- Joined
- Jul 1, 2024
- Messages
- 1,703
- Likes
- 7,138
JuttSikhi has an unique tendency to turn upon itself. The insurgency was killed partly due to the heavy handed tactics of the state courtesy KPS Gill & his men but mostly coz the ordinary JuttSikh as well as other Sikhs decided that the state was a lesser evil as compared to the terrorists.They can because of their tremendous influence over Gurudwaras. Whoever controls the Gurudwaras, controls the narrative on Khalistan.
Towards the end most people who joined did so for the lifestyle perks it offered - easy money , liquor, women , extortion , land grab etc . That's how the ordinary man turned against them & collaborated with the state.
What also helped was there was no central leadership. Every group did its own thing nor was there any ideology. Arguably this harked back to Bhindranwale's time. Nobody till date can tell what exactly he stood for. What exactly was his grouse against the state was unknown ?
This is a cautionary tale of what happens when you take a semi literate preacher with no knowledge of politics or vision of statecraft & make him the head of a movement which has no ideology worth the name except killing all those against whatever it is they stand for , which in itself is not known to the perpetrators themselves.
Consider Paxtan & their irrational hate of India . Now extrapolate that to Bhindranwale & JuttSikhi & that's a mirror image of Paxtan. They define themselves as a negation - Hindus aren't Sikhs . For the sake of argument they contend they're waqri qaum or tisar panth .
It really hasn't gone beyond that except an irrational fear & hatred of Hindus & Hinduism. And both parts of the Punjab are in a similar crises. Ofc out there the entire country is in a state of multiple crises primarily coz their principle state Punjab itself is dysfunctional. With no leadership worth the name how far will such a country go or even succeed ?
What was SGPC doing then ? Did it pick up arms or advocate it ? Did it articulate its vision of what Sikhi is or on the present state of affairs ? No , they were busy tight rope walking between all sides protecting their privileges. Expect them to do the same in future.