Why isn't Britain as successful as Canada when it comes to Sikh politicians?

[singhbj singh]

 

Canada now has four Sikhs in it's cabinet - even more than India. Why has this not happened in the UK? Sikh immigrants didn't move to Canada any earlier than Britain - in fact a lot of them went over after what happened in Amritsar in 1984. So why is Britain so far behind when it comes to getting Sikhs into positions of power? Is lack of unity holding Sikhs back here - are there more barriers?

[dallysingh101]

There are infinitely more barriers. English people are a thousand times more devious than Canadians. Plus many white Canadians have at least attenuated their white supremacist thinking, whilst Anglos in England still cling onto old colonialist notions (even though they go miles to try and hide it). You have to walk, talk and think a certain way before they even let you near those positions here. And if any apna can do that, you can pretty much guarantee that they don't really have any genuine feelings for their own community, and are more than likely weak-minded sycophants, or ruthless opportunists who would never rock the boat in a million years in fear of losing their position.

[Ranjeet01]

41 minutes ago, singhbj singh said:

 

Canada now has four Sikhs in it's cabinet - even more than India. Why has this not happened in the UK? Sikh immigrants didn't move to Canada any earlier than Britain - in fact a lot of them went over after what happened in Amritsar in 1984. So why is Britain so far behind when it comes to getting Sikhs into positions of power? Is lack of unity holding Sikhs back here - are there more barriers?

Canadian Sikh is largely a post 1984 community.

Everything that has happened since 1984 is part of Canadian Sikh psyche and this plays into the dynamic.

That means the Canadian Sikh understands in a more intimate way the fundamentals in terms of being a cohesive unit particularly in terms of politics.

UK Sikhs are predominantly a post WW2 community and again it is impacts the psyche of UK Sikh. UK Sikh does not have the same kind of dynamic that the Canadian Sikh. 

[Guest Jacfsing2]

3 hours ago, singhbj singh said:

Canada now has four Sikhs in it's cabinet - even more than India. Why has this not happened in the UK? Sikh immigrants didn't move to Canada any earlier than Britain - in fact a lot of them went over after what happened in Amritsar in 1984. So why is Britain so far behind when it comes to getting Sikhs into positions of power? Is lack of unity holding Sikhs back here - are there more barriers?

The thinking of Canadians is a New-Age liberal type of thinking. There are only really 3 types of social liberals and only 3 types of social conservatives.

1. Progressive, (they try fighting for "progress" whatever that really means I don't know).

2. Regressive, (they fight for the past and "correcting wrongs", by being rude and sh*tholes.)

3. Cucks, (they'll fight for everyone's right except their own people).

As well as the 3 conservative groups.

1. Nationalists, (those who put country, before outsiders).

2. Religious Fundementalist, (anyone who is devout and wants to better society through ideas of their faith).

3. Individualist, (those who view individual as higher than the colllective).

What someone should know about Canadian politics is from what I know, it's heavily ethnic-based and not very policy-based, so it's a type of Affirmative Action of politics as well. Canadians as a whole are really afraid of offending people, (this doesn't apply to the Sikhs), likewise in the rest of the world they aren't afraid of offending people, (again not including Sikhs). 

What's going on? Many Sikhs in Canada are related or know someone who was related to a Khalistani Shaheeds. The idea among Canada Sikhs is be the best you can be to make your communitty proud, the rest of the diaspora is get the best job you can get and make your communitty proud. Many Sikhs in the diaspora just wouldn't try running for political office due to family reasons, for Canada it represents Punjabi Issat, (honor). Now you may be wondering why I made the statement about the liberals and conservatives 3 types, that's because in Canada, (with the exception of Quebec), it's the minorities who are conservative and the Goras are the liberals, this effects a lot on how Sikhs even get a chance to win Non-Sikh votes. In America the Goras tend to be the most religious batch of Christian and then are Hispanics, in Canada it's Sikhs and other non-Christian religions, and most religious ideology is about winning power to enslave the world, (Sikhi on the other side of the coin wants to save the world).

[genie]

3 hours ago, singhbj singh said:

 

Canada now has four Sikhs in it's cabinet - even more than India. Why has this not happened in the UK? Sikh immigrants didn't move to Canada any earlier than Britain - in fact a lot of them went over after what happened in Amritsar in 1984. So why is Britain so far behind when it comes to getting Sikhs into positions of power? Is lack of unity holding Sikhs back here - are there more barriers?

Canada = originally a brown indigenous land conquered by invading white europeans who genocided the brown skinned people. So there is alot or racist history in canada that they are coming to terms with and so they are trying to make amends for their evil crimes and sins of the past by allowing minority candidates get in power. Canada is probably the best western country for religious and ethnic minorities to get a fair chance to make a good life. The other white western dominated countries practice overt and covert discrimination in all levels.

UK = originally indigenous white skinned european people so were overtly racist against non-white and non-british people. Gradually this is changing but they are still covertly racist and do not give ethnic/religious minorities / brown skinned people an equal and fair chance in politics, employment and other sectors.

In uk the white racist political party leaderships are very scheming of all parties they only chose brown skinned politicians in seats where they know they will lose or will have a hard struggle to get elected. They chose white men and white women in safe seats where they know their candidate will most definitely will get elected.

British Sikhs must get educated how the political system works and either form their own political party in  population of Sikh dominated area's like slough and Wolverhampton and vote for those candidates. Or force the main political parties to put Sikh candidates in safe seats with huge majorities voting for that party.

 

[singhbj singh]

Canadian PM is a good man. He plus his council made an intelligent, balanced & historic decision in selecting Sikh ministers.

Can't say the same for British.

 

[Guest Jacfsing2]

Just now, singhbj singh said:

two Ramgarhia plus two Jat ministers.

Stop trying to insert caste in here, unless you want an entire caste war.

[singhbj singh]

25 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

Stop trying to insert caste in here, unless you want an entire caste war.

"Honesty saves everyone's time."

"Honesty is better than sugar coated BS"

[Guest Jacfsing2]

3 minutes ago, singhbj singh said:

"Honesty saves everyone's time."

"Honesty is better than sugar coated BS"

If you really want to go there, why not mention other Sikhs caste, maybe the Mahapurukhs or something. Get one thing in your head, the Non-Sikhs don't see Jatts, Khatris, Ramgharia, or anything else, all they see is some person with a turban and maybe a Kirpan. In the same way people don't see Punjabis as any different from other Subcontinentals regardless how different we want to make ourselves.

[dallysingh101]

35 minutes ago, Jacfsing2 said:

Stop trying to insert caste in here, unless you want an entire caste war.

No one is going to have a 'caste war'. Stop trying to avoid facing up to ugly truths about our own community. This only makes things worse in the long run.