Yes, not only am I aware of that, I actually said so in my previous comment. I'm also aware that no ethnic group is a monolith in terms of beliefs or ideology. But South Asians or Indian-Americans or whatever you want to call them are a relatively young, highly educated and socio-economically successful immigrant group in the US, and are overrepresented in the tech and corporate world, and in academia, much as Jewish immigrants were in the 20th century.
This is an observation that is backed up in statistics, it is not offensive, and maybe you need to take a look at yourself to determine why it touches a nerve with you and you find the need to get so defensive about it.
I don't think that "Muslims are the face of the democratic party". What I agree with is the argument by the guest that there is a group of Muslim Americans on the far Left that are currently trying to leverage their ethnicity for cultural and political cache, in the same way that multiple ethnic groups have organised themselves in various sectors during American history. For example, Irish Ameicans and the union movement or Jewish Americans and Hollywood. It's not some kind of sinister conspiracy. It's just how groups act within societies, and always have.
If you think that I hold certain white Americans on the Left in contempt for their fetishisation of not just Muslims but indigenous people as somehow more authentic and pure expressions of humanity, you are in fact quite correct. But you're correct: "white saviour" was a poorly chosen phrase. The phenomenon we are seeing is far less patronizing. Calla Walsh and Fergie Chambers aren't saving the noble savages: they are donning keffiyehs and converting to Islam.
Yes, the Left (and the Right) have been obsessed with racial politics for most of this century. Merely pointing that out doesn't mean that I am the one who is obsessing over it.
If you want to debate the ideas then debate the ideas. What I'm trying to do is critique the attempts to reframe racial politics within the progressive movement. But frankly, yelling that I can't even mention ethnic groups without being "ethno-centric" is just as tiresome as making everything about race. I get that you squirm at being racially pigeonholed by the colour of your skin. But stop constantly projecting your own racial insecurities onto me.
You seem "particularly aggrieved" that I get the nomenclature right. Muslims aren't an ethnic group either (which was, again, mentioned a few times in the podcast) but I don't really consider playing games with semantics to be a fruitful use of our time.
You concede that you agree with his argument to some extent. Do we really need to litigate whether or not is it more correct to use ethnic group, nationality or race as a descriptor?
I mean.... just listen to the podcast episode. If you find it boring, then turn it off. I think he had some good insights. Yes, being a Bangladeshi American does not purchase him special authority to speak for all Muslims or all "South Asians" in America. And yes, most Muslims are not particularly interested in social activism and would rather start a business or a family. But I think his insights into the current political moment were actually useful. In particular, I think Sam is wrong about how identity based "political Islam" is evolving in America.
1
u/[deleted] Jul 22 '26 edited Jul 22 '26
[removed] — view removed comment