Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Sports is a media platform. Disenfranchised people need every form of media exposeure they can't afford. It'd be better if we addressed the concerns so the players could feel Righteous standing again. 

Until the rights of water, land, food, dignity and freedom are restored to all we should all be kneeling. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 34
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Seeing as sport has such a large audience, it's probably the perfect platform to make political statements. Like Jesse Owens winning the Olympics in front of Hitler and the world.  I know footbal

They are all in it together. That's how they make it a culture, hence 'systemic'. The football fan types just articulate what the more clever, devious types up top believe and promote on the sly. The

4 hours ago, Premi5 said:

I think the fans booing are mostly ordinary people (not rich business types) who just want to enjoy their hobbies rather than having politics forced upon them. 

Instead of 'taking a knee' it would send stronger message if these 'celebs' boycotted their own industries/striked 

 - How do you mean please give an example ?

Knee taking is the only form of protest not to cost lives, only careers. Forcing people to stand is forcing politics. Let them kneel then play ball. 

The cost of civil disobedience is the history of Sikhi itself. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Premi5 said:

I am not someone's "pet" just because I have my own independent thoughts which differ from yours.

 

I don't think you have any independent thoughts. You just seem to parrot what a racist white boy would want you to say, to the point of even adopting their lexicon to frame your 'arguments', like you are one of their chumchay spokesmen. I mean this seriously, not trying to offend you. What you're doing is like what Priti Patel does, but on a lower level. 

Quote

Do you think these people 'taking the knee' would return the gesture in favour of brown people ? 

I don't get what you are saying here? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

I don't think you have any independent thoughts. You just seem to parrot what a racist white boy would want you to say, to the point of even adopting their lexicon to frame your 'arguments', like you are one of their chumchay spokesmen. I mean this seriously, not trying to offend you. What you're doing is like what Priti Patel does, but on a lower level. 

I don't get what you are saying here? 

Your first paragraph, fair enough

Second para - what I mean is, do you think black people in the UK feel solidarity with south Asians and other immigrants ?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Premi5 said:

Your first paragraph, fair enough

Second para - what I mean is, do you think black people in the UK feel solidarity with south Asians and other immigrants ?

What did Rihanna catch a Fir for again?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Premi5 said:

Your first paragraph, fair enough

Second para - what I mean is, do you think black people in the UK feel solidarity with south Asians and other immigrants ?

I know a good cross section of society. Including many black people. I know that they have been at the forefront of confronting racism here, something you're probably not old enough to remember, even less so given you've grown up with majority whites. 

Black attitudes differ: on one end some feel contempt, that many 'asians' don't fight against it like they do, and suffer for. Some of them (understandably from my perspective) resent the perceived placid brown folks for this. Some feel they make the sacrifices to confront it, whilst quiet, docile brown folk reap the rewards for their silence and are indirectly complicit.  

On the other end, I know plenty of black people, male and female, who abhor racism in general, and seeing it (even if against a brown person) hurts them. I know plenty who would step in against it too, or at least offer moral support, and not turn a blind eye and underplay it like the vast majority of whites do. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GurjantGnostic said:

What did Rihanna catch a Fir for again?

True

 

1 hour ago, dallysingh101 said:

I know a good cross section of society. Including many black people. I know that they have been at the forefront of confronting racism here, something you're probably not old enough to remember, even less so given you've grown up with majority whites. 

Black attitudes differ: on one end some feel contempt, that many 'asians' don't fight against it like they do, and suffer for. Some of them (understandably from my perspective) resent the perceived placid brown folks for this. Some feel they make the sacrifices to confront it, whilst quiet, docile brown folk reap the rewards for their silence and indirect complicity.  

On the other end, I know plenty of black people, male and female, who abhor racism in general, and seeing it (even if against a brown person) hurts them. I know plenty who would step in against it too, or at least offer moral support, and not turn a blind eye and underplay it like the vast majority of whites do. 

You could be right

If so, why do you think Black people (would have been mostly Black Caribbean in 50s-80s more so than Black Africans) fought more against racism, than say, the first Punjabis (Punjabis known for being typically bigger and stronger than other Indians or South Asians e.g. Gujaratis, Bengalis) ? 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Premi5 said:

True

 

You could be right

If so, why do you think Black people (would have been mostly Black Caribbean in 50s-80s more so than Black Africans) fought more against racism, than say, the first Punjabis (Punjabis known for being typically bigger and stronger than other Indians or South Asians e.g. Gujaratis, Bengalis) ? 

 

One reason I think those Caribbean blacks fought harder was because the experiences of slavery was still in their collective consciousness, and frankly they have had a lot of brutal experiences with whites that (understandably) made them suspicious of them. Remember, the Caribbean people interacted with whites for a lot longer than Panjabis, (by many centuries). Also, I believe that racist attitudes and propaganda that characterised blacks as slow witted and dumb, made whites put their guard down a bit around them, and as a consequence, blacks got to be privy to all sorts of things that they managed to hide from 'Indians', especially Sikhs. So all the rapes, pedophilia, massacres, torture, murder and violence (inflicted on males and females) were known about by these people (including some vague understanding about the existence of 'secret societies'), whilst the whites hid that from us really well, portraying themselves as paragons of virtue, which many apnay gullibly swallowed, not knowing the full truth behind the façade. 

I think the legacy and brutality of slavery toughened them up, and that they knew full well what was at stake from their people's longstanding history with europeans.  The early attitude of whites to nonwhite immigrants really reflected what you'd expect to find on a plantation, with physical and verbal attacks predicated on a sense of innate superiority. Blacks had been fighting this for a long while (and still are), and knew what they were facing from the get go. 

Many Panjabis on the other hand, didn't fight for their freedom and accepted subjugation under the british. This isn't true for everyone though, and those that did, independent-minded, freedom loving people like Bhai Maharaj Singh ji, Sohan Singh Bhakna, Kartar Singh Sarabha, Udham Singh and many others, are heroes to people like myself. But it must be said that hordes of apnay (despite being armed) toed the line in their own homeland and curiously fought many battles for the very people who had subjugated them. This tells us a lot about prevalent mentalities (often described as 'docile' by goray). 

I think those early immigrant blacks prioritised their personal liberty, safety and freedom, knowing full well what evils could be perpetrated upon them based on their own ongoing and recent history. They strongly objected to, and resisted, the treatment meted out to them. Most Panjabis (well apnay more than sullay) prioritised economic considerations and (I believe) still retained that servile, colonial mentality pushed on them post-annexation - but it must be said: some Panjabis, (more so 2nd generation) did fight goray here (despite being outnumbered), and fiercely too, and in many of these conflicts goray came off the worse, which made them think twice about attacking again. 

I think also many apnay were in shock too, they probably never expected all the racism and attacks (physical, psychological and verbal) and state collusion in this (especially by the police and tories), because colonial brainwashing meant many thought the sun shone out of goray's bhunds.    

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

 

One reason I think those Caribbean blacks fought harder was because the experiences of slavery was still in their collective consciousness, and frankly they have had a lot of brutal experiences with whites that (understandably) made them suspicious of them. Remember, the Caribbean people interacted with whites for a lot longer than Panjabis, (by many centuries). Also, I believe that racist attitudes and propaganda that characterised blacks as slow witted and dumb, made whites put their guard down a bit around them, and as a consequence, blacks got to be privy to all sorts of things that they managed to hide from 'Indians', especially Sikhs. So all the rapes, pedophilia, massacres, torture, murder and violence (inflicted on males and females) were known about by these people (including some vague understanding about the existence of 'secret societies'), whilst the whites hid that from us really well, portraying themselves as paragons of virtue, which many apnay gullibly swallowed, not knowing the full truth behind the façade. 

I think the legacy and brutality of slavery toughened them up, and that they knew full well what was at stake from their people's longstanding history with europeans.  The early attitude of whites to nonwhite immigrants really reflected what you'd expect to find on a plantation, with physical and verbal attacks predicated on a sense of innate superiority. Blacks had been fighting this for a long while (and still are), and knew what they were facing from the get go. 

Many Panjabis on the other hand, didn't fight for their freedom and accepted subjugation under the british. This isn't true for everyone though, and those that did, independent-minded, freedom loving people like Bhai Maharaj Singh ji, Sohan Singh Bhakna, Kartar Singh Sarabha, Udham Singh and many others, are heroes to people like myself. But it must be said that hordes of apnay (despite being armed) toed the line in their own homeland and curiously fought many battles for the very people who had subjugated them. This tells us a lot about prevalent mentalities (often described as 'docile' by goray). 

I think those early immigrant blacks prioritised their personal liberty, safety and freedom, knowing full well what evils could be perpetrated upon them based on their own ongoing and recent history. They strongly objected to, and resisted, the treatment meted out to them. Most Panjabis (well apnay more than sullay) prioritised economic considerations and (I believe) still retained that servile, colonial mentality pushed on them post-annexation - but it must be said: some Panjabis, (more so 2nd generation) did fight goray here (despite being outnumbered), and fiercely too, and in many of these conflicts goray came off the worse, which made them think twice about attacking again. 

I think also many apnay were in shock too, they probably never expected all the racism and attacks (physical, psychological and verbal) and state collusion in this (especially by the police and tories), because colonial brainwashing meant many thought the sun shone out of goray's bhunds.    

Afro Carribeans not only threw off their opressors, they took over. So their emotional legacy is different than those in america. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

 

One reason I think those Caribbean blacks fought harder was because the experiences of slavery was still in their collective consciousness, and frankly they have had a lot of brutal experiences with whites that (understandably) made them suspicious of them. Remember, the Caribbean people interacted with whites for a lot longer than Panjabis, (by many centuries). Also, I believe that racist attitudes and propaganda that characterised blacks as slow witted and dumb, made whites put their guard down a bit around them, and as a consequence, blacks got to be privy to all sorts of things that they managed to hide from 'Indians', especially Sikhs. So all the rapes, pedophilia, massacres, torture, murder and violence (inflicted on males and females) were known about by these people (including some vague understanding about the existence of 'secret societies'), whilst the whites hid that from us really well, portraying themselves as paragons of virtue, which many apnay gullibly swallowed, not knowing the full truth behind the façade. 

I think the legacy and brutality of slavery toughened them up, and that they knew full well what was at stake from their people's longstanding history with europeans.  The early attitude of whites to nonwhite immigrants really reflected what you'd expect to find on a plantation, with physical and verbal attacks predicated on a sense of innate superiority. Blacks had been fighting this for a long while (and still are), and knew what they were facing from the get go. 

Many Panjabis on the other hand, didn't fight for their freedom and accepted subjugation under the british. This isn't true for everyone though, and those that did, independent-minded, freedom loving people like Bhai Maharaj Singh ji, Sohan Singh Bhakna, Kartar Singh Sarabha, Udham Singh and many others, are heroes to people like myself. But it must be said that hordes of apnay (despite being armed) toed the line in their own homeland and curiously fought many battles for the very people who had subjugated them. This tells us a lot about prevalent mentalities (often described as 'docile' by goray). 

I think those early immigrant blacks prioritised their personal liberty, safety and freedom, knowing full well what evils could be perpetrated upon them based on their own ongoing and recent history. They strongly objected to, and resisted, the treatment meted out to them. Most Panjabis (well apnay more than sullay) prioritised economic considerations and (I believe) still retained that servile, colonial mentality pushed on them post-annexation - but it must be said: some Panjabis, (more so 2nd generation) did fight goray here (despite being outnumbered), and fiercely too, and in many of these conflicts goray came off the worse, which made them think twice about attacking again. 

I think also many apnay were in shock too, they probably never expected all the racism and attacks (physical, psychological and verbal) and state collusion in this (especially by the police and tories), because colonial brainwashing meant many thought the sun shone out of goray's bhunds.    

I think you make a lot of good points, was very interesting to read this post. 

I wonder how much language barrier also was a factor for Punjabi immigrants compared with the Caribbean immigrants ?

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Premi5 said:

I wonder how much language barrier also was a factor for Punjabi immigrants compared with the Caribbean immigrants ?

Even with the Panjabis that could speak english, the working class indigenous thought their accents were 'bud-bud-ding-ding' hilarious. Like this:

They'd be falling over themselves laughing whilst copying the accent. Still happens but not as openly. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

Even with the Panjabis that could speak english, the working class indigenous thought their accents were 'bud-bud-ding-ding' hilarious. Like this:

They'd be falling over themselves laughing whilst copying the accent. Still happens but not as openly. 

Sort of a tangent, but only the bretonic Welsh are indigenous there. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, dallysingh101 said:

Even with the Panjabis that could speak english, the working class indigenous thought their accents were 'bud-bud-ding-ding' hilarious. Like this:

They'd be falling over themselves laughing whilst copying the accent. Still happens but not as openly. 

Not just the working classes

all population

Wiki says Peter Sellers had a private education  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Not just North Punjabi/Mirpuri Pakistani types in the UK, presumably the below article refers mainly to white males   Samaritans volunteers met vulnerable callers for sex https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58057031 By Jennifer Meierhans BBC News Published 50 minutes ago Share IMAGE SOURCEGETTY IMAGES Samaritans says it has introduced new safeguarding measures after volunteers met vulnerable callers for sex. The charity, which offers a helpline to people in distress, will reportedly monitor calls in future to prevent inappropriate relationships. The Telegraph found incidents of middle-aged men using their position to meet up with female callers for sex. The charity told the BBC it did not dispute that a "very small number of safeguarding incidents" had occurred. Samaritans chief executive Julie Bentley said the "extremely rare" incidents had been identified and that swift and appropriate action had been taken. According to the Telegraph, a memo to volunteers said 44 serious incidents had occurred since 2017. Ms Bentley said Samaritans' 20,000 volunteers provided vital emotional support to anyone who is struggling, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Volunteers on the charity's telephone service have answered more than 13 million calls in the four years from January 2017, she said. 'Robust investigation' "Running any national service on this scale means that, on extremely rare occasions, high standards are not always met and from the millions of calls answered, a very small number of safeguarding incidents were identified," said Ms Bentley. "Our robust investigation procedures meant these incidents were handled swiftly and appropriate action taken. "Any safeguarding matter is one too many and as such we review our practices on an ongoing basis and have introduced further measures as part of our commitment to delivering a consistently high-quality experience for our callers." Incidents are investigated by the charity's Serious Safeguarding Panel and are reported to the Charity Commission, Samaritans said.
    • I think this type of attitude helps keep Panjab economically backwards.  
    • This history seems true. It's not a new discovery, and this Zorowar Singh palit has a history and legacy in Bassi Pathaan that people there still acknowledge.  Info has been out about Zorowar Singh Palit since the late 60s at least, when Ganda Singh put out Sri Gursobha. That people here haven't heard of him here says more about their own piss poor study of history than anything else.  Plus this figure being from a tarkhan background would have motivated the usual jut casteists to jealously try and bury his memory, so that probably played a big part in his occlusion and hence so much ignorance about him. I'm not too familiar with Uhdoke, what makes you say the above about him?    
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use