Whiteness

My last post detailed the racist abuse that has befallen me since I joined a Facebook group that described itself as a no-holds-barred humour group. Taking the group at its word, I engaged in open, honest banter; but it turned out that this was a privilege enjoyed only by the group’s overwhelmingly white membership, and not by me, a turban-wearing Sikh. To my shock and horror, the group was a race-hatred group – nothing more or less. Despite reporting them and the subsequent abuse I’ve suffered to the police, the group continues to operate, albeit under a superficial banner of political correctness; and I and my 70yr old sister remain vigilant about attempts to murder us – collating a gallery of photos, of the faces and car registration numbers, that follow us during our excursions outside home.

The ongoing matter lays bare the hypocrisy of the so-called indigenes of the UK. They demand integration by people of colour while actively preventing a turban-wearing, lifelong, senior UK citizen from exchanging humorous quips on par with themselves. If I’m stripped of what is frankly my English sense of humour, because of how I look, then what does that say about the call to integrate? That it’s a lie; because as integrated or English-like as you might become, you will always be an ‘other’; the indigenes will always find a way to make you an outsider.

The truth is that the English cite political correctness about integration, but it is evident that we’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t. Remain insular and closed off, and you become a target of race-hatred; make visible your British traits and characteristics, and, well, you become a target of race-hatred.

In fact, since we became targets following the Facebook fiasco, things have moved on: the whites have gotten West Indian youths involved, and they are now waging a campaign of race-hatred against me and my sister, including an imminent physical attack on us.

Here’s the thing though: if my family and I are hurt, there are certain groups of people – in whom we’ve confided the identities of our imminent attackers and those inciting them – who will retaliate.

On the macro-scale, the ongoing killing of brown bodies will cause business deals, foreign exchange, and foreign investment to dry up. Brexit has yet to bite, and already we can see the effects of chasing out hard-working migrants, whose jobs remain vacant because indigenous Britons won’t take them.

And here’s the irony: modern Britain and its financial solvency is due solely to immigrants. Chase us out and the United Kingdom will become a mirror-image of both Idi Amin’s Uganda and Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe.

A further irony of British racism is this: Europe, including Britain, was once the playground of the old Arya (Indian) Empire. Traces of this history remain, for example in the Sanskrit root and origins of many words; and in the dark skin and hair of many so called British indigenous people – a legacy of the Arya who chose to remain after the Empire ended.

And for those who think there is such a thing as a single white race, historical maps of Britain and Europe show this to be a myth. Indeed, during the early twentieth century, US Immigration classed many newcomers from the continent as black, including the Irish, Italians and Jews, such was the depth of miscegenation among Aryans and later Caucasian settlers.

To this day the Irish, Scots and Welsh are treated as inferior subjects by the English. And in the context of Brexit, they – like other non-whites in the country – are becoming emboldened to say: enough is enough. In recent days, for example, the home countries have sought to break away from the stranglehold of the English by demanding the right to negotiate with the EU as independent entities.

Everywhere England is facing a negative sea change in opinion and tolerance. Those who were once hospitable and forgiving are turning resistant and hostile. For so long we – the ‘others’ of the UK – immersed ourselves in the whiteness of England. We did so despite knowing that the structure, system, and institutions of the country were designed to prevent us from reaching our full potential; and despite knowing that no matter how English our humour or frames of reference our bodies were always at most risk of being threatened, stopped in their tracks, and incarcerated.

To each hater, I wish a long life. I wish you get your ‘white’ England. When you do, be sure to not go abroad for holidays, or buy foreign-produced goods. Let’s see how your insular country survives.

East Africa is begging its expelled Asians to return, especially the Sikhs. None are going back. Once the people you refuse to accept as part of the country are made to leave, they will never return. You won’t stand a chance of enjoying things as they are today: that is, being a land where others will want to live and work, even on slave-like wages.

Recent history shows that countries that have welcomed Sikhs flourished far in excess of their own natural ability.

In me you have picked a fight with an old fashioned Sikh. I am an old fashioned warrior. I’ll die, but will I cower to your race-hatred intimidation?

Try never.

I give you my word as a Sikh – I will not die alone. My patience has a limit. If I feel any threat to my sister, rest assured I will protect her and if that means you get killed, then so be it.

I’m going to live as a free man.

The sad part is the tossers who partook in the original FB group are hiding, and inciting others to fight their fight.

Advertisements

MYTH: UK’S INTEGRATION HYPE INCITEMENT TO MURDER

Having lived in the United Kingdom for over 50 years I thought I had seen all the good, bad and ugly that Great Britain has to offer. Yet since the mid-70s I have held the view that I am living in the UK on borrowed time, as integration is solely dependent on the indigenous people’s willingness to allow dignified cultural and religious disparity to take place while maintaining equal access to resources and amenities for all.

I recall vividly the degrading and disgusting names Sikhs were called regarding their turban, as well as in reference to their brown colour skin and their consumption of garlic, onion and ginger-enriched food.

In those days, out of sheer politeness and maturity in the face of what they recognised as the retarded mentality of the locals, the Asians in the UK kept their opinions about the natives to themselves.

Then race laws were introduced, banning racist references. Equality became enshrined in law. Cooperation and coexistence seemed feasible and, on the whole, tolerance, understanding and mutual appreciation evolved over the ensuing decades.

On 7th Oct 2017, I ventured into the social media platform of Facebook for the first time. Using a photo of myself and an Indian nickname that also sounded a tad anglicized, I joined several groups. One of these was called “ALL JOKES, ONE LINERS AND GREAT GAGS WITH REASONABLE ADMIN”. The group had 18,600 members, made no bones about the fact that it was a hard-hitting, over-the-top, no-holds-barred, adult humour group. I was happy joining since my humour and second-rate wit can on most occasions hold their own; and of course, the group wasn’t likely to throw anything at me that I had not heard before. Approval to join the group came through and I began to read the posts.

As promised, the FB group was hyper-racist, homophobic and misogynist to the core. Reference to female genitalia was an accepted and standard norm in the construction of any given sentence by the contributors, who were white men. I only came across two women: one with a sensible, middle-of-the-road humour and wit, and the other engaging in badly disguised full-on race hatred.

I introduced myself to the group, my profile image visibly establishing me as a Sikh gentleman with a full grey beard and a white turban. I wrote that I had already heard most, if not all, of the stuff they were likely to hurl at me, and that rest assured I would give as good as I got.

Right from the start, my religion and turban were targeted. Indeed, an initial remark used the exact same wording we Sikhs used to hear in the 1960s. This means that although racism was successfully removed from open public dialogue decades ago, it has been passed down the generations, from great-grandfathers through to great-grandchildren. Without hesitation, I retorted with a frank put-down, which silenced the guy who made the racist remark. He never made a comment to me again. I, in my social media naivete, thought he had gone on holiday until I was told he had blocked me. It became clear to me that I was dealing with grown men who could dish it out but became cry babies when it came to taking it.

Generally, I would make an observation, draw people into responding, and then fend them off with a sophisticated put-down, leaving a third person who was observing the exchange to smile and ask the other person, ‘What does it feel like to be played?

Rather than take it all in good grace, once the members of the FB group realised I could match their observational humour, the gloves came off. Explicitly degrading and disgusting religious, racial, cultural and dietary remarks came thick and fast.

By this time, I was on my third day into this experience. Concerned that there were zero non-white contributors, I scoured the list of group members and found pages and pages of people with African and Southeast Asian images and names – who had never participated in the group at all and seemed, to all intents and purposes, to be fake accounts. They were a front for the UK natives to spout their vitriolic race-hatred could flourish unbounded. The penny dropped that this was the real underbelly of the ordinary natives of Great Britain: their race hatred had flourished throughout the decades, and been passed down through the generations. It did not begin with Brexit.

The attacks on me by members of the FB group became more personal and direct. Seven days later, I decided to write my first post. I informed the group that in many cases their names, when translated into Asian languages, have explicit toilet meanings; and that they, like the rest of the animal world, have disgusting body odour, bad breath and stinky homes. In fact, if they were to meet an honest South-east Asian, this person would tell them that the average European’s freshly-washed smell is like sick.

Well, I could not believe it, my post disappeared. I inquired about what had happened to it. Terrance Ward, one of the group administrators, wrote back: ‘Didn’t you get the message?’ ‘What message is that?’ I asked in all innocence. I had been blocked. Given that the FB group was advertised as an adult, no-holds-barred humour group and its members posted the same, why block me when I had suffered a whole gambit of racial, cultural, religious and dietary abuse?

I left it there, trying to see the funny side of the group’s hypocrisy. My last exchange with them was on 13th October 2017.

Since then, I and my 70 yr old sister have suffered an onslaught of race-hate intimidation, leaving both of us in no doubt that we, and especially me, are going to be killed. The type of race-hate that was the norm in the 1960s is alive and well in our locality. All the Anglo-Saxons of our area check out the car when we are out driving, then the car registration number, and me with my white turban. In the initial days following the final denouncement of my FB group experience, a volley of venomous racial abuse spewed from their mouths. The underlying violent intent was immediately evident, and required only a trigger to be unleashed.

We reported the matter to the police. They noted the details of our case and our genuine belief that we are going to be murdered. The local community police officers contacted us subsequently, and set in motion the requisite procedures.

Like all people, our days follow a set itinerary. It is incredibly easy to log our movements and target us. Thus, regardless where we travel in our locality we are targeted. They, the rednecks, work in teams via multimedia mobile phones: logging the time they see us, they pass the message onwards about the direction we’re traveling, and as soon as we reach a certain landmark another two lookouts are already there waiting to check us out and pass the information further down the line. This has now translated into the message going out to a collective and who-so-ever thereafter notices us feeds back our movement information.

We take photos of them, and their car registrations numbers. WE HAVE THE NAMES AND PHOTOS OF THE CONTRIBUTORS FROM THE FACEBOOK GROUP “ALL JOKES, ONE LINERS, AND GREAT GAGS WITH REASONABLE ADMIN”… AND WE WILL NOT HESITATE TO PUT THESE ONLINE ACROSS SEVERAL MEDIA SITES IN ORDER TO OUT THESE RACIST PSYCHOPATHS.

Now, the question for Anglo-Saxons is this: If you, the indigenous can dish out racist toilet humour then how come you guys can’t take it?

All of a sudden the British bulldogs have turned into pussies? Integration and tolerance means verbal abuse is a two-way street. But for you Anglo-Saxons it just seems to mean that you get to rant, rave, and blame ‘others’ for everything without showing any modicum of maturity. You dish out abuse but can’t take the truth that comes your way. And an inferiority complex and low self-esteem leads you to kill rather than accept that, to others, perhaps your names do reference toilet habits, and you do smell.

You’re a race of psychopaths.

The media who represent you – e.g. The Daily Mail, The Daily Express and a selection of LBC radio presenters – should do the honourable thing for once and publicly announce what you and they really believe: that integration is bullshit (before returning to their usual racial venom).

Because real integration means that if you’re going to indulge in degrading racial abuse towards others, you have to accept the same back.

Re-claim the Nipple & Public Breastfeeding

It is a curious cultural phenomenon that images of the female chest are considered solely as objects of sexual titillation and fodder for male masturbation. Bovine udders don’t seem to hold the same fascination for men, so why do the female human equivalents?

Breastfeeding in public, in race-European countries, has become subject in the recent past to a discourse about (sexual) morality – as if feeding one’s young were about social principles rather than say, survival. Mothers are verbally abused, called derogatory names, and emphatically told to stop nursing their babies.

Apparently, this is civilised behaviour!

It is civilised to stop feeding the defenseless, helpless, and hungry in race-European societies. The fact that the defenseless, helpless, and hungry person being fed is a baby is neither here nor there.

The great sadness, as an exploration of internet sex websites based around race-European participants shows, is that the female breast is never caressed, tenderly stroked or lovingly kissed. It is used as a set of handles to hold or demonically squeeze, or indeed the nipples are pulled as if tugging grapes off the vine.

So degraded has the female breast become in the western world that it is reduced to a titillating advertising gimmick and masturbating mechanism.

Thus, the brutal onslaught against public breastfeeding isn’t about the morality of public nakedness at all – it is about ferociously safeguarding the female breast as a source of titillation, masturbation, and money-making.

But it’s worth remembering that this wasn’t always the fate of the female breast, or of breastfeeding. Back in the 1960s, public breastfeeding was pretty widely practiced in the UK.

However, easy access to the worldwide web seems to have perverted the minds of race-European men and increasingly of women too with regards what the female breast’s primary use is – to feed babies, lest we forget! – to the point that women are often even more vociferous than men in shaming breastfeeding mothers. The latter are rudely told to cover up in public, to go feed their child in the toilet.

And this is civilised behaviour?

Exactly how many of you lop-sided prudes are prepared to, and will henceforth, eat your meal in a public toilet?

Well???

It’s an absolute perversion that race-European perverts have not only led in the degradation of the female breast, but have also steadfastly refused to lift the ban on the nipple in public and on natural feeding practices, while audaciously laying claim to being the enlightened race.

On this basis, the anti-breastfeeding brigade must all be unequivocal supporters of women wearing the burkha…but they aren’t, are they?!

Please, those of you who belong to the self-righteous anti-breastfeeding brigade, come out in full support of the hijab and burkha as required clothing for all women, globally.

In my recent travels to India, I once again came across public breastfeeding. Not a single member of that conservative country deemed it offensive. However, here in race-European countries the very act is close to being criminalized.

The furore against breastfeeding and showing the female nipple in public for such purposes strongly suggests to me, as an outsider studying race-Europeans, that they are perverts on the cusp of becoming fully-fledged pedophiles.

Because, let’s face it, if a babe suckling at its mother’s breast sexually arouses you – and honestly, has the sight of a nipple ever made a man ejaculate in his trousers? – then you are a closet pedophile and pervert. Otherwise, explain your rationale and objection to a hungry and defenseless babe being nourished by its mother.

I request people to please grow-up and act with dignity as mature and accepting human beings. Or are you the person who forces a woman to wear long heavy garments, and then chops off her ankle if said ankle dares to stray into your sight, because you are too immature to control your sexual urges?

Race-Europeans, decide which side of the fence you wish to stand on: Pervert or evolved.

Sister/Brother responsibility, India style: “RAKHRI”

Psychically, women are superior to men and embody considerateness, forgiveness, and tolerance. However, at the conscious level – a level that cannot unmask the psychic layer – it is the brute strength of man that dominates. Men are rustic, manual, multi-dimensionally unskilled, emotionally limited, and bereft of inter-personal skills

Thus, in marriage and cohabitation, whether arranged or love-based, women always accommodate male intrusion and direction.

The situation is more marked for young girls who are married off. A young girl married off into a new setting, a new environment, a new family structure is at the bottom of that family’s pecking order in every way. She is, to all intents and purposes, defenceless and powerless.

To balance this inequality, a mature thought-based mechanism was put in place, whereby a woman’s opinions and thoughts could be represented by a male who had known her since childhood. The person had to be from her age group, and was usually her brother or her first male cousin.

The brother, acting both as his sister’s representative, and as his father’s ambassador, would appeal to his sister’s in-laws. If the appeal fell on deaf ears, then the woman’s paternal uncle’s would make the representation instead. And if that failed, then her father came and spoke privately to her husband’s father to resolve matters.

Representations and interventions by a woman’s paternal uncle signaled that the matter was serious. For her father to get directly involved signaled that the matter was nigh-on intransigent and insurmountable.

The role of the brother in assuming his sister’s or cousin-sister’s welfare is, by contrast, part of everyday social relationships. He counters his brother-in-law’s physical threat, safeguards his sister, acts as the link between two families, and assumes a critical role and set of observational responsibilities towards the welfare, rights and education of his sister’s children.

The day that commemorates this responsibility is called Rakhri, or Rakhari, or Raksha.

On this day, a sister ties a thick, symbolic, coloured cotton thread on her brother’s right wrist, and she feeds him barfi – a sweet made from milk, ghee, and honey/sugar. He in response, promises to protect and safeguard her interests in the coming year.

Originally, the promise took the form of a promissory note. In time, this was replaced by a nominal amount of money.

By the way, it is worth noting that Rakhri is not a Hindu festival. It is and always was a global, communal, mature, ancient festival that pre-dates the advent of Vedic concept.

The annual gesture of acknowledgement and promise, by sister and brother, indicates divine ethos and humanity. Arguably, a culture that finds such gestures inimical to their own belief degrades their own humaneness and divine connection. So, I ask those of you who are anti-brother/sister celebration of Rakhri – which this year took place on 7th August – what exactly is your problem???

Free Slaves

The western human-animal world cherishes freedom more than dignity. Rape has to be proven in a harsh and degrading sexual inquisition where the woman is emotionally re-raped and de-robed, and her private parts psychologically exposed to public gaze and comment. Her word and her trauma are considered, by the men who draw up society’s laws, insufficient evidence to sentence a man. Man-made laws are devised to protect the status quo of male law-framers and their cultural morality.

The cultural-moral genealogy of western, and English, laws can be traced to the Quran, Torah and Bible – books that were written by educated men bereft of divine awakening.

Until the late 1990s, a woman in the west could be beaten at home, and the United Kingdom’s police forces found excuses not to intervene on her behalf. She was owned. Mentally, spiritually, emotionally, and physically she was owned first by her father and then by her husband.

From the 1930s onwards, western, and in particular English, doctors led the way in imposing rules of conduct and behaviour on women – for example, forbidding them from expressing pain, stress, and agony during labour. Indian women who entered maternity wards were screamed and shouted at, and spoken down to by the nursing staff, for moving their bodies into positions that alleviated the pain of giving birth. English women, baulking at the naturalness of their Indian counterparts’ expression, claimed that they were somehow superior in dealing with pain!

Ironically, the British Medical Council now advises women in labour to express their discomfort, and contort their bodies to ensure maximum comfort during labour. ‘Enlightened’ staff in maternity wards also encourage women to express their agony vocally. The penny has dropped, and it is now widely acknowledged that screaming mutes pain and can in fact increase a person’s pain threshold.

A question worth asking is: Would women-run institutions have turned women into a conveyor belt of reproduction, like chickens laying the mandatory egg, as the medical men of yesteryear deemed fit?

No. I firmly believe they would not have entertained such an idea.

Another question worth asking is: What precipitated pregnant womens collusion in the conveyor-belt mentality imposed by men?

Free slavery.

Free slavery is a form of mental domination, where the subject is intellectually browbeaten into submission on the basis of ‘evidence’ marshaled by the educated. Postgraduate researchers come up with one fandangled idea that marks them out from the rest of the crowd, and institutions impose it as a kind of gold standard, the norm. In the context of the post-1930s English maternity mindset, pregnant women in labour felt they could not act contrary to what the ‘experts’ demanded. Hence, they were free slaves.

Similarly, immigrants and other powerless people in society – though they may feel themselves to be free to all intents and purposes – are treated as if they are non-people. They exist in the imagination (and in policy) as Schrodinger’s immigrant: too lazy to work while also taking our jobs.

Consider the Grenfall Tower fire in west London and the attacks that preceded it. Are we really to believe that these are unconnected? The fire at a predominantly Muslim tower block occurred just weeks after a spate of Muslim radical attacks elsewhere in London and in Manchester.

We are asked to believe that the Nazi gas chamber style cooking of a largely Muslim ethnic minority living in Grenfell Tower, mostly on welfare benefits, was triggered by a faulty appliance. I know from experience how regularly appliances in my own home malfunction and the brakes on my car fail. It is easy to create such situations. Trained security experts can enter a standard home and improvise an incident to take place at a later date. In Grenfell Tower, the fire started in a kitchen, and transferred itself along the outside of the building around right-angled corners.

I hope I am wrong, but it seems to me that accelerants were placed at convenient points to aid the progress of the flames around the tower. If my immediate premise and instincts, while watching the inferno unfold, are correct, then the security experts working for the state apparatus manufactured the Grenfell Tower deaths – of course, without the knowledge of government ministers. Until categorically proven otherwise, this must be understood as mass murder committed by renegade security personnel in order to settle scores following the carnage caused by Muslim radicals in preceding weeks.

But why?

Because immigrants and other powerless peoples, as I stated earlier, comprise a dispensable non-class, while believing they are free.

Globally, races live as slaves, albeit that they flourish financially and academically throughout the span of western, and especially the English, empire. The fact is that their lifestyle and success are micro-managed. Only a selected few are moved up the career ladder, promoted as window-dressing, and sometimes even given top positions as long as they spout European propaganda. However, when the powers-that-be tire of their presence, some personal weakness or other is brought to light, their impartiality and integrity are attacked, and ‘proof’ is wheedled out of some dark corner in order to dethrone them. Far graver misdeamours by a European race person in the same position of course go unpunished. The point is that there is no possibility of ability-linked advancement amongst the race-slaves; but they are made to believe that their successes are their own.

This is how free slavery works.

Indians encouraged into British East Africa are a prime example of free slavery. While the strings of power, and total arms control, were in the hands of the Europeans in East Africa, an Indian mercantile class was lured into running the artificially manufactured country. Kenya’s businesses and entire civil service structure were managed by Indians, while the British retained ultimate control.

In free slavery, people are compelled to follow a template for appropriate thought and conduct set by slave-masters. They are encouraged to believe that they are in charge of making decisions, when in fact these decisions are the inevitable outcome of the cultural logic and deductive process imposed on them. Which is to say that they are slaves to a system of thought and practice, but falsely believe themselves to be functioning as free individuals. They are dupes, compelled into a system that’s been rigged to subjugate them while instilling in them the illusion they are free.

The illusion of freedom has systematically corroded and destroyed intuitive-based racial-cultural psyches, de-culturalising and de-humanising people, and replacing primordial dignity with mimicry of the slave-master races. Witness Afro-Caribbeans in the western world – they have lost their language, culture, and heritage. Their DNA lineage has been virtually destroyed. But for a public announcement to the effect, they are a new species of humanity.

Global free slaves haven’t fared much better. Unceremoniously, systematically, and clinically, these races are perniciously engaged in their own psyche-gene editing. Their bio-organism is being thoroughly defused, and their intuitive-psyche capabilities curtailed. They are successfully being groomed into becoming non-beings.

Global free slaves are turning their backs on their natural heritage of divinity; they no longer entertain the idea of a seer-divine birth. They are culpable in pioneering a genome with a lower-awakening configuration, where the divine creative field and its attributes are diminishing. They are helping turn themselves into aberrant beings.

The narrowing of the neuro-thinking range is creating a landscape where the multi-gene is being replaced by a narrower bandwidth, where psychical mutations are rendered useless.

The only remaining difference, that of outer skin pigment, is also being procedurally tackled. The implementation of pigment-less skin, where once pigmented skin was hailed as a natural protection against the sun’s and earth’s electro-magnetic presence, is now a targeted and desirable outcome. Global free slaves will become like the race Europeans of the preceding generation. But then what?

The fear of artificial intelligence, created by race-European numbskulls chasing ever elusive financial gain, is a danger that human-animals have already suffered in our collective past.

You will not like the next paragraph…

Race-European pigment was created to make them stand them out from other human-animals: as a destructive psyche-genome (for use of a better word) that compels that bio-configuration to kill, destroy, and amalgamate; to overlook commonsense; and to champion artificial intelligence, where synthetic blood-like fluid (as yet awaiting formulation) will aid in developing an autopoietic AI race, culture, and communication with a sense of self-worth…all at the cost of natural-pigmented human-animals.

However, in tandem with that technical fear of AI, the viral/bacterial violence awaiting human-animals poses a far greater and imminent threat. Race-Europeans have, in their haste and haughtiness to eradicate viruses and bacteria, instead consolidated the eruption of those life-forms’ mastering control mechanism. I will not at this moment share what that controlling mechanism is. However, history is in the process of repeating itself all over again, unless race-Europeans amend their attitude to existence and forego the belief that they exist above the natural, creative force and energy system.

My humble warning…

It will take only a single bacterial attack on the new look-alike pigment-less humans, who will be unable to defend themselves against such a nature-induced attack, to end human civilisation as we know it.

Reflections on proposed caste discrimination legislation: or ‘What is this thing called caste?’

The question I put to the British parliament is this; Why is her Majesty and the entire stratum she occupies not included in the proposed caste law, and why is it limited to race and aimed only at South Asians as it is currently tabled?

The Merriam-Webster dictionary definitions of caste are as follows:

  • One of the hereditary social classes in Hinduism that restrict the occupation of their members and their association with members of other castes.
  • A division of society based on differences in wealth, inherited rank, or privilege, profession, occupation or race.
  • The position conferred by caste standing.
  • A system of rigid social stratification characterized by hereditary status, endogamy, and social barriers sanctioned by custom, law, or religion.

My argument:

Please read Caste, Class and Community in India: An Ethnography Approach by Balmurli Natrajan (William Paterson University).

The article’s argument supports my view that we are confusing class/economic distinctions with caste, such that the economic status of social groups is being projected onto, and even conflated with, social caste.

The fact is that like-minded social groups gel and function together as they have intimate nuanced understanding that cannot be accessed by other groups. To put it another way: we humans are neither psychologically nor socially identical, and do not share the same life experiences. This does not, at least in various Indian cultures, emerge as prejudice but is rather a form of snobbishness verging at times on hostility.

Precisely because of this, it makes sense therefore that individual social groups practice social endogamy and establish their own kinship clubs – Gurdwaras are a case in point. And they should be encouraged in doing so.

My point is that caste is a paradigm encased in structured cosociality rather than in subjugation and unequal power relations.

(And if we are talking about the latter, it is worth noting that I have repeatedly experienced rejection by well-to-do so-called lower castes – which blows apart the idea that oppression works in one direction only!)

The problem with the proposed legislation against caste discrimination is that it is embedded in the notion that caste is a form of unequal class/economics relations. It simply does not recognise the cosociality of caste as a valid, necessary and comforting form of in-group identity.

But consider this: in playgroups, babies can clearly be seen exhibiting strong likes and dislikes towards each other; they congregate in like-minded groups. Who taught them such prejudice? No-one. We human-animals psychologically attach ourselves to, and associate and intermingle with like minds.

This is not prejudice. What precisely it is, we have yet to sort out.

Now, for those who say caste as practiced today – in the form of class/economic inequality and hostility – is a historical phenomenon within South Asian societies… go learn your history!

Buddhism, Sikhism and Vedism in earlier times – before Bharat lost her substantial lands and succumbed to successive periods of colonization – did not apply caste divisions as we understand them today.

Indeed, caste division is not ‘Indian’ at all. It began in the west as a form of rigid social organisation whereby people were not permitted to work outside the occupational bandwidths set by the state, as happening to trades people in the United States. The Roman Empire relied on this to protect itself from implosion. Thus, caste refers in this sense to established western practices of restricting people to certain occupational domains, which restricted them socially and economically.

Such casteism continues to operate in the west today, as a cursory examination of recent English history illustrates. The cost of moving beyond the barriers of one’s caste was experienced by King Edward VIII when he deigned to marry Wallis Simpson – he had to abdicate. Even Prince Charles was not permitted to marry at will, but was shepherded into a marriage of convenience.

All of this is not to say that caste is not an aspect of Indian cultures. But as I noted earlier, it was certainly not a feature of earlier Buddhist, Sikh or Vedic societies, especially not in the western form of restricting people to particular occupational bandwidths.

Originally, in Bharat, children were given into the care of faith-teachers whose task was to find the appropriate occupation and role of their wards, and to encourage them to fulfil that. So, a farmer’s child with artisan skills would be encouraged in that direction, while the child of unskilled workers would move into farming if they exhibited the abilities for such work. It followed that people did not necessarily follow in their parents’ footsteps; they moved across groupings freely based on their skills-set.

It also follows that parents did not prize financial solvency when looking for life-partners for their children, rather they laid greater store by a prospective son- or daughter-in law’s capacity to manage their affairs responsibly and maturely.

However, older western societies have come to exert a strong influence on the modern construct that is Hinduism, which is itself the product of a socio-political revolution against the perceived rigidities of Vedic practices. Ironically, Hindusim has curated the kind of casteism for which the whole of India has become renowned, and which it erroneously embraces as an inalienable and intrinsic aspect of itself.

Consequently, we forget that caste refers to a bandwidth of in-group intimacies that in fact have been vital in enabling the successful transnational flow of people. Sikhs and others who moved to East Africa or to the United Kingdom were intrepid aspirants, but they were only able to ease the isolation that migration brings by congregating with others who shared their language, diet, rites and rituals, and who could advise them of local mores and provide a network of support.

Against the cosociality that caste traditionally referred to in older Indian societies and cultures, is the highly stratified system of difference which it exhibits in the west and which we forget to call out because we are so busy misunderstanding and denigrating our own eastern cultural heritages and practices.

And if we are in doubt as to the rigid boundaries that caste builds in the modern western world, let’s consider how our kids from North America and England emerge from university with degrees – equipping them to practice some trade or other, but which actively preclude them from switching trade or following another occupational strand. For that, they have to go right back to university and re-train, and get re-certified.

The same restrictions apply ofcourse to trades-people. Since the emphasis is on economic security and socio-economic mobility, very few people get to change occupational track despite showing flair and having accumulated skill-sets that make them ideal for jobs other than those they’ve been certified to do. The moral degeneracy of this situation is that it stratifies people, restricting them ‘to their own kind’. Yet, when they embody such stratification and hierarchy, we call them out and propose anti-caste legislation. When the system itself enforces this, why blame the people for imbibing it?!

And to what degree will anti-caste legislation be enforced? Will Gurdwaras have to provide a register of how many people of other castes (cosocial cultural groupings, as they themselves see it) attend in order to stay on the right side of the law? What counts as discrimination? Will I, as somebody who has repeatedly experienced discrimination from so-called lower castes, be safe-guarded and be able to pursue my case under law?

Will the British monarchy be allowed to continue to exist in its closed forms, while the average person on the street gets vilified for belonging to a group they know intimately and feel a sense of support, security and belonging with?

Clearly, I am missing the point of the anti-caste legislation, because it feels to me very much like a stick with which to beat Indians. And the best thing is, we Indians are culpable in this, because we know nothing of our own history or that of caste as a phenomenon.

Bhindrawale: an alternative view

‘The Sikhs are the only race, that I know of, who sacrificed their own nationhood in order to free the non-Sikh population of India from more than one thousand years of humiliation, subjugation and occupation at the hands of not just one but two (Semitic) Empires. They did so having fought for and secured their own independence as a nation under Islam rule more than 200 years earlier.’ Avtar

For you to appreciate this hard-hitting essay I need to explore, examine, and briefly lay bare what is a Sikh.

It is a misnomer that being born into a practicing Sikh family makes you a Sikh. Certainly, children practice the rites and ritual of Sikhi. But that is learned behaviour. Even when mimicking their elders, and perhaps even aspiring to be a proper Sikh through such mimicry, children are not Sikh in the metaphysical sense.

A Sikh, as I have written countless times, is a strata above the realm of advanced Sants, Svamis, Sufis, and Saints. A sant is one who has absolute mastery over the psychic realm. A Sikh is responsible for the welfare of the sant realm.

At the times of, and attendant in seva to, the ten Sikh Gurus, (and due to the high originality of advanced innovation), a Sikh was an unbelievably calm pacifist, who, when required, would to lay to rest a repeat killer. The Sikhs of those times never had need to raise their voice. Their psychic bearing and presence was enough.

Bear in mind, in those times artificial voice projecting apparatuses such as the megaphone and later the mic and loudspeaker system, had not yet been developed. So, an orator of that period, regardless of faith, literally had to shout to get his message across. Shouting behaviour has not died, in India at least. People there seem to forget that they are using microphones, and can therefore speak gently. The screaming and shouting automatically raises one’s blood pressure, heightens one’s nervous system activity, and leads to a tensed physiology, which renders one primed for a physical confrontation. The person sounds and behaves assertively.

Another problem of the birth-Sikhs is that they are reared on stories of historical events that highlight bravery, courage, chivalry, and heroism. These are stories of fighting the odds and succeeding, more often than not. However, the Sikh parent imparting such stories is themselves not a Sikh in its full reality, but like their child a Sikh by birth only. And therein lies the problem of Sikhism.

A Sikh is one who, coming from any faith, is the master of, and has hands-on responsibility for, those who are an authority over the so-called spiritual world. That was what separated the Sikhs of the Gurus from the faithful of all other faiths.

Only the best of the best, the most humble of the humble, found a way to be in the seva of the Sikh Gurus. Some attributes of a Sikh:

* An analyser, scrutiniser, and improver…of whatever they may confront

* Addressing every female as ‘Ma’am’ and treating every female with dignity, chivalry, and lack of misogyny

* Studies war tactics and stealth strategy

* Master of hand-arms combat

* Outmanoeuvers opponents strategically

* Sikh men/women are regarded as tender, passionate, sensual lovers by most South Asians

* Remain faithful and loyal to one partner

* Their word is sacrosanct

Only with the above clarity will you be able understand today’s essay.

Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale

According to web searches he was born Jarnail Singh Brar on 2nd June 1947, and he died on 6th June 1984 aged 37. Leader of Damdami Taksal, one of the five formal seats of Sikhism, he was an outspoken orator. He voiced the resentment of the ordinary Sikh about their betrayal by the Hindus: leading up to and even after India’s independence, the Hindus had promised a separate Sikh nation; they reneged on this promise.

His popularity stemmed from his insistence that the faithful remain vigilant, and abide by the high requirements of the elite Sikhs, the Khalsa. Like the majority of Sikhs, he saw the events of bygone times through rose-tinted glasses, rather than accepting that society has always been a multi-spectrum of misfits who dally with idealism and bemoan the failures of others.

The majority of Sikh ‘leaders’ increasingly fail to appreciate what it takes to become a Sikh, and that there are unbelievably high standards of advanced knowledge required to progress into the Khalsa realm. The same was true of Bhindranwale, except that in his case his heart was in the right place. Like other leaders, though, he was not advanced enough to recognise the what or the why that makes a Sikh and the Khalsa uniquely responsible and thus special.

An insight: The sublime is experienced by nearly all practicing Sikhs as a faith-right; however, collectively, it remains an unquantifiable realm. They are moved and ‘protected’ by this arena, but they are oblivious as to how best to describe its existence, or the experiences it yields.

He was precisely in the same boat as your average run-of-the-mill Sikh. Like them, he too sensed, but he could not explain the sensation.

He was a doer, a go-getter, one who could not sit still. He readily took a stance against anything or anyone whom he considered to have fallen from the excellence he thought all Sikhs should live by. Drugs, a hedonistic lifestyle, and irreverence for the image of the perceived Sikh status quo rankled him. His generation blamed all society’s ills on the wealth that Panjab enjoyed as the green, agricultural energy-field of India. Panjab literally fed, and to this day feeds, India. This brought prosperity.

Prosperity in tandem with zero pressure of either local wars or impending invasions, led to parents showering their children with monetary gifts hitherto unheard of in India. Sikhs were, and are, massively wealthy compared to the rest of the non-west European world. In fact, when I traveled the countries that were at that time locked behind the iron curtain almost twenty years after leaving Panjab, I was shocked to see those countries suffering from lower, weaker, almost non-existent infrastructure; and the local poverty was breathtakingly shocking even in comparison to the Panjab of twenty years earlier.

So, Panjab was wealthy. Wealthy enough to send members of their family to study abroad, and indeed to live abroad; these members in turn sending remittances back to the family village and home, thereby increasing the family’s earning and power-prestige further.

The handicap of wealth is improved health. Health, married to wealth, automatically childs conceit, self-importance and delusions of the self as an omnipotent being. Sikhs of his time suffered from the same disease of the avant-garde, technicolour palette of romanticism seducing monologue, with philosophies spiced with short-lived interactions with European industrial civilisation.

In a mixture of multi-complex rationales, he laced his oratory skills with the insistence that wealthy Sikhs ought to pressure their children towards the rites normally associated with a Sikh monastic lifestyle. Its conditions are so confusing to an outsider, especially when each male is meant to see each woman as his sister or mother, yet be anxiously prepared to marry one of these very women, and thereafter, to engage in and enjoy a full sexual life with her. It’s a case of heads I win, tails you cannot live a normal lifestyle, unless you marry. These rich kids, emasculated by the parental pressure he advocated, threw tantrums.

He, meanwhile, gained fame and popularity. For he constantly evoked age-old glories of sword-fighting, small hand-arms defence, and overcoming outrageous odds against trained armies of invaders, or indeed against ‘home grown’ newly settled Muslim rulers. He drew crowds. He spoke uncompromisingly, mired in passion as if he had returned fresh from sword-fighting and hand-to-hand combat. Sikhs so love tales of hand-to-hand combat against overwhelming odds…his popularity increased exponentially. However, he had never set a foot on a battlefield, and he had no formal or informal military and tactical training.

He was an orator, one who had the ability to inflame his audience. He evoked passions. His message stirred people. He became an irresistible force. This drew the attention of the politicians. However kitsch he appeared to seasoned politicians nevertheless he commanded a sizeable vote bank that they couldn’t ignore. So, his ego was massaged, and seduction-hypocrisy gained momentum. Everything has a price. He had a price. It was a matter of identifying that price and leveraging him into the politicians’ pocket.

His price?

A date with destiny, a reluctant delusion that he was ‘chosen’ to deliver respect, along with self-determination to Sikhs within the statehood of a collective India.

Expatriate Sikhs stoked, inflamed, and financially supported calls for an independent state named Khalistan (and not Panjab). I truthfully cannot recall him advancing that particular idea, but the theme of self-determination never left his lips. In reality, all he sought – and as is the demand of all Sikhs – was dignity via the fulfillment of a promise; and the honest barter of that promise made to Sikhs by Pandit Nehru and (Mohan Dass Gandhi) Mahatama Gandhi, in the days before India’s independence.

This set him on a collision course. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi stepped into the ring and offered a staged, well-practiced trade-off; stopping short of Sikh demands for the fulfillment of the Anandpur Sahib Resolution.

A dance of Shiva had begun.

Death was on the cards.

Each thought it would be the other’s.

The death drum gathered speed.

And he made one naive mistake after another. He miscalculated the world of politics. In fact, he had zero appreciation of politics. He did not understand that you cut a tree for firewood one day and the next day you stand on its stump delivering a speech pronouncing your credentials as an ecologist.

His lack of military service became evident in his utterances. He took the bait. He prepared to take on the might of the Indian army’s modern weaponry and tactics with his handful of men equipped with small arms weapons. He was neither a politician, nor a strategist or tactician. His popularity was based on his honesty, earnestness and frankness. He lacked guile. He lacked deceit. He lacked hypocrisy. He lacked cunning. What he said was what he meant. Wonderful attributes for a religious orator. But as a politician and military tactician he was a dead duck.

If he had had a cunning mind, then he would and could have instigated a war between Pakistan and India. This would have brought the Sikh regiments stationed far afield from Panjab back to the border with Pakistan, which in the main is shared by Pakistan and Panjab. Simultaneously, he would, on the quiet, have had his own followers present in various cities ready to occupy main-frame buildings; the armed occupation of which would have put him in control of mass broadcast, and of transportation, thereby causing maximum and immediate mayhem among the people. Thereafter, he could have incited the Sikh regiments to support his quest for the negotiation of the Anandpur Sahib Resolution from a position of reasonable strength. Just for the fun of creating discord and facilitating the possible breakup of India, Pakistan would have supported him to the hilt, politically and militarily.

However, he did what no Sikh army had done in Sikh history. He occupied the holy shrine of Amritsar not for its protection from an imminent attack but for sheltering in. After all, prior to his occupation Amritsar was under absolutely no threat from an imminent Indian army attack.

A majority of expatriate Sikhs were against his occupation of Amritsar. Yes, he had supporters, but they were a minority, albeit a vocal one.

The outcome?

A foregone conclusion.

A mere formality.

He totally played into the hands of the politicians.

The rest is history.

I witnessed the events here in the UK, and am shocked by how many of the people who ridiculed him at the time, including his lack of education, now address him as a glorified, proud, fearless Sikh General.

Yes, they call him General!

He was an innocent man, honest and sincere as the day is long. But a General? Are Sikhs really that desperate that they equate his tactics with those of a General? I absolutely will credit him with fearlessness, courage and strength of character. He did not sell himself short. But a General? Come on, please, you Sikhs can do better than that. Give him plaudits, but let us not get carried away with overly emotional praise either.

Having said that, for me as a Sikh, he gave me the one thing no one else had delivered up to that point.

Let me explain.

While traveling Europe I would come across veterans of the first and the second European war (1914-18 and 1939-45) who many a time would present themselves to me as admirers of the Sikh soldiers and battalion, and who would salute me as an orthodox young Sikh. Apart for these European war veterans, everyone else would confuse me for an Arab, Muslim or indeed a Hindu. I was never recognised as a Sikh.

Because of this sincere, honest, earnest Sikh preacher, today I am recognised globally as a Sikh, part of a nation of people who gave up their own kingdom, their country, in order to free India.

My nation, a people I am proud to call my own, the Sikhs, made a selfless sacrifice foregoing their own nation for the sake of securing freedom for what is now more than a billion people in India.

Yes, the ruling classes cheated us out of a promise. But that is the political Hindu for you. The citizen Hindu and Muslim of India, by contrast, categorically maintains that we do deserve our own statehood. I thank them for their support.

Yet in today’s India, the arrogance of some Hindu politicians is leading them to proclaim that all citizens of India are Hindus.

I once again want to remind them that ‘Hindu’ is neither a race nor a religion.

Hindi is a communal language of communication that slowly gathered momentum following its birth just over one hundred and fifty years after the establishment of Sikhism.

Hindi is like the fabled pan-European language Esperanto. Nothing more and nothing less.

And as for Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale: Sikhs, he was a seasoned preacher, a Giani. He was not a Sant in any shape or form. Please, let us not get over emotional about his credentials. Let us be sincere in our evaluation.

As a Giani, what he achieved for Sikhism is that which the best amongst us will never be able to emulate or attain. He gave me global recognition, a global presence. And, no, I do not accept the excuse that globally, in the age of the internet, race Europeans mistake me for a Muslim. The truth is that they hate me because of the colour of my skin – pure and simple. It is race and culture hatred that they exercise. And the easiest way to murder me is to call me a Muslim. Race Europeans are neither that ignorant nor that stupid that they cannot tell me apart from a Muslim. Exactly how many Muslims in the western world walk around with their traditional very loose cloth wound around their heads? I have only ever seen three in all my years of living in race European countries.

So, the fact that the world now views me as a Sikh must be credited entirely to this one, very basically educated, sincere orator/preacher, who merely wanted the dignity and self-esteem of the Sikhs to be respected by the Hindu Government – the very Hindus who until 1946 had been slaves in their own land for just a little over one thousand years.

Sikhs deserve their dignity and self-esteem to be respected by the Hindu Government of India.

And on the anniversary death of this preacher I hope and pray it will begin to accept a world where Sikhs, Muslims, Buddhist, Jains, Christians and Hindus can live in peace with each other in the land we now call India: as autonomous cultures, languages, heritages, and dignities that together protect our collective defence, economy and infrastructure as these exist now.