Do we have "manok sabong" after Taib-post era?

In my last posting, I posed the question: Are we Dayaks ready for a change of government? And this time I am going to ask every one of us equally important questions: Who should lead us after the Taib-post era? Or be our “manok sabong” (fighting cock) to fight for our cause? Before going further, let me compare the Dayaks in the Brooke era with the Dayaks of the present day.

* “The Dayaks are noted for their honesty, humility, bravery and spirit of adventurism (bejalai). In wars, they are motivated by their battle cry – AGI IDUP AGI NGELABAN (as long as there is life, we fight). Their incredible courage during the height of communist insurgency in Malaya before and after it became independence in 1957, communist terrorism and the “confrontation” after the formation of Malaysia, had earned them gallantry awards.

Our forefathers were also the most feared tribes of Borneo successfully practicing headhunting and territorial expansion. The reasons for their successes were that they were united, brave and loyal to their community.

But nowadays we are all “ngeleput” and are losing those traits – the pioneering spirit, the spirit of expansionism and adventurism as well as the spirit of “beduruk, segulai, sejalai, sepenemu enggau penyarakup” (working and living together in unity towards a common goal) and the effects of this lack of those traits lead us to disunity, bickering and fighting among ourselves even for a trivial issue causing us to lose our numerical superiority, our political influence and our sense of direction. Indeed, we are more individualistic driven by greed and jealousy, the weakness of which is being manipulated by those who wish to see the Dayaks in a state of continued periphery and subjugation.*

The current political situation offers a golden opportunity for any Dayak to prove himself as a leader. For example, when Anwar Ibrahim calls for the end of Abdul Taib Mahmud’s political dominance and regime in Sarawak, Dayak leaders should come forward to express support and a similar sentiment, because they know that Dayaks have become victims of unjust “politics of development”. Why must it be Anwar Ibrahim who wants Taib to go? He must have a lot of guts. And why the deafening silence from the brave Dayaks? Or is the present generation of Dayaks no longer brave?

But what should we do now to revive the spirit of bravery, the spirit of headhunting and the spirit of adventurism as espoused by our forefathers?

First and foremost, we have to put our house in order. “This should be our priority number one,” said Dr Dusit Jaul, a senior INTAN lecturer when commenting on my previous article.

“The question is who should play the leading role. In this, we no more can depend on the old generation of the Dayaks in the Abdul Taib Mahmud era. Those self-proclaimed Dayak leaders have ample opportunities to prove their worth to the Dayaks. You can see for yourself what have they have done to the Dayak causes at large,” he said.

In the days of “ngayau-mulau” (headhunting), a Dayak leader had to prove his leadership quality by conducting “ngayau” expeditions and returned home successfully with their war trophies and loots, and only then he would be recognized as a “manok sabong” or a “Raja Brani” (warrior).

According to Dr Dusit, a leader must have the ABC leadership - ability to lead, must be brave and at the same time competent. “Now how many of our Dayak “leaders” fit with these leadership qualities, not to mention the leadership qualities of the 21st century,” he said.

Currently Jabu is the most senior Dayak “leader”. However, he knows only how to praise Taib Mahmud and addresses him with the words “yang disayangi” (most beloved) not once or twice, but several times in his speech so much so that it causes embarrassment to the audience. Some of his enemies say that Jabu is not a leader, describing him as only fit to be a community leader (Tuai Rumah) or a discipline officer barking and condemning his “anembiaks”.

Dr James Masing, although highly educated, has spoilt himself after he brought the death of Parti Bansa Dayak Sarawak (PBDS) in 2004 in collaboration with Sng Chee Hua. Generally, the Dayaks cannot forget nor forgive him, even though he has realized his blunder and is trying his best to be recognized as a leader in the new party he formed.

Another Dayak leader is William Mawan. Many Dayaks distrust him because of his close association with Tiong King Sing and many have also questioned him over his personal behaviour. He is only good as a follower.

What about Joseph Salang, you may ask? Although Salang can be a uniting force between the hardcore members of the defunct PBDS and the members of PRS, he is new to PRS and being new he has been very cautious for fear of stepping on the toes of some of the senior leaders. He is being groomed to take over after Masing steps down, perhaps in the next State election. His quality as a leader is yet to be seen.

Other Dayak leaders in the present Taib era are not worth mentioned, as their performances are below par. They are the “Yes” men.

Although there are many Dayak intellectuals among us, so far no one has come out to show his colours the way the HINDRAF leaders do and who are prepared to go to jail fighting for their community’s rights. Until we find some one possessing the spirit of our forefathers, the Dayaks will not be able to free themselves from being marginalized and manipulated.

* Taken from a page in the volume two of "The Broken Shield – The Dayak Dilemma"