Do You Agree With This Statement

[fordcapri]

Multiculturalism only works if you exlude Muslims from it.

[Matheen]

No. There were Muslims in Guru Sahib's sangat and some of the writings in Guru Granth Sahib Ji are by Muslims. Do you think we should remove them?

Look, not all Muslims are bad. Just today an apna was revealed to be part of the UK's biggest ever heroin capture - are all of us heroin dealers? All communities have their bad apples.

I do agree that multi-culturalism can't work with certain types of Muslims though.

[dalsingh101]

Do you agree with this statement?

Fordcapri is absolutely terrified of Muslims and is a white man's ass licker as a result. He needs to go to the gym and train in martial arts instead of idolising white supremacist/neo-nazi groups as potential saviours from sulleh. A better alternative would be for him to quietly join the British army and go to Pak/Afghan and actually fight the sulleh he hates so much. But he probably doesn't have the tuttay to do this.

What d'you think?

[dalsingh101]

Just today an apna was revealed to be part of the UK's biggest ever heroin capture - are all of us heroin dealers? All communities have their bad apples.

Was this the shipment from South Africa? I didn't know an apna was involved. Are you sure?

[kdsingh80]

To be honest I partially agree with the statement.

When there is multiculturalism then muslim kids will expose to many things which muslim society in General not like it.Like some of muslim may become athiests,may start worshipping idols.Their girls could

start dating and marrying non muslim boys.To be honest how many muslims are ok with the fact that there daughter marry a non muslim boy LIke a Hindu or sikh?

If I am not wrong countries like malayasia who project them as Liberal muslim countries have outlawed muslim women marrying non muslims.This shows that how much

tolerance liberal muslim societies have

[Matheen]

Dal Singh, no, someone drove across from France with it stored in boxes in his car. The apna was under surveillance and was caught during the switch over at the M20 services.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6959079.ece

Edited December 16, 2009 by Matheen

[dalsingh101]

To be honest I partially agree with the statement.

When there is multiculturalism then muslim kids will expose to many things which muslim society in General not like it.Like some of muslim may become athiests,may start worshipping idols.Their girls could

start dating and marrying non muslim boys.To be honest how many muslims are ok with the fact that there daughter marry a non muslim boy LIke a Hindu or sikh?

If I am not wrong countries like malayasia who project them as Liberal muslim countries have outlawed muslim women marrying non muslims.This shows that how much

tolerance liberal muslim societies have

I think that is them being quite clever and ensuring their society doesn't get absorbed into another. In anycase, a typical Panjabi father would not usually like his daughter to marry a gora. So I don't get your point? People should be able to form strong communities of their own in the diaspora. The only thing pi55ing people off is that sullay seem to be more successful at doing this than any other group.

The truth is, in Britain, the long term aim is to absorb all the communities within the natives over time. The only people who aren't falling for this in droves are sullay. We could possibly learn important lessons from that?

[Mekhane'ch Jannat]

The statement is a paradox - when the word multiculturism is taken in its meaning of all inclusiveness. But I get what he is trying to say and it is true. Muslims in order to protect their culture and traditions from the eroding impact of western society have retreated into themselves. But i am afraid if you close your eyes the world does not go away. The loss of traditional values and religious culture have to be acknowledged and something new must be created by us all. Muslims are aboard a sinking ship, and so are Sikhs who take an obsessional stance in preserving and retreating into tradition. The white man has changed the world and changed all of us. He has laid down a challenge, and by flinging ourselves backwards into the shelter of a tradition that is no longer nourished by a living source we cut ourselves off from all help. Muslims are afraid of evolving afraid of change and afraid of the new, they are like our pendoo's who stick with tried and trusted methods. But I am afraid that the tried and trusted methods have been knocked on the head by Mr Smith and they don't work anymore.

[HSD1]

The statement is a paradox - when the word multiculturism is taken in its meaning of all inclusiveness. But I get what he is trying to say and it is true. Muslims in order to protect their culture and traditions from the eroding impact of western society have retreated into themselves. But i am afraid if you close your eyes the world does not go away. The loss of traditional values and religious culture have to be acknowledged and something new must be created by us all. Muslims are aboard a sinking ship, and so are Sikhs who take an obsessional stance in preserving and retreating into tradition. The white man has changed the world and changed all of us. He has laid down a challenge, and by flinging ourselves backwards into the shelter of a tradition that is no longer nourished by a living source we cut ourselves off from all help. Muslims are afraid of evolving afraid of change and afraid of the new, they are like our pendoo's who stick with tried and trusted methods. But I am afraid that the tried and trusted methods have been knocked on the head by Mr Smith and they don't work anymore.

A brilliant and spot on point. I am surprised.

[dalsingh101]

He has laid down a challenge, and by flinging ourselves backwards into the shelter of a tradition that is no longer nourished by a living source we cut ourselves off from all help.

Vhut ju mean by living source?

[kdsingh80]

I think that is them being quite clever and ensuring their society doesn't get absorbed into another. In anycase, a typical Panjabi father would not usually like his daughter to marry a gora. So I don't get your point? People should be able to form strong communities of their own in the diaspora. The only thing pi55ing people off is that sullay seem to be more successful at doing this than any other group.

The truth is, in Britain, the long term aim is to absorb all the communities within the natives over time. The only people who aren't falling for this in droves are sullay. We could possibly learn important lessons from that?

Its true a punjabi father may not like it but still a lot of sikh Girls are marrying outside religion and their parents do accept it if they are not very hardcore jatts or Strict sikhs.But with muslims we all know how extreme they could go if their Girls marry outside religion.In India it is one of the main reason they don't allow their daughters to educate at higher level.Also in case of muslim their men freely marry non muslim women and raise Muslim kids so there is only one way traffic while in other religions we can say that both men and women marry outside faith.The exceptions are only muslims

What you said about Britain is also true for India and except Muslim and christians we may not see other religions especially sikhs.Punjabified hinduised sikhs who will go to Gurdwara's ,Dera's and mandirs is the future of sikh community in India if we look at broader level.

[dalsingh101]

Also in case of muslim their men freely marry non muslim women and raise Muslim kids so there is only one way traffic while in other religions we can say that both men and women marry outside faith.The exceptions are only muslims

That makes them clever in my eyes. No wonder they are growing so fast. Hmmmm.....they seem cleverer than us.

Edited December 16, 2009 by dalsingh101

[kdsingh80]

That makes them clever in my eyes. No wonder they are growing so fast. Hmmmm.....they seem cleverer than us.

They have more faith in sharia and traditional values

We have more faith in western liberal seculer values.

Traditional values were made so a Religion ,or culture

could survive through generations .In Liberal values

a religion or culture could be wiped out in 2-3 generations.Parsis are biggest example of this.Population at start of century 1.2 lac now only 70,000 while the population of other religions grew 4 times their actually declined.The reason is simple assimilation in other faiths mainly Hinduism and Islam

[kdsingh80]

Also In Multicultural society ,if communities want to

maintain healthy relationship then It is a must that all communities main similar birth rate.Again on this point muslim don't agree.There Birth rate is always quite compare to other religions.So anyone can see that political balance start shifting towards them which other communities never like

[Mithar]

I think that secularism is possible even with Muslims. But it is not possible if Muslims are the majority. Sirdar Kapur Singh Jee in Sachi Sakhi has written about this more in detail to explain why it is not possible for a multicultural or mulireligious society to exist in equality in a Muslim ruled state.

[kdsingh80]

I think that secularism is possible even with Muslims. But it is not possible if Muslims are the majority. Sirdar Kapur Singh Jee in Sachi Sakhi has written about this more in detail to explain why it is not possible for a multicultural or mulireligious society to exist in equality in a Muslim ruled state.

When secularism is not possible when they are in majority then it is not possible at all.How could one community shout about minority rights when they are in minority but when they reach majority,they say that

they don't beleive in secularism.Also as I said above

birth rate of muslims is quite high so other religions will always feel threatened with them and their communal feelings will arise

[dalsingh101]

They have more faith in sharia and traditional values

We have more faith in western liberal seculer values.

Traditional values were made so a Religion ,or culture

could survive through generations .In Liberal values

a religion or culture could be wiped out in 2-3 generations.Parsis are biggest example of this.Population at start of century 1.2 lac now only 70,000 while the population of other religions grew 4 times their actually declined.The reason is simple assimilation in other faiths mainly Hinduism and Islam

So basically you are saying two possibilities exist. Most of us (who haven't buried their heads in the sand), have a good idea of how the more kuttarh musalmaan would like to deal with us if they ever were in power. I live in a predominantly sullah area, I don't doubt that some would like to finish what their forefathers tried to do. If there is a dimwitted apni kuri wondering around, consider her fair game. Our history gives us a glimpse of what we can possibly expect if they ever were ever unchecked. But be under no allusion. others such as Jews, Shias etc. would also get it. The snidy label for us these days is 'Guru wallay' btw. The other so called 'liberal' alternative seems to involve a slower death over generations. If you live in London you can see 'Sikhs' in the advance stages of assimilation already. They have absolutely no physical or emotional connection to their language, culture or religion. This is how white man want it.

The strange thing is Sikhs seemed to have a better record of surviving and fighting the direct brutal type assaults (see 1700s), than the more surreptitious type of attack. For me this boils down to us being pretty unsophisticated in terms of grasping and thwarting insidious plans for us. We always seem to end up in the middle of bloodthirsty mobs before we realise there is a serious issue. This doesn't seem to be changing/

I think it is plain stupidity that makes some of you people seem to expect sulley to mold themselves to democracy and liberal values when they have a complete system that they should be following, which has clearly defined its boundaries visa vi the west. You must understand that the kuttarh sees surrender to western values as a betrayal to God. Besides, it is arse licky in the sense of independence, even if you take faith out of it. I have had goray blatantly telling me that they respect those pathaans for their stout resistence whilst at the same time laughing at Singhs for being their trained attack dogs for so long. In terms of masculinity, we are considered less than those who stoutly resist. Jannat said sullay are on a sinking ship, but I don't think we can be so complacent. If we are honest, they are dealing with the white man quite well. They have formed strong safe pockets in whiteys land. They have become a factor to be considered when making military and political decisions, mainly through the suicide bombing.

These people (sullay) aren't going anywhere, and I think they will get stronger and more emboldened soon because the west seems to be losing its war on sullay.....or terrorism...or whatever they are calling it these days. Plus the current economic conditions makes fighting the war even more riskier than it already is. Who knows, these current battles could be the ones that break the white man's back because of the economic downturn?

In the end, we have to learn to live with sullay. Like all aggressive quoms/panths they usually rely on weakness on the part of their perceived enemies to take them on. Anglos are the same. However, informing Sikhs of how they turned themselves into a strong force that deterred targeting from sullay during the 1700s seems like howling at the moon today. But this fear of sullay that is exhibited by the FordCapris of the world will only cause us more grief. Trust me, sulleh sense that shit like a shark does wounded prey. We need brave independent Singhs now. Not cowards or sycophants. Sullay make us up our game. You have to respect that.

[Mekhane'ch Jannat]

Dalsingh, what you say is the external side of the situation and I broadly agree with what you say. But there is also the living source of tradition, I mentioned before, that comes into all you have said. If there is no inclination to orientate ourselves to the living tradition (which may involve some sacrifice of rituals and regulation) than we only pursue a purely secular goal - which is what the west has been doing for the past few hundred years. This is what I mean when I say that by protecting Sikhi as merely a sociological phenomenon it will become assimilated into the western secular state and lose any link with the living tradition. An excessive focus on protecting external values and forms, takes away the power from the influences that shape the external values. E.g. a beard is a sign of manliness and sagacity, but if these qualities are not inherent in a man with a beard then the beard becomes robbed of the power it is meant to represent. This is why muslims are on a sinking ship, externally they may be doing well, but the gap between the reality/living source of their religion and their outer actions is becoming wider. And Dalsingh, you are measuring 'success' of muslims as what western society has defined as successful and therefore IS successful, how can you fight something when you are so pervaded by its notions. We as Sikhs instead of focusing on making people wear Paghs and keep beards (although important) should focus on keeping alive the virtues that these symbols represent. This reality that vivifies the symbols of religion is what should be fought for in balance with keeping a niche and respected place in society, but I see an overbalance in protecting identity and preserving a niche in a society. In a society at that, which promotes illusion and falseness. Someone amusingly described britain as a de-meritocracy - a state that rewards stupidity ignorance and falseness over truth justice and virtue. To regain new life we must visit the waters of life and take off our old clothes, and bathe and become purified and renewed ready for another age, there are many myths and legends that say the waters of life are hidden in the deep pits of darkness, Yeh noor-e-zulmat ke tafsir hai....

[fordcapri]

Do you agree with this statement?

Fordcapri is absolutely terrified of Muslims and is a white man's ass licker as a result. He needs to go to the gym and train in martial arts instead of idolising white supremacist/neo-nazi groups as potential saviours from sulleh. A better alternative would be for him to quietly join the British army and go to Pak/Afghan and actually fight the sulleh he hates so much. But he probably doesn't have the tuttay to do this.

What d'you think?

First of all I didnt come up with statement I read it somewhere and just wondered what people thought of it.

Secondly you're forming personal opinions of me when you dont know me, I do go gym and trained in martial arts for a few years.

Edited December 17, 2009 by fordcapri

[dalsingh101]

First of all I didn’t come up with statement I read it somewhere and just wondered what people thought of it.

Secondly you're forming personal opinions of me when you dont know me, I do go gym and trained in martial arts for a few years.

Why do you buzz around BNP arse then? Why do you get 'starry eyed' over EDL twats. I know these types of twats. Get this in your thick head - THEY DON'T REALLY LIKE US. They have just been overwhelmed with sullay and are trying to use us to fight battles they are struggling with. You're just making us look weak and dumb. We should be putting more fear into nazi whitemen then the sullay, not flirting with them like you. I've had personal approaches myself and have spoken to a few other Singhs, who've told me that white scum who normally give it akarrh, all of a sudden are being friendly trying to get you on their side. I'd spit on them. Sit back and watch sullay and goray destroy each other. That is EXACTLY what they would do if the ball was on the other foot.

Thing is, you idiot, some of us older people remember the forefathers to these organisations and remember how they would attack and even murder asians, including Sikhs, when you was floating around in your peus tuttay! If you don't like sullay, fight them yourself and don't hide behind goray!

You're a disgrace - weak link. Convert to another religion that accepts cowards or quit your shameful flirting with scum. Lions don't hide behind foxes, like you are trying to do. You have no sense of izzat or anakh it seems.

Also, when I've asked you questions about your sycophancy before you've run off without answering. Is that how weak and undefendable your thinking is. It makes me physically sick to think there are Sikhs like you out there, bum licking away and destroying what little reputation we have in the process.

Edited December 17, 2009 by dalsingh101

[dalsingh101]

Explain the living source of tradition better. You haven't clearly defined it. I know there is a problem with people equating Sikhi as almost parallel to western liberalism and although the two do overlap in certain areas they are also distinct. People emphasising similarities between the two frequently overlook stark differences. Sikhi is not the everything goes, type philosophy that western liberalism espouses. On the other hand, those who follow the dogmatic approach, which seems to reduce everything solely to ritual prayer, physical appearance etc. without any deep understanding of political goals and the darker realities of humanity seem to be falling into a comfort zone which excuses them from fighting the big, external battles in life. We are lucky to have a system which clarifies the issue so clearly with the miri-piri conceptualisation.

That being said, the way I see things these days, what we are missing from the bulk of our society today is some of the more 'ritualistic' cornerstones. Muslims are heavily united through their prayer rituals. We must make prayer a cornerstone of Sikh life again. Most common Sikhs have never even heard Japji Sahib in full, let alone understanding and practicing nitnem. It is only now that I am older that I can see how far off the mark many of us have got (that especially includes me btw!)

I agree. I think it should be preserved as a spiritual phenomenon but we have strong forces within and without that are hell bent on explaining everything in terms of race, caste and other miscellaneous red herrings. I was watching a programme on Scottish history yesterday and one bit that was said in the end really struck home. The presenter said how we interpret the past will also dictate our future. I think we are still struggling to present our past in the best possible way and the universal apathy of youth today (Sikh and nonSikh) to their heritages, is another massive barrier. Personally, I feel a modified, updated version of the thesis produced by Jagjit Singh in his work The Sikh Revolution is the best thread to develop and disseminate to the wider panth now. The bullshit historical, Scythian, Aryan and even Panjabi interpretations have clearly divided and weakened us. We need to revert back to, and isolate, the grand ideological principles that helped our forefathers emancipate themselves in the 1700s, as inspired by the the Godsent Gurus. That is the live tradition that I see. What did you have in mind?

I'm with you a hundred percent on this one. I'm all against the promotion of external forms that are not matched by internal conviction and belief.

I disagree, I think many of them are actually getting closer to the fundamentals of their religion.

Look, few growing up in the west can claim to be untouched by its influence. Besides I am not saying every last thing that stems from the west is negative and that we cannot learn some positive things from this quarter. But when that involves sycophancy and unmanly submission, we must draw the line. It takes serious higher level thinking to extract yourself from the western paradigm, and I doubt it is fully possible by those of us raised here. But what we can do is try and draw on our experiences and take what is good and attempt to preserve the 'heart' of what was our Sikh inheritance.

Constantly seeing the consequences of excessive focus of the external, I am strongly inclined to believe this. The spirit that permeated those wonderful puratan Singhs were as internal as external. Someone once told me that the Khalsa roop is the external manifestation of internal belief. I don't know what it becomes when it is not matched by the internal qualities it is supposed to represent. One blatant example is cowardly Singhs or Singhs who are involved in all manner of unnecessary criminal activity solely for personal greed and status.

Man, the world has changed so much and so rapidly in the last 60 odd years....mainly due to technology and the rise of secular thought....I'm looking around and asking if my brothers have really noticed this and understood what these changes mean to us as a panth? The truth is that as a quom and as inheritors of a spiritual and political movement, from what I can see, it seems like the majority of us haven't?

We are still a baby quom in comparison to others. But we do seem to lack any strong direction.

Edited December 17, 2009 by dalsingh101

[Mekhane'ch Jannat]

Thanks for the reply, you raise some interesting points. I believe strongly a person should not give up his rituals and practices in the face of wishy washy western liberalism. The rituals and practices (rehat maryada nitnem etc.) this is what defines a person and community. But an excessive rigidity with regards to these practices, prevents life or vivifying power from reaching them IF they are not in harmony with our daily lives in society. What happens is a kind of splitting where the person inhabits two worlds, one of an ideal Sikhi and the other of mundane life. If this continues and the two worlds are not brought together than Sikhi will become like an island unable to affect the social reality. It is like that to some extent now. Muslims have huge numbers they are trying to drown what they don't agree with by sheer weight and quantity. But i am afraid the genie cannot be put back in the box, that is why muslims are fighting a losing battle. The onset of western rationalism and the 'scientific' revolution has created major changes in the psyche of man. These changes have to be assimilated. If you want to see the other side.

By living tradition I mean something that puts an individual in touch with his centre, and also, within a certain framework, directs his energy into useful and mutually beneficial activities for the whole of society(Sarbat Da Bhalla) Sikhi does not tell us how to behave in a modern corporate environment. But it does put us in touch with our real self. Instead of keeping these two areas seperate they need to be integrated. We can see this problem with modern sikh youth who feel as though Sikhi has no relation and relevance to their daily lives. It provides no sustenance for people to get through and over their samajik problems because it has been raised to such an abstract 'goodness' that it has no reality in the world we occupy. This is what occured in the decline of christianity God was whittled away from a living presence in the world to an abstract principle in no relation to society and the world. But people feel Sikhi has to be 'protected' from something or other. This is the effect of western nihilism that affects all of us, no one really believes any more but we want to believe. So we try to cover up our non-belief but it comes up as a split between outer society and a pure Sikhi unrelated to that non-belief. The problem is very deep psychologically. It is the central problem of duality projected onto the world in a myriad of ways, we all need to become brahmgyanis and I'm not joking.

[laalsingh]

Thanks for the reply, you raise some interesting points. I believe strongly a person should not give up his rituals and practices in the face of wishy washy western liberalism. The rituals and practices (rehat maryada nitnem etc.) this is what defines a person and community. But an excessive rigidity with regards to these practices, prevents life or vivifying power from reaching them IF they are not in harmony with our daily lives in society. What happens is a kind of splitting where the person inhabits two worlds, one of an ideal Sikhi and the other of mundane life. If this continues and the two worlds are not brought together than Sikhi will become like an island unable to affect the social reality. It is like that to some extent now. Muslims have huge numbers they are trying to drown what they don't agree with by sheer weight and quantity. But i am afraid the genie cannot be put back in the box, that is why muslims are fighting a losing battle. The onset of western rationalism and the 'scientific' revolution has created major changes in the psyche of man. These changes have to be assimilated. If you want to see the other side.

By living tradition I mean something that puts an individual in touch with his centre, and also, within a certain framework, directs his energy into useful and mutually beneficial activities for the whole of society(Sarbat Da Bhalla) Sikhi does not tell us how to behave in a modern corporate environment. But it does put us in touch with our real self. Instead of keeping these two areas seperate they need to be integrated. We can see this problem with modern sikh youth who feel as though Sikhi has no relation and relevance to their daily lives. It provides no sustenance for people to get through and over their samajik problems because it has been raised to such an abstract 'goodness' that it has no reality in the world we occupy. This is what occured in the decline of christianity God was whittled away from a living presence in the world to an abstract principle in no relation to society and the world. But people feel Sikhi has to be 'protected' from something or other. This is the effect of western nihilism that affects all of us, no one really believes any more but we want to believe. So we try to cover up our non-belief but it comes up as a split between outer society and a pure Sikhi unrelated to that non-belief. The problem is very deep psychologically. It is the central problem of duality projected onto the world in a myriad of ways, we all need to become brahmgyanis and I'm not joking.

Keep going Veer. Brilliant!! So does that mean from our real self should come new traditions which tells us how to behave in modern corporate environment (while still being compatible with sikh values)?

[Dharma]

Multiculturalism only works if you exlude Muslims from it.

Strictly speaking the statement is false.

I can think of the names of several secular Muslims, past and present. Mohammad Rafi, A.R. Rahman, Bismallah Khan, APJ Abdul Kalam, Mishal Husain, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown. There are instances of Muslim women marrying non-Muslims. It's rare but it does happen. Yasmin Alibhai-Brown being one example, and also A.R. Rahman's mum was a Muslim and his dad a Hindu. Some Muslims in India participate in non-Muslim religious ceremonies and are patriotic. Some are only ethnically Muslim and don't really practice, like Shabana Azmi.

Some UK Muslims do try to integrate and get on with local white people but can be shunned or victimised. I saw a Panorama documentary which examined the notion that immigrants are unwilling to integrate. It showed secret footage of a Muslim man who with his family moved into a white area. He immediately visited his neighbours home and gave them chocolates and introduced himself. Thereafter however, he was totally ignored. Obviously that is his neighbour's prerogative, but you can see that he was willing to integrate into the society.

[kdsingh80]

I can think of the names of several secular Muslims, past and present. Mohammad Rafi, A.R. Rahman, Bismallah Khan, APJ Abdul Kalam, Mishal Husain, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown. There are instances of Muslim women marrying non-Muslims

No one is saying that there are no secular muslims.There are very good muslims .But when we discuss these type of statement we have to look at broader community level not at indivisual level.The question here is whether as a community they can mix with others,I think the answer is no.

In India muslims are very poor still there demand is not good schools.They prefer that shariat courts should be allowed.