90 posts in this topic

2 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

I am no apologist. 

But like I said before, it is a much more nuanced game.

Once you understand the game that is being played, you can then formulate a strategy.

The Sikh way is the holistic way to see things from all angles, 

Some of the solutions are simple and straightforward, others are not so much.

As a first step, if we psychologically accept that subjugation is somehow acceptable - we've lost already. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

As a first step, if we psychologically accept that subjugation is somehow acceptable - we've lost already. 

In what context are we subjugated?

And how are we accepting this subjugation? 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

In what context are we subjugated?

And how are we accepting this subjugation? 

You know what mate. Do you remember that BBC Television talk that Jagraj Singh (of BoS) was on? You actually sound like the modern incarnation of that embarrassingly fawning, apologist crusty uncle that was on that show. 

Seriously.....

You're asking me how Sikhs were subjugated after the AngloSikh wars!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

You know what mate. Do you remember that BBC Television talk that Jagraj Singh (of BoS) was on? You actually sound like the modern incarnation of that embarrassingly fawning, apologist crusty uncle that was on that show. 

Seriously.....

You're asking me how Sikhs were subjugated after the AngloSikh wars!

You have not answered my question. 

But let's try to come up with some logical critical assessment:

We lost an empire - yes.

Are we going to get our empire back? - not likely

The vast majority of our population is living in India -yes.

Do we have our self determination - no.

How many Sikhs think they are subjugated in India? 

Out of those Sikhs who think they are subjugated, would they prefer to live in their own Sikh run state or continue being in India?

Would these subjugated people prefer India because they think Sikhs are not capable of running their own state?

Is this thinking that Sikhs not being capable part of the psychological subjugation or is this from realistic practicalities? 

Is living abroad preferable to an Independent Sikh State or living  in India?

If living in the west/abroad provides more rights and higher standard of living than India are these Sikhs still subjugated?

I don't have any answers but these types of questions have never been asked as far as I am aware.

 

 

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

You have not answered my question. 

But let's try to come up with some logical critical assessment:

We lost an empire - yes.

Are we going to get our empire back? - not likely

The vast majority of our population is living in India -yes.

Do we have our self determination - no.

How many Sikhs think they are subjugated in India? 

Out of those Sikhs who think they are subjugated, would they prefer to live in their own Sikh run state or continue being in India?

Would these subjugated people prefer India because they think Sikhs are not capable of running their own state?

Is this thinking that Sikhs not being capable part of the psychological subjugation or is this from realistic practicalities? 

Is living abroad preferable to an Independent Sikh State or living  in India?

If living in the west/abroad provides more rights and higher standard of living than India are these Sikhs still subjugated?

I don't have any answers but these types of questions have never been asked as far as I am aware.

 

 

These are good questions and warrant reflection.  I'm unwinding for the weekend but people should ponder them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 13Mirch said:

'Did not promote inequality' and then, 'support structural inequalities?' Self-defeat in one go isn't it?

I'm sorry if you don't understand the nuance. The text itself doesn't suggest inequality between varnas it just suggests a separation of roles. It was used by the 'brahmanical' elite to provide and legitimatise structural inequalities.. Does that help 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 13Mirch said:

'Did not promote inequality' and then, 'support structural inequalities?' Self-defeat in one go isn't it?

As you are probably well aware many texts, concepts  are decontextualised and exploited to support power structures.. I.e. How natural selection was used as a justification for racialism. It wasn't at all what darwin was suggesting but it didn't stop colonialists from using it as a tool of oppression  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boom @13Mirch it's a real shame you're more interested in 'winning' than talking 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

err I'm guessing you haven't read the caste-based punishments in the same text , of pouring hot lead in the ears of a shudra/untouchable if they commited the sin of hearing sanskrit/ geeta/vedas ... real non-discrimination.

Or the rule that if a brahmin or khastriya kills a shudra no sin is attached, in fact killing a cat would incur more paap/karmic load 

It also delineates the control and suppression of females.

Fair enough. Thank you 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sukhvirk1976 said:

Fair enough. Thank you 

Maybe having researched the text, in question, before elaborating on it could have saved time.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, 13Mirch said:

Maybe having researched the text, in question, before elaborating on it could have saved time.

LOL! I was waiting for you make a contribution.. May be we should discuss it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sukhvirk1976 said:

LOL! I was waiting for you make a contribution.. May be we should discuss it 

Don't revert back to your base state... it will only derail an otherwise profound discussion. 

3 people like this

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

    • First Khalsa were Bhai Mardana ji and Bhai lehna ji.  Nihangs who follow the teachings of Bhai Mardana ji and Bhai Lehna ji are Khalsa. You can scream at the top of your lungs, wear weapons, tie a dummalla and still Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji would not give you his favor.  Those who sing chandi di vaar, wear weapons, tie a dummalla and have their focus on Gurbani is the nihang and the Gurus Sikhs 
    • Is there a special committe of punj for confessions? Or any 5 will do What if someone in the panj are vaping discreetly themselves. How does it work then 
    • Such utter bs. My mom is the dearest person to me
    • Destruction youve made some pretty dumb posts yourself get off your high horse goof. On one thread you lost your <banned word filter activated> because somebody comapred the khalistani shaheeds to the purataan shaheeds, News flash buddy the khalistani shaheeds were the exact same as the shaheeds of old maybe the circumstances were slightly different but that doesnt change the fact that these ppl gave up EVERYTHING for us including there lives and even the lives of there innocent family members who were tortured to death in the most barbaric ways by the police and government.The kharkus fought through hell for us I understand someone who is anti sikh saying those things but for someone to call themselves a sikh to disrespect our own shaheeds like that is disgusting. The true kharkus were the same as the shaheeds of old and they deserve the exact same respect. They even had to live underground the same as the singhs of old the commonalities far outweigh the differences in this case.