Another Good Post on the Topic
By Jagjit Singh, again.
And again, I don't agree with everything he's said...almost everything though.
This is probably the biggest domestic news issue in England at the moment, and its even getting some play in some North American cities.
Its largely becoming symbolic for the 'fight' for freedom of speech in England, which is genuinely under attack by ridiculous censorship laws. However, I don't think this story is representative of that debate at all. Mostly because the vast, vast majority of demonstrators are peaceful, and they're not calling for the state to forcefully censor the authors of the play... they're simply 'peacefully protesting' to ask for some relatively minor adjustments.
Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa! Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!
Pyare jio, although a post mortem may be pre-mature with the possiblilty of the play going to another venue. Still we need to evaluate so far, and improve ourselves, learning lessons, so that we do not make the same mistakes again.
LEARNING LESSONS - in my opinion:-
1. Apart from a few notable exceptions, Mohan Singh, Jasdev Singh, most of our media representation has been poor, neither concise, nor capable of winning the argument. Our spokespersons should learn from modern day politicians and leaders. The way you talk to media, is you have 2 or 3 vital argument winning points, and push them. Do not degress, waffle, or speculate. We also need more youth contributing on radio discussions, emailing news media and working on responding in a Gurmat manner.
2. The strategy has been good from The Birmingham sikhs. This is not a question of censorship, but a question of context in terms of the setting of the play,and its bringing sikhism into it. Change the setting and we have no problem. This is the message which need to be drilled more into the media. Plus that fact we support freedom of speech, our Guru were shaheed for it, but it needs to sensible and factual, and not abused with the sole intention to benefit from the publicity of controversy. This is what needs to be highlighted.
3. Youth need to stop relying on elders with hidden agendas, and become far more prominent in seva. Clearly much of this could have prevented if our so-called leaders were not more worried about their own agendas during pre-screening and far more vocal then. Birmingham singhs really need to look at this, and remove those who have performed particularly badly in representing us.
4. Violence - this is not something we should be proud of. We should see how everyone has jumped on that, and it has encouraged thier position on us censoring them. Yes, it has made them take us seriously, but sikhs need to be wary of being seen as thugs. When questioned about this, our leaders need to condemn it. Not say they have no control over youth, this is poor. Instead they should highlight the countryside alliance protests, and show hot-headedness is in every community. Also mention, there is probably more disturbances on a saturday night in town centres, and this is being blown out of propotion. It is the Brom Rep, who cannot guarantee the safety of children, no us sikhs.
5. THE WRITER - a olive branch should be presented to the writer. The leaders of the protests should send out a statement, that if the writer will apologise for the setting on the play in a Gurdwara, and change this. Then we as Sikhs will welcome this and draw a line under this matter. But a clear apology for the setting of the play is essential! Although some may disagree with this, I feel this is essential to show we as Sikhs are trying to resolve it in a sensible way, and we are not "fatwa-like muslim fanatics". If you watch todays Channel 4 coverage it was hinted it was only middle-aged fundamental men who are protesting, hinting they have something to hide. I think we should put the pressure on the writer rather than letting her be a "Martyr to Freedom of Speech". It will also counter the whole threats things, as we are willing to have structured dialogue with her.
Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa! Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!
And again, I don't agree with everything he's said...almost everything though.
This is probably the biggest domestic news issue in England at the moment, and its even getting some play in some North American cities.
Its largely becoming symbolic for the 'fight' for freedom of speech in England, which is genuinely under attack by ridiculous censorship laws. However, I don't think this story is representative of that debate at all. Mostly because the vast, vast majority of demonstrators are peaceful, and they're not calling for the state to forcefully censor the authors of the play... they're simply 'peacefully protesting' to ask for some relatively minor adjustments.
Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa! Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!
Pyare jio, although a post mortem may be pre-mature with the possiblilty of the play going to another venue. Still we need to evaluate so far, and improve ourselves, learning lessons, so that we do not make the same mistakes again.
LEARNING LESSONS - in my opinion:-
1. Apart from a few notable exceptions, Mohan Singh, Jasdev Singh, most of our media representation has been poor, neither concise, nor capable of winning the argument. Our spokespersons should learn from modern day politicians and leaders. The way you talk to media, is you have 2 or 3 vital argument winning points, and push them. Do not degress, waffle, or speculate. We also need more youth contributing on radio discussions, emailing news media and working on responding in a Gurmat manner.
2. The strategy has been good from The Birmingham sikhs. This is not a question of censorship, but a question of context in terms of the setting of the play,and its bringing sikhism into it. Change the setting and we have no problem. This is the message which need to be drilled more into the media. Plus that fact we support freedom of speech, our Guru were shaheed for it, but it needs to sensible and factual, and not abused with the sole intention to benefit from the publicity of controversy. This is what needs to be highlighted.
3. Youth need to stop relying on elders with hidden agendas, and become far more prominent in seva. Clearly much of this could have prevented if our so-called leaders were not more worried about their own agendas during pre-screening and far more vocal then. Birmingham singhs really need to look at this, and remove those who have performed particularly badly in representing us.
4. Violence - this is not something we should be proud of. We should see how everyone has jumped on that, and it has encouraged thier position on us censoring them. Yes, it has made them take us seriously, but sikhs need to be wary of being seen as thugs. When questioned about this, our leaders need to condemn it. Not say they have no control over youth, this is poor. Instead they should highlight the countryside alliance protests, and show hot-headedness is in every community. Also mention, there is probably more disturbances on a saturday night in town centres, and this is being blown out of propotion. It is the Brom Rep, who cannot guarantee the safety of children, no us sikhs.
5. THE WRITER - a olive branch should be presented to the writer. The leaders of the protests should send out a statement, that if the writer will apologise for the setting on the play in a Gurdwara, and change this. Then we as Sikhs will welcome this and draw a line under this matter. But a clear apology for the setting of the play is essential! Although some may disagree with this, I feel this is essential to show we as Sikhs are trying to resolve it in a sensible way, and we are not "fatwa-like muslim fanatics". If you watch todays Channel 4 coverage it was hinted it was only middle-aged fundamental men who are protesting, hinting they have something to hide. I think we should put the pressure on the writer rather than letting her be a "Martyr to Freedom of Speech". It will also counter the whole threats things, as we are willing to have structured dialogue with her.
Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa! Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!
posted by Japnaam Singh at
1:33 PM
4 Comments:
"This is not a question of censorship, but a question of context in terms of the setting of the play,and its bringing sikhism into it. Change the setting and we have no problem."= Censorship, exactly. It bugs me when people say this isn't censorship, just change this or that. That is censorship! The reason Sikh leadership seems inarticulate is that it is trying to call for censorship without seeming like it is.
The more I read about this play, the more I think it was probably gratuitously inflammatory -- it might have offended (or at least annoyed) even me. But what the Sikh community needed to do here was make it clear that there was a problem, and then stop. Real freedom of speech is the ability to tolerate what offends you.
Censorship implies a sense of force.
And that's why its usually associated with the state.
This isn't censorship because although they're being offended, they aren't using FORCE to stop the production of the play. (Well, most of them aren't anyway.)
They're demonstrating with what seems to be genuine concern, and 'asking' not 'forcing' the play producers to slightly alter the content.
And I agree that they haven't gone about it in the smartest way...
Agreed that censorship requires force. Until the theater was sacked on Saturday, I myself was publicly saying that this wasn't a case of censorship. Standing on the sidewalk, carrying signs is fine -- though people who are doing it have an ethical obligation to see the play or read the script first (few people had done so, even in Birmingham).
But Breaking glass, destroying doors, injuring policeman... that's violence.
It doesn't matter whether we use the word censorship that much. "Intimidation" is just as bad.
You're arguing that it's a small number of people. My friend in Birmingham, a guy named Harpreet, told me a different story in an email he sent me.
You might argue that this is some goonda elements in the community. But I think the leadership in the Gurdwaras in Birmingham (and even other parts of England) knew exactly what it was doing when it whipped up a frenzy over this play. They also bear some responsibility.
In general, I think Sikhs need to develop a thicker skin, and a greater tolerance for disagreements, differing interpretations, and criticism.
I still think that the media coverage of the thugs at the demonstrations is overblown.
Even if those thugs number in the dozens, they still don't represent any portion of mainstream UK Sikh thought.
If this was an issue solely about those causing violence, it would be a pretty simple and basic thing. Everyone, including myself would simply condemn the actions of those teenagers and move on with life.
However, its not that simple, because the actions of a few dozen people (at most) have come to represent mainstream Sikh beliefs, and thats why this is such an annoying issue.
I genuinely do not believe that any Gurdvara committee members or anybody of genuine 'leadership' within the community condoned or took part in the violence. If someone provides evidence to the contrary, I'd be more than willing to recognize a deeper, more profound problem.
Until that happens, I still consider this relatively 'isolated'... and something that will die down soon.
Normally, I don't like to talk-down my community, but Sikhs, in general, have become quite useless over the past decade when it comes to causing a stir or creating havoc of any kind. Which is good in a sense, but its also reflective of a childish obsession with not wanting to offend anybody. Sikhs are almost exclusively passivist in nature... only some teenagers out there are actually 'militant' in any sense.
Post a Comment
<< Home