Desi Manifesto Blog: The Forum for South Asian American Men

Jindal and his constituency. Thank you to the New York Times.

[Guest Blogger: Cajun Desi] On January 14, 2008, Piyush “Bobby” Jindal was sworn in as the 55^th Governor of the State of Louisiana. Jindal is the first non-white governor in Louisiana history since the bi-racial P.B.S. Pinchback assumed the governorship during Reconstruction. Jindal is also the first elected Indian-American governor in U.S. history as well as only the second Asian-American governor in the history of the continental U.S. Previously, Jindal was a two-term U.S. Representative for Louisiana’s 1^st Congressional District based in the New Orleans suburbs. He was only the second Indian-American in Congress since Dalip Singh Saud in the 1950s.

As an Indian man living in Louisiana for many years, I have often been asked, by members of all races, what my thoughts on Bobby Jindal are. I tend to hate answering such questions because I often feel doing so plays into the notion that there exists some monolithic Indian-American voting bloc. The media especially loves promoting such angles. For example, virtually all blacks are Democrats, born-again evangelicals are by necessity Republicans, and so on and so forth. In some cases these views are justified (virtually all blacks, for good reason, are Democrats). But what I think of Jindal has little to do with my being Indian. What I think of him is really based on that one universal question that all responsible citizens should ask themselves when deciding between political candidates: Where does he stand on the issues that I care deeply about?

As dirty a word as this may be in Louisiana political circles (where even Democrats must embrace centrism, at least, in order to win elections), I am a liberal. With that confession out of the way, it should not be hard to predict how I feel about Bobby Jindal the politician. I disagree with many aspects of his extreme social conservatism, including his positions on abortion (he is pro-life in cases of rape, incest, and even where an abortion would be necessary to save a woman’s life), gay rights, stem cell research, the teaching of intelligent design in public schools, and gun control (he received an “A” grade from the Gun Owners of America, a group generally considered more extreme than the NRA). His stance on environmental issues and his wholesale support for President Bush and the Iraq War also trouble me greatly. It is no surprise he voted with the Republican Caucus 97% of the time in the 109^th Congress. In essence, there is little if nothing about his politics with which I can find common ground. To put the icing on the cake, conservative talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh recently said of Jindal: “He is the next Ronald Reagan.” It would be difficult to find a more polarizing political metaphor – a title that would be considered a pejorative on one side of the aisle has been sought after with an almost maniacal fervor by political candidates on the other.

It would be very easy and convenient for me to stop there. I am a liberal, he is a conservative, case closed. But we all know it is not that simple. As much as I loathe the popular notion of the monolithic racial voting bloc, it is impossible for me to look at Jindal like another Republican because of his race. At some basic level, he is One of Us – or is he? That question demands an answer. What he has achieved as a super-minority in a state with, to put it kindly, a troubled racial history, is nothing short of remarkable. In truth, he has achieved what I thought growing up as an Indian-American would never be possible, let alone in the Deep South. He deserves a great deal of credit for his accomplishments. But again, it would be easy if the script stopped there.

I would be lying if I said that it did not bother me that while his real name is Piyush, he has adopted the name “Bobby” for himself (it should be noted, without a legal name change). The fact that such a conversion was based on his affinity for the character “Bobby” on “The Brady Bunch” does not assuage me. I am in no way religious, but it bothers me that he converted from Hinduism to Catholicism in college and has testified before both Baptist and Pentecostal congregations. It bothers me that after losing several conservative Northern Louisiana parishes in his failed 2003 bid for governor, reportedly largely due to fears about his race, he aggressively courted those same voters in those same parishes in the 2007 race. I would rather he simply ignore them.

A cynic would say this is just politics as usual. You do what you have to do to win elections. But I would like to ask “Bobby” how he can ask for the support of a conservative base that includes many people who would not support him simply because of his race? During the election I saw pictures of him standing with rural voters at state fairs and other events in parishes which he lost in 2003. The question he should ask himself is, considering his conservative positions, whether he would even need to do all this campaigning if he were just a regular white guy named Bobby Smith or (since this is Louisiana) Bobby Breaux or Bobby Hebert? I would like to ask him the same questions I would like to ask Michael Steele, J.C. Watts, Herman Cain, Mel Martinez, Alberto Gonzales, and Clarence Thomas, among other prominent conservative minorities: How does it feel to be a part of a movement and an ideology, not to mention a political party, that have won elections and support in large part due to the politics of racial polarization in the latter half of the 20^th century until present day? I find it absurd that someone can advocate so passionately and earnestly the interests and agenda of such people, large proportions of whom can never truly support said person because of his or her skin color.

But he is One of Us, is he not? And if he indeed believes what he claims to believe (and his voting record would not indicate otherwise), then so be it. At least there is integrity in that. And while I find his racial pandering nauseating, if that is the only way he can win elections and accomplish what he in his heart believes is the right thing for his state and his country, then so be it. Why should he be any different than any other politician, liberal or conservative, who debases himself for votes and will say absolutely anything to get elected (Mitt Romney, anyone)? What we have seen with Jindal is simply the bastard stepchild of the Nixonian Southern Strategy: Instead of using veiled racism to attract white voters, Jindal used the politics of superficial and perceived racial conciliation to woo skeptical voters (“See! I am no different than you!”).

The truth of the matter is, no matter what I or any other Indian thinks of Bobby Jindal, he will determine how the people of Louisiana and the American people think about us. This is unavoidable. His successes or failures will reflect on all of us. If he fails, it will confirm what the racists thought all along – that an Indian is ill-suited to be a governor. If he succeeds, it will likely be painted as a triumph of conservative principles and the GOP way, but it might also show that we can be governors, or mayors, or legislators. This is the burden he carries, whether or not he likes it and whether or not he accepts it. However, this is also the burden we must carry as Indian-Americans, whether we like him or not, and whether he is in fact One of Us or not.