leong888
I have just published a book: “The White Rajahs…Myths Retold, the Massacre of the Bau Hakkas. The Hakkas” were the gold miners who initiated the so called Chinese Rebellion against the White Rajah.
To the locals, we see the event differently. The whole Web is telling the wrong White Rajah story. Sir James Brooke ordered the extermination of 3,500 Hakkas. In today’s term, it is world class genocide. Below is an excerpt from the book:
In today's term, the colonists were institutionalized plunderers. Therefore their victims had every reason to retaliate until their legitimate rights were restored. In this light, fighters against the Brookes should not be “rebels.” In reality, the invaders were the thieves and the locals the masters of the land. West baised stereotype discourses on the White Rajahs described them as “atypical , not even colonists.”
Most books blatantly lied. They say James Brooke was rewarded with the state of Sarawak peacefully. They closed their eyes to history saying Sarawak was founded after the Brunei capital was razed to the ground before the Sultan ceded our state to him. Many books give the impression that the Sarawak and Brunei were always on friendly terms. Nothing is further from the truth.
Mass killings Plagued him like Guilt
The Rajah did lots of killings here. Robert Payne, in The White Rajahs of Sarawak reveals that James Brooke questioning himself in his diary: “Am I, then, really fond of war? And I answer - “Certainly”. However, he said he would not fight an “unjust war.” He attacked tens of longhouses during his first six to seven years in Sarawak. Payne observes: “For the rest of his life he was to be haunted by the nightmare of the Chinese rebellion, which plagued him like guilt.”
Below is one of many imaginative “history” stories we read today in cyberspace: “After a long period of wandering, Brooke met the Sultan of Brunei who told him of the myriad tribes living in the south of his kingdom that were constantly warring with each other in his small sultanate. This ceaseless fighting disrupted the peace of the sultan's kingdom, but he could not control them.
“Brooke came up with a clever solution in which he aligned some of the tribes with the sultan and convinced them to conquer the others. This plan worked, resulting in lasting peace for the region. Brunei's sultan was so pleased that he gave Kuching to Brooke in 1841, naming him raja over the lands which are now Sarawak.”
Here is another cock and bull story: “In the 1840s, a British man and failed merchant by the name of James Brooke arrived in Brunei and offered to assist the Sultan keep order in an uprising that was flaring up in Sarawak, the southern portion of the realm. Brooke was successful in arranging a peaceful settlement, but the Sultan refused to pay him, and Brooke responded by threatening the rule of Brunei with his makeshift yet professional military force. The Sultan responded by granting Brooke the title of Rajah of Sarawak.”
A “prevalent” lie is James Brooke was appointed as the Rajah of Sarawak by Mudah Hashim who had no such power. Brooke knew it. His own Journal disclosed that the idea of making him a Bruneian Resident only came after he resolved the Siniawan rebellion problem. Writing to his mother from 'Kuchin' he says: “….at the end of the war he (Mudah Hashim) professed that my assistance had alone saved the country and that my support absolutely necessary to him. He concluded by offering the government of the country of Sarawak.”
The two then discussed in detail whether, under Brunei law, he could be one of the district governors entrusted with the duty of collecting taxes from the people. For this appointment, he had to patiently wait for five long months. He wrote home that for weeks on end, he never even got the chance to talk to his host.
Analogy
Could a local raja give away Sarawak to a foreigner merely for quelling a rebellion? Let us take this analogy. A man summoned the police when he found an intruder had broken into his house. After the police chased away the house breaker, the house owner “gratefully rewarded” the cop by giving him the house. Like robots, our local writers are “cut and pasting” this naive “reward” myth into their books and web blogs.- Desmond Leong
To the locals, we see the event differently. The whole Web is telling the wrong White Rajah story. Sir James Brooke ordered the extermination of 3,500 Hakkas. In today’s term, it is world class genocide. Below is an excerpt from the book:
In today's term, the colonists were institutionalized plunderers. Therefore their victims had every reason to retaliate until their legitimate rights were restored. In this light, fighters against the Brookes should not be “rebels.” In reality, the invaders were the thieves and the locals the masters of the land. West baised stereotype discourses on the White Rajahs described them as “atypical , not even colonists.”
Most books blatantly lied. They say James Brooke was rewarded with the state of Sarawak peacefully. They closed their eyes to history saying Sarawak was founded after the Brunei capital was razed to the ground before the Sultan ceded our state to him. Many books give the impression that the Sarawak and Brunei were always on friendly terms. Nothing is further from the truth.
Mass killings Plagued him like Guilt
The Rajah did lots of killings here. Robert Payne, in The White Rajahs of Sarawak reveals that James Brooke questioning himself in his diary: “Am I, then, really fond of war? And I answer - “Certainly”. However, he said he would not fight an “unjust war.” He attacked tens of longhouses during his first six to seven years in Sarawak. Payne observes: “For the rest of his life he was to be haunted by the nightmare of the Chinese rebellion, which plagued him like guilt.”
Below is one of many imaginative “history” stories we read today in cyberspace: “After a long period of wandering, Brooke met the Sultan of Brunei who told him of the myriad tribes living in the south of his kingdom that were constantly warring with each other in his small sultanate. This ceaseless fighting disrupted the peace of the sultan's kingdom, but he could not control them.
“Brooke came up with a clever solution in which he aligned some of the tribes with the sultan and convinced them to conquer the others. This plan worked, resulting in lasting peace for the region. Brunei's sultan was so pleased that he gave Kuching to Brooke in 1841, naming him raja over the lands which are now Sarawak.”
Here is another cock and bull story: “In the 1840s, a British man and failed merchant by the name of James Brooke arrived in Brunei and offered to assist the Sultan keep order in an uprising that was flaring up in Sarawak, the southern portion of the realm. Brooke was successful in arranging a peaceful settlement, but the Sultan refused to pay him, and Brooke responded by threatening the rule of Brunei with his makeshift yet professional military force. The Sultan responded by granting Brooke the title of Rajah of Sarawak.”
A “prevalent” lie is James Brooke was appointed as the Rajah of Sarawak by Mudah Hashim who had no such power. Brooke knew it. His own Journal disclosed that the idea of making him a Bruneian Resident only came after he resolved the Siniawan rebellion problem. Writing to his mother from 'Kuchin' he says: “….at the end of the war he (Mudah Hashim) professed that my assistance had alone saved the country and that my support absolutely necessary to him. He concluded by offering the government of the country of Sarawak.”
The two then discussed in detail whether, under Brunei law, he could be one of the district governors entrusted with the duty of collecting taxes from the people. For this appointment, he had to patiently wait for five long months. He wrote home that for weeks on end, he never even got the chance to talk to his host.
Analogy
Could a local raja give away Sarawak to a foreigner merely for quelling a rebellion? Let us take this analogy. A man summoned the police when he found an intruder had broken into his house. After the police chased away the house breaker, the house owner “gratefully rewarded” the cop by giving him the house. Like robots, our local writers are “cut and pasting” this naive “reward” myth into their books and web blogs.- Desmond Leong