Comments on: In the Army Now

By: lifelong

lifelong — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 21:15:27 +0000

Late to the party as usual. I just wanted to say how proud I am when I see this photo and article. Thank you Amardeep.

By: JT

JT — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 22:51:10 +0000

In the case of Sikhs, I know that there are many Ravidass gurudwaras throughout the UK and now some are emerging in other communities with substanial Sikh populations. There have also been large scale protests by Ravidassis against casteism in the Sikh religion, following the assassination of Sant Ramanand. I don’t know what proportion of Jatts engage in casteist practices, but it’s substanial enough to provoke a lot of anger and isolation. For all their faults, Hindus don’t appear to have been riven to the same extent by caste divisions. I agree that all Sikhs can’t be tarred by the actions of some, but the same is true of Brahmins and Hindus.

By: Moni

Moni — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:35:16 +0000

@jt

Its pointless discussing it if you're going to talk about "some people" who do this or that. In any religion you can find enough examples to justify anything you want to say. There are too many people who bastardize any religion.

By: Ghuriya

Ghuriya — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 08:35:54 +0000

This is wonderful news! It’s been such a long fight and it’s gratifying to see their success. The arguments against their inclusion about compromising unit cohesion and a uniform appearance are the same arguments that were used to keep the armed forces segregated, to exclude women from the military and is still present in the rhetoric in support of DADT. Before regulations were enacted and rigidly enforced, at least a dozen turbaned Sikh men served in the US military during war and peace time without incident. There are also documented incidents where turbaned Sikh men were able to successfully act as liasons in Afghanistan between soldiers and local communities. I’m not sure why but this isn’t the first time I’ve heard of Sikh men holding a position of respect in Middle-Eastern countries. This is a small but promising step

By: JT

JT — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 08:20:17 +0000

The Chamars and Chuhras have historically encountered plenty of religious discrimination at the hands of Jatts. It's a common occurence for Jatts to refuse Chamar/Chuhra langaar because it's "unclean" and to maintain other caste practices in the gurudwaras. This has made the latter two groups eager to establish their own places of worship.

You can argue that Sikhism is against these practices in theory, but in practice the Sikhs haven't behaved any better than the Brahmins that they are so critical of. With the recent incidents between the Jatts and Ravidass community, one might argue that Sikhs have gotten even worse than Hindus.

Tell me if I'm wrong, but didn't Guru Nanak marry his children off to other Khatris?

By: Moni

Moni — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 10:42:34 +0000

@JT – It’d be more accurate if there were separate gurudwaras for jatts, papey, etc. Chamars and others you listed have varying beliefs. And the original comment was sikhism rejects casteism. It doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist in our culture. My mom will have a heart attack when i marry a non jatti. Sikhism also rejects drinking alcohol. I think punjabi sikhs could give the irish a run for their money when it comes to drinking. So yes, while there is a very real presence of casteism, it does not mean sikhism is not against it. There are many aspects where punjabi culture overtakes religion. Its a fact that sikhism is fundamentally against casteism. There is no denying that.

By: filomene

filomene — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 03:48:16 +0000

“That’s why I rarely read the comment sections of online newspaper articles, whether regional or national–too many trolls of all kinds and especially right-wing trolls.”

What is the difference between a troll and a comment with which you disagree? Maybe you’re just out-voted. The 80%/20% (former supportive of the Sikhs, latter not so much) dichotomy sounds about right for the opinions that I detect and other studies and polls I’ve encountered in reviewing military news, personnel, and records. Sikhs and Hindus had a long history of serving in the British army, with relatively little angst about it, so I’m not too surprised that Sikhs should find a career with the military of their current country. Most of the problems come with [many] Americans’ ignorance of why turbans are worn. They confuse them with head coverings worn bfory Muslims. Because of the situation in the middle east, Islam, does raise problems of loyalty with some Muslims. I’m not saying it has to, but for now, it does. Sikhs, however, are a different story, and emphasis is being put on making people in the military aware that different religious and ethnic customs don’t necessarily conflict with the doing the job they willingly sign up to do.

By: JT

JT — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 07:13:34 +0000

I think having more Sikhs in the US military will go a long way towards clearing up misconceptions people often have. Good job Dr Rattan!

After all, sikhism rejects the casteism, idol worship and polytheism of brahminism.

Really? There are different gurdwaras for Jatts, Chamars, Valmiki Chuhras, and Tharkhans. Why is that?

It seems to me that, despite what the Gurus preached, casteism has managed to persist even among the Sikhs. Khalistan, to some extent, was a caste conflict. As was the flare up over the assassination of the Ravidass Guru in Vienna.

By: Vikrant

Vikrant — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 15:13:36 +0000

Were any Marathis massacred when Mohandas Gandhi was killed?

@kodak moment:Sorry to butt in... I occasionally read this blog and seldom comment. But yeah it is a well known fact that Congress workers did murder and drive out Marathis esp. Brahmins from large swathes of Central India (esp around Nagpur). The incident however i suspect got lost, given that the magnitude of partition killings which were going on, ecllipsed this event.

By: TTCUSM

TTCUSM — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 04:03:38 +0000

Oops… I didn’t see SM Intern’s warning at #57. Please feel free to delete my comment at #59.