Why Khalistan is a BAD Idea..

Discussions on various aspects of Sikhi
JasbeerSingh
Active Forum User
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2016 10:36 am

Re: Why Khalistan is a BAD Idea..

Post by JasbeerSingh »

nanuckpunthee wrote:Before 1980s the concept of Khalistan was more like a joke. When some people took it seriously in 1980s it started with the killings of Hindus in Punjab and repercussions from outside Punjab.

For me, being a Sikh living outside Punjab in India, the concept of Khalistan looks disastrous. As we have already experienced in 1947 and partly in 1984, my family might be raped or killed, however IF LUCKY I have to leave all my property and earnings and has to start my life from scratch. Now we do not have any third authority like British, so Khalistan will be more like a warzone like ISIS and again there is no certainty of the safety of my family in Khalistan. IF LUCKY, I might end up in some Western country as a refugee and the existence of my family will be a political agenda for some Trump or Le Pen. Now Khalistan is of no use for me IF I AM LUCKY !

Also I do not interpret 'raj karega khalsa aaki rahe na koi' as an istruction to create some Sikh majority Nation State in North West India and kill all non-Sikhs in it. For me it is a soverignity of an individual with faith in the spiritual kingdom of my Sache Patshah which is above all these worldy empires and states.
I am really happy that finally a Sikh from outside of Punjab in India spoke up against this, it really surprised me and still surprises me that the Sikhs who will be hit the most due to this will be Sikhs outside of Punjab in India, yet I hardly saw any considerable voices from them against this menace. Though I am from Punjab and these days have no one living outside Punjab, I can also adopt uncaring attitude but the point is I do care and think on these lines like you think, it really worries me a lot , hence I just pity the selfish attitude of Khalistan supporters. I have spent a lot of time outside Punjab as a child and student and I know it very well that there is no discrimination particularly on religious Lines with Sikhs in India apart from some jokes and usual stereotypes which if exceeded can easily be fought through legal means and panthic Unity and for which certainly separte country is not required for sure. The doubts which you have raised are exactly what I think if Khalistan is made.. More and more Sikhs outside Punjab must ask boldly and demand answers to some very obvious questions which many Khalistani supporters living their comfortable lives in abroad and some in Sikh Majority Punjab fail to think even More and more sikhs who don't support it must speak up more Before it's too late

Thanks Nanuckpanthee for your upright and honest opinion
Bik1999Singh
New User
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2016 11:23 am

Re: Why Khalistan is a BAD Idea..

Post by Bik1999Singh »

JasbeerSingh,

You seem to have a fixation on Pakistan probably something that now is drilled into Indian Sikhs to make their fear the country more than they fear their own politicians who incidentally think nothing of carrying out a genocide of the Sikhs and yet the Indian Sikhs are fixated on what Pakistan did to them in 1947.

I am well aware of what the Pakistanis did to us in 1947 but I am also aware that our lack of a strong leader led us to go from being the colonial subjects of the British to being the colonial subjects of the Indians. Those who murdered Sikhs in 1947 are long gone but the ones who murdered Sikhs in 1984 are walking around and enjoying political patronage and have not seen even a day in jail. So tell me wise one, who should I be more concerned about? The Muslims of 1947 or the Indians of 1984?

It is ironic that you want Sikhs to free Lahore when there are no more than a handful there and yet want the Sikhs of Amritsar to be under Indian rule when they number over 2 million! Let's also have a sense of honesty, just as the Muslims massacred and evicted the Sikhs from West Punjab, we also as a consequence massacred and evicted the Muslims out of East Punjab. A free West Punjab and a free Khalistan can be good neighbours. You speak of Sikhs not being allowed to grow in Pakistan but you do know that the Sikhs in Pakistan have been growing at a steady rate and there are hundreds of Sikh families living in Nankana Sahib when just 30 years ago there were less than a dozen Sikhs there. Pakistan is also amenable to the creation of a corridor for Sikhs to visit Kartarpur Sahib without visa formalities and it is the Indian rulers who have rejected this.

As I have stated before to me both Pakistan and India are artificial countries and their break up would be a good thing. So if you are looking for me to support Pakistan so that you can use the typical Indian tactic of calling any Sikh supporting Khalistan as a Pakistani agent then you are well off track.

Unfortunately it is in the nature of Indian colonial state that any minority that demands freedom will not only face the full force of the state and its genocidal polities but members of that minority in other states will also suffer for violence as a result. As I stated before the ideal solution for the current situation of two brutal nuclear powers having a stand off is for both to break up. Like the break up of the Soviet union which did not see mass violence then the break up of India and Pakistan can also be peaceful which state assemblies voting to break away from a powerless central government. Unfortunately at present as a Sikh outside of Punjab in India you are a hostage and your life and property is liable for destruction if the Sikhs of Punjab start again to demand freedom from the Indian colonial state. My advice to any Sikh in India outside of Punjab and the core Sikh areas like Northern Haryana, Ganganagar etc would be to hedge their bets and invest some of their money in Punjab or maybe even find freedom abroad.

In the end the Indian colonial state has as all brutal states do, been successful in creating a situation where the Sikhs of Punjab will have to live as colonial subjects of the Indian state with the state looting their natural resources or demand freedom and risk the massacre of Sikhs outside of Punjab.

Moderator Note: This topic has extended beyond its scope. It will be closed at 8pm MDT on 11/28/16. Everyone please post final thoughts by that time. Thanks.
gurmail
Active Forum User
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 3:43 am

Re: Why Khalistan is a BAD Idea..

Post by gurmail »

Khalistan is not possible until People of Punjab are provided with a real believable alternative. It has to be something that will bring a sustainable change in their life. It has to be clearly seen and not just words and slogans engineered to fill the space.
JasbeerSingh
Active Forum User
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2016 10:36 am

Re: Why Khalistan is a BAD Idea..

Post by JasbeerSingh »

You seem to have a fixation on Pakistan probably something that now is drilled into Indian Sikhs to make their fear the country more than they fear their own politicians who incidentally think nothing of carrying out a genocide of the Sikhs and yet the Indian Sikhs are fixated on what Pakistan did to them in 1947.
I don't have any fixation for Pakistan as a true Sikh I want peace to prevail in Pakistan as well on the lines of "Sarbat da bhala" but I am surprised to see your 'Selective hate’ against India. What my whole point was if Khalistan is to be demanded rightfully then it has to be demanded from both countries, you cannot select one country and attack it with full force while totally ignoring the other because the Punjab that kahlistanis put their claim on lies on both the sides. Hence it makes some logic my friend. And saying that there are no Sikhs in Pakistan hence they are excused of their crimes well this is like giving them a clean chit for the grievous crime they committed. Then why don’t you do it for India also, wait for few more years this will also be a thing of past and all perpetrators will die their natural death, no you cannot give such logics.. and if you believe in it then apply it on both the sides don’t just select one country.
I am well aware of what the Pakistanis did to us in 1947 but I am also aware that our lack of a strong leader led us to go from being the colonial subjects of the British to being the colonial subjects of the Indians. Those who murdered Sikhs in 1947 are long gone but the ones who murdered Sikhs in 1984 are walking around and enjoying political patronage and have not seen even a day in jail. So tell me wise one, who should I be more concerned about? The Muslims of 1947 or the Indians of 1984?
No one says that India is clean on it's dubious role in 1984 and the fact that perpetrators are still unpunished is really unfortunate reflects poorly on worn out judicial system, but that again prompts me to remind you that Gen Dyer and O'Dwyer the butchers of 1919 Jallianwalla bagh, still remains in the list of "Distinguished Officers who served the Queen" instead of plain terrorists, neither any British officer was penalized for mishandling the Partition of India indirectly resulting in millions of sikh lives, a community who were always at front to protect British interests be it in Afghanistan or in WW 1 & 2, yet I am sure no questions will be asked to the British Citizen Sikhs neither they will be poked for being subject to British colonialism and no one will ever prompt them to question their Government too.. All the attacks will be at India and everything, all sacrifices will be expected from India's Sikhs.. That is why it looks highly selfish and selective hate as I have said many times before

It is ironic that you want Sikhs to free Lahore when there are no more than a handful there and yet want the Sikhs of Amritsar to be under Indian rule when they number over 2 million! Let's also have a sense of honesty, just as the Muslims massacred and evicted the Sikhs from West Punjab, we also as a consequence massacred and evicted the Muslims out of East Punjab. A free West Punjab and a free Khalistan can be good neighbours. You speak of Sikhs not being allowed to grow in Pakistan but you do know that the Sikhs in Pakistan have been growing at a steady rate and there are hundreds of Sikh families living in Nankana Sahib when just 30 years ago there were less than a dozen Sikhs there. Pakistan is also amenable to the creation of a corridor for Sikhs to visit Kartarpur Sahib without visa formalities and it is the Indian rulers who have rejected this.
Sir, you have completely misunderstood my comment, i don't want Lahore to be free I respect any country's integrity. All my point was why DOUBLE STANDARDS? If Freedom is expected from India WHY NOT PAKISTAN, when it occupies 3/4th of Punjab and has a larger share of Punjab with them.. It was a counter actually and then raking in maharaja ranjit singh’s rule, quoting that example is a habit of khalistanis why do they forget that Lahore was his capital.. I agree that killings were on both the sides in 1947, but you fail to notice the difference in Indian Punjab the Muslims have grown to 5,00,000 as per the latest census in 2011.. while Sikhs in entire Pakistan still remain under 50k (that too if we take exaggerated nos.) they don't even form of 0.1% of Pak Punjab while Muslims now account for 2% of India's Punjab Population which had been reduced to 0.7% in 1947.. So the difference is so apparent.. Bottom line is Pakistan never allowed Sikhi to grow in their country, while it was not the case in India for Muslims especially if you see from Punjab’s context.

As I have stated before to me both Pakistan and India are artificial countries and their break up would be a good thing. So if you are looking for me to support Pakistan so that you can use the typical Indian tactic of calling any Sikh supporting Khalistan as a Pakistani agent then you are well off track.
There is no Indian tactic or Pakistani tactic.. Really it is something that cannot be said, even moderator took objection on such lines.. It's sad to see a Sikh advocating breaking up of nations forgetting the ideal “Sarbat da bhala” Breakup of nations will cause lot of turmoil, how can a Sikh even say that I seriously wonder.
Unfortunately it is in the nature of Indian colonial state that any minority that demands freedom will not only face the full force of the state and its genocidal polities but members of that minority in other states will also suffer for violence as a result. As I stated before the ideal solution for the current situation of two brutal nuclear powers having a stand off is for both to break up. Like the break up of the Soviet union which did not see mass violence then the break up of India and Pakistan can also be peaceful which state assemblies voting to break away from a powerless central government. Unfortunately at present as a Sikh outside of Punjab in India you are a hostage and your life and property is liable for destruction if the Sikhs of Punjab start again to demand freedom from the Indian colonial state. My advice to any Sikh in India outside of Punjab and the core Sikh areas like Northern Haryana, Ganganagar etc would be to hedge their bets and invest some of their money in Punjab or maybe even find freedom abroad.
Imagine if someone tells you tomorrow start planning to leave your place as you may be asked to leave in future. how will you feel? I am filled with feeling of disgust by just reading these lines, I mean how can you tell someone to pack up and start planning to leave what about the tremendous amount of hard work that those Sikhs have put to get themselves settled only to leave everything?? Is this the way a Khalistani thinks of his Sikh brothers this reflects poorly on your part really. Also like to point out that we all saw how difficult it was even for several countries of Europe to accommodate the refugees coming from Syria , can you just imagine what kind of humanitarian crises it may trigger? It will be so difficult to adjust the incoming of refugees from India for a newly formed nation. So easily you said that without realizing what it may mean for some family on whom this hell will break loose. Brother, you seriously don't understand the gravity of the situation that means
In the end the Indian colonial state has as all brutal states do, been successful in creating a situation where the Sikhs of Punjab will have to live as colonial subjects of the Indian state with the state looting their natural resources or demand freedom and risk the massacre of Sikhs outside of Punjab.
Same anti-India rhetoric get out of this hysteria my bro.. there is a famous saying for an intelligent person even a gesture is enough
User avatar
nanuckpunthee
Active Forum User
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2012 2:47 am

Re: Why Khalistan is a BAD Idea..

Post by nanuckpunthee »

In my FINAL SAY I particularly like to write about the propaganda that Sikh Leadership failed in 1947.

Firstly that the British were giving some Sikh State to our Sikh Leaders and they rejected it. If we look at teh demographics of pre-1947 Punjab, most of the Sikh population was located in the Sikh States particularly the Patiala State. So it was these Sikh Princely States on which the fate of most of the Sikhs were dependent.

In British Punjab it was just a Tarn Taran tehsil of Amritsar district where Sikhs were in majority. In all other tehsils or districts they have to stand with Hindus or Muslims (that means Congress or Muslim League) for absolute majority. So, Sikh Leaders can maximum could create a Sikh State in Tarn Taran and still 95% Sikhs of Punjab would be out of this State where they have to take a stand with Congress or Muslim League. That is why it was just a joke.

Now another proganda that Sikhs should have accepted the proposal of Jinnah. Actually Nehru and Jinnah both made the same promises of autonomous Sikh State in India or Pakistan. Sikh leaders trusted Congress as Muslim League workers were already killing and raping the Sikhs in North West Frontier Province, Congress was atleast not involved in Sikh killings till then. Though after struggle but Sikhs finally got a Sikh majority State in India. In Pakistan, as Jinnah died in 1948, I am wondering about the condition of Sikhs under One-Unit policy of Pakistan that they adopted in 1954 or further under the Sharia state of General Zia-ul-Haq. Then our same pseudo-intellectuals will be pointing the mistake of Sikh Leaders of not joining secular India.
Locked