“After extensive consultation, discussion, and deliberation, the American Muslim 2024 Election Task Force has decided to encourage American Muslims to vote for any presidential candidate of their choosing who supports a permanent ceasefire in Gaza and a US arms embargo on the Israeli government, such as candidates Dr Jill Stein, Dr Cornel West or Chase Oliver,” read the statement, obtained by Middle East Eye.
The statement was written by the American Muslim 2024 Election Task Force, an umbrella group formed this year that consists of a number of prominent Muslim organisations including the political arms of Americans for Justice in Palestine (AJP), Cair, and the US Council of Muslim Organizations.
“We cannot endorse Vice President Kamala Harris’ candidacy because of her refusal to even consider imposing the arms embargo on the Israeli government required by US laws and her failure to promise any other changes whatsoever to President Biden’s failed policy of steadfast financial, diplomatic and military support for Israel’s genocide in Gaza,” the statement read.
Easy to say when you aren’t the target. It is the job of a politician to win over voters they are shedding.
Your line of thinking is that over half of Muslim-American voters simply “aren’t thinking,” which borders on racist. Instead, think about why they are doing what they are doing, and how that can change.
Saying that people aren’t thinking isn’t how we should be having this discussion. The Israeli government, military, and many of its citizens are acting as a terrorist nation. Palestine should be a free country instead of one oppressed and murdered by its neighbors. These attacks should not be supported, funded, or supplied by any country, especially one that claims to value democracy (and yet continually acts against those values). The UN overwhelmingly supports all of the above. The US is wrong here. The US needs to change its stance.
The US is political system is a two party system. It truly truly sucks that we do not have a ranked choice voting system. Currently, voting in national elections for a third party is only effectively denying a vote to one of the two major parties. (Local elections are a different story and the only way to possible route to national change of our two party system is to start locally.)
Neither viable candidate has a good stance on Palestine. Of the two viable candidates, it should be obvious which one will have less negative impact on racial and religious minorities. It should also be obvious which candidate could possibly change their incorrect stance on Palestine once reaching office. I’m not saying there’s a large possibility, I’m saying ANY possibility.
If all Americans were required to vote, and could only vote for one of the two major parties, which candidate do you think the vast majority of Muslim-Americans would vote for? In the world where you can choose to not vote, or support a candidate that literally has no chance of winning, all you’re doing is lowering the total number of votes for the candidate who closer aligns with your values. Yes, that’s the lesser of two evils. Yes, that does mean voting for someone who hasn’t taken a stance against the genocide currently happening. Yes, it feels awful to support someone that you don’t agree with on such an important topic. The alternative is worse.
When protesting against our country’s stance on Israel and Palestine (which I will do until people are free from the river to the sea), I would much rather be protesting against someone with a shred of empathy rather than someone who is likely to engage the military to use deadly force and brutal repression against us who protest.
The Israeli government, military, and many of its citizens are acting as a terrorist nation. Palestine should be a free country instead of one oppressed and murdered by its neighbors. These attacks should not be supported, funded, or supplied by any country, especially one that claims to value democracy (and yet continually acts against those values). The UN overwhelmingly supports all of the above. The US is wrong here. The US needs to change its stance.
Why does the US support Israel, and why has it for so long? The answer will show the course we need to take.
The US is political system is a two party system. It truly truly sucks that we do not have a ranked choice voting system. Currently, voting in national elections for a third party is only effectively denying a vote to one of the two major parties. (Local elections are a different story and the only way to possible route to national change of our two party system is to start locally.)
It does more than that, it signals where people are willing to vote.
Neither viable candidate has a good stance on Palestine. Of the two viable candidates, it should be obvious which one will have less negative impact on racial and religious minorities. It should also be obvious which candidate could possibly change their incorrect stance on Palestine once reaching office. I’m not saying there’s a large possibility, I’m saying ANY possibility.
Neither candidate has any possibility of changing unless they fear losing the election because of it. The genocide isn’t a moral choice, but economic.
If all Americans were required to vote, and could only vote for one of the two major parties, which candidate do you think the vast majority of Muslim-Americans would vote for?
If we lived in such a dictatorship, then I believe Muslim-Americans would join Leftists in organizing outside of the electoral system and help build up Dual Power.
When protesting against our country’s stance on Israel and Palestine (which I will do until people are free from the river to the sea), I would much rather be protesting against someone with a shred of empathy rather than someone who is likely to engage the military to use deadly force and brutal repression against us who protest.
Neither have a shred of empathy, and Tim Walz sent in the National Guard to disappear BLM protestors under Trump. Neither are good, both are evil, neither care.
So what are you going to do about it, and why is that better than making a choice between one of the two candidates that will definitely be in office in less than 4 months?
