Towards a Sikh Perspective on the Indian Elections
The election results in India seem to be in. The Congress Party has increased its power in the center and even some of the commenters here in The Langar Hall have been jubilant.
While the Indian elections have received brief commentary, here and there in The Langar Hall, the results call out for some analysis towards a Sikh perspective.
Overwhelming have been the shouts of “Singh is King” as it seems that Manmohan Singh will continue to keep the Prime Minister position, at least if his victory-speech is any indication, until his political overseers – the Gandhi family – are ready to replace the kursi-warmer with Rahul Gandhi. Others in The Langar Hall have already written critical pieces of this so-called Great Sikh Hype.
News media have rightly commented on the Congress Party’s sweeping electoral victories in Delhi on the party’s dumping of the mass-murderers Jagdish Tytler and Sajjan Kumar (albeit it seems more political maneuvering – with one of the positions filled by Sajjan Kumar’s brother, than any true remorse) and the projection of Manmohan Singh as a way to draw Sikh votes in Delhi away from BJP candidates. As a strategic community, Sikhs in no way should they tether their votes to a single party.
Although either some of the Sikhs were either inarticulate or reporters made mistakes, a clear view is still ambiguous:
Residents said it was the “party’s efforts” that paid off. “The Congress went all out to get the Sikh vote. Even Prime Minister Manmohan Singh held a rally in West Delhi to ask for Sikh votes,” Chiranjeet Singh (45), a resident of Tilak Nagar, said. “Our community decided to vote for the Congress because of Indira Gandhi. She did so much for the country,” Balak Singh Bedi (80), a resident of Subhash Nagar in West Delhi, another Sikh stronghold, said.[link]
Really?? Why don’t I buy that?
In the Punjab, the Lok Sabha elections possibly provide some clues of upcoming trends. With the Shiromani Akali Dal’s sweeping victory in the Punjab Legislative Assembly in 2007, the SAD seems it will maintain its hold for the next five years, despite some Congress claims. However, there are interesting shifts in the Lok Sabha results. Here is my quick sketch (one would expect result tables such as this would be easier to come by, but I still had to figure this out by myself):
2004 – BJP(3) SAD(8) INC(2)
2009 – BJP(1)SAD(4)INC(8)
The Congress party made large gains, with the BJP only keeping its seat in Amritsar with the victory of Navjot Sidhu, by a razor thin margin. One wonders at the need for the SAD to continue its alliance with the BJP as the BJP hardly seems to contribute to the SAD’s strength within Punjab. The SAD kept some of its seats, but lost significant ground. Interesting for me, their candidate in Jalandhar, Hans Raj Hans, yes, that Hans Raj Hans – they actually fielded him – lost against the Congress candidate.
Another dismal trend is the increasing monopolization of power by Parkash Badal. No longer trusting his associates in the SAD, he is more and more relying on his own family members to maintain the levers of power. Possibly he didn’t trust men like Sukhdev Libra, formerly a member of the SAD who switched parties to the Congress and kept his seat, after being shunted as a traitor by kaka Badal for abstaining instead of casting his ballot against Manmohan Singh in a vote of confidence last year. Badal successfully fielded his daughter-in-law, kaka Badal’s wife, Harsimrat Kaur. The trend is hardly limited to the Badal clan alone. Captain Amrinder Singh of the Congress Party saw a split in results with his wife winning in Patiala, but his son losing to Harsimrat Kaur.
There is still much time between 2009 and the 2012 election for the Punjab Legislative Assembly. If the Lok Sabha election is an indication of the political winds, then the cyclical process will continue and hand the SAD a striking loss. Such would be good as it is only in defeat and in disarray that calls against Badal’s hegemony will be sounded. In fact the SAD mimics a “panthic” Party only as the opposition, never when in power.
So one set of elections ends and many are indeed happy with the loss of the fascist BJP party, still those that hope for a top-down approach in Punjab that is suppose to bring change will find little here as in the rest of the country to celebrate.
61 Responses to “Towards a Sikh Perspective on the Indian Elections”
Thanks for posting this.
The better of two evils won, and I am glad India made that decision.
Whether Manmohan Singh is a so-called kursi-warmer or not, that remains undecided. The fact that is very much a reality is that he has earned the respect of every Indian (regardless of religion) for his contributions to India's growth. Last 4-5 years (that Manmohan Singh was in charge) have been economically the strongest in Indian history. Now that we are faced with economic recession, he is one of the best men in the country to tackle it effectively. Chidambram is obviously another brilliant candidate.
Just because Manmohan Singh happens to be a Sikh, why is he expected to solely pay attention to only the Sikh issues? His job as a prime minister is to cater to India as an Indian and not a Sikh. Someone on this blog mentioned that Manmohan Singh considers himself an Indian first and a Sikh later. What's wrong with that? I feel the same too and I've said that previously as well. My religion is something I practice in my private domain; however, my skin color – my nationality, my heritage – is on display every minute of my existence for every one to see. I am an Indian first too and a Sikh later. Nothing wrong with Dr. Singh saying that. In fact, I respect him for having his priorities straight and not involving personal bias in the job that he is chosen for.
The man must be given more credit by Sikhs and be celebrated for who he is. He must be respected to not allow his personal biases interfere in his job … the job that he is doing rather well at.
Having said that, election of Sajjan Kumar's brother is terrible news. Hopefully, someone would hold Jagdish Tytler, Sajjan Kumar, Narendra Modi, Raj Thackarey, Pramod Muthalik and the likes guilty of the hatred that they have spewed into the Indian fabric and punish them accordingly too. Hopefully, our system would, one day, reach that status of efficiency. Heck, if US (with all its apparent lack of corruption in the political system *ha!*) is having troubles sorting out the currently hot news on media: the 'torture of prisoners' issue, I have little hope for India.
It is very disappointing to see Sikhs constantly complaining about Manmohan Singh. What I gather from the criticism is that for Dr Singh to be acceptable, we want him to be a Sikh in roop, be well educated, command the respect of the whole nation (something that Gyani Zail Singh, butt of many jokes, amongst others like Buta Singh did not) – AND at the same time, look after Sikh issues, give them priority, and not care about how he is perceived by the whole nation when he is giving favour to Sikhs.
I'm sorry but being the Prime Minister of India means that he HAS to be an Indian first, then a Sikh. I would want it no other way regardless of whether the PM is Muslim, Hindu or whatever.
Wake up my fellow Sikhs. We make up 2.5% of the national population. If not for a brilliant person like Dr Singh, we would not have ever had the opportunity to see a Sikh as PM. Be proud of the fact that he is widely respected. As a Sikh living overseas, Dr Singh's being PM has made a very big difference to the image of Sikhs after the lost years of the 1980's, when it was common to be suspected of being a terrorist when seen in a turban.
Why is he personally responsible for solving long standing Sikh issues? He can contribute, and I have no doubt that given his constraints, he has. This attitude of Sikhs shows such a negative side of us – we rarely produce a leader of any note, our state of Punjab is run like the jagir of the feudal lord Badal, our children don't care to keep their Sikh roop, alcohol and drugs are a big problem in Punjab. Instead of putting our house in order, let's all blame the one Sikh who is bright, capable, commands widespread respect, and has national appeal (?!!). Why such negativity directed to Dr Singh personally?
I for one am bloody well proud of Manmohan Singh. Can you think of the last time that the Punjab CM post was held by a person as well educated and intelligent as him? Please stop complaining and let's put our own house in order first.
Thanks for posting this.
The better of two evils won, and I am glad India made that decision.
Whether Manmohan Singh is a so-called kursi-warmer or not, that remains undecided. The fact that is very much a reality is that he has earned the respect of every Indian (regardless of religion) for his contributions to India’s growth. Last 4-5 years (that Manmohan Singh was in charge) have been economically the strongest in Indian history. Now that we are faced with economic recession, he is one of the best men in the country to tackle it effectively. Chidambram is obviously another brilliant candidate.
Just because Manmohan Singh happens to be a Sikh, why is he expected to solely pay attention to only the Sikh issues? His job as a prime minister is to cater to India as an Indian and not a Sikh. Someone on this blog mentioned that Manmohan Singh considers himself an Indian first and a Sikh later. What’s wrong with that? I feel the same too and I’ve said that previously as well. My religion is something I practice in my private domain; however, my skin color – my nationality, my heritage – is on display every minute of my existence for every one to see. I am an Indian first too and a Sikh later. Nothing wrong with Dr. Singh saying that. In fact, I respect him for having his priorities straight and not involving personal bias in the job that he is chosen for.
The man must be given more credit by Sikhs and be celebrated for who he is. He must be respected to not allow his personal biases interfere in his job … the job that he is doing rather well at.
Having said that, election of Sajjan Kumar’s brother is terrible news. Hopefully, someone would hold Jagdish Tytler, Sajjan Kumar, Narendra Modi, Raj Thackarey, Pramod Muthalik and the likes guilty of the hatred that they have spewed into the Indian fabric and punish them accordingly too. Hopefully, our system would, one day, reach that status of efficiency. Heck, if US (with all its apparent lack of corruption in the political system *ha!*) is having troubles sorting out the currently hot news on media: the ‘torture of prisoners’ issue, I have little hope for India.
Brilliantly said, Tejbir.
Tejbir,
You completely miss the point. 'an Indian Sikh' draws much closer to the critical issue. You write:
But the point is he hasn't. Tell me what has he done? The issue of justice for the victims of 1984 and 2002 are not Sikh and Muslim issues. The fact that you continue this line of thought points to the problem of the Indian polity. They should be INDIAN issues, but they are not considered as such. What could be more important for India than the pursuit of justice? So long as justice is denied, especially when the perpetrators of the crime were actually sanctioned by government officials, why should people celebrate India?
As for Manmohan Singh's personal culpability, it is well documented. In 1993, although he was Finance Minister, he was specially chosen to lead the Indian delegation to the World Conference on Human Rights. There with his Sikhi saroop and for this reason he was sent by then-PM Narasimha Rao to go before the international audience and lie. On that world stage, he claimed that there were no human rights abuses in Punjab and Kashmir. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International were appalled at this blatant misrepresentation. Human rights groups such as Ensaaf and Benetech have recently released a report revealing Manmohan Singh's deception. At the very moment he was uttering these false words, human rights groups have proved the Indian state was engaging in systematic persecution:
My expectations are not that he must prioritize 'Sikh' issues, but rather Indian issues such as justice for the victims of the pogroms in Delhi and Gujarat. He has done nothing on this front.
Finally, there is skepticism regarding his position. You are absolutely correct that he is more brilliant than any politician in Punjab, but unfortunately it also indicates a problem in the Indian polity. Manmohan Singh has NEVER won an electoral contest. He has no popular support. He has never won a Lok Sabha position. All positions were when he was appointed by the Congress Party to the Rajya Sabha. He is not a threat to the Gandhi family because he has no popular base. He can be brought in and discarded at a whim. As soon as Rahul Gandhi is ready, you will see it occur. Mark my words that it will occur within the next 5 years. You heard it here first.
It is very disappointing to see Sikhs constantly complaining about Manmohan Singh. What I gather from the criticism is that for Dr Singh to be acceptable, we want him to be a Sikh in roop, be well educated, command the respect of the whole nation (something that Gyani Zail Singh, butt of many jokes, amongst others like Buta Singh did not) – AND at the same time, look after Sikh issues, give them priority, and not care about how he is perceived by the whole nation when he is giving favour to Sikhs.
I’m sorry but being the Prime Minister of India means that he HAS to be an Indian first, then a Sikh. I would want it no other way regardless of whether the PM is Muslim, Hindu or whatever.
Wake up my fellow Sikhs. We make up 2.5% of the national population. If not for a brilliant person like Dr Singh, we would not have ever had the opportunity to see a Sikh as PM. Be proud of the fact that he is widely respected. As a Sikh living overseas, Dr Singh’s being PM has made a very big difference to the image of Sikhs after the lost years of the 1980’s, when it was common to be suspected of being a terrorist when seen in a turban.
Why is he personally responsible for solving long standing Sikh issues? He can contribute, and I have no doubt that given his constraints, he has. This attitude of Sikhs shows such a negative side of us – we rarely produce a leader of any note, our state of Punjab is run like the jagir of the feudal lord Badal, our children don’t care to keep their Sikh roop, alcohol and drugs are a big problem in Punjab. Instead of putting our house in order, let’s all blame the one Sikh who is bright, capable, commands widespread respect, and has national appeal (?!!). Why such negativity directed to Dr Singh personally?
I for one am bloody well proud of Manmohan Singh. Can you think of the last time that the Punjab CM post was held by a person as well educated and intelligent as him? Please stop complaining and let’s put our own house in order first.
Let's get one thing straight. The killing, rape, mass-murder, and torture of innocent people in Punjab, Delhi, Nagaland, and Gujarat IS an INDIAN issue – NOT a Sikh issue, NOT a Muslim issue, and NOT a Christian one. As Jodha points out above, Manmohan Kohli has continually danced to the tune of his Hindu masters and failed to assert any principled stand on behalf of oppressed people in his own country. As the Prime Minister of India, doesn't he owe it to his country men to take a stand against injustice, persecution, rape, murder, and other gross human rights violations? Would we expect anything less of our leaders in England, Canada, or America?
Brilliantly said, Tejbir.
Tejbir,
You completely miss the point. ‘an Indian Sikh’ draws much closer to the critical issue. You write:
But the point is he hasn’t. Tell me what has he done? The issue of justice for the victims of 1984 and 2002 are not Sikh and Muslim issues. The fact that you continue this line of thought points to the problem of the Indian polity. They should be INDIAN issues, but they are not considered as such. What could be more important for India than the pursuit of justice? So long as justice is denied, especially when the perpetrators of the crime were actually sanctioned by government officials, why should people celebrate India?
As for Manmohan Singh’s personal culpability, it is well documented. In 1993, although he was Finance Minister, he was specially chosen to lead the Indian delegation to the World Conference on Human Rights. There with his Sikhi saroop and for this reason he was sent by then-PM Narasimha Rao to go before the international audience and lie. On that world stage, he claimed that there were no human rights abuses in Punjab and Kashmir. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International were appalled at this blatant misrepresentation. Human rights groups such as Ensaaf and Benetech have recently released a report revealing Manmohan Singh’s deception. At the very moment he was uttering these false words, human rights groups have proved the Indian state was engaging in systematic persecution:
My expectations are not that he must prioritize ‘Sikh’ issues, but rather Indian issues such as justice for the victims of the pogroms in Delhi and Gujarat. He has done nothing on this front.
Finally, there is skepticism regarding his position. You are absolutely correct that he is more brilliant than any politician in Punjab, but unfortunately it also indicates a problem in the Indian polity. Manmohan Singh has NEVER won an electoral contest. He has no popular support. He has never won a Lok Sabha position. All positions were when he was appointed by the Congress Party to the Rajya Sabha. He is not a threat to the Gandhi family because he has no popular base. He can be brought in and discarded at a whim. As soon as Rahul Gandhi is ready, you will see it occur. Mark my words that it will occur within the next 5 years. You heard it here first.
What I don't understand is why is it being assumed that the Prime Minister of India has absolute power to do anything that he likes? I am sure that you do understand that there is a legislature and a judicial branch of the govt as well. Prime Minister merely executes what Lok Sabha decides and there's a chance that Supreme court might even overthrow Lok Sabha's decision if it believes that it doesn't agree with the constitution. There's always checks and balances at all stages. PM of India is not a dictator with absolute power to do anything his dear heart desires.
A Prime Minister alone cannot undo wrongs done in the past, injustices against minorities, take a stand against persecution, etc etc. It takes a team effort. A PM literally and legally is quite powerless without the support or a strong voice coming out of the Lok Sabha. Manmohan Singh realized the importance of Nuclear deal for India but he couldn't do much until Lok Sabha came in with its support. So the people that this blog should be targeting is the Sikh leaders being elected out of Punjab for Lok Sabha or leaders at the state level. They need to make the right noises. If there's anyone with the power to do anything, it is them. And if they are not doing anything, it is THEM who should be held accountable. It should be the likes of Badal, who are filling in their private bank accounts with the cash that should rightfully belong to the suffering farmers of Punjab, who should be tarnished … unlike Dr. Singh who is an honest man doing his job to the best of his abilities without any greed for either power or money.
As for him being a yes-man to Sonia Gandhi, I really don't understand the power Sonia might wield on him in terms of his decisions for the country. IS she the one who decides whether he should press on the nuclear deal or not? Really? Cuz I don't think so. She has better things to do … like maintain her leadership role … so she can pass it on to her son and retire. She put Dr. Singh in charge because she knows he is capable of making the right decisions whilst she takes care of the political decisions. She is a shrewd politician but surely she can't be bothered to interfere in country's financial ongoings and more. She is suerly to be only concerned with the fact that Congress stays in power. Good for her.
"Would we expect anything less of our leaders in England, Canada, or America?"
Nope, we won't. However, given those circumstances, I do wonder how much Obama or Gordon Brown can do on their own except giving speeches and the final executive nod. They will need Congress and Parliament's (respectively) support to execute any decision. Given this torture of prisoners issue, how much is Obama able to do alone? Media is playing a huge role in running with the news … public wants answers … the Congress has to give them answers … attorney general has to decide whether cheney is to be charged after congress-commissions are done investigating and contemplating … Obama, however, has the power to decide whether he wants to follow up with attorney general's decision or not.
Let’s get one thing straight. The killing, rape, mass-murder, and torture of innocent people in Punjab, Delhi, Nagaland, and Gujarat IS an INDIAN issue – NOT a Sikh issue, NOT a Muslim issue, and NOT a Christian one. As Jodha points out above, Manmohan Kohli has continually danced to the tune of his Hindu masters and failed to assert any principled stand on behalf of oppressed people in his own country. As the Prime Minister of India, doesn’t he owe it to his country men to take a stand against injustice, persecution, rape, murder, and other gross human rights violations? Would we expect anything less of our leaders in England, Canada, or America?
What I don’t understand is why is it being assumed that the Prime Minister of India has absolute power to do anything that he likes? I am sure that you do understand that there is a legislature and a judicial branch of the govt as well. Prime Minister merely executes what Lok Sabha decides and there’s a chance that Supreme court might even overthrow Lok Sabha’s decision if it believes that it doesn’t agree with the constitution. There’s always checks and balances at all stages. PM of India is not a dictator with absolute power to do anything his dear heart desires.
A Prime Minister alone cannot undo wrongs done in the past, injustices against minorities, take a stand against persecution, etc etc. It takes a team effort. A PM literally and legally is quite powerless without the support or a strong voice coming out of the Lok Sabha. Manmohan Singh realized the importance of Nuclear deal for India but he couldn’t do much until Lok Sabha came in with its support. So the people that this blog should be targeting is the Sikh leaders being elected out of Punjab for Lok Sabha or leaders at the state level. They need to make the right noises. If there’s anyone with the power to do anything, it is them. And if they are not doing anything, it is THEM who should be held accountable. It should be the likes of Badal, who are filling in their private bank accounts with the cash that should rightfully belong to the suffering farmers of Punjab, who should be tarnished … unlike Dr. Singh who is an honest man doing his job to the best of his abilities without any greed for either power or money.
As for him being a yes-man to Sonia Gandhi, I really don’t understand the power Sonia might wield on him in terms of his decisions for the country. IS she the one who decides whether he should press on the nuclear deal or not? Really? Cuz I don’t think so. She has better things to do … like maintain her leadership role … so she can pass it on to her son and retire. She put Dr. Singh in charge because she knows he is capable of making the right decisions whilst she takes care of the political decisions. She is a shrewd politician but surely she can’t be bothered to interfere in country’s financial ongoings and more. She is suerly to be only concerned with the fact that Congress stays in power. Good for her.
“Would we expect anything less of our leaders in England, Canada, or America?”
Nope, we won’t. However, given those circumstances, I do wonder how much Obama or Gordon Brown can do on their own except giving speeches and the final executive nod. They will need Congress and Parliament’s (respectively) support to execute any decision. Given this torture of prisoners issue, how much is Obama able to do alone? Media is playing a huge role in running with the news … public wants answers … the Congress has to give them answers … attorney general has to decide whether cheney is to be charged after congress-commissions are done investigating and contemplating … Obama, however, has the power to decide whether he wants to follow up with attorney general’s decision or not.
What A I S, with his two posts reveals is what is lacking in "Indian Sikhs" — the very term is a misnomer.
1. A Sikh, according to Guru Granth Sahib is to be answerable to no one but Waheguru. For this the first Nanak laid down the condition that anyone who wishes to walk the path of Sikhi should be ready to die without hesitation — for one who is not afraid of death, what threat can work to force them from the path one feels to be right? And it must be accepted that there can be only one "right" in a given situation. For two plus two will give only one right answer and innumerable wrong ones — that is the difference between "right" and "wrong". "Indian Sikh" thus becomes a misnomer — because if persons living in US or India or Australia say "I am a Sikh" that means they share a set of values. If one says "I am an Indian Sikh", the other says "I am an American Sikh" they won't be sharing the same value set — for instance, when it comes to, say, the pogroms of 1984 or deeds of KPS Gill, the "Indian Sikh" is likely to see the demands for accountability and justice prevailing as "unpatriotic". Or as "efforts to tarnish India's shining image". A "Sikh" on the other hand (wherever they may be living), will be ready to die fighting for justice even though no relative or friend may have suffered the injustice (as our demand for justice for the victims of RSS goons in Gujarat shows). The best "patriotism" is one that is focused on Truth — not in justifying inhuman acts like pogroms of 1984 and 2002 or goings on of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.
2. A I S also talks of "Punjab leadership" in contradictory terms. If my friend you are really interested in analysing the whole issue you should study the evolution of this leadership — Compare Gopi Chand Bhargava's fundamentalist Hindu (and anti-Sikh) policies to Bhim Sen Sachar's enlightened leadership; to Partap Singh Kairon's points of disagreement with PM Nehru and the capitulation of Punjab's interests by Giani Zail Singh and Darbara Singh. I am talking of only Congress CM's because that is better comparison. Otherwise compare the stupidity and corruption of Justice Gurnam Singh with the brilliance of Lachhman Singh Gill. Badal stands out in no way as his corruption and his capitulations are now the norm rather than an exception. A mud blot on a white shirt attracts everyone's attention — but when the whole shirt is muddy people simply turn away their eyes.
3. A I S is also wrong in saying India's interests take precedence over Sikh interests. Why is this conflict between Sikh interests and "Indian interests" happening only in India? Why can the Sikhs in all western democracies negotiate with their governments and attain their rights while in India the Sikhs are told (amongst others by people like our friend A I S) to forego our rights in the name of "patriotism"? If a citizen's rights are in conflict with that country's definition of "patriotism" the fault lies with the definition not with the citizen's demand for their rights.
4. Finally, Jodha, I think you are spot on in your analysis and your reply. For me personally, it is insignificant that Manmohan Singh happens to sport a turban. Today if I feel proud at his becoming a PM then tomorrow I should feel ashamed when another turbaned person does something criminal. These are individual achievements and individual crimes. The community would feel proud if an individual achiever says it is their Sikh beliefs which have made those achievements possible. PM Singh has never said that (Period)
What A I S, with his two posts reveals is what is lacking in “Indian Sikhs” — the very term is a misnomer.
1. A Sikh, according to Guru Granth Sahib is to be answerable to no one but Waheguru. For this the first Nanak laid down the condition that anyone who wishes to walk the path of Sikhi should be ready to die without hesitation — for one who is not afraid of death, what threat can work to force them from the path one feels to be right? And it must be accepted that there can be only one “right” in a given situation. For two plus two will give only one right answer and innumerable wrong ones — that is the difference between “right” and “wrong”. “Indian Sikh” thus becomes a misnomer — because if persons living in US or India or Australia say “I am a Sikh” that means they share a set of values. If one says “I am an Indian Sikh”, the other says “I am an American Sikh” they won’t be sharing the same value set — for instance, when it comes to, say, the pogroms of 1984 or deeds of KPS Gill, the “Indian Sikh” is likely to see the demands for accountability and justice prevailing as “unpatriotic”. Or as “efforts to tarnish India’s shining image”. A “Sikh” on the other hand (wherever they may be living), will be ready to die fighting for justice even though no relative or friend may have suffered the injustice (as our demand for justice for the victims of RSS goons in Gujarat shows). The best “patriotism” is one that is focused on Truth — not in justifying inhuman acts like pogroms of 1984 and 2002 or goings on of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.
2. A I S also talks of “Punjab leadership” in contradictory terms. If my friend you are really interested in analysing the whole issue you should study the evolution of this leadership — Compare Gopi Chand Bhargava’s fundamentalist Hindu (and anti-Sikh) policies to Bhim Sen Sachar’s enlightened leadership; to Partap Singh Kairon’s points of disagreement with PM Nehru and the capitulation of Punjab’s interests by Giani Zail Singh and Darbara Singh. I am talking of only Congress CM’s because that is better comparison. Otherwise compare the stupidity and corruption of Justice Gurnam Singh with the brilliance of Lachhman Singh Gill. Badal stands out in no way as his corruption and his capitulations are now the norm rather than an exception. A mud blot on a white shirt attracts everyone’s attention — but when the whole shirt is muddy people simply turn away their eyes.
3. A I S is also wrong in saying India’s interests take precedence over Sikh interests. Why is this conflict between Sikh interests and “Indian interests” happening only in India? Why can the Sikhs in all western democracies negotiate with their governments and attain their rights while in India the Sikhs are told (amongst others by people like our friend A I S) to forego our rights in the name of “patriotism”? If a citizen’s rights are in conflict with that country’s definition of “patriotism” the fault lies with the definition not with the citizen’s demand for their rights.
4. Finally, Jodha, I think you are spot on in your analysis and your reply. For me personally, it is insignificant that Manmohan Singh happens to sport a turban. Today if I feel proud at his becoming a PM then tomorrow I should feel ashamed when another turbaned person does something criminal. These are individual achievements and individual crimes. The community would feel proud if an individual achiever says it is their Sikh beliefs which have made those achievements possible. PM Singh has never said that (Period)
Oh it is absolutely necessary to mention my 'nationality' since somehow it is assumed by a lot of commentators on this website that Sikhs in India are suppressed and consistently being discriminated against. It is imperative that I repeatedly mention that I am an Indian and VERY happy in the PRESENT day India despite following the Sikh faith. No one is violating my freedoms to do anything that any legal citizen of this country is free to. As to answer your questions:
1. I've repeatedly asked for accountability as well but am strictly against any hateful propaganda that generalizes a group of people ! Not all Hindus are bad and not all Sikhs are 'dudh de dhule'. Every race/religion/ethnicity has good and bad people. This site shouldn't become an avenue to dish out venomous views on an entire group based on the actions of a very few and I will argue that for as long as I don't get frustrated with ignorance.
2. Excuse me? In short, you are saying that the Punjab leadership has primarily remained incompetent? How do we differ there? Sure it has … that's what i said … and I also said that it should be held accountable more than anything and anyone else.
3. No, I did not say any such thing at all. All I said was that since the PM is a Sikh doesn't automatically imply that he should bring his religious bias into his executive decisions. He has to leave his religion at the door when he enters his office which is meant for him to be equally partial to all religions. What rights are you talking about? No one answers me directly on this site. What rights??? To be called a Sikh in the constitution rather than being grouped under Hindus and being treated the same as Hindus? Do you want to be grouped differently and treated differently? Is that the right that you are asking for? What else? Please enlighten.
4. Dr. Singh sporting a turban is irrelevant in political terms … definitely … but like Tejbir has clearly outlined elsewhere:
"on a positive note, I would say that having a Sikh PM builds trust between Sikhs and other communities in India. A respected Sikh national leader does much more to repair relationships than a thousand bullets would ever do, and it is ultimately this repaired relationship and mutual respect that reduces the chances of an 84 like event ever happening again. Sikhs are seen as vital members of the India union, loyal citizens, and intelligent contributors – a big revamp on the image during the 80s. Anything even close to 84 occuring now would leave India outraged; in fact, the nation is rejecting right wing politics and its about time. If people like Manmohan and Montek do nothing else, even their presence there as capable Sikhs does a lot. Be proud."
Amen. Obama is serving the same purpose for Black America. He is a symbol for many that success can be achieved despite your skin color. It's not that Obama can or would do anything that would favor Black America alone or undo all the misgivings in the past. Nope, none like that. Instead, he is a very influential symbol for many who he fills with hope and dreams that they could've never had before.
Our Sikh symbols of success do the same for many of our youth. Hopefully, we'd let it happen without criticism for Punjab is currently lost to drugs and crime … we need youth to get out of the cycle of hurting themselves and working hard towards a future that is well within their grasp.
Oh it is absolutely necessary to mention my ‘nationality’ since somehow it is assumed by a lot of commentators on this website that Sikhs in India are suppressed and consistently being discriminated against. It is imperative that I repeatedly mention that I am an Indian and VERY happy in the PRESENT day India despite following the Sikh faith. No one is violating my freedoms to do anything that any legal citizen of this country is free to. As to answer your questions:
1. I’ve repeatedly asked for accountability as well but am strictly against any hateful propaganda that generalizes a group of people ! Not all Hindus are bad and not all Sikhs are ‘dudh de dhule’. Every race/religion/ethnicity has good and bad people. This site shouldn’t become an avenue to dish out venomous views on an entire group based on the actions of a very few and I will argue that for as long as I don’t get frustrated with ignorance.
2. Excuse me? In short, you are saying that the Punjab leadership has primarily remained incompetent? How do we differ there? Sure it has … that’s what i said … and I also said that it should be held accountable more than anything and anyone else.
3. No, I did not say any such thing at all. All I said was that since the PM is a Sikh doesn’t automatically imply that he should bring his religious bias into his executive decisions. He has to leave his religion at the door when he enters his office which is meant for him to be equally partial to all religions. What rights are you talking about? No one answers me directly on this site. What rights??? To be called a Sikh in the constitution rather than being grouped under Hindus and being treated the same as Hindus? Do you want to be grouped differently and treated differently? Is that the right that you are asking for? What else? Please enlighten.
4. Dr. Singh sporting a turban is irrelevant in political terms … definitely … but like Tejbir has clearly outlined elsewhere:
“on a positive note, I would say that having a Sikh PM builds trust between Sikhs and other communities in India. A respected Sikh national leader does much more to repair relationships than a thousand bullets would ever do, and it is ultimately this repaired relationship and mutual respect that reduces the chances of an 84 like event ever happening again. Sikhs are seen as vital members of the India union, loyal citizens, and intelligent contributors – a big revamp on the image during the 80s. Anything even close to 84 occuring now would leave India outraged; in fact, the nation is rejecting right wing politics and its about time. If people like Manmohan and Montek do nothing else, even their presence there as capable Sikhs does a lot. Be proud.”
Amen. Obama is serving the same purpose for Black America. He is a symbol for many that success can be achieved despite your skin color. It’s not that Obama can or would do anything that would favor Black America alone or undo all the misgivings in the past. Nope, none like that. Instead, he is a very influential symbol for many who he fills with hope and dreams that they could’ve never had before.
Our Sikh symbols of success do the same for many of our youth. Hopefully, we’d let it happen without criticism for Punjab is currently lost to drugs and crime … we need youth to get out of the cycle of hurting themselves and working hard towards a future that is well within their grasp.
Another question for Tejbir and A I S:
What does the Hindu majority of India need do to repair this damaged relationship between Sikhs and Hindus?
all i wanna say this time is no matter what the khalistani brigade says including Ibadat Hussein…..ibadat bhaijaan now your first name and surname look as if they are made for each and this surname goes better with your first name(SERIOUSLY) have you got your paycheck from ISI for this weeks contribution to all the anti indian propaganda…………anyway people like you remind me of one very famous punjabi saying "dhobi da kutta…na ghar da na ghaat da" coz soon what you are doing against India not only are you gonna get blacklisted to go back to India but when in some years time a nationalist party wins in UK USA OR CANADA where ever you live….and they decided to throw all the foreigners out of there contry you will have nowhere to go…even Pakistan whose payroll people like you are on….is not gonna let you in there country….then situation of people like you is gonna be like "dhobi da kutta…na ghar da na ghaat da…….to all the indian Sikhs here just ignore the hypocrite SIKH TALIBAN and celebrate the sucess of our PM and his party and just listen to the song SINGH IS KING…….god give him long life to serve his nation………i am proud that i am an indian and a sikh
"sikh and indian" [a.k.a. A I S?]
You reveal yourself as a trained propagandist — unfortunately of not a very high calibre. You use obfuscation as a tool but most ineffectually. Making abusive comments against someone does expose you as a tool — and not the sharpest one either
A I S has written above:
"s a i" [a Freudian acronym?!] is pure venom — and since this venom is justified in the name of "Indianness", it does not reflect well on India either. Rather it shows what is holding back progress of Indian people's rights.
LOL at "sikh and indian" above. Derangment and poor grammar never cease to humor. Keep on entertaining, buddy!
A I S,
No offence, but frustration won’t stem from “ignorance” on this website but from you tying yourself in knots in justifying what is clearly a contradiction in terms.
At point 3, I wrote “A I S is also wrong in saying India’s interests take precedence over Sikh interests. Why is this conflict between Sikh interests and “Indian interests” happening only in India?
And your response to that is 3. No, I did not say any such thing at all.
If that is true, what do you make of the following quote from your original posting:
Not only are you agreeing that the “Indian” part of Manmohan Singh’s identity and yours takes precedence over the “Sikh” part but you are also implying that the “Sikh” part is subservient to the “Indian” part:
What you wrote before these lines is even more telling of your own biases than anything that I or others might have written:
1. Sikhi my friend is something that is always visible, through the turban, through the 5k’s and through our very demeanour. When a Sikh of Punjabi heritage meets a Sikh of African or European heritage, the skin color is secondary while the Sikh identity retains its primacy. When a person of any skin colour meets a Sikh of any skin colour, it is not the skin colour that they see but the Sikh identity. So your argument about “Indian” taking precedence over the “Sikh” contradicts your own efforts to present Manmohan Singh as a “Sikh” achiever, whereas what I am arguing for is that he looks like a Sikh but his actions will make him a Sikh.
2. Your latest reply also includes a rather revealing line: “am strictly against any hateful propaganda that generalizes a group of people ! Not all Hindus are bad and not all Sikhs are ‘dudh de dhule’.” Who said anything about “Hindus” as a whole? People on this forum know how to differentiate between Muslims like Osama and Muslims like Fareed Zakariya. We also know how to differentiate between Bhim Sen Sachar’s sincerity and Jawahar Lal Nehru and Valabhai Patel’s duplicity. AND we have been given wisdom by the Guru to see the nefarious designs of RSS. I admire Jyoti Basu for leading Bengal out of the quagmire that a bigot like Sidharth Shankar Ray had led it into. And I intensely dislike Narinder Modi and Thackrey and all those who claim to be “proud Indians” and indulge in killings and maiming and general genocide and then make excuses for “rioters” not being held to account.
3. I have a simple question for you — how many “communal riots” have taken place in India post 1947 and how many people have been punished by law for inciting a “riot” or murdering, raping and pillaging? Remember these were acts that invaders used to do — which are now being committed by the “proud Indians”.
4. Finally the quote you cite from Tejbir exposes you as a propagandist. Please do re-read that quote and tell me if you (and Tejbir) are not arguing that — 1984 happened because of Sikhs’ own fault and now Sikhs can “build” the relationship with Hindus through a turbaned man becoming a PM (and not doing anything on issues that agitate the Sikhs), and PM and Montek are helping change the “Sikh image” of 1980s.
5. Who created and propagated that “1980s image” that you refer to? President at that time was a turbaned person, Police Chief and even Chief Ministers were turbaned persons. If one of those single-handedly could not create an alternative “Sikh image” I think you may be overshooting the arrow by crediting two persons, viz., Manmohan Singh and Montek Singh, with changing the image.
My friend propaganda never lasts long — Nazis at one point in time were most admired, but are now most disliked because their propaganda ran out of steam. Sikh image (of an enlightened, honest, hard working and fearless person) was sought to be damaged through propaganda in 1980s. That propaganda has run out of steam and the reality has resurfaced.
There are so many contradictions in your arguments that mind boggles at the thought of you missing all of them. You should read more analyses man and not just watch Star TV or read Indian Express (no offence
Out of curiosity, what do you think of Patwant Singh’s “The Sikhs” and “The World According to Washington”?
A I S,
No offence, but frustration won’t stem from “ignorance” on this website but from you tying yourself in knots in justifying what is clearly a contradiction in terms.
At point 3, I wrote “A I S is also wrong in saying India’s interests take precedence over Sikh interests. Why is this conflict between Sikh interests and “Indian interests” happening only in India?
And your response to that is 3. No, I did not say any such thing at all.
If that is true, what do you make of the following quote from your original posting:
Not only are you agreeing that the “Indian” part of Manmohan Singh’s identity and yours takes precedence over the “Sikh” part but you are also implying that the “Sikh” part is subservient to the “Indian” part:
What you wrote before these lines is even more telling of your own biases than anything that I or others might have written:
1. Sikhi my friend is something that is always visible, through the turban, through the 5k’s and through our very demeanour. When a Sikh of Punjabi heritage meets a Sikh of African or European heritage, the skin color is secondary while the Sikh identity retains its primacy. When a person of any skin colour meets a Sikh of any skin colour, it is not the skin colour that they see but the Sikh identity. So your argument about “Indian” taking precedence over the “Sikh” contradicts your own efforts to present Manmohan Singh as a “Sikh” achiever, whereas what I am arguing for is that he looks like a Sikh but his actions will make him a Sikh.
2. Your latest reply also includes a rather revealing line: “am strictly against any hateful propaganda that generalizes a group of people ! Not all Hindus are bad and not all Sikhs are ‘dudh de dhule’.” Who said anything about “Hindus” as a whole? People on this forum know how to differentiate between Muslims like Osama and Muslims like Fareed Zakariya. We also know how to differentiate between Bhim Sen Sachar’s sincerity and Jawahar Lal Nehru and Valabhai Patel’s duplicity. AND we have been given wisdom by the Guru to see the nefarious designs of RSS. I admire Jyoti Basu for leading Bengal out of the quagmire that a bigot like Sidharth Shankar Ray had led it into. And I intensely dislike Narinder Modi and Thackrey and all those who claim to be “proud Indians” and indulge in killings and maiming and general genocide and then make excuses for “rioters” not being held to account.
3. I have a simple question for you — how many “communal riots” have taken place in India post 1947 and how many people have been punished by law for inciting a “riot” or murdering, raping and pillaging? Remember these were acts that invaders used to do — which are now being committed by the “proud Indians”.
4. Finally the quote you cite from Tejbir exposes you as a propagandist. Please do re-read that quote and tell me if you (and Tejbir) are not arguing that — 1984 happened because of Sikhs’ own fault and now Sikhs can “build” the relationship with Hindus through a turbaned man becoming a PM (and not doing anything on issues that agitate the Sikhs), and PM and Montek are helping change the “Sikh image” of 1980s.
5. Who created and propagated that “1980s image” that you refer to? President at that time was a turbaned person, Police Chief and even Chief Ministers were turbaned persons. If one of those single-handedly could not create an alternative “Sikh image” I think you may be overshooting the arrow by crediting two persons, viz., Manmohan Singh and Montek Singh, with changing the image.
My friend propaganda never lasts long — Nazis at one point in time were most admired, but are now most disliked because their propaganda ran out of steam. Sikh image (of an enlightened, honest, hard working and fearless person) was sought to be damaged through propaganda in 1980s. That propaganda has run out of steam and the reality has resurfaced.
There are so many contradictions in your arguments that mind boggles at the thought of you missing all of them. You should read more analyses man and not just watch Star TV or read Indian Express (no offence
Out of curiosity, what do you think of Patwant Singh’s “The Sikhs” and “The World According to Washington”?
Another question for Tejbir and A I S:
What does the Hindu majority of India need do to repair this damaged relationship between Sikhs and Hindus?
all i wanna say this time is no matter what the khalistani brigade says including Ibadat Hussein…..ibadat bhaijaan now your first name and surname look as if they are made for each and this surname goes better with your first name(SERIOUSLY) have you got your paycheck from ISI for this weeks contribution to all the anti indian propaganda…………anyway people like you remind me of one very famous punjabi saying “dhobi da kutta…na ghar da na ghaat da” coz soon what you are doing against India not only are you gonna get blacklisted to go back to India but when in some years time a nationalist party wins in UK USA OR CANADA where ever you live….and they decided to throw all the foreigners out of there contry you will have nowhere to go…even Pakistan whose payroll people like you are on….is not gonna let you in there country….then situation of people like you is gonna be like “dhobi da kutta…na ghar da na ghaat da…….to all the indian Sikhs here just ignore the hypocrite SIKH TALIBAN and celebrate the sucess of our PM and his party and just listen to the song SINGH IS KING…….god give him long life to serve his nation………i am proud that i am an indian and a sikh
“sikh and indian” [a.k.a. A I S?]
You reveal yourself as a trained propagandist — unfortunately of not a very high calibre. You use obfuscation as a tool but most ineffectually. Making abusive comments against someone does expose you as a tool — and not the sharpest one either
A I S has written above:
“s a i” [a Freudian acronym?!] is pure venom — and since this venom is justified in the name of “Indianness”, it does not reflect well on India either. Rather it shows what is holding back progress of Indian people’s rights.
LOL at “sikh and indian” above. Derangment and poor grammar never cease to humor. Keep on entertaining, buddy!
WARNING: This topic is about the recent elections in India. Let us keep the topic there. ALSO, THIS IS A STERN WARNING. I am sick of people calling each other names. That is specifically AGAINST The Langar Hall's policy. CONSIDER THIS YOUR FIRST AND LAST WARNING. NOBODY here is an ISI agent, a RAW agent, a RSS agent, etc. We, as Sikhs, need to grow up and cut out the name-calling. We have different perspectives and different opinions. That is a good thing. We don't need to resort to childish caricatures of the opposition. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.
why is it being assumed that i am 'indian and sikh'? assumptions galore! no, i am not 'indian and sikh'. I am clearly 'a I S' and 'indian and sikh' was decent enough to not use my name as someone else clearly did previously in a different post.
as for your other responses, A P Singh, I really can't be bothered at the moment. Shall get back to it when I have time.
A I S,
Sure mate — take your time. But please do pay attention to what you read before responding — see the "?" after a.k.a. A I S
And I'll appreciate if you start with the question about "what the Hindus should do to repair the relationship with the Sikhs". I think your views on that will help take this discussion forward
why is it being assumed that i am ‘indian and sikh’? assumptions galore! no, i am not ‘indian and sikh’. I am clearly ‘a I S’ and ‘indian and sikh’ was decent enough to not use my name as someone else clearly did previously in a different post.
as for your other responses, A P Singh, I really can’t be bothered at the moment. Shall get back to it when I have time.
A I S,
Sure mate — take your time. But please do pay attention to what you read before responding — see the “?” after a.k.a. A I S
And I’ll appreciate if you start with the question about “what the Hindus should do to repair the relationship with the Sikhs”. I think your views on that will help take this discussion forward
A true Sikh can NEVER be an Indian.
India has betrayed Sikhs. it has enslaved Sikhs. It has tortured and murdered hundreds of thousands of Sikhs. Sikhs are today under the economic, political and military boots of a Hindu thugocracy examplified by Indira Gandhi, Naredra Modi, Butcher Karmoo Gill Rajiv Gandhi, Arun Nehru Sajan Kumar Tytler and Kamal Nath etc.
Sikhs did not join India to be treated as slaves. Manmohan Singh- the JEE HAZOOR of the Gandhi family and Hindu establishment is a shame and disgrace to the very character of a Sikh. A true Sikh will never compromise with the oppressors while he has been an apologist for them and his turbaned face has been used for phony apology and to gather votes during recent elections. In 1984 another turbaned minion Zail Singh (Zaleel) ' turban was used to justify the attack on Harmandir Singh. And as a so called commander in chief of armed forces he was forced to hide during Rajiv sponsored mayhem against Sikhs. Sikhs should NEVER ever fool themselves with these symbolic Sikhs. In fact Manmohan Singh is doing a huge damage to the Sikh nation by making the enemy of the Sikhs..India..a stronger country.
A true Sikh can NEVER be an Indian.
India has betrayed Sikhs. it has enslaved Sikhs. It has tortured and murdered hundreds of thousands of Sikhs. Sikhs are today under the economic, political and military boots of a Hindu thugocracy examplified by Indira Gandhi, Naredra Modi, Butcher Karmoo Gill Rajiv Gandhi, Arun Nehru Sajan Kumar Tytler and Kamal Nath etc.
Sikhs did not join India to be treated as slaves. Manmohan Singh- the JEE HAZOOR of the Gandhi family and Hindu establishment is a shame and disgrace to the very character of a Sikh. A true Sikh will never compromise with the oppressors while he has been an apologist for them and his turbaned face has been used for phony apology and to gather votes during recent elections. In 1984 another turbaned minion Zail Singh (Zaleel) ‘ turban was used to justify the attack on Harmandir Singh. And as a so called commander in chief of armed forces he was forced to hide during Rajiv sponsored mayhem against Sikhs. Sikhs should NEVER ever fool themselves with these symbolic Sikhs. In fact Manmohan Singh is doing a huge damage to the Sikh nation by making the enemy of the Sikhs..India..a stronger country.
WARNING: This topic is about the recent elections in India. Let us keep the topic there. ALSO, THIS IS A STERN WARNING. I am sick of people calling each other names. That is specifically AGAINST The Langar Hall’s policy. CONSIDER THIS YOUR FIRST AND LAST WARNING. NOBODY here is an ISI agent, a RAW agent, a RSS agent, etc. We, as Sikhs, need to grow up and cut out the name-calling. We have different perspectives and different opinions. That is a good thing. We don’t need to resort to childish caricatures of the opposition. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.
Teg (and everyone)
Be careful. Sweeping statements around INDIA as a nation or otherwise don't help. Don't create imaginary enemies in the form of other nations or sub-continents or other faiths. Any person regardless of religion or nationhood can be bad or good. There are no good or bad nations or faiths. Either you understand this or else you can go attack the windmills on your own.
Also stop this obsession with Manmohan Singh. He has a job and a tough one at that. Taking your advice, even if he picks up a faith related issue or two with his party, most likely he will be kicked out and that doesn't help the issue. So, thats not a great practical advice. At least he is good on other fronts that matter to me as a citizen (e.g. economic growth, stability, etc). I am happy as long as a manmohan singh keeps the other useless guys away from the PM job.
If you think you can do better than whine on this board, you have to convince me. Finally, don't judge others lest others judge you.
Regards
Singh
Teg (and everyone)
Be careful. Sweeping statements around INDIA as a nation or otherwise don’t help. Don’t create imaginary enemies in the form of other nations or sub-continents or other faiths. Any person regardless of religion or nationhood can be bad or good. There are no good or bad nations or faiths. Either you understand this or else you can go attack the windmills on your own.
Also stop this obsession with Manmohan Singh. He has a job and a tough one at that. Taking your advice, even if he picks up a faith related issue or two with his party, most likely he will be kicked out and that doesn’t help the issue. So, thats not a great practical advice. At least he is good on other fronts that matter to me as a citizen (e.g. economic growth, stability, etc). I am happy as long as a manmohan singh keeps the other useless guys away from the PM job.
If you think you can do better than whine on this board, you have to convince me. Finally, don’t judge others lest others judge you.
Regards
Singh
Manmohan Singh is an Arya Samaji's dream. A man who carries the visible identity of a Sikh, yet blindly dances to the tune of his hindu masters, worships in temples, applies tikkas to his forehead, worships pictures of indira bahmni, claims he is an Indian first – a puppet, who in the name of indian nationalism, sees no wrong in blurring the critical distinctions of ideaology between the Hindu tradition and the progressive Sikh faith.
On the issus of being an Indian first:
I am a Sikh American. According to Sikhi, God will not ask, "Are you Indian? or American? or German?" God will only be concerned with my ACTIONS. And one's actions are dictated and influenced by one's FAITH. Therefore, to say "I'm an Indian first" is absolutely ludicrous.
Never forget that that our great Gurus, our Sahibzadey, and countless Shaheeds laid down their lives for our spiritual identity and heritage to flourish, and to fight injustice, persecution, and intolerance – NOT FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF HINDU INDIA, THE CONGRESS PARTY, OR INDIAN NATIONALISM.
A man willing to compromise his own religious beliefs and betray his faith community, in the name of Indian nationalism – can NEVER be a Sikh.
Manmohan Singh is an Arya Samaji’s dream. A man who carries the visible identity of a Sikh, yet blindly dances to the tune of his hindu masters, worships in temples, applies tikkas to his forehead, worships pictures of indira bahmni, claims he is an Indian first – a puppet, who in the name of indian nationalism, sees no wrong in blurring the critical distinctions of ideaology between the Hindu tradition and the progressive Sikh faith.
On the issus of being an Indian first:
I am a Sikh American. According to Sikhi, God will not ask, “Are you Indian? or American? or German?” God will only be concerned with my ACTIONS. And one’s actions are dictated and influenced by one’s FAITH. Therefore, to say “I’m an Indian first” is absolutely ludicrous.
Never forget that that our great Gurus, our Sahibzadey, and countless Shaheeds laid down their lives for our spiritual identity and heritage to flourish, and to fight injustice, persecution, and intolerance – NOT FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF HINDU INDIA, THE CONGRESS PARTY, OR INDIAN NATIONALISM.
A man willing to compromise his own religious beliefs and betray his faith community, in the name of Indian nationalism – can NEVER be a Sikh.
i do understand what admin is trying to say and agree with them but i just want to know what are we supposed to do when people like ibadat come and call all sort of names to our indian PM….I don't know what he is trying to reflect……..i hope above warning by ADMIN is for everyone….thanks
ibadat i am sikh and punjabi and i am proud that i speak read and write perfect punjabi…..and if my English grammar is bad i don't really care because english is not my priority but because you raised this issue then for you perfect english grammar might be a priority and how i right what BLOODY NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS…….you call your sikh punjabi but i guaranty that you can't even speak punjabi properly….te baki reh gayee gal entertainment di taa kadee punjab aawee dekh teri kinni sohni entertainment karangey….proper punjabi style……..i hope you know what i am trying to say…waisey tu kaafi sayaana hai
i do understand what admin is trying to say and agree with them but i just want to know what are we supposed to do when people like ibadat come and call all sort of names to our indian PM….I don’t know what he is trying to reflect……..i hope above warning by ADMIN is for everyone….thanks
ibadat i am sikh and punjabi and i am proud that i speak read and write perfect punjabi…..and if my English grammar is bad i don’t really care because english is not my priority but because you raised this issue then for you perfect english grammar might be a priority and how i right what BLOODY NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS…….you call your sikh punjabi but i guaranty that you can’t even speak punjabi properly….te baki reh gayee gal entertainment di taa kadee punjab aawee dekh teri kinni sohni entertainment karangey….proper punjabi style……..i hope you know what i am trying to say…waisey tu kaafi sayaana hai
akali phoola singh ji
If I,tejbir,an indian sikh or sikh and indian write anything pro india then that is pure and simple propaganda for you anti-indian sikh taliban(the best name for people like you as suggested by sikh and india,well done s.a.i)but just because you have done Phd in english literature and because you are putting your view forward in a slightly more intellectual way does not make you the voice of entire sikh nation.
but we need people like you and jodha and ibadat singh gill because frankly speaking this discussion will become boring and too one sided without you people,there is always a need of a good opposition to have a constructive debate.And i would say god bless the entire world and i hope and pray that all Sikhs around the world unite one day and stop criticizing their nation.
In fact i have told so many of my indian sikh friends and relatives around the globe to come on langarhall and share their view.
I would like to applaud admin on a great job they are doing with this website,please keep up your good work.
To all those keen on negating the fight against injustice, please refrain from self-serving remarks and understand the following:
Our great Gurus, our Sahibzadey, and countless Shaheeds laid down their lives for our spiritual identity and heritage to flourish, and to fight injustice, persecution, and intolerance – NOT FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF HINDU INDIA, THE CONGRESS PARTY, OR INDIAN NATIONALISM.
akali phoola singh ji
If I,tejbir,an indian sikh or sikh and indian write anything pro india then that is pure and simple propaganda for you anti-indian sikh taliban(the best name for people like you as suggested by sikh and india,well done s.a.i)but just because you have done Phd in english literature and because you are putting your view forward in a slightly more intellectual way does not make you the voice of entire sikh nation.
but we need people like you and jodha and ibadat singh gill because frankly speaking this discussion will become boring and too one sided without you people,there is always a need of a good opposition to have a constructive debate.And i would say god bless the entire world and i hope and pray that all Sikhs around the world unite one day and stop criticizing their nation.
In fact i have told so many of my indian sikh friends and relatives around the globe to come on langarhall and share their view.
I would like to applaud admin on a great job they are doing with this website,please keep up your good work.
To all those keen on negating the fight against injustice, please refrain from self-serving remarks and understand the following:
Our great Gurus, our Sahibzadey, and countless Shaheeds laid down their lives for our spiritual identity and heritage to flourish, and to fight injustice, persecution, and intolerance – NOT FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF HINDU INDIA, THE CONGRESS PARTY, OR INDIAN NATIONALISM.
Still don't have much time … but a couple quick points …
@ Ibadat: One Sikh Guru did lay down his life for HINDU Brahmins. And another Guru led an entire army against Moghuls protecting both Hindu and Sikh brethren.
@ Teg: "Sikhs did not join India to be treated as slaves."
Sikhs joined India? When? I thought we were natives of India. Was I wrong all this time? I really thought India is as much ours as our Hindu and Muslim counterparts.
@ Akali Phoola Singh: I read your response and I didn't get anything out of it that added anything to my knowledge except that I learned that I apparently watch Star TV and read Indian Express 😉 (which I do neither of but must check out now heh). You haven't answered the most important question I raised though. When speaking of Sikhs getting their rights in India:
"What rights are you talking about? No one answers me directly on this site. What rights??? To be called a Sikh in the constitution rather than being grouped under Hindus and being treated the same as Hindus? Do you want to be grouped differently and treated differently? Is that the right that you are asking for? What else? Please enlighten."
Also, I am a woman. Very much so. Thanks :).
Still don’t have much time … but a couple quick points …
@ Ibadat: One Sikh Guru did lay down his life for HINDU Brahmins. And another Guru led an entire army against Moghuls protecting both Hindu and Sikh brethren.
@ Teg: “Sikhs did not join India to be treated as slaves.”
Sikhs joined India? When? I thought we were natives of India. Was I wrong all this time? I really thought India is as much ours as our Hindu and Muslim counterparts.
@ Akali Phoola Singh: I read your response and I didn’t get anything out of it that added anything to my knowledge except that I learned that I apparently watch Star TV and read Indian Express 😉 (which I do neither of but must check out now heh). You haven’t answered the most important question I raised though. When speaking of Sikhs getting their rights in India:
“What rights are you talking about? No one answers me directly on this site. What rights??? To be called a Sikh in the constitution rather than being grouped under Hindus and being treated the same as Hindus? Do you want to be grouped differently and treated differently? Is that the right that you are asking for? What else? Please enlighten.”
Also, I am a woman. Very much so. Thanks :).
an Indian Sikh: Why did I know that you'd use that example. Classic textbook hindu propoganda. Here's the SIKH version of the Saakhi (the way your parents should have recited it to you):
Guru Tegh Bahadur Patshaahi laid down his life NOT for a particular faith – BUT FOR FREEDOM OF RELIGION AND TO FIGHT PERSECUTION. Sure, the Kashmiri Pundits are indebted to our Guru – but the result would have been the same if the persecuted minority had been Christians, Buddhists or even Jews. This is the reason Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib is referred to as "Dharam di Chadar" as opposed to "Hind di Chadar".
With regards to your second sentence in which you claim: "another Guru led an entire army against Moghuls protecting both Hindu and Sikh brethren. " — Your interpretation of Sikh Itihaas is superficial at best. The fight was against Mughals, who were the rulers of the Indian subcontinent at that time. Again, the war was waged in order to fight injustice, intolerance, subjugation and persecution – not against a particular faith.
an Indian Sikh: Why did I know that you’d use that example. Classic textbook hindu propoganda. Here’s the SIKH version of the Saakhi (the way your parents should have recited it to you):
Guru Tegh Bahadur Patshaahi laid down his life NOT for a particular faith – BUT FOR FREEDOM OF RELIGION AND TO FIGHT PERSECUTION. Sure, the Kashmiri Pundits are indebted to our Guru – but the result would have been the same if the persecuted minority had been Christians, Buddhists or even Jews. This is the reason Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib is referred to as “Dharam di Chadar” as opposed to “Hind di Chadar”.
With regards to your second sentence in which you claim: “another Guru led an entire army against Moghuls protecting both Hindu and Sikh brethren. ” — Your interpretation of Sikh Itihaas is superficial at best. The fight was against Mughals, who were the rulers of the Indian subcontinent at that time. Again, the war was waged in order to fight injustice, intolerance, subjugation and persecution – not against a particular faith.
Manmohan Singh has failed the Sikhs time and time again…
To add to the list mentioned previously by others…on the 400th anniversary of Adi Granth Sahib in 2004 at Amritsar, Manmohan Singh made a press statement (which was covered in the punjab tribune)in which he said that he will make it his utmost priority to ensure the Sikh Literature taken by the army during operation bluestar be returned to the panth…
…its 2009 now, 5 years on and we're still waiting for Manmohan Singh to live up to his words!!!
Manmohan Singh has failed the Sikhs time and time again…
To add to the list mentioned previously by others…on the 400th anniversary of Adi Granth Sahib in 2004 at Amritsar, Manmohan Singh made a press statement (which was covered in the punjab tribune)in which he said that he will make it his utmost priority to ensure the Sikh Literature taken by the army during operation bluestar be returned to the panth…
…its 2009 now, 5 years on and we’re still waiting for Manmohan Singh to live up to his words!!!
To Ibadat Singh Gill and other members of the anti-India brigade:
Yes, 84 was a tragedy, a violation of Sikh rights, backed by propaganda and bigotry. Yes, the Congress screwed up big time! Yes, the Delhi riots are a blot on India’s secular image. I agree with all of this without hesitation.
But, why do you all never consider these:
(1) The Akali leadership severely let the Sikhs down in the 1980’s, and nothing much has changed on this front since then. Even the selection of the Jathedar of the Akal Takht is now completely done on political whim – an insult to the kaum. How come your energy is never channelled in addressing such issues?
(2) Any idea of a Sikh state is ludicrous. A theocratic Pakistan (a similar concept to your beloved Khalistan, the Sikh state) has fuelled extremism, retained feudal rivalries, and generally failed its people. In fact, India has done far better on most if not all fronts (yes, despite blots on its record like 84). Hypothetically speaking, even if you lot got your Khalistan (and this is very hypothetically!), do you really think that it will be a paradise? Internal inter-Sikh rivalries would surface almost immediately. The Jatts, Phapas, Rangariahs, etc etc will all go off and do their own thing, without any united stand for the cause of the Sikh nation. Can you even think of one potential leader who would have done your Sikh nation proud, and united all Sikhs? The state of Punjab lacks good leadership. Period. They couldn’t even unite under the severe adversity of the 1980’s! Different groups with different agendas emerged even then! A Sikh state would have been a leaderless entity, constantly squabbling over petty issues, with Jatts treating the state as their fiefdom, and others slowly growing resentful.
(3) The Sikhs in India have actually moved on. Yes, I realise that this is easier said than done for those who suffered personal losses. But for the most part, Indian Sikhs have made a fresh beginning. It is you lot sitting outside India that keep fuelling the fire. It is rather convenient to behave like the “Sikh Taliban” as another writer put it while sitting overseas isn’t it.
(4) Justice has not been done for the victims of 84. That this is a failing of the Indian state is true. But India has a notoriously poor law enforcement machinery, which has failed just about every other community in India at some stage as well. Sikhs have not really been singled out for this poor treatment, this is a systemic problem. But yes, I do believe that swift justice would have healed many wounds, and I do hold India responsible for failing on this front.
To conclude, I am starting to see more and more in common between the views of extremist Sikhs (mostly living overseas) and those of the people of Pakistan (a near failed state). Low tolerance. No desire to co-exist. Constant blame directed to India. Conspiracy theories. A complete lack of acknowledgement that their own house is not in order. External blame, not internal improvement. Such narrow minded ideology that spawns theocratic states has failed in the past and will fail again.
Regroup, move on, and make the most of the opportunities at hand. The best foot that we as Sikhs can now put forward is to be well educated, prosperous, and relevant to the well being of the nation.
Just because Manmohan is a "Sikh" does not give him the right to treat Sikh issues/grievences as irrelevent.
To Ibadat Singh Gill and other members of the anti-India brigade:
Yes, 84 was a tragedy, a violation of Sikh rights, backed by propaganda and bigotry. Yes, the Congress screwed up big time! Yes, the Delhi riots are a blot on India’s secular image. I agree with all of this without hesitation.
But, why do you all never consider these:
(1) The Akali leadership severely let the Sikhs down in the 1980’s, and nothing much has changed on this front since then. Even the selection of the Jathedar of the Akal Takht is now completely done on political whim – an insult to the kaum. How come your energy is never channelled in addressing such issues?
(2) Any idea of a Sikh state is ludicrous. A theocratic Pakistan (a similar concept to your beloved Khalistan, the Sikh state) has fuelled extremism, retained feudal rivalries, and generally failed its people. In fact, India has done far better on most if not all fronts (yes, despite blots on its record like 84). Hypothetically speaking, even if you lot got your Khalistan (and this is very hypothetically!), do you really think that it will be a paradise? Internal inter-Sikh rivalries would surface almost immediately. The Jatts, Phapas, Rangariahs, etc etc will all go off and do their own thing, without any united stand for the cause of the Sikh nation. Can you even think of one potential leader who would have done your Sikh nation proud, and united all Sikhs? The state of Punjab lacks good leadership. Period. They couldn’t even unite under the severe adversity of the 1980’s! Different groups with different agendas emerged even then! A Sikh state would have been a leaderless entity, constantly squabbling over petty issues, with Jatts treating the state as their fiefdom, and others slowly growing resentful.
(3) The Sikhs in India have actually moved on. Yes, I realise that this is easier said than done for those who suffered personal losses. But for the most part, Indian Sikhs have made a fresh beginning. It is you lot sitting outside India that keep fuelling the fire. It is rather convenient to behave like the “Sikh Taliban” as another writer put it while sitting overseas isn’t it.
(4) Justice has not been done for the victims of 84. That this is a failing of the Indian state is true. But India has a notoriously poor law enforcement machinery, which has failed just about every other community in India at some stage as well. Sikhs have not really been singled out for this poor treatment, this is a systemic problem. But yes, I do believe that swift justice would have healed many wounds, and I do hold India responsible for failing on this front.
To conclude, I am starting to see more and more in common between the views of extremist Sikhs (mostly living overseas) and those of the people of Pakistan (a near failed state). Low tolerance. No desire to co-exist. Constant blame directed to India. Conspiracy theories. A complete lack of acknowledgement that their own house is not in order. External blame, not internal improvement. Such narrow minded ideology that spawns theocratic states has failed in the past and will fail again.
Regroup, move on, and make the most of the opportunities at hand. The best foot that we as Sikhs can now put forward is to be well educated, prosperous, and relevant to the well being of the nation.
Just because Manmohan is a “Sikh” does not give him the right to treat Sikh issues/grievences as irrelevent.
vah ji vah, Gabru! spoke my mind with such eloquence.
jeet singh khalsa, i am glad you've passed this site on to more indian sikhs. it is nice to get that side of the story sounded as well.
ibadat singh: I am afraid I don't understand the need for you to get personal. My parents didn't recite Sikh history for me, first of all. They didn't need to. I was educated in a Sikh school in India that had Sikh history as a part of its curriculum from grade 1 through grade 10. We also had gurbani lessons. That's where my knowledge comes from … from my teachers. If you are to blame, please blame them. They might not know what they were teaching.
in order to answer your concerns:
1. "Dharam di chadar"??? I'll admit that's something new. I've always known him as "Hind di chadar" … but that's only jargon and is irrelevant. My point basically is that he gave his life up for another religion … it could be any … and by giving his life, he practiced what he preached: tolerance for all. And here you are, claiming to be his Sikh and doing just the opposite and spreading hatred against people you haven't even met only because a few people of their religion wronged yours at one point in time.
2. When did I say that the fight was against a faith? I said 'Moghuls'. And please don't bother questioning my knowledge of Indian history at least .. that's just plain ludicrous.
vah ji vah, Gabru! spoke my mind with such eloquence.
jeet singh khalsa, i am glad you’ve passed this site on to more indian sikhs. it is nice to get that side of the story sounded as well.
ibadat singh: I am afraid I don’t understand the need for you to get personal. My parents didn’t recite Sikh history for me, first of all. They didn’t need to. I was educated in a Sikh school in India that had Sikh history as a part of its curriculum from grade 1 through grade 10. We also had gurbani lessons. That’s where my knowledge comes from … from my teachers. If you are to blame, please blame them. They might not know what they were teaching.
in order to answer your concerns:
1. “Dharam di chadar”??? I’ll admit that’s something new. I’ve always known him as “Hind di chadar” … but that’s only jargon and is irrelevant. My point basically is that he gave his life up for another religion … it could be any … and by giving his life, he practiced what he preached: tolerance for all. And here you are, claiming to be his Sikh and doing just the opposite and spreading hatred against people you haven’t even met only because a few people of their religion wronged yours at one point in time.
2. When did I say that the fight was against a faith? I said ‘Moghuls’. And please don’t bother questioning my knowledge of Indian history at least .. that’s just plain ludicrous.
Eventually this gets old. All were warned. Learn to play together, talk together, and share together. Labeling one another RSS agents, Sikh Taliban, ISI agents, RAW agents, is silly. Hopefully one day, we will all grow up. For now, this thread is closed.
Eventually this gets old. All were warned. Learn to play together, talk together, and share together. Labeling one another RSS agents, Sikh Taliban, ISI agents, RAW agents, is silly. Hopefully one day, we will all grow up. For now, this thread is closed.