Pages

Powered By Blogger

Tuesday, 27 November 2018

Government and Politics

Finland Table of Contents SINCE THE ESTABLISHMENT of its present system of government in 1919, Finland has been one of the more fortunate members of the Western community of democratic nations. Compared with other European states, the country was only moderately affected by the political turmoil of the interwar period; it passed through World War II relatively unscathed; and, although right on the line that divided Europe into two hostile blocs after the second half of the 1940s, it survived as an independent nation with its democratic institutions intact.
        This enviable record was achieved against formidable odds. Although the constitutional basis of their government grew out of long-established institutions, Finns had never been fully free to govern themselves until late 1917 when they achieved national independence. Swedish and Russian rulers had always ultimately determined their affairs. Finnish society was also marked by deep fissures that became deeper after the brief civil war (1918), which left scars that needed several generations to heal. In addition to class and political divisions, the country also had to contend with regional and linguistic differences. These problems were eventually surmounted, and by the 1980s the watchword in Finnish politics was consensus.
         A skillfully constructed system of government allowed Finns to manage their affairs with the participation of all social groups (although there were some serious lapses in the interwar period). Checks and balances, built into a system of modified separation of powers, enabled the government to function democratically and protected the basic rights of all citizens. The 200-member parliament, the Eduskunta, elected by popular vote, was sovereign by virtue of its representing the Finnish people. An elected president wielded supreme executive power and determined foreign policy. Although not responsible politically to the Eduskunta, the president could carry out many of his functions only through a cabinet government, the Council of State, which was dependent upon the support of the Eduskunta. An independent judiciary, assisted by two legal officials with broad independent powers--the chancellor of justice and the parliamentary ombudsman--ensured that government institutions adhered to the law.
           Working within this system during the 1980s were a variety of political parties, an average of about a dozen, ranging from sect-like groups to large well-established parties, the counterparts of which were to be found all over Western Europe. The socialist wing consisted of a deeply split communist movement and a moderate Finnish Social Democratic Party that by the late 1980s was a preeminent governing party.  The center was occupied by an agrarian party, the Center Party, which had been in government almost continuously until 1987; the Swedish People's Party; and a formerly right-wing protest party, the Finnish Rural Party.  The right was dominated by the National Coalition Party, which was fairly moderate in its conservatism.  In the 1970s and the 1980s, the mainstream parties, and even a good part of the Communist Party of Finland, had moved toward the center, and the political spectrum as a whole was slightly more to the right than it had been in previous decades.
          A constitutional system that was conservative in nature had allowed these parties to work together, yet within constraints that permitted no single group to usurp the rights of another.  Nevertheless, the variety of parties had made it very difficult to put together coalitions that could attain the strict qualified majorities needed to effect fundamental changes.  Only since the second half of the 1960s had it been possible, though at times difficult, to find a broad enough multiparty consensus.
        Powerful interest groups were also involved in Finnish politics, most noticeably in the negotiation and the realization of biannual income policy settlements that, since the late 1960s, had affected most Finnish wage-earners. Interest groups initially negotiated the terms of a new wage agreement; then it was, in effect, ratified by coalitions of parties in government; and finally the Eduskunta passed the social and economic legislation that underlay it.  Some observers complained that government's role had become overly passive in this process and that the preeminence of consensus actually meant that Finnish politics offered the populace no real alternatives.   Yet most Finns, remembering earlier years of industrial strife and poverty, preferred the new means of managing public affairs.
        There was also broad agreement about Finnish foreign policy.  The country was threatened with extinction as an independent nation after World War II, but presidents Juho Paasikivi and Urho Kekkonen, both masters of realpolitik, led their countrymen to a new relationship with the Soviet Union.  The core of this relationship was Finland's guarantee to the Soviet Union that its northeastern border region was militarily secure.   Controversial as the so-called Paasikivi-Kekkonen Line was initially, by the 1980s the vast majority of Finns approved of the way Finland dealt with its large neighbor and were well aware, too, of the trade advantages the special relationship had brought to their country.
        Working in tandem with good Finnish-Soviet relations was the policy of active and peaceful neutrality, the backbone of Finnish foreign policy. Advocating, as a neutral state, the settlement of disputes through peaceful, legal means was a role Finns adopted willingly.  A high point of this policy was the part the country played in planning and in hosting the 1975 Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe.  Another facet of active neutrality was a committed membership in the United Nations, most notably in the organization's peacekeeping forces.
CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
Constitutional Development

The Constitution
GOVERNMENTAL INSTITUTIONS
Legislature
President
Council of State
Legal System
Civil Service
Provincial Administration
Local Administration
Electoral System
Aland Islands
POLITICAL DYNAMICS
The Social Democratic Party
The Center Party
The National Coalition Party
The Communist Party
The Swedish People's Party
Smaller Parties and the Greens
Interest Groups
FOREIGN RELATIONS
For more information about the government, see Facts about Finland.

Sunday, 25 November 2018

Blog, Tweet and Facebook 26/11/2018 Will and Way


Blog, Tweet and Facebook    26/11/2018  Will and Way
        It is said, “Where there is will, there is a way.”  Did you know that about 100 countries have become independent in the late 50 years?  Were they blessed with any laws to become independent?  Is there any law in this world granting the colonised countries to become independent on their accord?  Stop being idiotic to get so entangled in the dominator-centred rule of laws.  If you are so federal-minded, centred and oriented, you can never get free from this self-entanglement.  There is no hope for Sarawak to become an independent country once again. 
Where majority of Sarawakians want Sarawak independence, there is the way to gain Sarawak independence.  Did you know that how difficult Bangladeshi struggled to gain their independence?   We Sarawakians can avoid the ordeal of Bangladeshi through votes.  We can vote Sarawak out of the federation of Malaysia.  Who says we cannot?  Do you agree that miracles are in the hand of God but wonders are in the hand of man?   So, I say, “kuala Malaysia or not, we Sarawakians decide.  Sarawakians want Sarawak independence.”  The realisation of this dream for Sarawak independence will become really true some day if Sarawakians are determined to fight for Sarawak independence.  The time will come sooner or later.
The declaration of decolonisation on 14th December, 1960 (1514 XV) grants people the rights  for freedom and justice.   You may argue that provisions set by the United Nations are not biding.  Well, unless you want to go your own way and remain isolated, otherwise, why do you think the resolutions of the United Nations are not biding?  
        It is idiotic to get so entangled in those laws based on unequal treatment.  How can we get free from being tethered if we are entangled with those irrational laws? 
        Will Registrar of Societies grant Sarawak Liberation Movement the permit?  Without the permit, do you mean that they cannot carry on their work to fight for Sarawak Independence?   Try to think outside the box.  Avoid being so ‘dog’ (follow the set rules or patterns blindly) in thought.  
        Sarawak is for Sarawakians and only Sarawak-minded, oriented and centred Sarawakians can create a better future for Sarawak.  Sarawakians are determined to create role model of Sarawak like Singapore for the whole wide world to refer to.
        We should be prepared to uproot all the Malayan parties in Sarawak.  I hope to see all the Malaya flags to fly out of Sarawak one day.

Wednesday, 21 November 2018

Blog, Tweet and Facebook 22/11/2018 To break the curses


Blog, Tweet and Facebook   22/11/2018     To break the curses
        To break the curses of more Sarawakians to become traitors,  we Sarawakians should take it as our responsibility to vote Sarawak out of the federation of Malaysia or the grip of Malayan government in real essence. 
         The mould of federation and state in relationship tethered BN-crowned puppeted-political Sarawakian clowns to dance according to the string pulling of the Malayan colonial masters.  Now the PH-crowned puppeted-political Sarawakian clowns will dance in the same way as those BN-crowned ones.  These crowned puppeted-political Sarawakian clowns are under the spell of their Malayan colonial masters.
        My half a year observation of these PH-crowned Sarawakian political clowns/PHcSpc, I have noticed that they are so federal-minded, oriented and loyal.  They are too obsessed, attentive and role-model focused to think ouside the box anymore.  They have lost themselves in Federal-State Model to think to fight for the rights of Sarawak, not to say Sarawak Independence which is out of their mind.
        To rank them in the list of betrayal, Chong Chieng Jen take position 1; Wong King Wei No. 2;  Kelvin Yii Lee Wuen No. 3; Alan Ling Sie Kiong No.4; Larry Sng No.5; ….these clowns are too busy in the mad-rat-race to think for the interests of Sarawak as a whole.  This is another batch going to sell Sarawak for their self-interests and official positions.  How many more will follow behind them is just too sad for us to count. 
        In my eyes, they are trapped and bounded to work for the big interests and benefits of the Malayan government in the name of Malaysia.  This is how Sarawak has been plundered, exploited, oppressed, suppressed, robbed and bullied through the help of federal minded, obsessed, and oriented Sarawakians to help them to accomplish their mission and vision to colonise and dominate Sarawak.
       To break the spell, I strongly that Sarawak should become an independent country like Brunei and Singapore.   With all the resources at our disposal and the human capital, we can develop Sarawak on par with Singapore, Brunei, Dubai, Finland, Norway and the like.  There is no hope for Sarawak if we still continue staying in the Federation of Malaysia which stands for plundering, exploitation, oppression, suppression, robbing and bullying.  It is humiliating and ashamed to all Sarawakians being colonised and treated like slaves all the time.  What are we to the Malayan government?  Is it not idiotic to preach patriotism to the colonised people when YB Hannah Yeo, (DAP) preached patriotism in the function with the backdrop emblazoned with the words ‘A day of patriotism’.
        With the awareness of Sarawak as a trust territory to the Malayan government, we have the autonomy and we Sarawakians can decide to quit from Malaya government in the name of Malaysia for good.  So 2021, Sarawak election, I hope all the Sarawakians with some exceptions will stayed united in one heart and mind to vote for Sarawak Independence.  I believe that the United Nations are waiting for us, Sarawakians to take a bold step to Sarawak Independence.   Many big countries near and far are interested to invest in Sarawak and develop my homeland, Sarawak indirectly.  Yes, we are ready!

Blog, Tweet and Facebook 22/11/2018 今天的故事,明天的历史。



Blog, Tweet and Facebook   22/11/2018     今天的故事,明天的历史。
         第一个人说, “砂罗越是砂罗越人的/S4S。”是Stephen Kalong Ningkan,咱们砂的第一位首长.  之后,SUPP采用S4S这口号连接当时砂人。结果,马来联邦霸权以内安法令就把黄金明关起来。SUPP 从此噤声。后来被收编当了政府。当了政府后,就自然而然,移身转向迎合以霸权的意愿为意愿。结果,被人民唾弃了。
        2012,内安法令停止了。2013开是被打压很久的S4S口号又开始复活了。从一群爱砂罗越人从新出发。 过程中,也分野了S4S大队,SIA S4SSLMS4S等等。像基督教的教会分了很多教堂,但是还是以耶稣为主信奉上苍。各帮人马有各帮人马的原则做法和作风。各帮人马要如何合作,还在磨合期。各做各的,也是一中选择。
     5/11/2018,和平集会,我也去凑人数。顺便回娘家。顺便要去看人家的公司的书仓。这家公司有分门别类的的藏书。 为了赶上集会,星期天4/11的课还挪后到2/12上呢。 这一趟回娘家,我发现我85岁的阿爸很S4S哦。全家大小都知道了:砂罗越原来是  托管给马来亚,有自治权,可以自决独立的一天。 
        大姐/大姑姑出马了。一位宅妇会如此热忱,肯定引起好奇。刚好大妹子还在Kuching。她和大嫂特地从Australia回来照顾我阿妈。她跌倒了,动了手术需要特别照顾。大嫂在Australia是专门照顾老人家的。大妹配合大嫂一起回家。
        那天,我大妹子和大侄女陪我去集会。 我大大声的喊了我自己准备好的口号“Kuala Malaysia or not, we Sarawakians decide.”其实,我还想喊第二句口号,“We Sarawakians want independence.”可是,有人说,今天不要喊,因为今天是快闪的集会。  其实他们在4/11/2018 也有集会。我没有准备参加。
          2021是砂国选举,这就是[生死战:脱马/留马] 经过55年打压,砂人多少都有点傻傻的。被马来亚殖民了还不知道。 最近,我做民意调查:[A. 砂罗越脱马独立好; B. 继续留马只要自主权] A99.99%.   很多人不知道砂罗越原来是托管给马来亚的,因为当年我们没有自治能力,现在有能力了,可是马来亚霸权,在这过程当中,以各种手段,不平等协约把砂的石油和天然气,主要税收像印花税,income  tax, 进出口税等等都[占为自有/鲸吞]。每年霸凌去的税收+石油和天然气高达3000多亿。每年愿意给回的只有区区40-50亿。为了要收买人民,当然,有再潵点。 搞笑得很。用咱们砂的钱来送礼。蒙骗百姓。
         人民所累积的怨恨和愤怒已经登顶了。 砂人透过醒觉的努力,希望砂罗越人可以用手中那一票的自决权决定砂罗越的未来。我们把那些有独立议程的代表送进砂议会完成 [联合国赋予的去殖民化的自决权]来决定砂罗越的未来。 只要有51% 的代表在砂议会启动独立议程,砂议会就可以宣布独立。一宣布独立,砂议会就通知联合国。我相信联合国也在等我们独立等得好辛苦了。
        独立后的砂罗越会跟新加坡,文莱,Dubai,芬兰,挪威等等看齐。我们砂国会变成第二个Dubai或芬兰。 不被打压后的砂国有自己的丰富的资源迈向无限的发展空间。想想这是多么美好的前景和愿景啊。维护砂罗越是每个砂罗越人的责任和使命。但愿每个砂人懂得用手中宝贵的一票[联合国1960年去殖民化宣言][1514号议决]赋予的自决权去决定砂罗越的未来。(林梅芳稿)

Thursday, 15 November 2018

我要独立 9:08 PM九个国王是马来人
正副首相是马来人
军警高官是马来人
政府高官是马来人
经济扶持是马来人
工程给给是马来人
政治特权给马来人
金融高管给马来人
进口AP给马来人
这样还被边缘化,我真的无话可说。
lauhsion73 9:55 PM(10/11/18应邀在砂拉越文化研究学会国事论坛《透视509后砂拉越人的政治迷思》讲座会主讲的内容)

砂要复邦索权,先设 “权为民所用、利为民所谋”机制“捍卫砂拉越权益” 、复邦和复权等等议题可以是砂盟的一张王牌,也一样可以是希盟中央政府还按在胸口的一张犀利的好牌。问题是,砂盟这张牌怎麽打?

第一,砂盟不是力争更大的行政权、自治权吗?在争取的过程中,何不充分利用现有的行政权力对砂州党政制度作出能力范围所及的改革?

这个改革可以让砂盟体现出它的确不再是国阵,也不同于希盟,毕竟希盟在很多执政的大前提上走不出国阵的老路。

先决要做的就是建立自我权力制衡的党政机制。砂盟组合跟砂盟政府都应该急不容缓地把自己的家给整理好,一党独大,众党顺从的执政组合模式不行了,“政权分享”长期来自觉或不自觉地走向“主仆关係”的歧途其实就是国阵溃败的真正原因之一。

更加平衡的“政权分享”必须反映在执政组合及政府中,我们希望看到各成员党拥有更加平衡的话语权和执行力,也希望能真正体验到“机会分享”及“资源分享”被落实在砂拉越政府的政策上。

509証明,长期没有话语权与执行力的执政成员党只有走向衰落的末路,一旦主导政权的巫统有所闪失,政权就立马崩溃了。同样的现象也可以发生在砂拉越,不能掉以轻心。

第二,吸取509教训,亡羊补牢,改弦易辙……被撵掉的前朝政权所拥有的毛病,砂盟政府会没有吗?它有没有这积弊的清单?只有建立有效的制衡机制,提供监督的空间,坦荡透明,而且,洗心革面,才能証明砂盟不再是国阵。

要改变,就必须从 509得到教训,而且必须迅速着手,马来西亚会发生509变天,至少揭示了一个教训,就是前朝并没有从菲律宾和南韩吸取它们的509教训!

509谜题有共同的答案,就是:
*领袖贪污受贿、渎职、滥用职权
*朋党滋生政治权贵
*政治军阀、世家和财团垄断政经关键位置
*行政体系贪腐
*政权在资源分配上并没有将发展红利实惠到社会底层
放倒前朝领袖及撵掉前朝政权,目的就是:

铲除执政权力绑架人民权利的傲慢和贪婪
如果体制积弊本身已是孵化和孕育极权领袖、朋党主义、分利集团、政经垄断、分配偏差及制度不公的温床,那么,制度化的矫正和更改才叫作“治本”,藉此向人民表明你的不一样,与此同时,争取民心,支撑复邦、复权与捍卫砂拉越权益的诉求。这是砂盟应该做的事,至少开始做。

第三,真正进行政改,做到“迎合砂拉越人民需求,尤其是砂拉越拥有独一无二的多元种族、文化及宗教社会”,也落实“捍卫所有族群的利益”的砂盟承诺。

国阵做不到,希盟敦马哈迪政权也不打算改变的大前提,就是种族主义至上的统治紧箍咒应该从砂拉越州政策与制度“从头”解开,紧箍咒若解除,很多其他的“附属问题”大多迎刃而解。

砂拉越可以实验砂拉越人的砂拉越体制,这样更能体现“砂拉越拥有独一无二的多元种族、文化及宗教社会”。这样,砂拉越儿女会知道,为什么必须支持争取更大的砂州权力,为什么恢复砂州地位及享有自主权是至关重要的运动。

当砂拉越子民认定他们的州执政体系可以做到“权为民所用、利为民所谋”时,大家没有理由不支持,也没理由看不清楚本土政治体制是不同的,是有别于国阵,也跟希盟有差异的。

把砂拉越的机会和资源更公平、更合理及透明分配给各族人民,提升生产力、竞爭力,携手创造财富和加大砂拉越经济蛋糕;与此同时,把扶贫济弱当作是共同责任来扛,这是跨越种族、文化与宗教,并要求精准扶持真正弱势砂人的政策。

经济弱势社群有很多是土著,是达雅族、马来族和原住民同胞,但是,也不能否定有一部分是非土著华裔,政策没有必要以种族来区分,没有必要荒谬喧嚷“华人有钱”……这是敦马哈迪始终走不出去的零和游戏思维!

砂拉越既然要做到独一无二,那就必须认清贴上种族标籤的资源分配特权和经济蛋糕的分配绝对是个二元对立的零和游戏,相反的,它恰恰应该是个非零和或双赢游戏,只要撕掉种族标籤,落实多元政策精神;当经济弱势社群的情况好转时,所有人都受益,消费市场会更蓬勃,整体经济必然更好!

近几年,砂拉越的“复权运动”呼声响亮,有几点值得思考:

*争取砂州执政组合拥有更大的行政权,而且涵盖自主和自治权力的更高成分[Sticker][Sticker]那么,这权力要如何制衡?如何被制度化关在笼子里?如何受到监督?如果能清晰看得到所争取的更大权力受到制衡?否则,这权力一不断膨胀,就变成大象,而这头大象会强大到谁都驯服不了,骑不上去……鑑此,必须先建立制衡机制。

*要取信于民,务必吸取509教训,从速展示向沉疴宿疾对症下药的决心,认真务实地革除积弊,做到“权为民所用、利为民所谋”。

*向联邦争取公平、合理的资源分配,包括石油税收,那就必须设定一套将资源分配给砂拉越子民的政策,直接惠民的运作制度。

*砂拉越“复权运动”不应该继续停留在口号和感性意识的层次,它必须具体化为未来政策的方向,也必须让砂拉越人民感受得到,所争取的是实惠人民的;是民有、民享的权益。

对老百姓而言,你给我们愿景,我们给你支持!

不可否认的,迷茫的政局中还存在着一些未解开的谜题和吊诡,也存在着政治交易的可能性,这些都必须被厘清,清楚向老百姓交代,不能留一手!
agatha wong 6:56 AM【 #砂立法议会首次会议纪念碑被盗? 】

砂拉越立法议会是马来西亚最古老的立法机构,是在1867年9月8日首次在民都鲁举行的首次会议之后成立。由Rajah Charles Brooke领导的21名成员组成。砂拉越立法议会由六名Brooke的官员和16名当地社区领袖组成。1903年,立法议会更名为Council Negri。

1941年,Brooke的儿子Vyner在砂拉越Brooke统治100周年庆典期间制定了一部宪法。立法议会的成员人数增加到24人。而一位首长被任命为砂拉越立法议会主席而不是Vyner Brookes(只担任Rajah)。

1963年,议会的成员人数增加到42人。从那时起,它在1968年逐步上升到48,1989年为56,1996年为62,2006年为71. 1976年,议会更名为Dewan Undangan Negeri(DUN),人數也增至82人。

这纪念碑对砂拉越的历史是多么重要,这代表着砂人民自己做主管理砂拉越国家的开始。是砂拉越主权的象征。政府应非常注重此事。找出来还原此碑和保护好它。

这应该是民都鲁必到打卡拍照的地点才对。

#请分享此文章让更多砂人了解并找出来还原它。