Race in the race

What do you say to a frightened senior citizen who won’t vote for Barack Obama because he is an “arab”? Well, if you’re John McCain, confronted with supporters whose anger has been unleashed by his campaign rhetoric, you reassure the frightened woman that no, Mr. Obama is not an Arab, or a Muslim, or a terrorist. According to McCain, Obama is a good man, not the bad Muslim of his supporter’s nightmares. That’s what seven years of the “War on Terror” has brought us – American citizens who equate Arab with Muslim with terrorist.

It’s all well and good to refute the ridiculous blather about Barack Obama’s background, as a report in the New York Times has done, and as Obama himself has done by stressing his Christian faith. What’s missing from this conversation is a rejection of the notion that the Arab and/or Muslim citizen is somehow dangerous, unamerican, a threat. How about this: the next time some irrationally fearful individual insists that Mr. Obama is an Arab, respond by saying: the senator is not an Arab or a Muslim, but if he were, he would be just as acceptable a candidate.

Meanwhile, there is an Arab American running for president, and while he has been vilified for many things, nobody has accused Ralph Nader of being a dangerous terrorist. At this point, the Muslim/Arab label is a foil because in this toxic electoral atmosphere, it is easier to attack someone for perceived membership in a hated group, than to admit discomfort with an African American candidate. In order to move past this, our political leaders need to model acceptance of difference, rather than defensively denying it.