Whatdoiknow

The state apparatus is going in overdrive to spread Sikhphobia. Godi media is publishing many baseless 'Khalistanti conspiring with Pakistan' articles...seems like a powder keg they are trying to build to incite communal violence. This will be a convenient tactic to create a false enemy and vilify them come election time. Same tactic Indira/Rajiv used in 1984. Sikh leadership needs to be more vigilant, and have a dedicated PR campaign to show the masses all conspiracies are baseless and fabrications. The 'nation within a nation status' and to get the promised rights, and to enact all elements of the Anandpur Sahib Resolution is not separatist. However if you look online at the amount of brainwashed and hate-filled bhakts who are spreading more lies supported by the media, the narrative can quickly change. There are also many bad actors dressing up as 'Sikhs' spreading nonsense and I fear they will engage in false flag attacks to escalate and defame Sikhs, to justify systemic targeting and killings again. How can Sikhs raise their voices, obtain their rights, without having to incur additional losses as shown in the past?

Wanted to share this great podcast: https://anchor.fm/the-sikh-renaissance It's based and presents true facts, history and issues affecting Sikhs. It's not sugar coated or concerned about being politically correct either. The Kaum needs more awareness and alignment to shows like this so it knows it's history, and is prepared to face the challenges it has directly. Here's a link to some of the episodes directly on Spotify:

Posting for some levity:

I subscribed to Redditt recently and came across some sub-reddits from India. This one in particular has a lot of hate and nonsense written in it: https://www.reddit.com/r/IndiaSpeaks/ It is deeply disturbing to see how many users there are in the forums which are spewing lies and fabrications about Sikhi (ex. Sikhs are snatani, Sikh Guru's worshipped Hindu gods and goddesses, british came up with 5 Kakkars, Sikhs are really Hindus etc.), about Punjabi history from 1947-onwards and how anyone speaking about any issue in Punjab (water-riparian rights, drug issue, language rights, nation within a nation status - or anything related to the Anandpur Sahib Resolution) is a 'Khalistani terrorist' without any consideration for factual historical events----rather they gaslight on false narratives like how Sikhs massacred thousands of Hindus in the 80s??? which never happened etc. There are so many people on these forums, that even when you try to set the facts straight with them with evidence, they swarm you like hyenas with more lies, insults and gaslighting... You try to report these users to the Reddit Moderators and nothing happens... It's clear the indian state apparatus is somehow making these groups untouchable for spreading disinformation, and hate and threats... It seems like they are taking their propaganda campaign global with how they are targeting Sikhs in the diaspora, and using their sleepers in Governments across the world to promote this anti-Sikh, false 'Khalistani' narrative... (ex. I wonder what can be done to effectively counter this? The state apparatus in india is an extremist organization spewing hate, and setting up conditions for something which seems like a Rwanda 2.0 (embed hatred for minorities to the point where it may tip over and result in severe communal violence). You can look at Jewish and Ismaili communities, who are a minority, however have insulated themselves from being targets to an extent (granted Jewish synagogues are regular targets for shootings and stabbings by extremists) There must be a method to how they do this. Any thoughts on what the most effective way would be to set the record straight and counter the disinformation being peddled? 1 billion+ people is a lot of people to wake up to the truth, and they seem to be happy in their hate filled echo chamber. (They are immigrating in mass all over the world, bringing this hatred with them - it will only be a matter of time before they overtake the Sikh diaspora in sheer numbers, and influence in local governments, and start to harm Sikhs by virtue of power and influence)

basti and jaloos, people are laughing at them, and they are none the wiser...'don't judge, it's a special day, we're having a good time, stop being such an extremist...' guess the masses are ok with it, so who is anyone to say anything otherwise

there's no originality, they take hit hip hop tracks, change them up slightly, not enough that you don't recognize what they are, and put some trash lyrics over it, no originality, pathetic message in music, it really is cringe

Was reflecting more on this - and it seems that there are so many minor things that as a collective minority could be done to bring awareness and understanding to Sikhi. Knowledge is power. Spreading that knowledge in a consistent way, keeps the script in check. One doesn't need to be visibly Sikh to be charged as an 'ambassador' for Sikhi, however if all the sehajdari Sikhs felt empowered to communicate and educate, or even passively correct misperceptions when they arise amongst the general public, we will have informal controls to set the narrative for Sikhi in the eyes of non-Sikhs. The sad thing is our own people are not aware themselves, and culturally are passive when it comes to bringing awareness to tenets of Sikhi. No one is saying go proselytize and claim supremacy like a lot of abrahamic faiths do - however why not claim the set and project that when appropriate and necessary? I found through personal experience, that people will fly the flag of punjabiyaat and the related vices which are associated with it (party people, strong and big physique etc.) as opposed to championing the amazing blessing by association punjabiyaat gets by way of Sikhi.

For example - in the spirit of equity/diversity/inclusion, companies are sending announcements and social media posts to include the celebration of Ramadan this year with Easter. However where is the mention of Vaisakhi? And if there is a mention of Vaisakhi, what you see is 'the harvest festival', the 'Sikh new year', and no mention of the birth of the Khalsa...? It starts at home though for sure, because there are a lot of 'Sikh' who don't know their own history, and can't articulate it to others as a result. A first easy step is to equip all 'Sikhs' or those who may not call themselves Sikh, however still attend Gurudwara, with the understanding of the significance of Sikh tenets, history and ideals. It wouldn't be hard to fold in a couple of sentences at any Gurudwara program. I usually see some people making speeches and announcements at some point with the larger congregation. Why not just put up a couple of slides (for the Gurudwara with projectors), or speak to it (in both Punjabi and English or whichever is the native language of the place you are in), and make it interactive and a quick fact. If this could be implemented on a broad basis, just imagine how informed and inspired many people in the congregation could be, and the parting message could be those people, please don't keep this knowledge to yourself. Share it and spread awareness where and when possible. (not to say everyone will be comfortable doing this) Some grass movement to claim and communicate could go a long way.

Caveat: this is a broad observation and being framed on an anecdotal basis I'm finding in North American western media, there does not appear to be very much mention of Sikhi among the world's largest religions whenever a discussion of religious relativity occurs (ex. comparative stats for religions, interfaith discussions etc.) I always see a reference to Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Judaism, Buddhism, however very little mention of Sikhi amongst the grouping of major world religions. I find it concerning as Sikhi is visibly distinct, there are many Sikh-related issues which can be addressed with greater awareness and understanding such as the constant wave of disproportional hate crimes targeted at Sikhs for their visibly different appearance. Sure there the mention of the occasional 'langar', however i don't think there's much time allocated to explain the context and history behind the practice of Sikhs providing 'langar' and how it connects to the broader ideals of Sikhi. This is not to say there have not been campaigns to educate and inform western media about Sikhs by many Sikh organizations doing great work. A great example is the recent PBS documentary about Guru Nanak Dev Ji - https://gurunanakfilm.com/ which was aired on local PBS stations across the US) It just makes me wonder though if the disregard is intentional or due to a lack of awareness of Sikhi or perhaps a conflation of Sikhi as some part of Snatan Dharma (which I imagine is viewed as what is called Hinduism')? There has been a sustained anti-Sikh campaign by many powers that be over history (with a live campaign in India and Pakistan to distort and downplay Sikh history in history textbooks for example), and historical evidence of attempts to dissolve Sikhi or assume it as part of a larger group (ex. Hinduism). So it wouldn't surprise me if the truth is a mix of ignorance and what many would call 'conspiracy'. This being said, in this age of equity/diversity/inclusion, there's a real opportunity to seize the openness and invitation to the table to present the Sikh identify, and bring greater awareness to it to counter any narrative which is misrepresenting it.

Call me skeptical, however this looks like another step in appropriation of Sikhi by Hinduvta and an attempt to water down the sovereignty of Sikhi and diminish the significance of Sikh history. They think this will buy them votes, because they believe Sikhs as a minority needs to subscribe to a slave mentality and be eternally grateful for whatever the central government does. If the government changes the name of the day and ensures the historical explanation to all Indians is aligned to the documented Sikhi history, then we will know this is being done in good faith.

very based perspective. thank you for calling it out for what it is. this is how you address the root causes because the hypocrisy behind holding the 'spiritual values', but not embodying them in action never ceases to amaze me

Division between state and faith is needed for a secular society to work, and for people's rights to be upheld. Racism of low expectations and politically correctness has made scrutiny or critical examination of unfair treatment by certain so-called 'protected groups' unpalatable - this 'us' and 'other' attitude for those in power is unacceptable. They are public servants, and need to serve the public at large - not their preferred tribe. (i get that this is very idealistic and won't ever exist 100%, however discriminatory attitudes can't be so overt and tolerated in the name of political correctness) People need to get more based, and realize their 'tribe' and 'allegiance' should be with the institutions and practices which secure their freedom and well-being... here's a great example of not addressing an issue head-on for fear of being 'racist' https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/islamophobia-uk-muslim-officers-extremist-views-ignored-met-police-a7237786.html?utm_source=reddit.com "Ms Saeed, who worked for Scotland Yard for 10 years, told The Sunday Times she had been demonised by some of her fellow Muslim officers for not wearing the veil and was told she was “better off at home looking after her husband”. The 35-year-old said she resigned in March from the force’s Muslim Contact Unit (MCU) after being fed up of the “political correctness” which allowed an “us and them” culture to develop among the 600 Muslim officers."

I am not sure if this has already been posted before, however I found this interesting article which has a interesting and pointed rendition of Sikh history. It has condensed and very much simplified history for brevity, nonetheless calls a spade a spade in many cases. It is written in the context of the incident with KS Brar in 2012. I thought I would share as I it refreshing to read something from the point of view of a non-Sikh that does not whitewash or perform apologetics for the hypocrisy and corruption of the times. It doesn't sugar coat things as I've seen in many other cases. https://www.nsfwcorp.com/dispatch/were-sikhs-of-london/ "...Sikhism is a pretty new religion, born in the Punjab around 1500 by warriors who were sick to death of damn near everything about their world, especially the insane cruelty of the Moghul invaders. The Moghuls were only the latest in a long line, an A-list cast, of slaughterers who marched through the Punjab. Alexander did it (and was seriously impressed with the Punjabis’ fighting ability), and the Aryans before him; even a subtribe of the Huns made it through the passes, slaughtering as they went. It’s a grim history, but the grimness reached kind of a peak, a real Tarantino climax, when the Moghuls came. “Imagine, if you will”—as they used to say on Twilight Zone—“Imagine, if you will, the perfect killing machine: A mixture of Mongol horsemanship and organization with Muslim zeal for killing unbelievers.” That was the Moghuls, and they hit the Punjab like the Plague on horseback. They were kin of Timur himself, the little man who turned Central Asia into the wasteland it’s been for the past few centuries, and they believed in maintaining the family business, which was destroying higher cultures, unbelievers, and any stray lizards too for that matter—basically anything that moved. You mix that Mongol thoroughness with Muslim enthusiasm for conversion by the sword and voila: Northern India, which had been one of the most densely populated, advanced regions in the world, was a bloody wasteland by the 16th century. Some of the peasant hordes converted and others chose death. The rest just sort of hung on, using the tools conquered peasants everywhere use: groveling, lies, and a high birthrate. Well, “Out of the mud grows the lotus,” as Jeff Wong used to say; and out of this landscape full of human weasels and lemmings came something truly wonderful: The Sikhs. They were born out of total disgust, and they rejected every <banned word filter activated> thing about their filthy, disgusting, cowardly, mean world, reinventing themselves as something new: people without caste, people who rejected both the ignorant cruelty of the Muslims and the weakness of the Hindus. Of the two groups, the Sikhs were closer to the Hindus; some Hindu families even sort of tithed their oldest sons to Sikhism, like hedging their bets; but the Sikhs very clearly said they were not Hindus, or Muslims either, which basically was saying: neither lemmings nor weasels. They decided they would be lions: Apex predators, fighters rather than throat-slitting murderers. This was a big, big move, because in a world where caste, clan and cult mean everything, names tell you instantly whether the dude with that name is someone whose toes you have to lick or somebody who has to lick yours. The Sikhs cut right through that <banned word filter activated> in their classic style: Every Sikh man took the name “Singh,” meaning “Lion,” and every Sikh woman was renamed “Kaur,” which means two things: “Princess” and “Lioness.” They were all equal; there were no castes. Every Sikh man carried a little knife, to remind him that he must fight—which was simply a fact, if you were from the Punjab. There’ve been so many massacres of Sikhs that they have to have names for them, so Sikhs will talk about “The Big Massacre” of 1762, when the Moghuls killed, oh, about 40% of the Sikh population, from the “Little Massacre” of 1746, when the Moghuls only managed to kill 30% of the Sikh population. The Sikhs were better fighters than the Moghuls, when the numbers and the guns were anything like equal, and by the time the Brits arrived, they’d carved out their own state in the Punjab. They fought the Brits twice, swords against cannon, and were slaughtered, then flattered, then coopted—the classic Imperial method of dealing with brave but dumb cannon fodder, as in “Our dear Highlanders,” cannon fodder in cute kilts. The Sikhs were left in the middle when the Raj ripped apart into Hindu and Muslim states in 1948. The two big religions each got a country, but as usual, the Sikhs got ripped off, and in their classic manner, decided to fight. That’s what led up to the storming of the Golden Temple in 1984. It was a story any Sikh kid could have told in his sleep: We stand up and fight; we are vastly outnumbered and outgunned; we kill as many of the enemy as we can and die fighting. But Sikhs are not in love with that one-sided martyrdom thing. That’s one of the many wonderful things about them; they hit back. There’s not a lot of hitting back in the history of this dirty world. Mostly, military history is massacres; mostly, the conquered tribe gets wiped out—nothing is more normal, more common, than genocide, whatever your hippie social studies teacher told you—but the Sikhs get knocked down and come up swinging. Their first counterpunch after Operation Bluestar came four months after the Temple was stormed. It was a wonderful, beautiful assassination, one of my favorites. There’s Indira Gandhi on her way to an interview, ridin’ high in the polls after showing the voters how she crushed those big scary Sikhs. She passes two of her bodyguards who, uh, happen to be Sikhs themselves; we’ll call them Singh #1 and Singh #2. See, Indira wanted to make a point about diversity or some such <banned word filter activated>, “See? I’ve even got Sikh bodyguards, which just proves there’s no hard feelings.” At this point—Indira majestically stomping over to do her interview—she sees these two big Sikhs, giant beards and turbans, sorta blocking the garden path. She says “Namaste” to them, like ya do, and is a little uneasy when these normally polite guys don’t “Namaste” her back. Kinda rude, and about to get a lot ruder, because Singh #1 (actual name Beant Singh) pulls out an automatic and shoots her five times in the gut. Singh #2 (real name Satwant Singh)—who wasn’t even supposed to be allowed close to the PM, but told his super he had diarrhea, which nobody in India would doubt for a second, and had to be close to a toilet, which somehow translated into being in the Green Zone—whipped out a sten gun and emptied the clip into her. Why’d they let him in with a loaded sten gun when he wasn’t even supposed to be there and had diarrhea? Let’s just say it was a sweating debriefing that afternoon for whoever was in charge of Indira’s security detail. At this point the non-Sikh bodyguards started to catch on—“Hey, that’s not diarrhea, that’s like murder!” and started blasting the two Singhs, sending the marigolds flying through the garden, very cinematic, and the fat Brit who was going to do the interview waddling for cover. Beant was killed, luckily for him, but Satwant survived, which if you know about Indian police interrogation methods, was very bad luck for him. Indira had been hit 30 times, which would have put Lazarus himself down for the count. The doctors looked at her and said, “Maybe in the next life.” Little reincarnation humor there—sorry. Anyway, the Sikhs took their revenge, which as far as I’m concerned is totally proper. In fact, the whole thing is a great story as far as I’m concerned. Indira was a tough, smart PM; she did her job. The Sikhs avenged their dead brothers; they did their job. Everybody comes off pretty well in this story, if you ask me—except maybe the Hindu mobs that avenged Indira by slaughtering about 5000 Sikh civilians, beating and burning them to death in the streets of the cities..."

don't have more context to this video, however the original post says the person's hair is 'shorn' - you can see it at 0:29... i think the insinuation is that this is all staged? does anyone have any more info on this?