Assimilation: Looking for an American standard

Last updated on: August 18, 2010 at 4:00 am by Guest Contributor

Assimilation: Looking for an American standard 2010-08-18T04:00:42-04:00 Guest Contributor

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Now comes the hard part

About six months ago, I became an American citizen. They gave me a nifty handbook called “The Citizen’s Almanac: Fundamental Documents, Symbols, and Anthems of the United States,” replete with quotes: Franklin Roosevelt, James Madison, Woodrow Wilson, Supreme Court decisions, Reagan’s speech at the Brandenburg (“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”) and so many others from the colorful cast that comprises American history. In the naturalization ceremony, each of us was asked to name our “country of origin” at the microphone; it was an inspiring display, as intended, and I even felt rather bland with my Canadian roots – as though somehow I barely made the diversity cut-off. The room felt full of good will, and there was the real sense that we were all being welcomed to partake in the rich tradition of “liberty and justice for all” unique to the best country in the world; the little American flags handed to us as keepsakes signaled that we no longer had to prove ourselves.

According to Ross Douthat’s recent article at the New York Times, we might be proving ourselves for a while yet, because my experience was only representative of one America. There is another, you see. It’s the same one that led to Arizona’s SB 1070, the same one that has right-wing politicians talking about “anchor babies” and rabble-rousing over Park51. In the first America, “it doesn’t matter what language you speak, what god you worship, or how deep your New World roots run,” and “allegiance to the Constitution trumps ethnic differences, language barriers and religious divides.” This second America, however, “speaks English, not Spanish or Chinese or Arabic. It looks back to a particular religious heritage: Protestantism originally, and then a Judeo-Christian consensus that accommodated Jews and Catholics as well. It draws its social norms from the mores of the Anglo-Saxon diaspora — and it expects new arrivals to assimilate themselves to these norms, and quickly.”

On the whole, Douthat’s piece already contains some factual glossing, not least of which is considering Jews and Catholics – who became an accepted part of the American fabric only in the last 60 years – part of the “religious heritage” of the nation. Then, too, there is his insistence that assimilation is essential to the “unum” derived from the “pluribus” – though if the “unum” is the goal, from where do these two Americas come, and why are they referenced like longstanding faces of the same coin?

Neither of these, nor the other discrepancies, particularly matters compared to the larger argument: that discrimination is, in large part, the modus operandi of this country, and that it’s just the Muslims’ turn to weather the storm for the greater good. Douthat suggests that this discrimination, later euphemized as “steady pressure to conform to American norms, exerted through fair means and foul,” has been a positive social force in the goal for a united American identity. His examples of Catholic and Mormon integration are specious at best, but they’re troublingly touted as success stories because they allegedly resulted in the Judeo-Christian norm that exists today. Douthat, it seems, has already decided which America is the better to turn to in times of national identity crisis.

He forgets, though, that these “two Americas,” as he calls them, are in diametric opposition to each other. In selecting one, we don’t simply take it on a first date; we set a serious precedent by indicating to ourselves and the world the value system to which we turn when our two most reasonable are in competition. And because the two do not agree, we actively choose, every day, which America we want to be.

Moving beyond tribal responses to the assertion of cultural difference, Douthat sets a dangerously unjust standard for Muslims: Do not simply apologize for the misinformation of those Americans who believe Islam’s values to be inherently different from their own; prove it. Since 2001, in fact, the consistent refrain has placed with Muslim-Americans the responsibility to disassociate themselves from the acts of their fringe international counterparts. Never mind that Muslims have been Americans since the very inception of the term, or that the general media environment seems to fear boatloads of Muslim immigrants at Ellis Island, clamoring to throw up their minarets, their eyes furtively darting around in a sea of black fabric. No indeed, there needs to be some greater pageantry, some indication that Muslims are not merely models of moderation by a global standard, but – and here it gets good – by an “American standard.”

When Douthat talks about this American standard, I’m not sure to which he’s referring: the American standard of freedom of religion, the fundamental right to which we thought ourselves entitled in this nation? Or the new American standard, wherein Imam Rauf’s foreign policy beliefs – completely acceptable when stated by Glenn Beck (or President Obama, or about half of America) – become the method by which to deny him his rights?

Even if we accepted the author’s premise that assimilation is the key, Park51 is the epitome of “assimilationist” Islam. William Dalrymple wrote a piece to that effect in the Times, wherein he pointed out that Imam Rauf is in fact Sufi – that token progressive, mystical sect of Islam. I’m hard-pressed to believe that Islam can be much more moderate than to devote a floor or two out of thirteen to a mosque, where the rest will truly attempt to give back to the lower Manhattan religious community at large. Added to the recent study concluding that contemporary mosques deter radicalism, Park51 as a project could not really have expressed moderation any better (though there are steps that can be taken to mitigate the fall-out).

It is a serious exercise in the national psyche to collectively reflect on the weaknesses of past policy and history. But that’s the job of the first America: to critically examine whether this country lives up to the virtues it extols. And where is this first America, when we need it? Does it exist, if we can’t call on it? And can we wield it as our identity, lace our rhetoric with it, embolden our troops with it, if we cannot preserve it at home? Douthat claims that this second, “cultural” America, believes itself to be more than “just a set of political propositions.” But those political propositions, rendered so feeble in the face of this contention, are in some part the reasons for which the names of 36 countries were called on the day I was granted my American citizenship.

Woodrow Wilson once said that “[America] is the only country in the world which experiences this constant and repeated rebirth. Other countries depend on the multiplication of their own native people. This country is constantly drinking strength of new sources by the voluntary association with it of great bodies of strong men and forward-looking women out of other lands.”

It’s time, perhaps, for Ross Douthat—and anyone else who advocates his position – to skim the pages of that citizen’s almanac given to newly naturalized Americans. He might then realize that like every country with competing interests, America is at yet another critical juncture in its national narrative. And while that second America may try to preserve a unique and important culture, it is only the first America which enabled its creation.

(Photo: Greg Westfall)

Sara Haji is a freelance writer and a recent journalism graduate from the University of Texas at Austin. You can follow her on Twitter at saraserenahaji.

Commentary

Previous Post

August 16, 2010

Afghanistan: Prosecute Taliban leaders for war crimes

Next Post

August 20, 2010 Education: The other Islam controversy in NYC

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2012 Elections 30 Dayd 30 Writers (2017) 30 Days 30 Writers 30 Days 30 Writers (2015) 30 Days 30 Writers (2016) 30 Days 30 Writers (2018) 30 Days 30 Writers 2017 Ali Asadullah Ali Eteraz Alper Bilgili Arthur Richards Asides Asma Uddin Black History Month Briefings Charles Turner Commentary Cyrus McGoldrick Eman H Aly Fatimah Popal Hajj Hajj and Dhul Hijjah Hesham Hassaballa Hisham Hellyer Ibrahim Abusharif Inas Younis Irfan Yusuf Jalal Baig Junaid Afeef Laila Alawa Laila Alwala Mas'ood Cajee Muqtedar Khan Nakia Jackson Newsmakers Parvez Ahmed Podcasts Rabia Chaudry Rafia Zakaria Ramadan Reviews Safiyyah Ally Saud Inam Shahed Amanullah Svend White The Opinionated Oncologist Visions Wajahat Ali Zahed Amanullah Zahir Janmohamed Zainab Khan

Select a Month November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 April 2002 March 2002

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What did Job maintain throughout his speeches?

Select your answer to see how you score.

His innocence His guilt His silence His wealth