Had an argument with a friend about the current industrial revolution in China...

Position A: China is being exploited by the West and is suffering for it.
Position B: China is being exploited by the West and is better off for it.

I am reminded of a parable in a novel or biography that I can't remember - but I remember the parable and it goes like this.

A man on holiday is walking along the seashore. The previous night there was a storm and the waves picked up all the starfish - thousands and thousands of them - and dumped them past the high tide mark. There they now sit, a whole heaven of stars, helplessly and inexorably dying in the sun.
The man sees a young girl who is picking up handfuls of starfish and tossing them back into the see. He walks up to her and asks "Why do you bother? You can't save them all?"
To which she replies "I can save these ones. I can make a difference to them".

I related this parable to another friend. He suggested this instead:

A rich business man is on holiday in a tropical paradise. The previous night there was a storm and the waves picked up all the starfish - thousands and thousands of them - and dumped them past the high tide mark. There they now sit, a whole heaven of stars, helplessly and inexorably dying in the sun.
The sea is now calm - so calm that he thinks he could skim stones across it. But there are no stones, only dying starfish.
So he picks up a starfish and tries to skim it over the water. It sort of works but the arms dig into the water as you would expect. After twelve attempted skims he changes the game to seeing how far into the sea he can throw a starfish. After fifteen minutes a young girl comes up to him. She is crying because all these starfish are dying because nature is uncaring.

So, which of the above characters owns the factory in China?

Errr....they just worked this out?!

"Mr Hunt, who is also a director of Tourism Australia, said travellers were increasingly looking for out-of-the-ordinary experiences they could brag their friends about..."

"Generation Y and baby boomer travellers looking for a holiday "brag factor" are influencing a new shift towards weird and wonderful tourism experiences, a conference has heard."

Really? People like bragging about their holidays?
Knock me down with a feather.
Next they'll tell me that cars are often seen as status symbols.
And let me guess that his audience were Gen X. I can see them all sitting there nodding along at how shallow Gen Y and the Boomers are, because THEY in Gen X only go on holiday because it's good the planet and because it helps them become a well rounded personality overflowing with understanding, insight and compassion.
I know this is how it truly works for Gen X people because we're differnet to GenY and the Boomers, but mostly because I went to Borneo.

Nah, that's me just being sarcastic: I was awesome long before I went to that place that none of you have been to. Losers.

But, still the important thing to bear in mind is this: "sure, Fred went and stayed in an eco-village on the Masai Mara for 18weeks and drives a Peugeot but he's still a fuckwit."

So yes, "Generation Y and baby boomer travellers look for a holiday "brag factor"" but it's because they are, by in large, fuckwits.

Instant Bachelor

Wow.
So Ellen went back to Melbourne yesterday and I became nutritionaly instantly a bachelor.

Part of my breakfast this morning was a packet of chips.
Dinner was pistaccios, some dutch almond biscuits and three beers.

Oh, and we've run out of washing-up liquid, so the washing-up is piling up.

Oh, and my fly's undone.

Fuck it: I think it's time to line up the shots and put on some real hair band rock.
(exits waving whiskey bottle and singing "Pour Some Sugar on Me")

Strawman - Eagleton v Dawkins

Terry Eagleton "is, among other things, professor of cultural theory at the National University of Ireland, Galway. His latest book is Reason, Faith and Revolution: Reflections on the God Debate."

For the London Review of Books he wrote Lunging, Flailing, Mispunching a review of 'The God Delusion' by Richard Dawkins (yes, this was back in 2006).
It is a pin-up straw-man argument. Yet again I am astounded by how smart people aren't.
I recommend reading it.

It starts with this "Imagine someone holding forth on biology whose only knowledge of the subject is the Book of British Birds, and you have a rough idea of what it feels like to read Richard Dawkins on theology."
Tadaa! The straw-man is constructed in the first sentence!

It is tempting to think that Eagleton's title was perfect irony.

My cousin, Dan, put it very well in his review of Eagleton's review:

"Richard Dawkins is a small man words words words words longword words words longword words words words words longword words words longword words words Richard Dawkins doesn't know much about what it means to be really bloody clever AND a Christian words words words words longword words words longword words It is okay to believe and not be really bloody clever, it is NOT okay to refute and be clever too Look over there! Ha, distracted you. Now you can't possibly disagree with me. Richard Dawkins is a small man words words words words longword words words longword words words words words longword words words longword words words. Dear reader, please ignore that Dawkins excels in a field of research that demands clear and eloquent demonstration and that religion is open to any number of permutations of interpretation. Please also ignore that theology and religion are not the same thing. Richard Dawkins is a small man."

Destination Sarawak

I have wanted to go to Borneo since reading Gerald Durrell's book set there. It sounded so pristine and wild and adventurous.
Then in 1998 a mate and I went to Kuala Lumpur for ten days and at the Royal Selangor pewter place gift shop we got into conversation with one of the staff and she said Sarawak was wonderful. That sealed the deal. I told her that next time I came to Malaysia I would go there - and I would hate to let her down as I am sure she is a devoted reader of this blog.

When most people visit Borneo they go to Sabah in the north east. It is a scuba diving mecca, apparently, and enjoys much higher tourist numbers than Sarawak. Since I am a rebel and say 'Fie!' to the opinions of hoi poloi I decided we would go to western Sarawak to try and be token tourists. And we were quite successful at that.
(Also, Ellen, wanted to go snorkeling and sit on a beach. Oh, and jungle would be nice.)



Even in the capital city of Sarawak, Kuching - a city of 300,000 people, there were only a couple of dozen white people. And we managed to avoid most of them because they didn't spend much time in the old part of the waterfront which was where we spent almost all our time.

I was originally looked at spending most of the time north of Kuching in Santubong, but reading around and the polite silence of a friend's boyfriend who knows the area gave me pause for thought.
I looked at the map again and saw that the road west ends at Sematan. That was why I picked Sematan.
There are two islands about 5kms north called the Talang-Talang islands that offer snorkeling sites, and there is a national park called Tanjung Datu (Where "Tg. Datuk" is on this map) that is accessible only by boat. I fugured we'd find some pretty authentic jungle there.
Finally, there is a resort there, right on the beach, that would allow us to be indulgent and lazy. Nine nights there please!

Safety First

Kuching, the capital city of the Malaysian state of Sarawak, North Western Borneo.

Kuching

Sematan. Fishing village 140kms west of Kuching. The resort we stayed at was 3km west of Sematan.

Adventurerering with Ellen: Borneo