Bobby Jindal, the son of Punjabi immigrants, has become Louisiana’s first post-Katrina governor, winning over 52% of the votes.

Jindal, a former Rhodes scholar, who lost his bid for governor by a narrow margin four years ago, then became a US congressman, and is now at 36 the state’s youngest governor.

Apart from being desi (this is the Indian word for “country” and means something like home boy), Jindal is interesting to me for his staunch down-the-line conservative position — dead against abortion and dead in support of teaching creationism in the schools. An odd position for someone who was a double- major in biology and public policy at Brown University, not known for being a Christian school.

Jindal’s anti-abortion stance is the orthodox Catholic one, only to be expected from a convert. And constitutionally, the states really ought to be free to conform to the predominant sentiment in communities. But, although Roe v. Wade was not especially a good decision as jurisprudence, it is the settled law of the land. Hopefully, Jindal will learn to negotiate that thoughtfully.

However, Jindal’s support of teaching creationism in the schools is more problematic to me.

I really don’t see the need to teach “Creation Science.”

It’s perfectly possible to reverse the incorrect “anti-religion” mode of interpretation of the constitution without endorsing a religious theory of creation in the classroom. You could, for example, teach various metaphysical or mythological theories of creation in a religion class, or you could teach comparative religious ethics in a philosophy class (or, in electives/activities outside the curriculum). But that would be quite different from endorsing a particular religious doctrine, which would – I think – violate the anti-establishment clause of the First Amendment.

Nevertheless, I can’t help but feel pleased at what Jindal’s election says about race. Race-mongers like to tell us that we stand or fall on race relations. And many in the PC crowd among opinion makers indeed do. But on the ground in America it’s usually a different business. Yes, there’s still a lot of nastiness, there’s still a lot of suspicion, ignorance, and warranted and unwarranted friction among groups. Still, I rather think that in this country, beliefs and ideas are proving stronger than simple affinities of skin color and ethnicity sans any other consideration.

Consider the ethnic and cultural difference between a typical white southerner and a Punjabi – even a Catholic convert — and between, say, a Punjabi and a Tamilian from the south of India. How much closer should the south of India and the north be? Much closer, you’d think, than a Punjabi and a southern white. But, I doubt if you would find a Tamil chief minister of Punjab. At least, not very easily (I could be mistaken, so I’ll research this more).

I’m not saying that race is not an important consideration in politics. It is. And I think it’s fairly natural to prefer someone – other things being equal – of your own race. But other things are rarely equal. Race in those cases becomes an invidious category – as the courts say, and could be used to disqualify well-qualified people.

Louisiana has just proved it’s unwilling to do that.

Good for it.

On the contra Jindal side, here are some indications of political expediency in his position, from some DailyKos bloggers who see his victory as an unmitigated disaster.

But I tend to think what’s happened in Louisiana may have much less to do with Jindal’s social positions than people assume. It might have to do with people simply being fed up with incompetence in the government – especially post-Katrina – and with fiscal irresponsibility.

In defense of this position, I should say that I usually give a very bright person the benefit of the doubt in such things. My reasoning is that you can excuse a few sins from the very competent on the grounds that the rest of the time, you’re getting a good deal. There’s no escaping the incompetent though.

The devil himself has to take a breather from being wicked once in a while. But stupid is 24/7.

Update:

I didn’t really comment on Jindal’s Iraq war position. I assumed –  as he is a staunch supporter of the Republican party line – that he’s pro-war. Here are his exact positions.

Since I’m fairly convinced that both parties are committed to the war and that – apart from Paul and Kucinich — everyone else is pretty much following the same line (with some fudges), it isn’t going to change the equation much one way or other.