# Sikh Referendum 2020



## RD1 (May 7, 2017)

I wanted to start an open dialogue on the Sikh Referendum 2020. What are your thoughts on the referendum? Agree or disagree with it? Is it a necessary step? What are the pros and cons? 

For anyone who wants more information on it: Understanding The 2020 Sikh Referendum - SRS of Chicago


----------



## sukhsingh (May 8, 2017)

RD1 said:


> I wanted to start an open dialogue on the Sikh Referendum 2020. What are your thoughts on the referendum? Agree or disagree with it? Is it a necessary step? What are the pros and cons?
> 
> For anyone who wants more information on it: Understanding The 2020 Sikh Referendum - SRS of Chicago


I just read the page on the link. And clearly the supposed referendum is biased. It calls for panjab to be liberated. Why is this vote including non-indian nationals?


----------



## Jasdeep118 (May 8, 2017)

RD1 said:


> I wanted to start an open dialogue on the Sikh Referendum 2020. What are your thoughts on the referendum? Agree or disagree with it? Is it a necessary step? What are the pros and cons?
> 
> For anyone who wants more information on it: Understanding The 2020 Sikh Referendum - SRS of Chicago


That will never happen to be honest, half of Punjab is Hindu and other religious minorities. I am for sure there will be a lot of opposition, and there will be some Sikhs who will oppose it. Also, in Gurdwara Committees there are always disputes between them. If these people cannot handle Gurdwara Affairs then how will they take care of an independent country? If they want to make Khalistan they have to cater to the needs of our fellow religious minorities. Or this will never happen.


----------



## Harkiran Kaur (May 10, 2017)

Jasdeep118 said:


> That will never happen to be honest, half of Punjab is Hindu and other religious minorities. I am for sure there will be a lot of opposition, and there will be some Sikhs who will oppose it. Also, in Gurdwara Committees there are always disputes between them. If these people cannot handle Gurdwara Affairs then how will they take care of an independent country? If they want to make Khalistan they have to cater to the needs of our fellow religious minorities. Or this will never happen.



Not to mention which version of Sikhi will be followed? Taksalis? Nihungs? Deras? Etc? Which Rehet Maryada will be perpetuated? Right now a good many of those in supposed control see women having a lesser role in Sikhi. Will that become the rule in khalistan? That we are never able to take leadership roles and do all sevas?


----------



## sukhsingh (May 10, 2017)

I 


Jasdeep118 said:


> That will never happen to be honest, half of Punjab is Hindu and other religious minorities. I am for sure there will be a lot of opposition, and there will be some Sikhs who will oppose it. Also, in Gurdwara Committees there are always disputes between them. If these people cannot handle Gurdwara Affairs then how will they take care of an independent country? If they want to make Khalistan they have to cater to the needs of our fellow religious minorities. Or this will never happen.


I think sikhi does not promote the centralisation of power.. Rather it empowers the Sangat on a local level


----------



## Jasdeep118 (May 10, 2017)

Harkiran Kaur said:


> Not to mention which version of Sikhi will be followed? Taksalis? Nihungs? Deras? Etc? Which Rehet Maryada will be perpetuated? Right now a good many of those in supposed control see women having a lesser role in Sikhi. Will that become the rule in khalistan? That we are never able to take leadership roles and do all sevas?


I also agree with that as well too. It appears that we are streaming away from Sikhism every single day. What is the use of a Khalistan if we do not follow the words of the holy Guru Granth Sahib, we are supposed to treat everyone as equal. Yet, women are discriminated against, and casteism is still rampant in Punjab.


----------



## RD1 (May 13, 2017)

Jasdeep118 said:


> That will never happen to be honest, half of Punjab is Hindu and other religious minorities. I am for sure there will be a lot of opposition, and there will be some Sikhs who will oppose it. Also, in Gurdwara Committees there are always disputes between them. If these people cannot handle Gurdwara Affairs then how will they take care of an independent country? If they want to make Khalistan they have to cater to the needs of our fellow religious minorities. Or this will never happen.






Harkiran Kaur said:


> Not to mention which version of Sikhi will be followed? Taksalis? Nihungs? Deras? Etc? Which Rehet Maryada will be perpetuated? Right now a good many of those in supposed control see women having a lesser role in Sikhi. Will that become the rule in khalistan? That we are never able to take leadership roles and do all sevas?



Sikhism does ultimately promote secularism. So other minorities should be tolerated. 

All good perspectives. Another way to see it is that since being a part of India is certainly not helping Sikhism, perhaps doing something different, and having a separate state will encourage change. Of course it would not be instantaneous. There is a lot of work to be done. The fate of Punjabis and Sikhs in India since the British came and left has not been good. India does not even officially recognize Sikhism as an independent religion, but instead, a sect of Hinduism.

All this has led to a dis-empowerment of a people. There is discrimination against Sikhs, there is loss of autonomy and sovereignty, massive violence/injustice/genocide has been committed against the Sikhs by India, buildings and physical structures a part of Sikh history and heritage are being destroyed. What do we expect when a people have to deal with this violence, discrimination, physical and cultural genocide? Its no surprise that there is all this violence, poverty, and drug addiction in Punjab. Minorities do not have a voice. India does not care. The issue isn't just religious per se, but about liberating an oppressed people. And definitely, the path to becoming a truly free and just society will not be easy if Punjab was to separate. 

The issue is complex, I don't know what the people of Punjab want. But there really has been no justice for them.


----------



## RD1 (May 13, 2017)

sukhsingh said:


> I just read the page on the link. And clearly the supposed referendum is biased. It calls for panjab to be liberated. Why is this vote including non-indian nationals?



I really am not sure exactly how a referendum works, and what the UN laws regarding this are. I think its fine if non-Indians can promote the referendum to be done - people living in the western world have a greater voice than those living in other parts of the world. However, the decision to actually separate should be made by people actually living in Punjab.


----------



## sukhsingh (May 13, 2017)

RD1 said:


> I really am not sure exactly how a referendum works, and what the UN laws regarding this are. I think its fine if non-Indians can promote the referendum to be done - people living in the western world have a greater voice than those living in other parts of the world. However, the decision to actually separate should be made by people actually living in Punjab.


The whole thing is frankly ridiculous


----------



## Harkiran Kaur (May 14, 2017)

sukhsingh said:


> The whole thing is frankly ridiculous



In order for an independent country to succeed alone they need to have certain things in place like their own currency (or an agreement) which requires a minting, their own national banking system, their own fully functioning military, infrastructure of their own for their military (meaning planes, tanks, weaponry, uniforms,  training system, and most importantly soldiers / airforce personnel and navy ships etc if they are on a coastline). They need their own energy act and means to produce power, a constitution, functioning system of government which can never be a theocracy), enough funds to function in world stage and give their part to UN etc. 

A state can't just vote to leave a country and then take all of the resources that it has from that country with them. In Canada we had a referendum (questionable whether it was even legal) in Quebec. The people in Quebec thought they would automatically get to keep all the Canadian Forces military bases and infrastructure, etc. But they would not. They also thought they'd et all the land that currently comprises Quebec. Also wrong. As a good portion belongs to the aboriginals and that area is all the area which contains the natural resources like forestry etc. So the French would have had one small area surrounding Quebec City and Montreal in the end, and Canadian forces etc would have been removed from there. France expressed no wishes to take on This new Quebec if it had come to that. Point being, they would not have survived as a country as they had no means to. 

Something to think about. Maybe fighting for more rights for identity while still belonging to India would be better than trying to form a whole new country that another nation (likely pak) could just come steal by force since there would be no real protection anymore. Lesser of two evils.


----------



## sukhsingh (May 14, 2017)

A referendum is only to a electorate.. How can people who don't even live in the panjab possibly think they even have right to influence.. Any poll would be just that a reflection of the opinions of a group of people on what should happen to the state of panjab.. A state level referendum would be include only and all the panjab electorate.. And since there is very little ground level support for independence in panjab is doomed to failure.. Which is why the organizers of this poll think easy let's just throw the net wider and do a poll of a constituency of like minded activists many of whom. 

It would be funny if the people behind these weren't so earnest and deluded..


----------



## Harre (Aug 15, 2018)

Discrimination has been targeted at sikhs on a community and individual basis, and institutionally against punjab as a whole eg. Water policies, which doesn't  target one community, all punjabis Sikh and non sikh suffer. 

If the self determination of punjab is based on religion won't that alienate people who may have voted on the basis of the right for punjabis, and not just sikhs, to self determine?


----------

