El-Sayed's Unapologetic Victory Shows Refusing to Pander to Islamophobia Works and Marks a Cultural Shift
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/profile/arwa-mahdawi. "Get ready habibis, Abdul El-Sayed’s ‘shawarma law’ is coming to the US | Arwa Mahdawi | The Guardian." November 4, 2026. www.theguardian.com
The Gist
The author says El-Sayed won a Senate seat by being openly Arab, Muslim and pro-Palestinian instead of toning himself down, which proves that standing up to racists works. She argues the backlash against him shows how much bigotry remains, but that American attitudes and culture are shifting in a way that makes his kind of candidacy possible.
Conclusion
Abdul El-Sayed's victory, won without diluting his Arab and Muslim identity or political beliefs, shows that refusing to appease racists is not divisive but effective, and that US politics and culture are shifting so that openly Arab, Muslim and pro-Palestinian candidates can now succeed.
Premises
- El-Sayed won his Senate race without hiding or softening his Arab and Muslim identity: he did not anglicize his name, did not condemn extremists he has no connection to, and did not adopt a 'politics of appeal'.
- Throughout the campaign and after his win, El-Sayed was met with vile racism and Islamophobia from MAGA figures like Laura Loomer, and with hostile framing even from 'respectable' commentators and media (Frum, Kirchick, CNN).
- His victory speech used Arabic and openly criticized US support for what the author calls genocide and apartheid in Gaza, which would once have been considered political suicide.
- Public attitudes toward Israel have shifted dramatically because of the war on Gaza, and Arab culture is increasingly present in mainstream US culture (Drake, Mo Amer, Macklemore, New York magazine).
- Right-wing criticism of El-Sayed as divisive mistakes refusing to pander to racists for division; what the establishment calls 'civility' is really servility toward people who see minorities as worthless.
Assumptions
- El-Sayed's win was caused by his authenticity and not by other factors such as the Michigan electorate, the national political environment, or his opponent's weaknesses.
- Criticism of El-Sayed by figures like Frum, Kirchick and CNN is driven by anti-Muslim or anti-Arab animus rather than by legitimate policy disagreement.
- Cultural visibility (albums, TV shows, tours) reflects and contributes to meaningful political acceptance.
- A single electoral result is representative evidence of a broader national trend.
- The characterization of Israel's war in Gaza as genocide and apartheid is accurate and is shared by enough voters to be politically viable.
- Satire and hyperbole about 'Muslim takeover' and 'shawarma law' will be read as mockery of Islamophobic fears rather than endorsement.