Is a powerful man also a known racist?
Donald Trump’s first executive action was signed on January 27th, 2017. It denied refugees entry into America and temporarily prohibited those coming from the following seven Muslim-majority counties: Iran. Iraq. Libya. Somalia. Sudan. Syria. Yemen. It was 90 days of visa suspension, except for visa categories like UN and diplomats. Trump claimed that the move was made to protect America from “radical Islamic terrorism”.
Even though this topic has been controversial, why? I will discuss Trump’s political and faith ideologies, including how they influenced his signing of the executive order. And why 84% (of GOP republican respondents) support Trump’s action. I will examine the Singaporean PAP’s values and compare them to Trump’s. This will reveal how their political ideologies and faith differ, which impacts on their governance. This controversial event will also be discussed in terms of my personal faith and political beliefs. Trump denied that the ban on travel was discriminatory against Islam. He said it was needed for “security” and that it would not happen again. Donald Trump’s political ideology is far to the right, which makes him conservative. This travel ban fits in well with republican ideologies, one of the main ideologies affirming that a strong national defense is vital (by RepublicanViews.org). Trump denied he was based his executive order upon his own personal religious beliefs, but it is important to understand how republican ideology is derived. These ideologies tend to be influenced by Judeo Christian ethics. This suggests that Trump’s executive order is primarily based on morals learned from the 10 Commandments. Republican ideologies are founded solely on the commandments.
Pew Research Centre found that 56% and 70% respectively of Evangelical Christians in North America were republicans. (Benjamin Wormald) This could be a reason why these people share similar republican values to Trump. Trump’s political group, the GOP, which includes 84% of its republican members (Shepard Steven), also supports the travel order. Despite sharing similar political ideologies with Trump and the republicans, there are 9% of Republicans within the GOP that strongly oppose the travel ban. Mitch McConnell is one of the Senators who cites that the ban on travel is “completely contradictory” to American values. Others claim it necessary in order to defend religious freedom. Marco Rubio (Senator) and Tim Scott (GOP Senator) both say that “we [GOP] are equally dedicated to the defence of religious liberties and our tradition to provide refuge to those fleeing persecutors.”
As was mentioned above, republicans tend towards conservatism and nationalism, so they are proponents of traditional methods of government. Due to the changing nature of society and the country, these republicans are unable to continue with their republican ideologies. Pew Research Centre has conducted a study which shows that Republican ideology changed during the first half century to match the society’s current trends. In addition to this social influence, Republicans largely have individualistic views, believing in prioritizing an American individual’s needs above all (by RepublicanViews.org). This is why they place the safety of Americans ahead of the safety of a huge group of Muslim asylum seekers.
In 2016, a poll found that 58% believed diversity would improve the country (by Bruce Drake, Jacob Poushter). Donald Trump’s banning of a religion has an impact on the development of diversity in America. It is important to understand the complexity surrounding the travel restriction. US economic embargos were issued long before the travel restrictions, including Iran, Sudan and Syria. While many believe that the ban is a result of religious beliefs, it seems to coincide with economic realities.
Singapore, a nation halfway around the world can be compared. Singapore, unlike America’s, is a diverse and young nation. They have developed over the years by embracing both modern western influences. Singaporean PAP government has been dominant since 1959. The party’s ideology is centered on the right side of the political spectrum. These include multiculturalism, communitarianism, and meritocracy. Singapore had just won independence from Malaysia. It was however divided based on race, religious beliefs and ethnicity. In the wake of the tragic race-riots in 1964 (by PAP), Lee Kuan Yew wanted to create a country where people of all races and religions could coexist. “Singapore will be a multiracial society.
We will be an example. This isn’t a Malay, Chinese or Indian nation. Everyone will find their place – equal; in terms of culture, language and religion.” (by PAP) His passionate belief has been with him since he became a leader. It is this conviction that has helped shape the ideology of the People’s Action Party. PAP places a high value on Singapore’s collective action, resulting in a strong sense collectivism. This heavily contrast to the more individualistic approach the GOP republican party have when it comes to their aims of making the United States a greater nation (by www.republicanviews.org).
It is important that the government believes in religious harmony because this influences laws to keep it. For instance, under the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act, those who incite hostility or hatred between different religions will face a restraining act. The ‘Sedition Law’ also prohibits any seditious act or expression through publication, and fits into the ideologies of some governments, such as multiculturalism and comunitarianism.
PAP’s Mission Statement: To build a fair society that is just, and where progress benefits all. (by PAP). This mission statement highlights the PAP’s view of all faiths and religions as equal. Their political ideologies are closely linked to it. Recognizing that laws like the Sedition Act limit the freedom of expression, is contrary to the US. Singaporeans can thrive in a diverse and friendly environment because of the government’s political and religious ideologies.
I initially thought that this event was a controversial one, but the main reason for the decision was Trump’s religious beliefs. To ban Islam in 7 countries is unreasonable. My bias against Trump was due to the racist statements made about him by Kevin Rawlinson and David Smith. My initial reaction was primarily influenced by the political ideologies in my native country of Singapore. Political ideologies and laws enforced in my home country, Singapore, have shaped my values. Since I was born here and grew up there, my values are shaped by these ideologies. My political leanings are similar to those of Singapore, who is centre right. The two are close to the middle. Though I am Hindu, my open-minded parents have influenced the way I view faith. All religions lead to a similar destination, and in an environment that is based on faith like Singapore it’s easy to have an open mind. Under any circumstances, I’ve never been put down for my religious beliefs. My initial reaction was based on my faith to the executive order of Mr. Trump.
After examining a wider range of angles, I have changed my perspective and now see a plausible link between Trump’s ideologies, his decisions, and his political views. As most republican views are influenced by Judeo-Christian values (by Vladimir Minkov), it’s possible that Trump could be the perfect storm of a clash between faith and politics.
What this means for me is that, in order to have a balanced perspective on any controversial decision or issue, I must consider and explore all angles. It is important that I refrain from expressing my opinion on these issues until I am fully aware of the issue and its divergent viewpoints.
Comments are closed.