Was Partap Singh Kairon a good leader? And why was he assassinated?

[puzzled]

Only came across this name yesterday, was he a good leader or was he like any other Indian politician? Was he good for Sikhs? And why was he assassinated? 

[S1ngh]

Badal's daughter is married in that family. They maybe was not as corrupt as badal tabar but they all are dirty politicians.

[puzzled]

4 hours ago, S1ngh said:

Badal's daughter is married in that family. They maybe was not as corrupt as badal tabar but they all are dirty politicians.

Yeah they all are connected. Was just wondering why he got assassinated, people either get assassinated because were bringing positive change or the complete opposite. 

Nepotism is the way in India, in politics, entertainment etc     in fact its the same world over. 

 

[californiasardar1]

You could easily google why he was killed.

 

Anyway, my father has argued to me that Kairon was overall good for Punjab and had a forward-looking vision of a "maha-Punjab" that was far better than what the Akalis wanted and ended up getting (a tiny, severely truncated Punjab that was thus very easy to marginalize).

[proactive]

Kairon was a tool used by Nehru to deny Punjabi Suba. He was the first for many 'sikh' Chief ministers of Punjab who were prepared to oppress their own people in order to please their masters in Delhi. He was able to convice Nehru that he could handle any agitation of the Akalis and this was enough for Nehru to ignore the Punjabi Suba demand. Had there been no Kairon, Punjabi Suba would have been formed a decade earlier. After the Govt conceded Punjab Suba with some Punjabi speaking areas left out due to the biased 1961 census being used to determine Punjabi and Hindi speaking areas there has beena  lot of revisionism about Kairon. People have now started to speak of him as some kind of visionary who if he had got his way the Punjab would have been much larger, Yes it would have been much larger but it would have been a state where Punjabi would not have had much of a status and it would have been a part of the Hindi belt. 

[proactive]

5 hours ago, puzzled said:

Yeah they all are connected. Was just wondering why he got assassinated, people either get assassinated because were bringing positive change or the complete opposite. 

Nepotism is the way in India, in politics, entertainment etc     in fact its the same world over. 

 

As if his family pedigree did not have enough traitors, Captain married his grandson to a daughter of the Dogras who destroyed the Sikh Raj. 

[S1ngh]

1 hour ago, proactive said:

Kairon was a tool used by Nehru to deny Punjabi Suba. He was the first for many 'sikh' Chief ministers of Punjab who were prepared to oppress their own people in order to please their masters in Delhi. He was able to convice Nehru that he could handle any agitation of the Akalis and this was enough for Nehru to ignore the Punjabi Suba demand. Had there been no Kairon, Punjabi Suba would have been formed a decade earlier. After the Govt conceded Punjab Suba with some Punjabi speaking areas left out due to the biased 1961 census being used to determine Punjabi and Hindi speaking areas there has beena  lot of revisionism about Kairon. People have now started to speak of him as some kind of visionary who if he had got his way the Punjab would have been much larger, Yes it would have been much larger but it would have been a state where Punjabi would not have had much of a status and it would have been a part of the Hindi belt. 

One of my distant relative was in charge of one district to take that survey of taking manual voting on the Language speaking (Punjabi suba) by going door to door. They had this hidden official rule which allows them to list the language that the person will communicate with pollster. For example; If the person say, my mother tongue is Hindi but if he communicates in punjabi then the peson taking poll must write punjabi rather than Hindi as his language. SADLY, They were told strictly not to follow this rule. However, my relative ignored and he did as per rule and proud to do that. However,  with such cruel hakumat, he was severely reprimanded by not giving him the promotions.

[puzzled]

14 hours ago, proactive said:

Kairon was a tool used by Nehru to deny Punjabi Suba. He was the first for many 'sikh' Chief ministers of Punjab who were prepared to oppress their own people in order to please their masters in Delhi. He was able to convice Nehru that he could handle any agitation of the Akalis and this was enough for Nehru to ignore the Punjabi Suba demand. Had there been no Kairon, Punjabi Suba would have been formed a decade earlier. After the Govt conceded Punjab Suba with some Punjabi speaking areas left out due to the biased 1961 census being used to determine Punjabi and Hindi speaking areas there has beena  lot of revisionism about Kairon. People have now started to speak of him as some kind of visionary who if he had got his way the Punjab would have been much larger, Yes it would have been much larger but it would have been a state where Punjabi would not have had much of a status and it would have been a part of the Hindi belt. 

Yeah most articles and videos seem to be praising him, but media opinion of a political figure normally is the complete opposite of what the Sikh opinion of the person is. 

[Jonny101]

I have heard that he had encouraged Sikhs to  strategically settle in large numbers in Haryana especially in areas near present day Punjab state back when Punjab and Haryana was one state. Maybe he knew that in future Haryana will be created so wanted maximum land area to come to Punjab in future but as we all know that didn't happen since a lot of Punjabi speaking areas went to Haryana.

[californiasardar1]

My father told me that the vast majority of government jobs in the enlarged Punjab (before it was divided into present-day Punjab, Haryana and HP) were held by people who were from what is present-day Punjab. In other words, people from what is present-day Punjab benefited disproportionately from the existence of the enlarged Punjab. Similarly, people from present-day Haryana benefited disproportionately from the division of Punjab.

 

It is worth considering whether the division of Punjab into present-day Punjab, Haryana and HP benefited or hurt Sikhs:

Were Sikhs better off as a majority in a smaller state with Punjabi as the official language?

Or would Sikhs have been better off as a large minority in a larger state? Would Sikhs have benefited from being the "king-makers" in all state elections (the way Hindus do in present-day Punjab) more than they benefit from being a divided majority in present-day Punjab? Would Sikhs have disproportionately benefited from being part of a larger state with more resources and more influence? Would Sikhs have gradually settled in larger numbers in what is now Haryana expanded the region where Sikhs have influence and power (similar to what happened with Sikh settlements in the "canal colonies" of West Punjab in the early 1900s)? Would it have been more difficult for the central government to isolate and "punish" Sikhs if they were part of a larger Hindu-majority state?