Did I mention I like Sikh T-Shirts?
I like T-shirts. I am a self-described ‘scrub.’
Someone who doesn’t care much about what they do or how they look doing it. Or if you just do something very very stupid.
((Girl walks into classroom for a class one day dressed in XXL sweatpants and a huge baggy sweatshirt, no makeup, hair looks nasty, but shes in perfect good health, just very lazy))
“Wow Anne, you are dressed like a scrub.”
T-shirts are my staple. For every season I have a Sikh camp/organization T-shirt. Need brown, I got it; need blue, I got it; need maroon, I got it. Did I mention I like T-shirts?
Apparently, so do a group of Sikh high school students in Surrey. Recently, the Canadian press reported here and here that:
Thirty students at Princess Margaret Secondary School say they’ve been put on suspension notice after wearing contentious T-shirts to class.
[Quick note, another new website reported twenty students]
The students commented:
“At around nine o’clock they (school supervisors) yelled at me and said get into the office right now,” said one student, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “When I got to the office, they tried to explain to me this is not a political school.”
Another stated:
“(A teacher) asked me to take off the shirt, but I wasn’t wearing anything underneath I didn’t have anything else at school, so they said put on a jacket so I had to put on a jacket and zip it up,” said one student, who declined to give his name.
“They’re saying it’s politics in the school, and the school doesn’t do politics, you’re not allowed to wear political shirts, right. But this has nothing to do with politics.”
Now although, I do love T-shirts, I am not saying all T-shirts are equal. In a prior post, I suggested that Sikh kids should retire the BKI T-shirts and other T-shirts. In that post, I wrote:
The guns of the Babbar Khalsa logo has become ‘cool.’ It has become the Sikh youth Che Guevera T-Shirt. Find another logo kids.
If the T-shirts had images of guns, then I agree that they should not be worn and the school district did the right thing. However, from the image, I don’t see any guns. In fact one student vehemently denied the accusation:
But some witnesses say they also saw similar t-shirts with images of AK47s on them, although the students deny that claim.
One website shows a picture of a T-shirt with guns, but I have a feeling this is just stock footage and without context was added to the article for the intended hysterical reaction.
Now, I am sure the hoopla is connected to the much-ado-about-nothing stir from the Surrey Nagar Kirtan. Despite all the stir in the Canadian national press, the event was successful, peaceful, and even the police thanked the over 130,000 people in attendance for a great family affair.
“I have to tip my hat to the South Asian community,” Surrey RCMP Sgt. Roger Morrow said Tuesday. “It was truly a celebration, there were no police incidents, and I thank them and congratulate them for it.”
However, from what I see of the T-shirts it seems that while they do convey a political message, this is a freedom of expression issue. In fact I give respect to one student that didn’t back down:
But at least one student says he will probably wear the shirt again.
“I don’t care,” he said. “Our tenth guru said, when all means of addressing the wrongs have failed it is righteous to raise a sword.”
So I say let the kids wear it. In fact, despite the political message, send me one and I will wear it in solidarity. Plus I need another black T-shirt!
54 Responses to “Did I mention I like Sikh T-Shirts?”
By Jodha on Apr 20, 2008 at 3:31 pm | Quote
Quick note: I just noticed something from the Surrey RCMP Roger Morrow’s comments. When the Canadian press is reporting something inflammatory, then we are definitely ‘Sikhs,’ however when someone is commending the behavior of our community, then we transform into ‘South Asians.’ Is this just a single observation or is there something more to this?
By Mohanpal Singh on Apr 21, 2008 at 8:28 am | Quote
It’s funny how we feel compelled to fight for our rights to wear T-shirts. Yet not a single person in the above photo is wearing a dastaar, which is what Guroo Saahib really prescribed for Sikhs to wear. Our sense of pride is grossly misplaced.
By kprincess on Apr 21, 2008 at 10:00 am | Quote
though i support the student’s right to wear their T-shirts, i kind of agree w/ Mohanpal Singh. It’s like the rap videos where the people wear big old crosses but they rap about drugs, killing, & so on (though here it’s not so bad). Or buying a Che T-shirt from the market but not knowing what he stood for.
By Mewa Singh on Apr 21, 2008 at 11:26 am | Quote
It seems rather odd that we assume we know these kids, when we do not. It also seems rather odd that while these kids are taking an interest in their faith, unlike the apathy in many, but yet all we can do is criticize them.
By P.Singh on Apr 21, 2008 at 11:37 am | Quote
While Mohanpal Singh and kprincess certainly have a point, I think the more relevant question is, was it right for the school to suspend the students?
Would the situation have been the same if the students were wearing “Free Tibet” t-shirts?
Or is this a case of the school buying the hype that Khalistan, and anything related to Khalistan has pro-terrorism connotations? That such t-shirts advocate violence against innocent civilians?
Is there any consideration that such t-shirts may be worn to highlight the very real history of gross human rights abuse committed by the government of India against the Sikhs? That the t-shirts exhibit pride for those Sikhs who gave their lives fighting against the tyrannies of I.Gandhi’s despotic regime?
By kprincess on Apr 21, 2008 at 4:37 pm | Quote
From reading the post, it appeared to me that those kids were just wearing the shirts for the hell of it, rather than for a particular reason. I don’t think there’s anything wrong w/ that, & I didn’t mean to criticize them since I don’t know the whole story. But from my own observations, I’ve seen the youth adopt symbols of a cause (or faith) rather than the cause itself. So I guess that’s the reason for why I made the comment.
As to the school. I agree that they probably wouldn’t suspend someone wearing a free-tibet T-shirt (as far as I know). I think it’s an infringement of political speech.
By Mewa Singh on Apr 21, 2008 at 6:16 pm | Quote
Kprincess,
I understand what you are saying and I do believe it is a freedom of expression issue. You can just look at other Canadian news sources to see the reactions of many goray.
However, I only took issue to how I read that you felt that the kids wearing the T-shirts were adopting symbols of a cause that they may or many not understand.
From the post, it seems that some (as it was a quote from only 1 student) were very articulate about their beliefs:
By sizzle on Apr 22, 2008 at 12:31 am | Quote
oh good lord. while i support the kids and especially like the “free tibet” analogy above, that quote is a bit out of place and kind of indicates the misplaced priorities some above commenters and jodha (bki post) have noted. beyond their mere right to wear the shirts, maybe it’s not a great choice to wear them. but, that’s their call.
By Mewa Singh on Apr 22, 2008 at 1:18 am | Quote
Sizzle helped me note that I may have read that quote out of context. If they were using the famous Zafarnama line of Guru Gobind Singh to refer to their right to wear a T-shirt that is sort of lame (especially if there is a veiled threat involved). If they were saying it to explain Bhindranwale’s actions and why they believe he is a hero (which is how I originally read it), then it seems that at least some of the students are NOT as ill-informed as people are making them out to be.
Sikhnet.com carried a story explaining the reason for the T-shirts based on interviews of Surrey youth by a sociology instructor at Langara College (Vancouver).
http://www.sikhnet.com/sikhnet/news.nsf/NewsArchive/2D445992ECEFD3E5872574320059F736
By R R on Apr 22, 2008 at 3:37 am | Quote
Do the shirts say ‘khalistan’ on them? Where is this ‘khalistan’ going to be? In canada??? cuz I don’t know why I am convinced that none of them will ever move to India if they were to be awarded a Khalistan.
By R R on Apr 22, 2008 at 3:40 am | Quote
Also, Khalistan is a political enough message for school authorities step in. I commend school authorities’ effort.
By Mewa Singh on Apr 22, 2008 at 9:59 am | Quote
RR,
You may or may not be correct. However, do you feel the same way about those that wear ‘Free Tibet’ T-shirts as well?
By R R on Apr 22, 2008 at 10:03 am | Quote
Yes, Mewa Singh, I would. Politics or political agendas should be left at a school’s doorstep.
By R R on Apr 22, 2008 at 10:05 am | Quote
I meant Yes, I ‘DO’ feel the same way that ‘Free Tibet’ T-shirts should also not be allowed in schools. It is a political agenda.
By Jodha on Apr 22, 2008 at 11:03 pm | Quote
Dear Roop,
Thanks for correcting your website. While I do appreciate your consistency with Tibet, I don’t believe that the high school classroom can be cut off from the world around it nor should it be. To deny a student a means to express herself/himself or to engage in the world around them, I believe is a ‘mis(s)ed-ucation.’
By R R on Apr 23, 2008 at 12:47 am | Quote
Fair enough, J :). We just agree to disagree in that case. I don’t think kids at that impressionable an age should be encouraged to bring politics into a closed environment like school. They are more than welcome to wear what they please outside. School should be a place of secularism, equality, and no conflicting political ideas. It is a place to learn the curriculum for career reasons primarily and gain unbiased knowledge to form a basis for rational thought. Plus I am amazed that kids so young are involved in this. They should have time to grow. hmm I’ll write a post on this in fact. Kids and their impressionable minds because if you look at Islam, it is the youth who the terrorist organizations target for suicide attacks. It’s because youth are easily impressed. A sad end for such promising lives.
By R R on Apr 23, 2008 at 12:50 am | Quote
Also, I must say I applaud you for continuing this discussion in a restrained and a respectful manner as opposed to what I’ve seen on most ‘even mildly controversial’ topics. Thanks.
By Sundeep on Apr 23, 2008 at 12:23 pm | Quote
It is by examining contentious issues at a young age that youths’ powers of analysis will be developed. High school age is young, but not too tender to do vichaar on politics. To forcibly remove such politics from school seems to be part of the trend in “dumbing down” education. We can see from the fact that people learn art and music in school (which very few people would be able to support themselves in), that school is about a lot more than just providing the basis for students to get jobs once they are out. It is providing education to promote the growth of the individual, and as politics touches everything in life, the absence of political understanding would certainly lead to lopsided growth.
And judging by the articulate response from the youth in the Voice article, at least some of them seem to have a pretty good idea what they are talking about.
By Camille on Apr 23, 2008 at 2:44 pm | Quote
I think it’s unrealistic to think politics are, or even can be, “left at the doorstep” at schools. Politics inform everything from the content of curriculum to the physical infrastructure of classrooms. Speech is speech. I understand that in the U.S. context the Supreme Court has severely limited the rights afforded to youth, and I have no idea how comparative “free speech” laws apply in Canada — maybe, like the UK, they do not apply in the same way. I think high school is always a tricky time — folks are near the age of majority, but not close enough that communities and schools enforce their prevailing attitudes/standards on everything from dress to conduct. I think some of this, when related to the educational mission or the quality of community, can be relevant, but what if the school banned wearing t-shirts supporting a local candidate for office? Perhaps a “pro-environment” shirt? Where do these definitions begin and end?
By kprincess on Apr 24, 2008 at 9:01 am | Quote
On the topic of freespeech - How about the black banners the students wore to protest the Vietnam war in the US. They were allowed to wear them because it was political speech - even if it offended many other students.
Also, most of the people who are protesting ag. the oppression of Tibetan people or the genocide in Darfur probably aren’t gonna go live there. The kids might not go live in Khalistan, or maybe they don’t even want a separate Khalistan. Maybe they’re just wearing the T-shirts to point out the genocide/atrocities committed by the Indian government.
By Prabhu Singh Khalsa on Apr 24, 2008 at 9:47 am | Quote
It seems ridiculous to me that people think wearing Khalistan t-shirts shows in interest in Sikh Dharma. As long as a single hair is cut, I don’t believe these kids care at all about the Guru.
Khalistan is not a religious issue, it’s a political issue. If they actually cared about Sikhi, they might wear the Guru’s bana. How’s that for a statement. These are more misguided and manipulated youth, who were born years after 1984 and are putting their western angst towards something they can identify with “Revolution.” The problem is Khalistan is not a revolution it is a degradation of the fundamental concept of Ek Ong Kaar (we are all one). Khalistan is a pathetic excuse for those who can only see parts of this dusty earth as their domain. The Khalsa belong to God and their domain is infinite. Raj Karega Khalsa!
The Khalsa does not belong to India or Khalistan or any other division. Khalsa belongs to God and so too does victory. WaheGuru Ji Ka Khalsa, WaheGuru Ji Ki Fateh!
By ItsMe on Apr 24, 2008 at 11:34 am | Quote
Politics should never be left at the doorstep of a school growing up in BC Current events was an essential part of our education. With Current events come politics and the world around you. With politics comes history and struggle and the plight of the few or the many.
The interview on Sikhnet just sparked a thought about what we discussed at some conferences and just round table discussions with friends and families.
At one of the conferences and kids day themes was Kartapur, and we discussed what is it where is it. I just feel this kid put it in terms I like that Kartarpur = Khalistan = A nation of people regardless of land mass = Khalsa = or taking liberties a great Sikh Nation. As point out by other Langarites “Free Tibet” is OK to the mainstream but Self Determination and Khalistan seem to be mad into Taboo subjects.
Bhuk Chuk Maaf (especially grammar).
By Mewa Singh on Apr 24, 2008 at 12:10 pm | Quote
Dear Prabhu,
It may seem ‘ridiculous’ that merely wearing a T-shirt shows interest, but it does. Movement occurs in steps and often piecemeal. However, what I am left wondering is why such a reflection of anger and hostility pouring from you? As you mentioned in another post, you are able to see the reflection of God, even in a stone object (particularly the Shiv Lingum), but then why can you not see God in your fellow man/woman? Why call them ‘manipulated’ or even their cause ‘pathetic’?
Guru Gobind Singh loved people, not just the Khalsa. The Khalsa has a particular duty, responsibility, and role, but it is not to be born out of anger, hostility, and malice.
I have a feeling it comes out of your belief of a ‘feudalistic’ (to use your words) mindset that pervades many Sikhs. However let us begin with a dialogue, not anger and disgust. As you yourself said, see Ik Onkar.
By Prabhu Singh Khalsa on Apr 24, 2008 at 2:40 pm | Quote
I don’t mean to show hostility towards any people, just towards depravity and unrighteousness. I think my post reflects that.
What seems ridiculous is not the interest shown by the t-shirts, the idea that the interest is Sikh related, when it is purely political. Khalistan has nothing to do with the message of the Guru, it’s about a homeland for a select few Punjabis. I think it’s a misguided idea and is not favorable to the majority of Sikhs.
If Khalistan is made then will Hazoor Sahib be a part of it? What about Nankana Sahib?
I know very few level-headed Khalistanis. Most, if you question Khalistan or the status of “Sant” given to Bhindranwale, they accuse you of being aligned with the RSS and not deserving of the name Singh (this type of behavior can be described as feudal).
So, if you feel the heat from my words, it’s an expression of the heat given to me by limited feudal minds.
I see the light of God in them and I know they believe their anger to be righteous. But anger is one of the five thieves that rob us of a spiritual life. If you really want to nail the GOI for what they’ve done, yelling about Khalistan won’t do anything. Helping the people of Punjab to live as Khalsa will get them to tremble at the knees.
By R R on Apr 24, 2008 at 3:13 pm | Quote
Mr. Prabhu Singh Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji ki Fateh indeed!! Finally, a man after my heart. You can’t imagine how absolutely relieved I am to read your comments. Someone capable of a rational thought process and knowledgeable enough to hold a balanced point of view. More power to you!!
By Suki on Apr 24, 2008 at 5:25 pm | Quote
I doubt these kids even understand what all the issues about Khalistan.
Everybody brings up issues like if the kids had Free Tibet shirts or some other political issues there would not be outrage. I would have to agree with that.
The problem with the Khalistan T-Shirts is that alot of people in Canada think of the Air India bombing when they think of Khalistan. With that being the worst terriorist attack in Canadian history, there will be very little support for this movenment here in Canada.
By Bobby on Apr 25, 2008 at 8:24 pm | Quote
All I have to say is that there is a major identity crisis in Canada amongst Sikh youths that manifests itself in feudal minded belligerence and confrontation and I can only see it increasing. The amount of double speak and hypocrisy on this issue is amazing. As for ‘freedom of expression’, the school has a right to refuse to allow political or sectarian slogans which can lead to division within its student body. Anybody who says this is not the intention of a co-ordinated wearing of these t-shirts is at best being disingenuous, at worst is being provocative in the extreme.
By Bobby on Apr 25, 2008 at 8:27 pm | Quote
What an irony too, that they are all moneh and are utilising the symbols of Sikh to bolster a belligerent ‘gangster’ image. I can see the same dysfunction and militancy and self-generated amongst a section of Sikhs in Canada as I see in a section of Pakistani Muslims here in the UK, which has led to some very dark and horrible places, and I can only hope that the same does not happen amongst Sikhs in Canada.
Oh, and by the way, Prabhu Singh Khalsaji, I love you man.
By Prabhu Singh Khalsa on Apr 25, 2008 at 8:44 pm | Quote
WaheGuru!
I feel absolutely humbled and appreciative of both RR Ji and Bobby Ji. Really thank you for your kind words and I am really am touched by your thoughts. Actually Bobby Ji, after reading your two comments, I thought, ‘Wow this guy feels the same way as me, but states it more eloquently.’
WaheGuru Ji Ka Khalsa, WaheGuru Ji Ki Fateh!
By Bobby on Apr 26, 2008 at 11:56 am | Quote
Prabhuji, it needs to be said. I believe the overwhelming majority of Sikhs feel the way we do, but don’t articulate it enough. It’s only those with an agenda, those belligerent ones, who need to scream the loudest precisely because they are so marginal already.
This is what happens when you pump people so full of rhetoric of belligerence, militancy, hatred, separatism. Of course nobody in India is interested in ‘Khalistan’, so all that brainwashing has to find an outlet somewhere, and it finds it in a pathetic little bullying campaign to wear political and sectarian slogans at a school in Canada and then act as if they are oppressed when told to take them off. This is really ridiculous. What are they going to do next, declare a massive morcha and dharamyudh against Canada? More and more they resemble the mentality of these [edited by admin: no name calling] jihadis we have in England who sulk in their own self-generated militant hatred and separatism and then blame everyone else for it.
And this is only happening to this extent in this part of Canada. Everywhere else in the diaspora Sikhs are doing without this attitude and ridiculous posturing bar a few exceptions. Canada has some major problems of mentality amongst a section of the Sikhs there — Taliban Sikhs I call them.
By R R on Apr 26, 2008 at 1:20 pm | Quote
wow Bobby!! I’ll agree with Prabhu ji and say that you do write really well!! I am in UK currently but I am originally from Canada. We went to the Southall gurdwara here recently and after a long time, I felt free from any extremist or political propaganda that we often keep getting subjected to in Canadian gurdwaras. Also, like you said, nobody in India cares about Khalistan!! People are too busy advancing their careers, making money to be bothered with these divisive ideas that will only cause them harm.
Prabhu ji, I really liked the line where you mentioned that anger is one of the five thieves. Fantastic. I mean we say it in Ardaas everyday but we don’t live by it. How sad is that!!
Either way, I am glad to know that there are people like you guyz out in these countries who do follow sikhi as it is intended. Whenever extreme Islam is mentioned in discussions, ‘moderate’ Muslims are called upon to have a voice …. I believe the same is required in Sikhism too.
Regards
By Reema on Apr 26, 2008 at 4:08 pm | Quote
Though I understand and sympathize with the concerns that you (RR, Bobby, and Prabhu) seem to have regarding Khalistan and its rhetoric,
it concerns me that your responses to the rhetoric aren’t attacking the arguments that individuals make, but the individuals themselves.
If you’re truly wary of the divisions within the community, then don’t add to the divisions by categorizing people or making grand assumptions about them.
Canada doesn’t protect freedom of speech/expression as much as the US (and neither do most other countries), so even though this would never happen in the US (speech has to be intended to cause real, imminent violence before it’s not ok), it might be ok in Canada (I don’t know where exactly the line is drawn there as to what’s protected there- can any Canadians help us out?).
By Reema on Apr 26, 2008 at 6:38 pm | Quote
quick clarification of my above statement - I don’t mean to question your real awareness of certain divisions- but I just think that while being wary of some divisions, it does no good to perpetuate others. no offense intended. just my 2 cents.
By Bobby on Apr 27, 2008 at 8:37 pm | Quote
What was the offending words I used, admin? I can’t even remember. I believe I described those jihadis in England who foment hatred and violence as backwards or lunatic. I stand by that description.
I think I’ve done both, Reema. I think their posturing is rooted in severe dysfunction, belligerence, self-pitying narcissim (as in attention seeking) and chauvinism, as well as extremism and the romanticising of a complex and tragic period of our recent history. So I’ll say it more plainly — I find their whole attempt to intimidate people to be divisive and loathsome.
Here is an article that makes some very good points, I feel.
http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5i6MDvZC-tmesKDcRNP87HHCTjpDA
By Bobby on Apr 27, 2008 at 8:45 pm | Quote
Those places do exist in the UK, there are a couple of Gurdwarey in Birmingham like that, but they are extremely marginal compared to how it seems to be in Canada, especially in Vancouver. It is a question of degree and for whatever reason its not so bad here. But we should always be vigilant about it. I personally intend to keep drawing the comparisons with jihadism and Islamic fundamentalism within the Pakistani Muslim diaspora. It is a very appropriate comparison and the highlighting of the similarities may open the eyes and wake up people who are sleeping about this issue. We do not want to go down the path that tragically, a section of the Pakistani Muslim diaspora have gone down.
By Bobby on Apr 27, 2008 at 8:58 pm | Quote
There’s absolutely nothing wrong with what the school did. They have every right to insist that provocative communalist / sectarian / political sloganeering designed to intimidate, bully and inflame are not allowed in their space. What next, Hindu kids wearing RSS t-shirts? Muslim kids wearing Hamas t-shirts? Jewish kids wearing Kahane t-shirts? White kids wearing White Pride t-shirts?
These boys were trying to intimidate Sikhs as well as non Sikhs. It was co-ordinated, and they got their 15 minutes of militant fame. The militants and separatists have been tickled pink by it all, the ideologues have been enraptured by it all.
Back in the real world, life goes on, no matter how much attention seeking ideologues propounding theocratic totalitarian dreams name checking violence and belligerence feel fulfilled for getting their pictures on local TV.
By sizzle on Apr 27, 2008 at 9:21 pm | Quote
Hello Bobby,
Restating the same thing OVER AND OVER AND OVER doesn’t really do much except annoy the hell out of the people who made the mistake of subscribing to this entry, even if we’re inclined to agree with you.
Best,
sizzle.
By P.Singh on Apr 27, 2008 at 9:51 pm | Quote
Bobby, I found the following statement from the article you referenced to be quite ridiculous:
John Thompson has little support for numbers of Sikhs killed by so-called militants, and appears to have ignored the tens of thousands killed by the Indian government. If we go by the numbers calculated by Mr. Khalra, the illegal cremations by the government in just Amritsar alone are horrific. There is little in the way of equivalency here - the Indian government committed unjustifiable, atrocious crimes upon the Sikhs, and the state-sponsored murders of Sikhs, approved by the Indian government, are the primary reason the issue of Khalistan still exists.
Then there is the obligatory statement tying Sikhs to the Air India bombing - sans evidence, of course. But why should lack of evidence keep anyone from villifying the Sikhs? I’m not surprised the writer failed to mention Canadian courts found the two Sikhs charged with Air India to be innocent.
Furthermore, the article paints a picture of the Khalistan movement which is common to such articles, and which has always bothered me. There is the premise that the Khalistan movement was an extremist, violent, seperatist movement and that the Indian government’s actions, as horrible as they were, were in response to such violence.
That simply is not true. If anything, violence became a tool for the Sikhs, in response to the Indian government’s brutality.
By P.Singh on Apr 27, 2008 at 10:43 pm | Quote
Wow. Not having spoken to these kids, not having listened to why they chose to wear these shirts, and certainly not having given them any benefit of doubt - that their actions could possibly be rooted in anything genuine or legitimate, you have no problems labelling their actions as mere “posturing”. Moreover, you state such posturing is rooted in “severe dysfunction” - how do you know this? From reading a news article? From listening to a sound bite on the ten o’clock news?
Where do you get the audacity to patronize these kids by labelling their intentions and actions as “romanticizing” the issue of Khalistan? Do you presume that they do not know the history behind the movement or have the ability to form legitimate political opinions? That they do not have the ability to understand the issues? Or is that you know better than they do, or that anyone having political views different than yours on the issue of Khalistan, is a self-pitying narcisist, whose words and actions are necessarily rooted in severe dysfunction?
You do not know these kids and you do not know of the genuine beliefs they may hold and which may have spurred their actions. You have offered your opinion on this issue (repetitively), and that is fine. However, attacking these kids is not fine. So let me say it more plainly, I find your comments in this regard to be arrogant, patronizing, and yes, a touch loathsome.
By Mewa Singh on Apr 27, 2008 at 10:48 pm | Quote
I thought Bobby’s suggested read was also interesting and just did some easy ‘google’ searches to find out the credentials of those ‘experts’ that were used:
I thought this is an interesting line of argument. It means that should a Jew ever be given a position in the German Government, then “times have changed” and Jews no longer should have any grievances. I assume it also means should Obama win the US presidential election, then ‘racism,’ as felt by so many communities of color, no longer exists? And if previous grievances existed, how have they been alleviated? Those political problems that used to exist, still exist.
Professor Aditya Raj only recently came to Canada and I would not expect an expert on ‘curriculum studies’ to be the first available ‘expert’ on such a sensitive topic.
The Mackenzie Institute is a Canadian statist organization. The most widely quoted person on their website seems to be Victor Davis Hansen of the Hoover Institute, an extreme Bush idealogue and neo-conservative. I was reading from their website and their claims and scare tactics are simply preposterous.
So beware of dhaaba owner, oh naive citizens of Canada! A terrorist lurks behind the jalaybi counter. Be afraid, be very afraid!
By R R on Apr 27, 2008 at 11:30 pm | Quote
Wow, this is merely resulting in a pro-k and anti-k discussion … rather futile accusations.
just a few points …
1. P. Singh ji: Although I value your analysis, I would’ve interpreted the same quotation differently. I would say that Mr. Thompson does acknowledge the so-called atrocities committed by Indira Gandhi and her clique, however, his point is that years of Sikh terrorism that resulted in Punjab due to the tragic events of 1984 took more Sikh lives than 1984 ghallu-ghaara itself (which is true).
2. Mewa Singh ji: I would say that since Prof Aditya Raj recently came to Canada from India, he is far more knowledgeable of the ground realities than us. He might not be an expert but he surely is more knowledgeable on this ’sensitive’ issue than we ever can be sitting away from India or visiting there for a month or so every year. I would trust an illiterate person from India to know better than a fully scholarly Canadian or American who has never lived consistently in India post 1984 and is unaware of the ground truths completely.
3. dear reema: you said .. “so even though this (banning kids wearing t-shirts) would never happen in the US” … i have a question …. (stealing Bobby’s words) would Hindu kids wearing RSS t-shirts? Muslim kids wearing Hamas t-shirts? Jewish kids wearing Kahane t-shirts? White kids wearing White Pride t-shirts? be allowed in US as well????
I am not sure if any one of you is aware of the very recent situation when a political party in Maharashtra started riots in Maharashtra to kick all North Indians out of the state. They said that Maharashtra only belongs to Marathi people. They didn’t get support from majority at all … neither from India nor from Maharashtra itself. There were riots in the state. People were attacked. North Indians (from Bihar and UP mainly) were targeted. Amidst all this violence, one innocent Marathi man was accidentally killed in one such riot. He was only coming back home from his day at work. Just like I saw one Sikh person getting killed on his bicycle as a result of a random shooting in Ludhiana in 1980z period of terrorism. He was merely coming back home on his cycle from a day of work too.
Either way, what I am trying to say is … situation in India now is different than what it was in 14 years ago. No one wants violence. No one wants separatism. Sikhs are well integrated into the society. I am married into a South Indian family and my in-laws have no issues in me practicing Sikhism despite them being from a very traditionally orthodox background themselves. When I was there visiting them, I met a Sikh gentleman who has a shop in a remote area of South India. He was a very happy man. He had a good business, respect of people there, and he was treated well by all!! No issues!!
It’s a global economy now. We’re all gradually becoming global citizens. More I travel, more I lose my alliance to any country really. I don’t wear my nationalism on my sleeve anymore. I feel a part of the world rather than just a Canadian. As for my religion, it is something I hold in my heart. It is not to impose on anyone. I give respect to everyone I meet. Even if they disrespect me in return, my religion (Sikhi) teaches me to respect them regardless.
It was our Guru Arjan Dev Ji who sat on a hot plate and didn’t lose his cool. It was our Guru Teg Bahadur Ji who didn’t flinch before laying his life down for saving some other religion. It was Guru Gobind Singh Hi who despite losing his family only thanked God for his well being from the jungles of Machhiwara in Mitar Pyaare Nu. Such fine examples of extreme patience, love and tolerance for all other religions and self-sacrifice for the greater good … and yet we get wrapped up in selfish petty reasons to fight? Greater good in current situation is to spread word of love and peace and certainly NOT separatism. Not even the idea of it. Greater good is in acknowledging and moving on the past, and also acknowledging the change that has occurred in the last 14 years. Greater good is in acknowledging the present and live in the present.
Again, thanks for this platform. I won’t be writing anymore on this topic. Like I said, it’s becoming a battle between anti-k and pro-k where no one is willing to listen to the other point of view.
That would include me too I guess. I am all for complete snubbing of any feeling of separatism or hatred even if in a benign form. It’s about time we let our religion rule us supreme in its true practical sense of loving and tolerating everyone despite of who they are or what they did/do. Of course, there are conflicting point of views to my statement, and I respect them too.
Thanks everyone. I surely have learned a lot from this discussion. I thank all of you for it.
Waheguru ji ka khalsa
Waheguru ji ki fateh
R R
By Mewa Singh on Apr 28, 2008 at 12:01 am | Quote
Roop,
I agree if the conversation is that you wish to suggest than it may not be productive. However, I do appreciate that I believe most have been civil, polite, and engaging.
I am going to address your comment about ‘expertise’ based on ‘nationality.’ If I may make an analogy, you are suggesting a ’sick’ person is more of an expert on a viral infection than a physician? Since the ’sick’ person has lived/is living the experience, than by virtue of that, they would automatically know more than a person that has studied a particular situation. It seems rather simplistic. In fact the problem that you are not engaging in is there are MANY ‘ground realities.’
Finally, although you addressed it to Reema, I do want to comment on the right to freedom of speech. The answer to your question is YES they would and should be allowed. Here I am NOT drawing parallels in causes, but only defending the absolute belief in FREEDOM of SPEECH. Although I have disagreements with the American government, I do think that the American PEOPLE can be great. It has been some years since I read a book titled When the Nazis came to Skokie, about how the ACLU successfully defended the right of some Neo-Nazis to hold a demonstration in a city where 1 out of every 6 Jews in the Chicago suburb was a Holocaust survivor. The book has always left an impact upon me and my absolute defense for freedom of speech, and yes as the subtitle of the book states “[even for] Freedom for Speech We Hate.”
By Reema on Apr 28, 2008 at 6:58 am | Quote
Dear RR,
The discussion to me so far has seemed anti K vs. freedom of speech. I am certainly not pro k, for some of the reasons that have already been stated above in conversation by others. I was making a factual assertion as to what the status of freedom of speech currently is in the US and Canada- not what it should be, but what it is.
For better or for worse (I happen to think it is a safety valve that allows grievances to be aired), freedom of speech is a highly protected right in the US, unless it is being used to incite violence- the kind of immediate violence that wearing a t-shirt does not do. Yes, for better or for worse, kids in the US have an objective right to wear RSS shirts. If you don’t want your kids to be subjected to political speech, you may have to send them to private school (unless you live in Canada
).
Your view about snubbing any form of hatred, even in benign forms is interesting. Though I value what I think is the motivation behind it- to prevent more violence- I think snubbing speech is counterproductive to preventing violence. I think the most effective response to hate speech is MORE speech- the type of thing you stated above:
I do agree that once K is brought into conversation, the conversation tends to deteriorate as emotions on both sides get (understandably) inflamed.
By P.Singh on Apr 28, 2008 at 8:30 am | Quote
RR,
I haven’t really seen this discussion as anti-Khalistan vs pro-Khalistan, but can see how it can be interpreted that way.
In case it is of interest, I am not in favor of many of the popular ideas put forward by those supporting Khalistan; however, I believe these individuals have the right to their political views, regardless of my particular stance. Moreover, I have spoken to enough pro-K individuals to know that they do not all fit the caricature of brain-washed extremist fanatics, hell-bent on causing violence. I may not agree with their rationale on many fronts, but they are as entitled to their political opinions as I am to mine.
By Bobby on Apr 29, 2008 at 3:51 am | Quote
There’s nothing audacious about having an opinion. If you must know, I come from a Khalistani family and grew up amongst the brainwashing and hatred and miltancy, I recognise it all.
Really? Why is attacking ‘the kids’ not fine? Arrogant, patronising and loathsome? I’d say those words apply as much to you as me. Some people need to grow a thicker skin.
Use the scroll button.
By Bobby on Apr 29, 2008 at 3:57 am | Quote
Do you think schools have a right to prevent sectarian / communal / political sloganeering from entering their school body?
Restating the Voltairean principles of freedom of speech is fine, but its a circular argument. This has more to do with concerted gangsterish intimidatory activism and its place in schools, which are supposed to be places of respite from precisely this kind of thing.
Yeah. Everyone who points out the dangers of unhinged sectarian hate mongering in the context of a violent history is scaremongering. Sure they are. Preaching hatred and separatism and using cruel belligerent rhetoric and indiscriminate bigotry is not to be noted at all, or warned about the dangers of.
Carry on, nothing to worry about at all.
By Mewa Singh on Apr 29, 2008 at 4:28 am | Quote