It is interesting to note that the Labor Party of Australia expected the new young voters to vote overwhelmingly for them. But that did not happen either. The election result demonstrated that the vast majority of the first-time voters--many of them university ‘freshies’—a Labor vote-bank abandoned the Labor Party; instead, they voted either the Liberals or the Greens, a small ‘environmental’ party. This deprived the Labor the victory that they were almost certain.

Many irreligious persons, atheists, secularists, leftists, socialists, communists voted for the Liberals too, knowing very well John Howard’s support for the Church and the Christian schools. Previously, they could have never thought of voting for a ‘dullard’ and a ‘dross’, Johnny--to put it mildly.

It is not surprising that same pattern of voting was reflected in the US election.

As mentioned at the beginning of this essay that the result of the Presidential election in the USA has divided not only the US society but also the world. It is no wonder to witness this division in many cyber forums like MM, Vinnomot, FFI just to name a few. Some members of such forums openly supported John Kerry (or George Bush) and transformed their website as an election propaganda platform. When the Republicans won the election many members in the opposite camp were disappointed, hurt and angry. Some of them even suggested that the re-election of George Bush will encourage more terrorism, more Islamic fundamentalism. This translates into more bloodshed and mayhem—according to them. Some of them even suggest that President George Bush has turned himself into a Christian fundamentalist waging Crusade against the Muslims. While I guess most Americans are religious, still America is the most staunchly secular country in the world. Same goes for Australia . Though the vast majority of the Australians are Christians and quite religious, the secular nature of Australia , including all its secular laws remain intact no matter which party is in power. No party can change this status of Australia —not even John Howard, even though he had a very good support from many Church based parties.  

I think America stands exactly in the same position. The secular nature of America can never change—not even in a few centuries. Therefore, the thought of Christian fundamentalism and Crusade are simply far-fetched and ill-motivated. George Bush and John Howard are doing simply their duties to their citizen—protect them at any cost—fight fire with fire, if need be.  

I must say that if anyone is responsible for the perceived rise of Christian fundamentalism it is actually due to the ascent of Islamic fundamentalism for the last few decades. When the Christians, the Hindus, the Buddhists find that they are being attacked, killed, burned and tortured by the Islamic Terrorists they have no choice but to turn to the parties that promise complete security to them. Ordinary people cannot depend upon the incomprehensible hypothesis of the liberals and the philosophical doctrines of the leftists. They need to protect themselves first—even if that means to resort to the use of force. That is why we see the rise of the Hindu fundamentalists in India in BJP and the rise of the extreme rightists in other countries, such as Austria , the Netherlands …etc. Violence begets violence—it is as simple as this. And it is Islamic Terrorism that started it all.

Remove Islamic Terrorism from the face of the earth and you will find no other religious fundamentalism/terrorism. Christian, Hindu or Budddhist fundamentalisms are the reaction of Islamic Terrorism perpetrated by the Muslim fundamentalists-- let’s face this truth. Islamic Terrorism cannot be removed through dialogue or negotiation. These terrorists do not believe in give-and-take--the very fundamental of any negotiation process. In fact, the terrorists consider an offer of negotiation as a sign of weakness—a time for a brief respite—a good opportunity to re-plan and execute further genocide and mayhem to establish Islamic Paradises in world. Anyone who offers an olive branch to the terrorists is simply drawing more Trojan Horses into his backyard. 

Finally, I would like to stress the importance of maintaining a bystander’s attitude in a cyber forum. It is unwise for an Internet forum to be brazenly partisan. A forum is not a political party. Members of these forums come from diverse backgrounds and they are spread around the globe. Just because they are in agreement with a few policies/ideas/philosophy does not mean that all of them must agree with the political, cultural and domestic issues of any or all countries. As an example: During the next Singapore election which political party should MM or Vinnomot support—PAP (People’s Action Party) or the opposition Workers Party? Surely, this is a contentious issue and it will be imprudent and childish to openly advertise for any one party. If a certain member writes anything about any party let that be only his personal opinion. The moderators and the key members of the group should, as far as possible, keep silence on the election issue. This, I think, should be a wise approach. It will prevent the unnecessary, hurt feeling, anger, frustration and jealousy in the forum. 

Back   <  1   2  3