1984
Nationalism: Who Am I?
by SIMRAN JEET SINGH
Sometimes, I’m not totally sure who I am.
Not in the crazy, lost-my-mind kind of way.
And not in the spiritual or philosophical kind of way either.
What I mean is that I don’t always know how to categorize myself. New Yorker? American? Indian? Punjabi? Texan? Sikh?
In most cases, I don’t struggle with these sorts of labels.
I’m well aware that general terms like these don’t come close to capturing our particularities. I also understand that, like everyone else, I’m a unique combination of “all of the above.”
Sometimes, though, we’re forced to select one of our multiple identities, and that’s when things get a little messy.
I was put into this sort of position just a couple weeks ago, and it’s been pretty challenging for me.
To make a long story short, I was invited to be a representative at the Parade of Nations for the 2011 ING New York City Marathon. It’s a huge honor, and the organizers were gracious enough to offer me the option of either serving as a delegate for the country of my birth (U.S.A.) or the country from which my parents immigrated (India).
While I feel extremely fortunate and humbled to have been selected, I also feel uncomfortable in having to choose between my national identities. I’ve never really had to make this decision so publicly before.
Indian or American? How could I choose?
Initially, I found myself leaning towards my American identity. I was born and raised in San Antonio, and even though I don’t fit the profile of a typical Texan (10-gallon turban, anyone?), it seems natural to me that I’d identify with America more
than any other country.
As I thought about it a bit more, I weighed the pros and cons of representing India.
On the positive side, I figured I’d be more noticeable since the pool of Indians is so small. (South Asians aren’t exactly known for being world-class athletes, so it probably doesn’t come as a surprise that only a handful of us are running in the ING
New York City Marathon.)
I also feel a connection with South Asia as the homeland of my parents, native language, and religious tradition.
On the other hand, however, I would feel extremely uneasy representing a country like India that has demonstrated a consistent willingness to support and perpetrate human rights violations against its own citizens.
Space is limited here, so I’ll just draw on a timely example that comes from the community I know best - the Sikhs.
On October 31, 1984, the Prime Minister of India was assassinated by her two Sikh bodyguards. In response to this assassination, mobs swarmed the capital city of New Delhi and started hunting down Sikh civilians. Eyewitness accounts report that the mobs were led by government officials, who incited the crowds and provided them with weapons and addresses of Sikh households and businesses.
The mob violence continued unabated for three days following the assassination, and by the time the police finally intervened,
thousands of innocent Sikhs had been killed.
Independent inquiries have clearly demonstrated the Indian Government’s complicity in the mob violence, and with the help of first-person accounts, they have identified a number of elected officials who were directly involved in organizing the pogroms.
However, more than a quarter-century has passed and not a single person has been held accountable for the violence that India unleashed on its own citizens.
It’s shocking that there are strong cases against three government officials - Jagdish Tytler, Sajjan Kumar, and Kamal Nath, to name a few - yet each of them has been gradually climbing the professional ranks within the government since participating in these atrocities.
It’s even more eye-opening when one realizes that this isn’t just a one-time thing. It’s a pattern.
The Government of India consistently perpetrates and condones major human rights violations against its own citizens, and instead of punishing the leaders responsible for their crimes, it rewards them.
How could I allow myself to represent a country like that?
The United States is hardly in the same class as India, a country that’s been described by Human Rights Watch as having “significant human rights problems.”
I’m not saying the U.S is perfect. I don’t agree with all of our political decisions, and I also realize that we’re not entirely clear of human rights violations. There’s a lot that can be improved.
Yet I find that the values and ideals of my religion, Sikhism, resonate more closely with those of America. Like the Sikh religion, the U.S. is founded on freedom, quality, and justice. This is the appeal of America, and it’s precisely why my parents immigrated here.
Thinking through all this has helped me develop a deeper appreciation of how fortunate and proud I am to be American. It’s also become increasingly clear to me that I don’t identify with the Indian State.
To be totally honest, I don’t totally buy into the whole nationalism thing. While it allows us to connect with others who belong to the same group, it also causes us to distinguish ourselves from people of other groups.
This distinction causes for a different kind of nation - alienation - and that’s where things don’t sit well with me. I don’t buy the assumption that people are more valuable because they belong to a particular nation. For example, I don’t believe that the life of an American is worth more or less than any other human life.
I’m proud to be American, but not at the expense of dehumanizing others.
I guess some people might think I’m taking things too seriously, and I’m sure that most people don’t really care whether I serve as a delegate for the U.S. or India at the ING New York City Marathon’s Parade of Nations.
But it matters to me, and I can’t help but think that these issues are of global importance.
Just making a tiny bit of difference in the world, for me, would make all the difference in the world.
[Courtesy: The Huffington Post]
November 3, 2011
Conversation about this article
1: Harinder (Uttar Pradesh, India), November 03, 2011, 10:24 AM.
Who are we? Sikh, Punjabi, Indian, South-Asian, Asian, American, North American, Earth dwellers, or inhabitors of the Solar system? The Milky Way-ans? "koi naam na jaaney tera!"
2: Kirpal Singh (Daytona Beach, Florida, U.S.A.), November 03, 2011, 10:59 AM.
Excellent article! I completely concur and empathize with your feelings and conclusions. Very well described. Bravo indeed!
3: Mahanjot Sodhi (Mississauga, Ontario, Canada ), November 03, 2011, 1:06 PM.
Awesome article! Could relate to each and every word written, and am pretty sure the majority of the Sikh diaspora will echo the same emotions all across.
4: Baldev Singh (Bradford, United Kingdom), November 03, 2011, 6:09 PM.
Ideally, it should be: I am a homo sapien.
5: G. Singh (Palatine, Illinois, U.S.A.), November 03, 2011, 7:12 PM.
Simranjeet Singh, you have put forth some interesting and well articulated thoughts. It is true that we juggle identities and owe allegiance to one or more, based upon where we are in life and what is important to us at the time. Nationalism, Einstein mused many moons ago - and it is no less true today - is "an infantile disease" and nothing more than a rationale "for militarism and aggression". For years, I have consistently raised my voice against the terrorism practiced by the Indian state, and against the numerous and ongoing violations against life and liberty in India. Yet, I find myself saddened by, what appears to me, your knee-jerk dismissal of India and a somewhat naive embrace of the U.S. There is, no doubt, much to admire about these United States of America and their stated values. There is also, no doubt, much to dislike about India's human rights record and its denial of justice and accountability. This comparison, however, is instructive. Actually, the comparison is unfair. If we are to compare two (or more) states, then it is fair only if we compare them according to the same criterion/criteria. We would not be served well by comparing our ideals to the practice of others. That would be misleading.
6: Jagdeep Singh (New Delhi, India), November 03, 2011, 7:56 PM.
I don't know where you're coming from, Mr. "G. Singh", but I can certainly see where you are going - a pathetic obfuscation of the facts and a pointless chasing the tail of an argument round and round. Here are the facts: ONE Sikh was killed in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 in America, in a case of mistaken identity. The culprit was promptly brought to justice, and steps were immediately taken by the authorities to prevent such further incidents. Now over to India: thousands of innocent men, women and children were massacred by mobs in broad daylight, particularly in the country's capital, while the police, the military, the politicians, the authorities, and the public ... all looked on. From the prime minister down to the dregs of society, much of the country has become complicit in the murders, either by acts of omission or commission, or 'after-the-fact' by pretending it never happened - and then there are those like you who prefer to gaze at their navels and come up with convoluted excuses and apologias. Here's the bottom line: regardless of the fact that no society in the world is perfect, and Lord knows America is far from it, 1984 and the 27 years since have proved that neither the government nor most of the people of India deserve being called a "civilized" nation, in the proper sense of the term. In contrast, the U.S., with all of its failings - and there are many! - stands at the opposite end of the spectrum. Finally, I can only conclude that either you do not have the mental capacity to understand the injustices perpetrated against Sikhs in and since 1984, or you have no interest in doing so - for whatever reason. There simply cannot be a third explanation.
7: N. Singh (Canada), November 03, 2011, 10:17 PM.
Bravo, Jagdeep Singh ji: Well said! To add further to your argument, I would like say that there have been and always will be 'rogue' elements within any government, police force or army but the difference lies in how any given society deals with these 'rogue' elements. After the release of the pictures from Abu Graib there was a public outcry at these human right violations. Both the media as well as elements within the U.S. government pushed for justice. On the other hand, the Indian army has an illustrious record of human rights abuses dating all the way back to Sri Lanka, the Punjab, Kashmir and now the North-Eastern States ... and there has never been a public outcry and no justice for the victims. Quite recently, rogue American soldiers were tried and found guilty of having 'killing teams' who attacked innocent civilian Afghans and again, also recently, there was a case of two Kashmir women being raped and killed by Indian troops and as is typical in India no one was bought to justice. India, it appears, is on a different planet altogether.
8: Arvinder (U.S.A.), November 04, 2011, 2:30 PM.
Does it really matter who you are, Simranjeet? You are not born Sikh, Indian, American, Asian or European. I was born in a Sikh family, so believe in Sikh teachings because I was raised in that environment and remember Waheguru through the Sikh path. I was born in India so that makes me of Indian-descent and now I am an American because this is my home. And yet it does not bother me at all about my real identity because I am ME and that is what is really important.
9: Manpreet Kaur Gill (Australia), January 05, 2012, 9:45 AM.
Simranjeet, great article! I was just sitting here nodding my head whilst reading it. Definitely relate to it. G. Singh: why are you saddened by Simranjeet's "knee-jerk dismissal of India"? How can you (as a Sikh) expect any Sikh to relate to or identify with India after '84? Sure, you can turn around and say that either we or our ancestors were born there and we should not disassociate ourselves from India, even though horrible people rule that country. Say if a Sikh-American found a cure for cancer, would you want a country like that to be taking credit for it? One thing I would like to add. I've heard that recently the stray dogs in Punjab (around the villages) have been killing and eating (small animals and humans) while traveling in huge packs. A 10-12 year old boy around my dad's village was killed. The government is not doing anything about it. So how do you feel, G. Singh, of relating to a country that can fund and support the genocide of Sikhs but can't even clear the streets of rabid dogs?