Bananachinese’s Weblog

April 13, 2011

So, how about a score for Sarawak?

I’m trying to vary the contents of me blog. Boring will it be if it solely be bananafied’s voice always (in Yoda language).

So, here’s another article from a friend in Sarawak to dedicate to BC’s dear readers. Any comments, you know what to do lar.

How About A Score For Sarawak?

There is one important question that a proud Sarawakian voter will question their election candidates before they pre-qualify them, especially to the novice politicians before letting them make long range policies on behalf of the people of the state.

We all know about those familiar faced candidates who have been involved in mapping out the Sarawak State Assembly policy for its economic and education future. From the Barisan Nasional’s side, they’re the ones who have been seen participating and contributed input into drawing up of crucial state developmental policies like education which achieved its goal of establishing 3 public universities, 3 private universities, 38 private colleges or university branch campuses. Another important developmental policy for the economic growth is outlined in SCORE (Sarawak Corridor Of Renewable Energy) that we keep reading about in the newspaper ever since BN highlighted it prominently in their manifesto.

Before we proceed, let’s arrive at a common understanding of what is a manifesto. According to Wikipedia, it is a public declaration of policy and aims, especially one issued before an election by a political party or candidate.

For this round of the Sarawak state election, the manifestos from both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat are already disseminated to the voting public and hopefully will not escape the scrutinizing of the all voters who may or may not be partial to any contesting party.

Let’s check out BN’s manifesto which actually has a long range plan via Score to change Sarawak to become the richest State in Malaysia. According the elaboration, Score would increase the state’s per capita income to RM97,500 by 2030, compared with RM45,000 in 2020 and RM37,287 last year.

So, what’s in the Score that is relevant to the normal man who needs to make a living from day to day to feed his family? A further check with the manifesto (by the way, this is a good authority to reference now that it is a made as promise by BN) says that Score is capable of generating 836,000 jobs by 2030, including 44,000 at the professional and management levels as well as 82,000 engineering and technical jobs. Ok, increase of job opportunities checked for the future.

Next, which sector of the economy that BN tells me I should guide my children to specialise in their studies so that they can ride on the economic road map?

Vide Score, BN will give special emphasis to oil, aluminium, iron, glass, marine engineering and food processing in the halal hub. Ok, checked – areas of education for children to pursue in their studies, if they do so desire.

Additionally, BN promises to do the following which I don’t think anybody will pick a quarrel with:
• The protection of the environment,
• The preservation of the culture,
• Traditions of all the peoples in the state; generating more employment and business opportunities;
• Providing more education opportunities and guaranteeing the people’s rights over their lands.
• Improve quality of life, basic amenities and infrastructure eg: roads, water supply, electricity, health services and housing would be provided.

Well, so much for BN’s manifesto.

What does Pakatan Rakyat’s 10 point manifesto tell voters?

Basically, to give the state’s wealth to the people. guarantee of freedom of religion, free WiFi to move Sarawak into a knowledge-state, a Competency, Accountability and Transparency system of governance, respecting the 18-points agreement and a promise to investigate allegations of ill-gotten wealth of BN leaders and their cronies.

Kudos for display of nice ideals and admirable aspiration, realistically please give details of your long range plans to your intelligent voters? How about a policy plan to 2020 or beyond to prove Pakatan’s here to stay, Baru Bian? Do consider this important hallmark of a government before attempting to score for the Pakatan ship.

By: Bintang Bulan

Advertisements

April 10, 2011

Let a wise man makes his own decisions, an ignorant man follows public opinion

An excited friend admonished me:

“My dear BC, why are you keeping silent on the Sarawak state election? It is really exciting here in Kuching, the crowds here get to listen to really good talks by opposition every night, DAP speakers are good and entertaining, SUPP not as fiery, but seems like the new chap Dr. Sim Kui Hian is steady and looks like a very reliable politician – if he is elected lar…”

My friend… I’m still in holiday mood and will opt to not side any one party at the moment. So, Sarawakian friends will be missing out on my knify sharp political analysis this week, hehehe.

Anyways, to sooth friends who are buoyed by the highs courtesy of opposition speakers, share with you something I’ve gotten from another savvy friend.

Until next week,

Let a wise man makes his own decisions, an ignorant man follows public opinion

It is a common human fallacy to generalize issues when trying to justify one’s argument in order to KO the opponent. Who haven’t heard of someone who will say “He/she is so typical of a xxx (insert race/category of profession) therefore he/she is (insert assumption of undesirable action here).”

Let’s not be ashamed to admit it, most of us might have done it conscious or unconsciously. Even the DAP and other opposition parties tend to do this ‘natural’ thing. Usually, the members of the opposition will strike first with accusations of xxx (insert preferred presumptions of guilt before trial here). And then it is followed up by bombardments and arguments to stir up the public’s emotion with insinuated wrongdoings such as, “xxx is rich, therefore xxx is corrupted”. This is a well worn method as human beings are found to be intrigued by real or imagined scandals especially if it can blacken the image of the more famous member of the community.

But if one were to dig deeper, one will find that the argument was not wholesome and skewed to be lopsided towards the interest of the opposition. For instance, when debating issues of development, the attacker will not acknowledge truths of how the whole community has also benefited to rise up to better living as compared to their forefather’s hard environment which seriously lacked the economic public infrastructure built up since then. There was no recognition for work and effort put in by the state to satisfy and balance various communities’ demands, sensitivities and interpretations of social justice.

One is reminded how the Chinese who are generally well recognised for their belief in ‘Dao’ and that everything in the universe have a black and white perspective that balances each side for a harmonious life existence. Many Chinese sayings have been handed down since the ancient sage kings to disseminate their wisdom to guide the new generations to balance all sides of each story. Indeed, this has given rise to the general perception that all Chinese are pragmatic practitioners capable of understanding the Dao of both sides of the story before making hasty decisions.

Why not try out the Chinese way to analyze what has been given as ‘truth’ and avoid the risk falling into the trap of ‘One stick knocking down the whole village’. Don’t you think it is a great injustice to deny the work of many good people from the village who has silently contributed to make our lives better today?

by: Bintang Bulan

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.