OPINIONS

Op ed: The importance of being Barack Hussein Obama

President Barack Hussein Obama’s election marked a new “Morning in America.” Not because he is black, but because he is different, and authentic.

His importance to me — as an irreligious first-generation American girl of Indian Sikh heritage — and to millions like me, minorities in different ways, is incalculable. We no longer believe we are any less American for being first-generation or non-white or non-Christian.

His significance lies in the very reason some Americans insinuate he is not one of us: He’s different. He’s different in his heritage; in that he admits that America, while great, is not perfect; in that he respects foreign cultures; in that he doesn’t hesitate to buck political dogma; and in that he frequently speaks his mind, sometimes colorfully, sometimes too soon, but always without malice.

It bothers many Americans that President Obama forsook neither his Arabic first name, Barack, nor his Kenyan surname, Obama — and not even his Islamic middle name, Hussein. But that is precisely why I admire him. Unlike Americans who adopt Anglican names to circumvent cultural prejudice, he chose to keep his name in its entirety — becoming President without compromising his identity and in spite of claims he was “secretly Muslim,” as if that were a “bad thing.”

The era of white Christian hegemony over American life is over, and we have President Obama to thank for signaling its end. His Presidency has nudged us away from our melting pot syndrome and toward our acceptance of a mosaic of cultures and religions that seek to coexist harmoniously. It has prompted our increasing acceptance of acculturation as an alternative to assimilation: our increasing acceptance of multiculturalism and its notion that minorities may adapt rather than abandon their culture to be full members of society.

To appreciate the perniciousness of a cultural melting pot, we need look no farther than the tortured history of Jews pockmarked by millennia of persecution for little more than wanting to maintain their cultural identity. The haunting Jewish refrain “Do you have a bag packed?” captures the universal angst of persecuted minorities everywhere — of blacks fleeing the Deep South no less than of Jews fleeing Europe.

And nowhere has the plight of Jews been worse than in Christian Europe and the Islamic Middle East. Europe gave us the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition and the Holocaust, while the Middle East continues to give us the unending tumult of jihads. But when President Obama reminded us of the Crusades in discussing ISIS, he sparked outrage, purportedly because he was comparing current events with a historical anomaly. As if the Crusades were not followed by centuries of European pogroms, or the inhumanity of white Christian Europe had long receded and Jewish cemeteries were not being desecrated there, as in Hungary and Poland and Germany.

In striking contrast, Jews have been comfortably ensconced in India’s religious and cultural mosaic since around 500 BCE, without ever facing local pressure or incentive to compromise their identity, as in America. That Indian Jews alone immigrated to Israel “not out of persecution or need, but simple desire has but one explanation: India’s multiculturalism, cradled by the pluralism of Hinduism, India’s predominant religion and culture that predates every other extant religion. In contrast, each of the three major Abrahamic religions is exclusivist: Jesus is the “only way” (John 14:6), Muhammad is the “final prophet” (Quran 33:40) and Jews are the “chosen people” (Deuteronomy 7:6-8). This mutual incompatibility of these three religions is what causes many non-Indians to be astonished that a Jewish spiritual leader could be venerated in India not only by Jews, and Hindus, but also by Christians and Muslims. What could speak louder to the virtue of acculturation and multiculturalism, values toward which President Obama has prodded us?

In light of the historical bigotry of white Christian Europe, to which most Americans trace their roots, America’s ever-increasing secularism and multiculturalism can only be welcomed. Whereas our focus since 9/11 has been on the scourge of Islamic terrorism, white and Christian extremism have been pervasive in America since its first European settlers: Witness the recent Charleston church shooting and the Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting before that, respectively.

If culture is what makes us human, multiculturalism is what signifies our humanity.

President Obama set himself apart from Hillary Clinton eight odd years ago, and then again from Mitt Romney four years later, by his authenticity: By distancing himself neither from his past, nor from his non-European and non-Christian heritage, as have other American politicians.

We Americans welcome self-reinvention, but we value authenticity. “And that has made all the difference.

 

Contact Gitika Nalwa at gitikanalwa ‘at’ gmail.com.

  • Stanford Alumn

    Let me understand this: you like Barack Obama because he hates traditional America, which like it or not is built on the Judaeo-Christian tradition, and you seem to hate that tradition too. Be careful what you wish for. If the enemies of the United States manage to bring down the Judaeo-Christian tradition, what will come afterwards doesn’t look very good. Do you like the caste Indian system that condemns to poverty a majority of the Indian population? What about the Chinese system where until very recently you could be forced to abort your second child (now they force you to abort any children beyond the second). What about Kenya, the land of Barack Obama senior? It doesn’t look very appealing to me. There is nothing more pathetic that a minority coming to America seeking the positives that come from the Judaeo-Christian tradition (like respect for the rule of law), that then goes to criticize America for well, being America. I never understood this mindset and this op-ed doesn’t make it any easier for me to understand why somebody like Barack Obama would like to be the President of the country he so much seems to hate.

  • Jason Farnon

    “nowhere has the plight of Jews been worse than in Christian Europe”

    remind me again how things went for them under the explicitly atheist nazi and soviet regimes?

  • Another Stanford Alunmus

    A country can be successful (for example, ours, and now China) while retaining deep “flaws,” correct?

    I never really understand references to “Judaeo-Christian tradition” when Christians are the ones who have been most out to kill and convert Jews: Is this part of the “Judaeo-Christian tradition”?

    And laws, my dear Stanford co-alumnus, were given to us by Hammurabi, well before Moses is said to have existed, and 2000 years before Christ: Yup, by the (pre-Islamic) Middle East, another culture that probably bugs the hell out of you.

  • My 2 Cents

    I do not agree with everything in this article, but it makes some valid points.

    President Obama is indeed a politician who panders, as do most, but it
    nevertheless might be fair to say that typically the more authentic candidate
    wins, as in Bush versus Gore (who used the racist card against Bush), Bush
    versus Kerry (who backtracked his support for the Iran war), and Obama
    versus Romney (who disowned the excellent healthcare system he gave
    MA and his stance that auto companies not be bailed out). Obama versus
    McCain might be an exception, but McCain lacked the temperament.

  • Smarter Stanford Alumn

    The reason you don’t understand these references is probably because you are ignorant, you weren’t paying attention in your classes or you were brainwashed by the ultra liberal Stanford faculty in the humanities. In any case, let me enlighten you. In 1982, the Iranian representative to the UN said that Iran couldn’t sign the Universal Declaration of Human Rights because he saw it as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights#Islamic_countries “a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition which could not be implemented by Muslims without conflict with Sharia”.

    Similarly, the German intellectual Jurgen Habermas has said that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%BCrgen_Habermas#Religious_dialogue

    “For the normative self-understanding of modernity, Christianity has functioned as more than just a precursor or catalyst. Universalistic egalitarianism, from which sprang the ideals of freedom and a collective life in solidarity, the autonomous conduct of life and emancipation, the individual morality of conscience, human rights and democracy, is the direct legacy of the Judaic ethic of justice and the Christian ethic of love. This legacy, substantially unchanged, has been the object of a continual critical reappropriation and reinterpretation. Up to this very day there is no alternative to it. And in light of the current challenges of a post-national constellation, we must draw sustenance now, as in the past, from this substance. Everything else is idle postmodern talk”

    So you get rid of the Judaeo-Christian tradition and you get rid of everything that makes the United States unique and so appealing to people like the writer of this op-ed: our respect for human rights, the notion that everyone is created equal (unlike the caste teaching of Hinduism) and our respect for the rule of law. My invitation to Barack Obama, that I also extend to the author of this op-ed, is that if the Judaeo-Christian element of America is so awful, so unbearable, they can go to live to the non Western country of their choice and leave those of use who like the Judaeo-Christian United States alone.

  • Another Stanford Alumnus

    How ironic that you quote a German, when that nation stands alone in its barbarity to Jews–the same Jews whose tradition and culture you would now like to appropriate into this “Judaeo-Christian tradition” you speak of.

    Independent of that, the claims of the “German intellectual” as to what this tradition has given us, is just hogwash. As my PhD adviser at Stanford used to tell me, “What the Greeks did not give us, the Egyptians did?” And, of course, the Greek and Egyptian and Middle Eastern and Hindu and Chinese cultures all predate the so-called “Judaeo-Christian tradition” you fantasize about.

    As for why immigrants find America attractive, it might have occurred to you that it is not the “Judaeo-Christian tradition,” but just financial success.

    Can you see Australians and Europeans so eagerly trying to ingratiate themselves to China right now? It is surely not the one-child or two-child policy that is on their minds: It is money.

    As for going to another country, only Native Americans are entitled to tell anyone to go back.

    Did Stanford really produce you?

  • Smarter Stanford Alumn

    It looks like when it comes to history or philosophy, your PhD adviser is as clueless as you are.

    Jurgen Habermas is considered one of the world’s most important thinkers. You probably didn’t know his name before I brought it to your attention, which is why I think you are clueless.

    I see that you don’t dispute that Iranian UN representative’s contention that the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not only a secular version of the Judaeo-Christian values, but also incompatible with Sharia Law. I guess if you are a woman or an LGBT person you rather live in a Judaeo-Christian country than in a Muslim country (or a Muslim society within a larger non Muslim country, as it is the case in many parts of India).

    Have you asked yourself why the US is financially more successful than third world countries like India or China? Or put in reverse, have you ever asked yourself what is that countries like India or China did to become more economically successful in the last 15 years? Let me break the news to you: what they did is to adopt values, such as free markets and the rule of law, that are the direct result of the Judaeo-Christian tradition (I refer you to the quote by Jurgen Habermas). The Indian ethic, that teaches that not all humans are created equal and therefore it is OK for the higher castes to subdue the lower ones, or the Confucian values, that promote cheating and dishonesty all around the place in order to create the illusion of harmony, are not conductive to the type of creativity and entrepreneurial thinking that results from the
    Judaeo-Christian, particularly the Judaeo-Protestant, tradition present in the United States.

    I find it utterly pathetic that immigrants to the United States, Instead of understanding and embracing these values, seek to live by the corrupt traditions of their countries of origin. It’s either ignorant, stupid or both.

  • jimidavis.com

    Hunting Season In Syria
    Is Obama lame duck?

  • jimidavis.com (soulful indie)

    President Obama-“whooo… are you…who, who….who, who”?
    Medical savior for the uninsured-minority or lightning rod insurance inflation for majority?
    Emancipator for the illegal immigrant or a reckless demagogue locking up..accountability?Visionary “let the chips fall” international leader, or blind to Russian Revelation in Oil land?
    A wise Lincoln unifying the American heart or a divisive force for fierce ideological civil war?

  • My 2 Cents

    He is all of the above, and yet his election is meaningful to many.

    He is no paragon of principle, but which politician is?
    Hillary? Romney? Jeb? Trump? Rubio? Cruz?
    Not even Bernie.

    You know why? Because the two parties are just two mobs with
    complete control over our democracy. They each value allegiance
    to their members over the good of the country. There was a study
    a few years back that showed that laws are more likely to change
    when the 1% wants it than when the 99% wants it, which is exactly
    what a democracy is not supposed to be.