — it’s actually more complex than that. Rather, the pride will be because he’s a fellow desi who’s evidently achieved, after a struggle, something I’ve long aspired to do: shake that dude’s hand.
amardeep on October 19, 2007 04:00 PM in Politics · T·r·a·c·k·b·a·c·k address · Direct link · Email post
I just disagree with him too strongly on the social issues — intelligent design and abortion rights, for starters — to let my sense of ethnic loyalty get the better of me.
good. shows you're an american ;-)
Meh. He probably didn't even wash it after going to the potty.
well, jindal should be a litmus test on how racialist vs ideological brownz are. i'm much more conservative than most SM readers and his policy positions make me wince:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Jindal#Positions_on_selected_issues
Thats because he started talking their language. For him to talk about outsiders finding justice for Jena 6 when he had no problem with the US being outsiders trying to bring democracy in Iraq is a little two faced(remember that purple finger thingy he did during one of the President's State of the union addrsses). I am sure the lil rednecks in LA appreciated that sentiment.
FWIW, if he gets elected, it wouldn't bother me. But he changed his name , religion, and now his outlook to fit in. I do not see anything that inspiring in it for me from an Indian point of view. However, he will be an improvement over Blanco. So at last the first Indian governor will not look like a fool to the mainstream. So I can take some consolation in that.
Nonsense. Ethnic loyalty has been part and parcel of the American cultural and political experience. Case in Point: Italian American rotting en masse for Joe DiMaggio or voting for Fiorello LaGuardia. Or the Irish and Tammany Hall.
In my opinion, the lack of support for Jindal among few desis also shows the great start for the Indian diaspora in the electorate process. Even though he is one of us and one of a very select few, we still don't blindly follow him and are able to seperate issues from ethnic identification.
For me Jindal win or loss is both a win-win situation. If he wins then great, one more fellow brother out breaking a path. If not, then great too, one less right wing nut!
Nonsense. Ethnic loyalty has been part and parcel of the American cultural and political experience. Case in Point: Italian American rotting en masse for Joe DiMaggio or voting for Fiorello LaGuardia. Or the Irish and Tammany Hall.
it's epiphenomenal, and indicative of lack of assimilation and orientation toward ideological (and individual) interests. anyway, tammany hall is bot a good & bad example. boss tweed was scots-irish, not an irish catholic. the white ethnics supported him & his machine out of their interests, not ethnic loyalty.
bot = both.
From his Wikipedia page:
"While at Oxford, he wrote an article for the New Oxford Review claiming he personally witnessed a friend being possessed by a demon"
This cat is even weirder than I gave him credit for!
As an African American, I don't get why you'd want to shake his hand in the first place. but, maybe that's one of those differences we can celebrate. :)
By the way, Fred Thompson (who has George "Macaca" Allen as an adviser) is quoting (Bush's dinner invitee) Andrew Roberts about the will to win wars with approval. This guy justifies actions like the Amritsar massacre in the Punjab and speaks regularly to the Springbok Club, which considers itself the white shadow government in South Africa. And why does anybody brown or black consider themselves republican again? These people are getting scary!
Pravin, I totally agree.
What's Brown on the outside, White on the inside ?
a. A potato.
b. Bobby Jindal.
At this point I must say it's b.
oh, re: 'ethic voting,' check out conn. 2006 race of lamont vs. lieberman
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/states/CT/S/01/epolls.0.html
page down to religion. there was a tendency for jews to favor lieberman over lamont to a greater extent than catholics or protestants, but the effect was obviously smaller than ideology.
If he wins, I won’t cheer, but I will, I expect, quietly feel a certain sense of pride at his accomplishment despite my strong disagreement with his kind of politics
I bolded his b/c if he wins, I'll also feel something like pride also, but not at him but at my country - the US.
I remember when he was running and Kathleen Blanco and he were running for govenor in Louisiana - same sense of "pride" in the US - here in this deep south state, we had a brown immigrant Indian-Americn running as a Republican against a white democrat women. Made me feel like....this couuntry is moving beyond race politics and black/white divides.
But he changed his name , religion, and now his outlook to fit in.
As I recall, he converted when he was in college -- at liberal/tolerant Brown University -- so to me it's not really fair to say that he converted to "fit in" as part of a political process.
Also, his going by "Bobby" is a fairly common thing -- I know many a "Bhupinder" who became "Bobby" in junior high... It is a *bit* of a sell-out (and we've discussed this with Kal Penn ad nauseam), but in some sense it's understandable/practical with people who are in high profile professions. If I were an actor or a politician I doubt I would get very far with the name "Amardeep Singh" (Wes Anderson might be my only hope!).
Dude! I thought you were almost as FOBish as me!
As I recall, he converted when he was in college -- at liberal/tolerant Brown University -- so to me it's not really fair to say that he converted to "fit in" as part of a political process.
i think it started at his catholic school before college. more later....
But he changed his name , religion, and now his outlook to fit in. I do not see anything that inspiring in it for me from an Indian point of view.
re: outlook, he's always been really, really, right-wing. i mean, i remember the ban-abortion-in-all-cases and pro-creationism (from a biology degree holder!) in 2003. but your point about his name and religion are spot on about what is important: what someone believes and what they hold to be good & true, not the color of their skin.
And why does anybody brown or black consider themselves republican again? These people are getting scary!
I once said to my Af-Am friend that I can't understand how blacks in the US can be Republican, but I can see how many Asians could be Republican, and I really offended my friend. I only meant that given the average socioeconomics of Af-Ams in this country it didn't make sense to me how any black person could be a Republican.
That guy on the right seems to be a living cliche (or stereotype). GIT R DONE. And no matter how whitewashed he may be, Jindal's physique is clearly "Made in India".
Dude! I thought you were almost as FOBish as me!
I play both sides of the fence.
I have both "Kaha Hai Woh Diwana" and "Sweet Home Alabama" on my Ipod, and I don't care if all the world knows it.
re: jindal's conversion to catholicism in the most catholic state in the deep south. i think we need to employ a little psychological sophistication
1) the fact that he was surrounded by catholics and that his political career would have been helped by the conversion (he was a double major in biology and public policy at brown) is obviously causal
2) but he could still be totally sincere about his beliefs and his conversion
as an example of what i'm talking about, the famous psychological test where you have someone surrounded by plants who agree on something obviously false. e.g., that line A is longer on the chalkboard than line B even though visually it is obvious than line B is longer. a substantial number of people will agree with the plants who have been told to lie unanimously. and these people will persist in their assertion and seem pretty sincere. anyway, my only point is that jindal could be both susceptible to outside pressures but totally convinced of his personal free choice in the matter. that's generally the default human mental state, we think our choices are totally our own and informed only by our own rational faculties when it is pretty clear that context matters a lot.
I only meant that given the average socioeconomics of Af-Ams in this country it didn't make sense to me how any black person could be a Republican.
more than half of black people are middle class. so obviously there are enough wealth blacks that if socioeconomics was the only predictor there would be many more republicans than the 10% of the normal vote. same with jews, who vote overwhelmingly democratic. so there are more complex historical and social factors at work (jews are VERY socially liberal for example and obviously are put off by the identification of the christian right with the republican party, so their high asset levels are irrelevant).
At the same time, if you were to shave, abandon the turban, vocally advocate a fundamentalist Christian ideology, adopt a WASP-pseudonym, and speak in a Southern accent, you'd probably make a lot of white people much more comfortable too.
I don't want to go so far as to say that Jindal "sold out", because these are sensitive identity issues and the guy has every right to make these choices. But I do think that it's worth mentioning that in order for hi mto overcome "his own sense of being something different, something other than a “normal” American, or in this case, a representative Louisianan", he's had to give up things that many (perhaps most?) Desis would sorely miss. He proves that brown skin in and of itself is not necessarily a barrier, sure. But Desi identity is more than skin deep. Even accounting for the politics, I don't see that much similarity between Jindal and myself.
re: jindal & conversion. googling suggests that his converted in providence and not baton rouge because of parental sensitivities. so his sympathies toward xtianity seem rooted in his teenage years (there are stories of southern baptist friends and girls who want to go the supreme court to save unborn babies, i think this is louisiana, not brown, speaking).
As I recall, he converted when he was in college
No, in high school in Baton Rouge, LA
At the same time, if you were to shave, abandon the turban, vocally advocate a fundamentalist Christian ideology, adopt a WASP-pseudonym, and speak in a Southern accent, you'd probably make a lot of white people much more comfortable too.
what accent are brown people in the south supposed to speak? are they supposed to speak like northerners? i'm kind of confused by this? or should american browns speak with indian english accents to be authentic?
(yes, i know many people in the south do not speak with 'southern' accents, but my friends from university towns say that you have to pick it up if you want to succeed professional or in the business world outside of particular locales like athens, georgia or auburn, alabama)
I wonder how his parents feel about him converting to Catholicism after sending him to Catholic school? Like, I honestly just wonder. I bet they're proud of him now that he's about to be governor of Louisiana anywho though.
Meta-irreverence aside, I have to say that I shook hands with plenty of bubbas just like that when I grew up wearing a turban and beard in Texas. Granted, it wasn't David Duke country, but people are much more complex than we're trying to make out here. I mean, that guy in the overalls might be a gora Sikh for all we know. Really--it's not outside the realm of possibility.
I wonder how his parents feel about him converting to Catholicism after sending him to Catholic school? Like, I honestly just wonder. I bet they're proud of him now that he's about to be governor of Louisiana anywho though.
from 1993
http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/001045.html
Jindal recalls, âMy parents were infuriated by my conversion and have yet to fully forgive me.â He even steeled himself for the worst by becoming financially independent. But that hardly prepared him for the emotional battles that ensued.
As Jindal explains, âMy parents went through different phases of anger and disappointment. They blamed themselves for being bad parents, blamed me for being a bad son and blamed evangelists for spreading dissension. There were heated discussions, many of them invoking family loyalty and national identity.â
He elaborates: âMy parents have never truly accepted my conversion and still see my faith as a negative that overshadows my accomplishments. They were hurt and felt I was rejecting them by accepting Christianity. According to Jindal, his parents resorted to âethnic loyaltyâ to counter his new faith
they have another son, perhaps he isn't weak in response to peer pressure ;-)
The fact that white Louisianans are willing to vote for a very conservative, wealthy American-born Indian doesn't say anything about the "black/white" divide to me. The history of race in this country indicates very different attitudes about Asian immigrants than about African-Americans, even if neither is particularly positive.
only meant that given the average socioeconomics of Af-Ams in this country it didn't make sense to me how any black person could be a Republican.
more than half of black people are middle class. so obviously there are enough wealth blacks that if socioeconomics was the only predictor there would be many more republicans than the 10%
Yes, I was definitely oversimplifying my feelings. I'm not sure what the mean af-am salary is but even it was middle-class (what is middle-class?), I think the Democrat tax strategy hurts upper-middle class people the most. And yes there are other factors - I think overall the structural racism in the US is more profound for the black community and many public policies that democrats espouse, like affirmative action, or minority loan programs or desegregation of schools policies, seem to directly support the average Af-Am more.
Even as I'm writing this, I realize that I said in my previous comment that "race politics" was lessening in America and I like that and maybe I am contradicting myself now. I think the reason my statement rankled my Af-Am friend was b/c I was seeing the Af-Am community as too homogenous and not as individuals. And to an extent I am at fault about this, b/c I am thinking "when so many people in your community (Af-Am) benefit from democrat policies, even if you are a rich Af-Am, wouldn't you still want to vote for a democrat." I think that many Asian groups, like South Asians, even if many of them look black, have had a different history in this country and are not directly affected from what's generally seen as democrat social policies. Anyways I'm a democrat and I think most policies that democrats usually lean toward benefit everyone. I'm still not sure about affirm action, but whatever.
The fact that white Louisianans are willing to vote for a very conservative, wealthy American-born Indian doesn't say anything about the "black/white" divide to me. The history of race in this country indicates very different attitudes about Asian immigrants than about African-Americans, even if neither is particularly positive.
i'm assuming that in some ways jindal is slotted into honorary white. there were chinese on the gulf coast and during segregation some areas put them in black schools and some areas with whites.
And yes there are other factors - I think overall the structural racism in the US is more profound for the black community and many public policies that democrats espouse, like affirmative action, or minority loan programs or desegregation of schools policies, seem to directly support the average Af-Am more.
much of the black middle class consists of government workers. who tend to vote democrat (for obvious reasons). so that's a variable to keep in mind.
Like I said, I'm not touching the authenticity argument, whether about his accent, faith, or any of the things I listed. In fact I'm sure a lot of American-born Desis reflect some of the adaptations in Jindal's life. In fact, I speak with a very Midwestern-inflected accent.
But you can't deny that it's one point in the gestalt that helps the guy seem more "American" and less "alien".
Whoops, typed in wrong field. Comment 34 was me.
But you can't deny that it's one point in the gestalt that helps the guy seem more "American" and less "alien".
but this is like saying that the fact that i wear t-shirts and pants makes me seem more "american" and less "alien" than if i wore a dhoti or lungi. humans naturally speak with the accent of their peer group. the main exception are autistic children, who will speak with the accent of their parents. on the other hand, humans tend to follow the religion of their parents, not those of their peers (though the two may often by the same). so jindal's religious change is more surprising and noteworthy than his southern accent.
fwiw, bobby didn't have the louisiana accent when he was in his twenties.
amardeep, i really don't see the lesson that you would draw -- i think that neal has this one exactly right in #23. do you really think that a jindal victory would signal anything about the likelihood that david duke voters would "shake the hands" of other desis in significant numbers? or that jindal himself would invest any political capital or personal energy -- not as abstract platitudes, but in situations where it really counts -- to make it more likely that will happen? that hasn't exactly been his track record.
do you really think that a jindal victory would signal anything about the likelihood that david duke voters would "shake the hands" of other desis in significant numbers?
the south has changed a lot in the past generation. the jindal victory is not going to be causal, it is going to be indicatory. remember, texas has a senator who was married to an asian american woman and had biracial children in the 1990s. that's a long way from the 1960s. if you consider florida the south,* jeb bush was another case where a miscegenated politician held elective office.
* northern florida is the south...southern florida, not so much.
Oh absolutely, no question. All I'm saying is that there are many aspects to Jindal's personality in which he has moved away from the "Desi" baseline and conformed much more closely to a different set of social norms.
I've experienced my share of 'but you are not REALLY Indian b/c..." thinking, so I'm not going to judge him on any of these things. But I can't really feel much of a kinship with him either. He proves that skin color doesn't matter so much anymore in the South if you satisfy certain other significant cultural standards (including being basically the only viable candidate!), but that's not quite the same thing as what Amardeep's saying, is it?
Agreed.
All I'm saying is that there are many aspects to Jindal's personality in which he has moved away from the "Desi" baseline and conformed much more closely to a different set of social norms.
yeah, but note that he is hittin' it brown.
OK, but then realistically what do you want/expect from the South? Some kind of color-blind, culture-blind utopia of the sort that's never existed in history?
If Bobby Jindal, who is of upper caste khatri punjabi ancestry, is elected Governor of Louisiana as seems likely, he will become the skinniest and blackest governor in american history. Only Governor Deval Patrick approaches Jindal in darkness of skin color.
what's the name of this senator? & do you think it would be different if they were married to black women as opposed to immigrant/immigrant-descended asian/hispanic women? (or does the race of the wife not really matter, because she is, after all, the wife and not the candidate?)
See, this is the thing...sometimes I feel that even the least-desi desis end up marrying other desis...makes me think that if you actually care about your desi identity, you'll marry a desi...but it doesn't always work out that way, sometimes you don't meet a desi you like, or you meet a non-desi you click with...for me personally, Jindal sort of makes me feel guilty about not marrying a desi. But then he was fortunate to meet someone who seems to be such a good fit for him while being desi nonetheless. He could have certainly given his children desi names though, which he did not. Many Indian christians have desi names, so there was no religious reason not to. His conversion was not political, but his choice of names for his kids I think was.
Jindals are not khatris. They are banias.
He is ridiculously thin. Arnold can bench press Jindal's weight on his pinkie. I would be afraid of marrying him out of concern for my gene pool.
1) Jindal converting to Catholicism isn't as good for his political chances as you might think. LA is one of the last states in the US where the Catholic / Protestant divide still matters. Which is why the supposedly (but not really) anti-Protestant remarks Jindal made were blown up so huge. If Jindal converted to Southern Baptism, that would be more easily seen as opportunism.
On the other hand, if he were still Piyush the Hindu, he would not be running for Governor.
2) Everything suggests that Jindal was not an honorary white in the last gubernatorial election. He got significantly fewer votes in protestant white northern LA than a 'normal' Republican.
3) All parts of the "south" are differet, just like all Desi regions are different. Bu LA is more different than most, and not in a good way. Texas, Virginia, and Georgia may be "modernizing", but northern Louisiana isn't.
4) The real test will be if Jindal doesn't get more than 50% of the vote and has to go to a run-off. Current polls suggest he will get only about 45%. I think the number 2 guy would be a white populist democrat from Northwest Louisiana, but its a tight race for second place.
Part of me hopes Jindal wins. If a guy with can't win with $11 million, the backing of all senior republicans in his state, a stellar policy career, a previous congressional victory, and a good Christian background, what the Hell will it take?
Amitabh - I believe his kids are named Celia (some spellings say Selia, in which case it seems more brown to me for some reason, heh), Shaan (SO Punjabi), and Slade (which is just a big WTF? I don't think either desis or conservative Catholic voters would be down with this name, LOL. oh and he delivered this baby himself! yowza!).
I think it's a bit premature to say that he picked his kids' names for political reasons... perhaps those are just names he and his wife liked? And like I said, I doubt 'Slade' will endear his family to Catholic voters who might care about it anyway.
And I think that you are in for an onslaught of comments along the lines of 'what is desi, exactly? why am i less desi if i marry a non-desi? just because I have an Anglicized name and not a Sanskrit or Arabic derived one doesn't make less desi. and you shouldn't feel guilty for marrying non-desi'
And honestly, his religion (& thus, conversion) probably matters more in a political context than his kids' names.
If Bobby Jindal, who is of upper caste khatri punjabi ancestry, is elected Governor of Louisiana as seems likely, he will become the skinniest and blackest governor in american history. Only Governor Deval Patrick approaches Jindal in darkness of skin color.
hi prema.
Jindal converting to Catholicism isn't as good for his political chances as you might think. LA is one of the last states in the US where the Catholic / Protestant divide still matters. Which is why the supposedly (but not really) anti-Protestant remarks Jindal made were blown up so huge. If Jindal converted to Southern Baptism, that would be more easily seen as opportunism.
do you have any studies on this? louisiana is 30% catholic and 50% protestant, though i assume white catholics outnumber white protestants. but blanco is a catholic, breaux was a catholic, both senators are catholic. it seems that catholics are doin' ok so far.
what's the name of this senator? & do you think it would be different if they were married to black women as opposed to immigrant/immigrant-descended asian/hispanic women?
i assume so.
Whycome nobody's talking about Nikki Haley in this context? She is a successful "outmarried" Republican politician in South Carolina who claims to be Sikh but has a crescent moon beside a palm tree as her logo on the rear windshield of her car, not a Khanda. And she works for her mom's company which is called Exotica International. In South Carolina!
hi prema.
wow, razib, you've got a very radar for premaisms.
On short notice, just this national Review article
Philip Jenkins ... predicts: “I hate to say it but . . . in Louisiana, that large territory located just south of the United States, these ads could be much more effective than someone living elsewhere might suspect…. What prevents appropriate anger about the Jindal ads is that most Americans don’t realize how uniquely bitter religious relations still are in Louisiana, and why such rhetoric is so poisonous.”
Though Bill Cohen, Maine Republican ex-Senator (1979-97) who was Clinton's second term Secretary of Defence (1997-2001) was (and is) married to Janet Langhart, an African-American model and TV personality, from 1996 on - during his last year as Senator and throughout his tenure at Defense. She was known as the 'First lady of the Pentagon'. Cohen's father was Russian Jewish but his mother was Irish-Protestant, and he himself is Unitarian. So bully for them both.
First - outstanding post by Amardeep...encapsulates my thoughts exactly.
Much of the outrage directed towards Jindal by Indians is that he is politically conservative and catholic, and thus not a true representative of we Indians. Some of the attacks I have read and heard are fairly visceral - there's an Uncle Tom vibe about them. For Indians to lob such attacks is a concession that we're all alike (rather than diverse in many different ways) and that America at large should have certain expectations about us, whether it be political, cultural, or religious. This is absolutely absurd and self defeating. It also ignores the fact that whatever success he achieves will inevitably bring about positive for the entire Indian community via the exposure he gains as he campaigns and if he wins. And what if he wins, what does that mean? That an Indian likely supplanted some other right wing nut who would have been white.
I might give his Indian attackers the benefit of the doubt and venture to guess that they're just fearful that his beliefs will be attributed to all Indians amongst the general Louisiana populace(a highly unlikely proposition, that even it if occurred, wouldn't even be truly detrimental to Indians). But, in all reality, I think their intolerance of his ideology trumps their ability to recognize any positive consequences his win would bring about.
Identity politics at it's finest. Sad.
ikram, jenkins is a specialist in anti-catholicism, so i don't dismiss it. but it seems empirically the case is weaker. but, the key is white catholics have been winning, jindal is sui generis.
Though Bill Cohen, Maine Republican ex-Senator (1979-97) who was Clinton's second term Secretary of Defence (1997-2001) was (and is) married to Janet Langhart, an African-American model and TV personality, from 1996 on - during his last year as Senator and throughout his tenure at Defense. She was known as the 'First lady of the Pentagon'. Cohen's father was Russian Jewish but his mother was Irish-Protestant, and he himself is Unitarian. So bully for them both.
i know about cohen, but new england isn't the deep south. mass. it elected a black senator in the sixties, but it is also one of the whitest regions of the countries.
what's the name of this senator?
Phil Gramm.
Gramm also ran for President, and switched from Democrat to Republican.
Identity politics at it's finest. Sad.
hm. the last sentence doesn't seem to make sense in light of the rest of your comment. a lot of the opposition to jindal is based on his beliefs, not his immutable identity as a brown man. it shows the power of politics, individual interest and ideology at the expense of racial fellow feeling.
Whycome nobody's talking about Nikki Haley in this context? She is a successful "outmarried" Republican politician in South Carolina who claims to be Sikh but has a crescent moon beside a palm tree as her logo on the rear windshield of her car, not a Khanda. And she works for her mom's company which is called Exotica International. In South Carolina!
she's a minor politician and physically she seems she might be able to pass for white. jindal might be governor of one of 50 states and he's a good ole kala fellow.
the skinnyness is f*king disturbing btw. he needs more gumbo and jumbalaya.
Makes him look like he's still 16 or 17 tops. Where's his South Asian genetic predisposition to adiposity? :)
I think you're misreading it. I think people are accusing him of opportunism--of using a fake southern accent, of (according to Razib in #17) espousing creationism despite his scientific education, etc. I think people doubt his sincerity, his motives for adopting these positions--not the fact that he has adopted them. I should really just speak for myself, though.
re: "who is a desi?" i will offer this: i think one could argue that there are many sufficient but no necessary condition for desiness.
is a white protestant american of english ancestry a desi? no. is a white american member of ISKON desi? i think so. is a brown american protestant desi? yes. is a white protestant raised in india, and of indian nationality, a desi? i think so. is a brown protestant adoptee a desi? i think so. and so on. SM is filled with all sorts so i don't think an exclusive and narrow definition will do.
one thing to remember, jindal is a politican. i think all comments about sincerity need to be normalized ;-)
This is ironic in contract with the rest of you comment which was calling for his opponents to put aside their "outrage" and embrace a fellow desi no matter how opposed they may be to his views. You seem to be saying you have to be "down with the brown" no matter if you think his views are ridiculous ... the very definition of identity politics.
The palm and crescent is from the South Carolina state flag.
Word.
. Wow, I had no idea. I thought she'd just photoshopped Omar Khayyam out of the image to make it more palatable to her constituents. South Carolina? Really? I thought they were all about Ol' Dixie, the Stars and Bars...Thanks!sistafriend said:
Roberts is the worst of the old ultra-reactionary wing of British Conservatism. He not only justifies the Amritsar massacre, he writes apologia for the brutality used against Boer women, children and men during the Boer war, and, by-the-by, denigrates the Irish freedom struggle as only a bitter old Colonialist red in face at his neutering ever could. He is a grade A racist, and the fact that he is part of the American administration's coterie and has the ear Bush is frankly terrifying and demented. Christopher Hitchens is a fan of his too, apparently. You can read more about this repulsive man in a review of his work by the British journalist Johaan Hari. It was originally published in the American magazine 'The New Republic', which requires subscription, but can be read in full here.
Let me just reiterate that I am not anti Jindal just because he converted(though converts at a later age tend to be too religious for my taste). Or because he changed his name. Or because he is Republican(I got many Republican friends). Maybe its a combination of all these factors plus his pandering to rednecks with his Jena 6 comment when he never made any effort to speak on bhalf of the people wrong in earlier incidents in that area.
I dont think he changed his name casually. I read that he really hated his name and that was one of the reasons why he changted. For a kid to change his name legally indicates some intense feelings. Other Indians who go by Western names never changed it legally.
At the same time, I dont mind his success because he hasnt been worse to minorities in Louisiana than a white Democrat like Blanco or Landrieu. Those White Democrats did nothing for Jena 6. I think he is a go getter and Louisiana definitely needs some smart leaders who are not too corrupt for a change.
As far as his being too religious, who cares at the state level. Lousiana can afford to tolerate his ideology if he can improve the state in other ways.
It was originally published in the American magazine 'The New Republic', which requires subscription, but can be read in full here.
almost all new republic articles can be read for free if you look up the title on google and click the link from there or view the cache. you might need to create a free registered account for the first option.
For a kid to change his name legally indicates some intense feelings.
i thought he is still legally piyush.
Razib -- White catholic democrats do fine. LA politics has 3 groups. White prots (dem turning rep, like all white prot southerners), white Catholic democrats, black democrats. The "jungle primary" allows the first two groups to compete while making sure blacks don't win statewide office. White catholics democrats win in the run off (round 2 vote) if they get enough statewide support from blacks, or if their opponent is a black democrat (in which case the white prots vote for the catholic democrat). Jindal is a non-white non-black Republican Catholic! He defies all categories.
Last gubernatorial election, enough white prots treated voted for Blanco over Jindal, suggesting they did not see him as "white" enough (why else vote for a more liberal Catholic woman?). But the whites in the wealthy suburban district he represents (Kenner) do see him as one of their own. That's a rural-urban divide among white protestants. This time around, the picture above suggests things could be different.
Anyway, all of this could be wrong. My LA knowledge is thin and a mostly pre-Katrina. A real LA guy (Maitri?) can probably correct the mistakes above, or just tell me I'm full of shit.
A real LA guy (Maitri?)
guy? why oh why don't brownz have more genderfiable names!
Guy is gender neutral. A gal like you should know that.
Jindal is a non-white non-black Republican Catholic! He defies all categories.
i don't know the dynamics of louisiana politics well enough, but the ? i have is this:
does a southern baptist jindal do better than a catholic jindal? on the one hand jindal is very right-wing and protestant, so he would solidify an appeal to right-wing protestatns if a baptist. on the other hand, being right-wing and catholic means he can offer the right-wingery to the white protestant segment and catholicism to the more moderate (though still conservative) cajun democrats. now only if he wore a 'fro he could appeal to blacks too!
Sigh.
Is it possible to feel unexpectedly positive towards a candidate whose views you don't agree with, because you are so turned off by the contentions put forth by their detractors?
Yes. Yes, it is.
I read somewhere that he got teased about his name when he was in 2nd Grade. Kids were going "Pee uuu" so he came home one day and said that his name was Bobby. He refused to answer to any other name from that day. I don't think politics had anything to do with it. I am surprised at overwhelming democrat leaning of Indian Americans. I tend to vote republican because I am fiscally conservative. Big Government has not worked anywhere, and visions of socialized health care gives me nightmares of my childhood when I had to stand in line for hours to see a doctor in a CGHS dispensary in India, and then again stand for hours to get my prescription filled while the pharmacist thought he was doing me an extreme favor by just doing his job. No country has got rich by increasing taxes. I would prefer he would keep his religion at home, but that's better than his hand in my pocketbook
Great commet--that pretty much sums up my view as well!
Agreed. My mother had to endure something similar. She had to be schedule for a hip replacement, and then waited 5 or 6 months for the first available appointment.
And that was in... wait a minute... Oh, yeah! That was right here in America!
D'oh!
You mean, Indian Americans on this blog/thread. I know plenty of brown who are in the Grand Ol' Party. I met a lot of them when I briefly lived in Dallas.
As for us, when we started, we had more people who identified as conservatives/republicans who read us, but they don't comment anymore. I've tried to keep it a non-partisan space, for many reasons, but I'm an Independent. That leaves the responsibility for political diversity in the bunker entirely to Vinod, the libertarian-loving cheese who stands alone, who posts relatively infrequently. Which means that the majority of the bloggers in the bunker would actually agree with Amardeep (see: first sentence of post). :)
What makes me want to rip my hair out, follicle by follicle is when we're accused of being "left-wing" AND "conservative" by different entities, usually simultaneously. I wouldn't want to be a part of this space if it identified with just one political party (or religion, or country, or language, or region, or...).
depends on what you define as "overwhelming." i wouldn't be surprised if brown americans are as democratic as jewish americans, on the order of 60-80% (depending on if you include leaners or not). but that still leaves 20-40%, and they are underrepresented on this weblog for a variety of reasons.
Why not infer from that that SM is pretty healthy, politically....
Please -- let's not talk about representation on the blog. For a lot of reasons, it's not a great place to comment if you're a Republican, a Pakistani patriot, a Pardesi Gori or a variety of what is (in America) heterodox desi views. Who care? As long as the blog doesn't pretend to be all things to all people (Ahem...).
I do. :)
I just wish they did.
Ikram, I think that's unfair, but I'm too tired to get in to it with you.
We try to be respectful and inclusive. But enough with the threadjack, no one needs more negativity, this is neither the time nor place...let's not and say we did...or...[insert cliche here].
ANNA @ 82 - what contentions of his detractors put you off?
Razib wrote: does a southern baptist jindal do better than a catholic jindal?
My view -- Yes. I think a S.Baptist Jindal would have beaten Blanco last time around. Which would have made Jindal governor during the (inevitable) Katrina disaster and aftermath. Which would have sullied the reputation of supposedly-competent scrawny young brown whippersnappers everywhere.
So let's say one Hail Mary for Bobby Jindal tonight.
Now that's classy.
Nala, that's part of your answer. I know, I owe you the rest. It's been a really long, difficult day or I'd write a whole post about what's on my mind! It's certainly more serious than cooties on cookies, I'll tell you that much.
Ikram,
Louisiana (especially South Louisiana) has one of the densest and largest population of Catholics in US. Those cajuns often are also mixed race.
In Louisiana politics, it helps Jindal to be a Catholic.
Because in North Louisiana, which is Protestant, his being a Protestant will not trump he being a non-White.
Other parts of South, your analysis works.
Jindal is a race baiter himself, ask anyone from Louisiana, he targets African Americans.
Nala, did you mean my comment at 78 or 82? I'm confused.
. I met a lot of them when I briefly lived in Dallas.
Were they doctors?
Well, if he's unfair to AfAms, then that would contradict some of that "white-washed piyush" palaver and indicate that he's about as desi as a lot of our parents.
NO! Not one of them! Engineers, consultants, nurses, everything else.
NO! Not one of them! Engineers, consultants, nurses, everything.
Must've been rich? although I don't get the nurses bit.
Oops, yeah, I meant 78.
Well, if he's unfair to AfAms, then that would contradict some of that "white-washed piyush" palaver and indicate that he's about as desi as a lot of our parents.
ZINGGGGG!!!
ROFL.. well said..
who cares if he's white washed or beige coated or catholic? there are good reasons to dislike him, namely - every one of his positions, which is just an unquestioning embrace of bush's agenda so he can establish his credentials as a party line toeing loyalist. that and the creationist idiocy and race politics he practices all make me want to throw up. and that would be the case if he was named sam brownback or ramakrishnan subramaniam.
Must've been rich? although I don't get the nurses bit.
that's a dumb stereotype. republicans, on average, are wealthier than than democrats, but both groups have a lot of variation and are a coalition of many different sorts. wealthy jews are democrats while rural white evangelicals who aren't particular affluent are generally republicans.
Hmm...I don't think so. They certainly didn't seem "richer" than the desis in NorCal, DC or NY. They were...average? I once would've said "upper-middle", because of something silly like the number of German cars, but a recent thread on here disabused me of that conception of affluence. According to what was hashed out by some of you in that convo, these people would be solidly middle-class.
Dallas was weird for me, I'd visit these palatial, 4,000 sq ft McManses and I'd find out that they cost less than half of what my mom's (very normal) house cost. Cost of living seemed way lower, so people seemed more well off than they probably were, if that makes sense.
Well, if he's unfair to AfAms, then that would contradict some of that "white-washed piyush" palaver and indicate that he's about as desi as a lot of our parents.
Anna, he (Bobby Jindal) often comes on radio, goes on his problem solving skills, financial management, people off the dole, and on saving money on the meds. His whole thing is reducing medical assistance, and that targets African Americans. His handlers (or god fathers) are very conservative white republicans (Mike Foster for example, who called him a boy genius, and gave him couple of crucial breaks).
As a political strategy, he knows being republican in Louisiana, there is no chance in hell that he will get any votes from african americans (even if ray nagin endorses him 1000 times), so it is the "others" for him that has no value in his great design.
While I understand what you're saying here, I must protest at the implication that being 'white-washed' means you're less racist toward Af-Ams. I don't think Bobby Jindal is 'white-washed' and frankly don't really care because I've come past such simple characterizations, but I do think he is someone who has completely bought 'into the system' so to speak, e.g. how he completely toes the Bush party line. And I think his race-baiting is different from our parents' racism because a) he is a 2nd-gen (I don't know many 2nd-gens who go around talking about how superior they are to Af-Ams), and b) his race-baiting is political, meaning it has consequences on a much larger scale.
His whole thing is reducing medical assistance, and that targets African Americans.
uh, i'm a little confused here. i can believe that something has disparate impact on AAs, but that's not prima facie evidence that he is targeting african americans. if jindal favors policies that are slanted toward the wealthy then it will favor whites over african americans by nature of differences in distributions of wealth, but that doesn't mean he's pro-white, that means he's pro-rich. the republican party is a coalition, and one faction is very pro-rich (think wall street journal), while another faction does have racialist sentiments (think tom tancredo), but you need to be careful not to confuse the two.
but I do think he is someone who has completely bought 'into the system' so to speak, e.g. how he completely toes the Bush party line.
i really don't get what you are trying to say here. he's a partisan and slavish follower of g.w. bush. so? he's a republican, what would you expect? if hillary clinton is elected i'm sure there'll be brown dems who toe the dem party line. what does that mean aside from the fact that they are partisan democrats?
Noted, Nala. I was implying something else entirely. ;)
but aren't you equating desi-ness to religion/hinduism in this case?
but aren't you equating desi-ness to religion/hinduism in this case?
to some extent, remember that i said there are many sufficient conditions, but no necessary ones. the hindu religion is an organic outgrowth of indian culture and civilization. its stories are to some extent the stories of india. that does not mean that christians, muslims, jews and zoroastrians can not be desi, but their religions are not fundamentally and inextricably indian. hinduism as it is practiced now, even universalist sects like ISKON, has a south asian cast.
i meant that if he is racist or supports racist policies/policies that happen to exacerbate racial issues in Louisiana, it's not because he is desi, but because he is a hard-line Republican. Though there may be some overlap between the two; I don't know what goes on inside his head.
re: hinduism, the beliefs of the balinese and the hindu chams of vietnam are two possible exceptions; it seems these are cases where hinduism has been indigenized enough so that the indian identification is somewhat less tight (and analogy might be northern european protestant christianity and the middle east, though christianity derives from the middle east and retains many of those sensibilities it has become thoroughly indigenized in northern europe).
what racist policies are you talking about?
i can believe that something has disparate impact on AAs, but that's not prima facie evidence that he is targeting african americans
Dude, Razib, let Maitri (who actually lives in Louisiana) chime in.
He talks in lot of thinly veiled, he always has.........Here is an example:
Earnest thanks to N. La. Lady who points us to a Shreveport Times opinion piece by Tannie Bradley. It confirms N. La. Lady's original report about Jindal using the loaded rhetoric of racism while he stumped in North Louisiana during the Jena 6 demonstrations.
[Race] is a part of the very fabric of American culture. Although it has no real biological basis, it has real meaning to us as individuals. No matter how it's negotiated, challenged, denied, or ignored, it's ever present in our lives.
On Sept. 20, the day people from throughout the nation gathered in Jena to march in protest of the unjust treatment of the Jena 6, gubernatorial candidate Bobby Jindal was in Shreveport speaking to students at LSUS. When asked about the impact of racial conflict in Louisiana, his response was déjà vu — unpleasantly reminiscent of the words and attitudes of southern politicians of not so long ago. When asked to comment on the demonstration in Jena, he said, "We don't need anybody to divide us. We certainly don't need outside agitators to cause problems." Accusing "outside agitators" of causing problems is a scapegoat and an attempt to avoid taking responsibility for the unresolved issue of race and fair and equal treatment.
Initially, mominem was skeptical that Jindal would be stupid enough to use such phrasing. In a comment at this post, mominem stated:
I think if Jindal actually said it it would be devastating to his campaign and credibility. It would be national news. I also think he’s smarter than that.
Well, apparently, Jindal's not "smarter than that". Unfortunately, while I felt N. La. Lady's report was likely true, I was much more skeptical than mominem that it would be "devastating" to Jindal's campaign. I know for a fact that rival campaigns have been informed of Jindal's blunder. Yet, even though these campaigns have nothing to lose, they are apparently too scared to make an issue out of it. The other campaigns (except Georges) were too scared to attend the Jena 6 marches, and now they are too scared to call out Jindal for echoing the awful loaded phrases of past segregationists (and their latter day spiritual heirs).
kush, there's a difference between pandering to white sentiment and "targeting" african americans. like most republicans he probably wants to just focus on the white vote because he knows he won't get more than 10% of the black vote.
Kush and dravidian lurker both pointed out some things that might suggest that he 'doesn't care about black people,' though your point about him just trying to get votes that he has a chance of winning is well-taken. And like you said, it's not necessarily 'racist policies' so much as policies that might exacerbate already-existent race tension, e.g. what is he going to do for New Orleans? And what he'll do for the rich vs. what he'll do for the poor.
But a lot of it is based on his anti-choice beliefs, which I've read some articles about which posit that anti-choice disproportionately hurts the Af-Am community. It might be different in the South though.
I don't like his politics or implicit race baiting either, so probably wouldn't vote for him. Yeah he converted, but so what. His is a first world conversion, of free wil