Re: Patrick's column

Patrick wrote a column suggesting that "tribalism" affected elections. As you can imagine, he was attacked as being racist... practically labeled crazy and/or stupid. Of course, part of this backlash was perhaps due to the title (which i'm sure some people didn't even get beyond). But the backlash is absurd. ANYONE who thinks there is no such thing as "tribalism during elections" is A MORON. Its the same reason we are sitting here today debating whether a black man can win the presidency. If there was no such thing as tribalism, "black man" would never be a factor to debate. Heck, "woman" wouldn't even come into play. Silly silly people...

My response (which prob won't get published since I'm not a resident)(second parenthesis - I gave the GNP readers and "Glendale" far too much credit when I said we're on the brink of moving beyond it - i just didn't want people to interpret my letter as being hateful so I had to soften it up):

In his column, Azadian suggested that a certain amount of “tribalism” might have played a role in the recent elections. In typical fashion, readers responded with a knee jerk reaction attacking Azadian’s theory.

The unfortunate truth, however, is that tribalism exists. The exact manner in which tribalism works and effects elections is not a hard science. But the notion of bloc voting and voting based on race or last names is nothing new or unique to Glendale. Perhaps those who were so quick to reject Azadian’s comments should take a course on politics or even sociology.

I don’t believe Azadian means to suggest an absolute theory. There are always exceptions, and sometimes more than just a few exceptions. Not everyone votes based on last names, just as not every man votes against a woman and not every white man votes against a black man. In fact, many of those who are so vocal in the Glendale News Press are those who are most aware of the issues and perhaps least prone to “tribal” voting.

The message here is not that candidates always win or lose solely based on their ethnicity. Indeed, Manoukian would never have been elected in the first place without support from all Glendalians. But the numbers suggest that Manoukian lost the support of only one segment of the community. Conversely, I would propose that after his failure to take the lead for Genocide Commemoration Week, Weaver lost a majority of the Armenian – American votes. Thus, Weaver was likely voted into office solely on “non-Armenian” votes. This shows tribalism on two fronts.

The message here is that we need to be aware of our own tribalism. Self awareness is the first step to erasing imaginary lines and breaking down the walls we’ve created. The suggestion that there was an “anti-Armenian” sentiment heading into these elections is not meant to be a racist remark. The suggestion is based on real and actual events throughout the last two years. Mailers linking Armenians to terrorism targeted to non-Armenian male voters (the tribalism there is undeniable), constant letters in the News Press making unsubstantiated claims that Armenian – Americans commit a disproportionate amount of crime, a slew of emails against a proposed Armenian high school, backlash against multilingual ballots (produced by an Armenian – American city clerk) etc. Although some of these discussions are based on issues, they undeniably show that ethnic background still plays a significant role in community politics and relations in Glendale. It is on us to move beyond this.

Every community in the United States has gone through its share of “tribal” elections and community tensions before fully accepting the beauty of the diversity. Glendale seems to be on the brink of putting race behind it. Today, I second Azadian’s wishes. I congratulate those who were elected and have high hopes they will work to unite this community rather than using the divide and conquer method for the sake of their own political aspirations.