singhbj singh

Aam Aadmi Party as Third Player in Punjab Politics

5 posts in this topic

One significant political outcome from AAP’s entry into Punjab politics as a key player is that the issue of Punjab politics being governed by Punjab politicians and not Delhi-based centralised leaders has acquired importance like never before.

http://www.epw.in/journal/2017/3/web-exclusives/aam-aadmi-party-third-player-punjab-politics.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting how nearly all polls had AAP at around 60% and the result was congress at 60%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There can be a number of reasons why punjabis voted for Congress.

1. SYL

2. Congress is pro business. AAP tried to control corruption in govt offices but "Chor-Baeemaan can't change there nature of accepting n giving bribes" result corruption is still there amount of bribe has gone up 10 times in Delhi. Punjabis don't want that to happen in Punjab.

3. Akalis knew they were going to loose so they told workers to support Congress secure a win in constituencies other than top bosses.

4. Punjabis don't trust outsiders they voted for local leaders rather than Jarnail Singh shoe thrower.

5. 1984 is not an issue is present Punjab, Mr Phoolka should work on current problems if he wants to win an election.

6. Kejriwal didn't invite a Sardar into his cabinet in Delhi and hopes to rule Sardar heart land is childish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I dont know about that but why some people on here found it hard to comprehend about what I stated about muslims were forced to convert to Sikhi is true according to what I have read and understood of the times and circumstances people lived in back in the 17th century. Forced conversions was what islamic rulers were doing to non-muslim populations in order to spread islam and take over faster and banda's men were merely returning the favor by forcing them to revert....it was karma. There is no doubt in my mind many cowardly muslims would rather have converted to Sikhi to save their lives than be massacred along with everyone else by banda's men and the other irregulars who had swelled his ranks looking for revenge and war booty. In those war like conditions and situations back then conversions weren't spiritual or by choice they are often forced to save ones own life.
    • Right, this just confirms what I stated: that there were loads of people who attached themselves to the invading army for the purpose of loot or revenge. BTW, even if you were quoting/reading Sikh historians, there are plenty of Islamophilic Sikh academicians whose histories are based (in the end) on Muslim sources, which would naturally play up the level of mayhem, bloodshed, and pillage, and also place the blame solely and squarely on the Sikh faith. Case in point: Dr. Fauja Singh, relying on Muslim sources, actually portrayed the execution of Guru Teg Bhadur Ji as just because the Guru was a brigand! Sirdar Kapur Singh, using authentic sources including Bachittar Natak, forced him to recant.
    • 1) I didn't say he was hindu all his life. I said he was from rajput hindu stock as he was born a hindu the operative word is "was" he converted to Sikhi while in the company of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. I didnt make this claim of soul saving your making this claim. I said muslims converted to Sikhi to save their lives from banda's brutal warriors and some muslims converted out of opportunism in plunder of war booty of rival mughul towns and some converted to sikhi because they were forced to convert to islam by the mughuls. The conversions of muslims to Sikhi wasn't to save their souls in theological spiritual terms it was a practical political demographics war tactic to ensure Sikh numbers grew and enemy muslim numbers decreased.  
    • Banda Singh Bahadur wasn't Hindu, (unless you believe Sikhs are Hindus like the Indian constitution claims). There were more Ksychatrias and Brahmin Sikhs percentage-wise then there is now, because of Banda Singh Bahadur taking the time to free those inside Punjab from their faiths. Also if he was so interested in saving people's souls like you claim, why did Sri Mata Sundri Ji not support him? Or Baba Deep Singh Ji for that matter? After all that, the Bandai Khalsas were formed and revered Banda Singh Bahadur, with Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji not given enough importance. If people did convert to Sikhi it wasn't because some king living in the jungles of Punjab, (because that's exactly where he lived, not out in the open), it would be because the Sikhs especially within Punjab did heavy Prachar. As great as his kingdom was, it was mostly skirmishes with the Mughals with only one real battle, (Sirhind/Fatehgarh Sahib).
    •   I don't refer to islamic history or their sources when saying Baanda Singh bahadhur and his warriors forced muslims of mughuls towns to convert, flee or get destroyed. But it also makes logical sense that in order to establish an area of self rule you would first destroy your enemies population and their institutions of authority. Banda singh bahadur wasn't a Guru he wasn't a overly religious pious man he was a warrior of hindu rajput stock, a warrior instructed to bring retribution to sirhind and mughul authorities for the cruel martyrdom of chotay sahibzaday. His mission wasnt one of compassion and niceties against murderous people..... his mission was one of bring a whirlwind of destruction of enemies of Sikhs and oppressed hindu's. And personally I am pretty comfortable with our hero's forcing muslims to chose between saving themselves and their towns by converting to Sikhi or be put to death through the warfare that would inevitable happen..... I see nothing wrong with those were were once forced to convert to Islam reverting back to a dharmic faith. "When the Sikhs left Ambeyta and advanced further, a large number of Gujjar from Rampur turned up to join the Sikhs. They declared that they were the followers of Guru Nanak and that they came there to take part in the Sikh religious war. By this strategem they were able to secure the advantage of making their own town and its surrounding area safe from pillage. Moreover, they also became partners in the plunder of Nanauta. The Gujjars had some old accounts to settle with the Sayyads. The Sikhs entered Nanauta on July 11, 1710, A.D. The Shaikhzadas of the town were brave fighters and expert archars. They contested every inch the Sikh onslaught in their part of the town. Three hundred Shaikhzadas lost their lives on that day during the courageous fighting in the courtyard of Sheikh-Mohammad Afzal's house alone. This sharp, bloody contest led to an utter destruction of the town. The royal mansions of the Sheikhs and of the Sayyads were destroyed. The whole town was left in ruins. It has been called Phuta Shahr or the town in ruins, since that day. " (BANDA SINGH BAHADUR and Sikh Sovereignty by HARBANS KAUR SAGOO) Gujjars were muslims whose hindu ancestors forced to convert to Islam decades and centuries earlier. There are other books and articles that I have read over the years that have made me come to that conclusion that a policy of forced conversions of muslims to Sikhi was enforced so that the inhabitants would escape mass slaughter at the hands of banda singh bahadurs men whereas their first course of action would have been to slaughter everyone and no mercy shown of converting to escape death.