Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Is it Unfair how Sikhism do not have a country to themselves? Watch

  • View Poll Results: Should Sikhs have a country of their own?
    Yes
    20
    28.99%
    No
    49
    71.01%

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheALevelStudent)
    Punjab is in a horrific state, this is directly due to the government.
    The last Prime Minister was Sikh and stayed in office for ten years. :confused:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by physicst)
    If there is any riot, then you know and I also know that innocent will get hurt. Don't you think during such scenario it is too difficult to point out the guilty peoples. ???

    What you have done in 1980 if you were PM? when there is chance that county will divided if in two seprate nations then will you allow to happen this.
    or you did something similar to indira did? I don't say you are completely wrong but think realistically without any support from india can Punjab survive as a separate country.

    I assure if people of punjab got their state, then due less developed security system, there are more crime and this state can't hold itself as your neighbors is Pakistan. One will expect a large disturbance from Pakistan.

    Instead of demanding separate state people will try to reform the existing one. I don't want to comment on any particular religion because I don't believe in particular religion or any set of rules on which I am not agree. Anyway thanks for your reply dear..
    There has never been a riot. If there has been, sikh are always the victims.

    First of all there was no talk of khalistan before hand. All we wanted was the the anandpur sahib resolution to come into practise. We were happy to stay in india. After attacks and mistreatment, only then did the demand for khalistan arise.

    We have tried reforming, when we do we get shot down. Ideally a reformation would be nice, but it seems unlikely.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    The last Prime Minister was Sikh and stayed in office for ten years. :confused:
    I think you speak of ex-PM Manmohan 'Singh'.

    You say he is a sikh... interesting.

    First you need to understand what a sikh is, after finding out you would realise that this Manmohan fella was far from it. Just because he wore a turban and had a beard does not mean he was a sikh.

    Many people know that he was just a puppet for the congress party and the gandhi family following 1984.

    In summary he was far from sikh.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheALevelStudent)
    I think you speak of ex-PM Manmohan 'Singh'.

    You say he is a sikh... interesting.

    First you need to understand what a sikh is, after finding out you would realise that this Manmohan fella was far from it. Just because he wore a turban and had a beard does not mean he was a sikh.

    Many people know that he was just a puppet for the congress party and the gandhi family following 1984.

    In summary he was far from sikh.
    Perhaps you should give sources instead of making accusations.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    Perhaps you should give sources instead of making accusations.
    Perhaps you should make an attempt to understand the situation and background, before sharing your opinion.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheALevelStudent)
    Perhaps you should make an attempt to understand the situation and background, before sharing your opinion.
    Manmohan Singh is widely recognised as Sikh. You claim he is not. The burden of proof is on you.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    Manmohan Singh is widely recognised as Sikh. You claim he is not. The burden of proof is on you.
    My user name is TheALevelStudent, I'm recognised as TheALevelStudent, next year when i go uni am i still TheALevelStudent? I may appear to be, but obviously I'm not because I'm at uni.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Taran001)
    Apparently there was a country called "Khalistan" but the British continuously had wars and it broke down the empire quite sad really
    That is completely wrong. There has never been a Khalistan, however current Sikhs (mostly NRI) want Indian Punjab to be its own state called Khalistan, governed under Sikh laws. It has never previously existed.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheALevelStudent)
    My user name is TheALevelStudent, I'm recognised as TheALevelStudent, next year when i go uni am i still TheALevelStudent? I may appear to be, but obviously I'm not because I'm at uni.
    Okkkkk. You're nuts.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    Okkkkk. You're nuts.
    When you can't comprehend the logic, you claim it to be crazy.

    Makes me laugh tbh
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheALevelStudent)
    I think you speak of ex-PM Manmohan 'Singh'.

    You say he is a sikh... interesting.

    First you need to understand what a sikh is, after finding out you would realise that this Manmohan fella was far from it. Just because he wore a turban and had a beard does not mean he was a sikh.

    Many people know that he was just a puppet for the congress party and the gandhi family following 1984.

    In summary he was far from sikh.
    Totally gree with you!
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheALevelStudent)
    I speak of the state government.

    Badal is a joke. That's exactly the problem. The state government are not being proactive. Badal simply cares about making money rather than actually reforming the situation in Punjab.

    The change in Gujarat has been amazing, and if this change happened in Punjab, the demand for a Khalistan would go. When Sant Ji started the revolutionary movement this change was imminent. Punjab was actually getting better. But of course the government labelled him a terrorist and attacked the golden temple.
    Now that WAS the Congress-led Central Government lol. Not sure if it was the State Government too, but it's sad if they labelled him a terrorist as well.
    This is the point I was making - when you talk of India and you mention "government", precisely which government you are talking about needs to be stated.

    But yeah, Punjab needs to dump the Badals. Unfortunately, if that happens, the other side (Congress) is no better. And I don't personally see any other party (including AAP) gaining enough momentum to get a majority in the Punjab Assembly in the next state elections (2017).

    (Original post by TheALevelStudent)
    I think you speak of ex-PM Manmohan 'Singh'.

    You say he is a sikh... interesting.

    First you need to understand what a sikh is, after finding out you would realise that this Manmohan fella was far from it. Just because he wore a turban and had a beard does not mean he was a sikh.

    Many people know that he was just a puppet for the congress party and the gandhi family following 1984.

    In summary he was far from sikh.
    That bit is so, so true!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Christians don't fully possess their own countries anymore. Why should other religions?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nucdev)
    Now that WAS the Congress-led Central Government lol. Not sure if it was the State Government too, but it's sad if they labelled him a terrorist as well.
    This is the point I was making - when you talk of India and you mention "government", precisely which government you are talking about needs to be stated.

    But yeah, Punjab needs to dump the Badals. Unfortunately, if that happens, the other side (Congress) is no better. And I don't personally see any other party (including AAP) gaining enough momentum to get a majority in the Punjab Assembly in the next state elections (2017).



    That bit is so, so true!
    Lol, love talking indian politics. Make me feel like those old dudes in the pind, that sit in the street playing cards and drinking tea.

    Im pretty sure state government also labelled him a terrorist.
    Yeah true i suppose, but i feel that at that time, congress central government had 'influence' over the state government pf punjab.

    Such is state of punjab politics. I think the best punjab could have is AAP in the current situation. They seem to have good intentions, and from a sikh perspective; they have some recognised sikhs in their party. E.g. HS Phoolk and Jarnail Singh.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Math12345)
    What type of Sikh?

    I can call myself a Sikh, but am I really a Sikh by definition of what Guru defines a Sikh to be.

    "One who calls himself a Sikh of the Guru, the True Guru, shall rise in the early morning hours and meditate on the Lord's Name.
    Upon arising early in the morning, he is to bathe, and cleanse himself in the pool of nectar."

    And to add to the point before. Manmohan Singh was too scared to do anything for the Sikhs. He knew if he did anything for them, the general Indians would go against him.

    Clearly Khalistan is needed. The government in India is corrupt and are just there for power and money. They do not help Sikhs. Why do you think the families of victims from e.g. 1984 are still suffering? If the government supported them they wouldn't be suffering.

    Punjab is a total mess (the homeland of Sikhs). Punjabi is not even the main language in Punjab whereas in other states like Gujarat they have their own languages being taught. Badal (the bander) the chief Minister of Punjab is again in that position for money. Even if he did care (which he doesn't), he wouldn't do anything because he is too scared of the government. When it's time for votes he visits the Golden Temple and helps people just for VOTES!!!
    You think that Punjabi elites are less corrupt? The Chief Minister is elected by Punjabis, right? How will it make a difference if Punjab is independent?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    It wasn't a "mass" genocide. Pogrom is the correct word.
    Considering at the time Sikhism had around 20m people in India Yes it is a mass sucicide
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    You think that Punjabi elites are less corrupt? The Chief Minister is elected by Punjabis, right? How will it make a difference if Punjab is independent?
    Punjab has the 2nd highest HDI in India, corruption in Punjab is known to be <30% which is in global standards successful. As the Uk is at 20% India at 70% and well Finland 1%
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I'm a Christian but I agree that Sikh's should totally have their own country (ies)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GdotMdot)
    That is completely wrong. There has never been a Khalistan, however current Sikhs (mostly NRI) want Indian Punjab to be its own state called Khalistan, governed under Sikh laws. It has never previously existed.
    Sorry made a mistake there was a Sikh Empire which existed until 1849 it consisted of the tip of Afghanistan and Punjab we call today in India it was huge. Languages spoken were Punjabi and Farsi (Persian)
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheALevelStudent)
    My user name is TheALevelStudent, I'm recognised as TheALevelStudent, next year when i go uni am i still TheALevelStudent? I may appear to be, but obviously I'm not because I'm at uni.
    I thought you were going crazy for a second.
    But I get where you're coming from
    Lool
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.