For a change, Barack Obama should not listen to fascists.
Dear President Obama:
As political scientists, historians, and researchers in related fields who have studied the Middle East and U.S. foreign policy, we the undersigned believe you have a chance to move beyond rhetoric to support the democratic movement sweeping over Egypt. As citizens, we expect our president to uphold those values.
For thirty years, our government has spent billions of dollars to help build and sustain the system the Egyptian people are now trying to dismantle. Tens if not hundreds of thousands of demonstrators in Egypt and around the world have spoken. We believe their message is bold and clear: Mubarak should resign from office and allow Egyptians to establish a new government free of his and his family's influence. It is also clear to us that if you seek, as you said Friday "political, social, and economic reforms that meet the aspirations of the Egyptian people," your administration should publicly acknowledge those reforms will not be advanced by Mubarak or any of his adjutants.
There is another lesson from this crisis, a lesson not for the Egyptian government but for our own. In order for the United States to stand with the Egyptian people it must approach Egypt through a framework of shared values and hopes, not the prism of geostrategy. On Friday you rightly said that "suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away." For that reason we urge your administration to seize this chance, turn away from the policies that brought us here, and embark on a new course toward peace, democracy and prosperity for the people of the Middle East. And we call on you to undertake a comprehensive review of US foreign policy on the major grievances voiced by the democratic opposition in Egypt and all other societies of the region.
Jason Brownlee, University of Texas at Austin
Joshua Stacher, Kent State University
Tamir Moustafa, Simon Fraser University
Arang Keshavarzian, New York University
Clement Henry, University of Texas at Austin
Robert Springborg, Naval Postgraduate School
Jillian Schwedler, University of Massachusetts at Amherst
Noam Chomsky, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Chris Toensing, Middle East Research and Information Project
Ellen Lust, Yale University
Helga Tawil-Souri, New York University
Anne Mariel Peters, Wesleyan College
Gregory White, Smith College
Asef Bayat, University of Illinois
Diane Singerman, American University
Cathy Lisa Schneider, American University
Robert Vitalis, University of Pennsylvania
Ahmet T. Kuru San Diego State University
Toby Jones, Rutgers University
Lara Deeb, Scripps College
Michaelle Browers, Wake Forest University
Mark Gasiorowski, Louisiana State University
Samer Shehata, Georgetown University
Farideh Farhi, University of Hawai'i at MÄnoa
Emad Shahin, University of Notre Dame
John P. Entelis, Fordham University
Tamara Sonn, College of William & Mary
Ali Mirsepassi, New York University
Kumru Toktamis, Pratt Institute
Rebecca C. Johnson, Northwestern University
Nader Hashemi, University of Denver
Carlene J. Edie, University of Massachusetts at Amherst
Laryssa Chomiak, University of Maryland
Mohamed Nimer, American University
Steven Heydemann, Georgetown University
Miriam Lowi, The College of New Jersey
Wendy Pearlman, Northwestern University
Hesham Sallam, Georgetown University
Melani Cammett, Brown University
Michael Robbins, University of Michigan
Katherine E. Hoffman, Northwestern University
Asli Bali, UCLA School of Law
Hamid Dabashi, Columbia University
Guilain Denoeux, Colby College
Tom Farer, University of Denver
Norma Claire Moruzzi, University of Illinois at Chicago
Saad Eddin Ibrahim, American University of Cairo & Drew University
Asma Barlas, Ithaca College
Ethel Brooks, Rutgers University
Maren Milligan, Oberlin College
Alan Gilbert, Josef Korbel School of International Studies, University of Denver
Glenn Robinson, Naval Postgraduate School
Ahmed Ragab, Harvard University
Kenneth M. Cuno, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Agnieszka Paczynska, George Mason University
Zillah Eisenstein, Ithaca College
Quinn Mecham, Middlebury College
Riahi Hamida, Faculty of Arts and Human Sciences Sousse Tunisia
Jeannie Sowers, University of New Hampshire
Hussein Banai, Brown University
Joel Gordon, University of Arkansas-Fayetteville
Ed Webb, Dickinson College
David Siddhartha Patel, Cornell University
Thomas Pierret, Princeton University
Nadine Naber, University of Michigan
As`ad AbuKhalil, California State University at Stanislaus
Dina Al-Kassim, University of California at Irvine
Ziad Fahmy, Cornell University
William B. Quandt, University of Virginia
Lori A. Allen, University of Cambridge
Eugene Sensenig-Dabbous, Notre Dame University Lebanon
Alfred G. Gerteiny, University of Connecticut (ret.)
Lucia Volk, San Francisco State University
Anne Marie Baylouny, Naval Postgraduate School
Ulrika MÃ¥rtensson, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology
Emma Deputy, University of Texas at Austin
Sherry Lowrance, University of Georgia
Kaveh Ehsani, DePaul University
Ebrahim Moosa, Duke University
Benjamin N. Schiff, Oberlin College
Jeff Goodwin, New York University
Margaret Scott, New York University (adjunct)
Mehrzad Boroujerdi, Syracuse University
Kevin M. DeJesus, York University, Toronto
Courtney C. Radsch, American University
Gamze Cavdar, Colorado State University
John F. Robertson, Central Michigan University
Institutional affiliations are listed for identification purposes only. Views reflected in this letter are those of the individual signatories.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)