What’s common between Netflix Chamkila and Trudeau’s trouble-infested Canada? They don’t get Punjab



Even in the weeks leading up to Chamkila’s assassination, there were massacres every other day. To airbrush all of this is sheer intellectual cowardice, if not a crime. And you know what, just as smug Bollywood filmmakers would like us to believe now that what Punjab — and the Sikhs — endured in 1988 was just some bad crime, Trudeau’s Canadians now see the Sikh diaspora gangs in their countries, who’ve all slipped through their immigration filters, though the same lens. Watch this week’s #NationalInterest with ThePrint Editor-in-chief Shekhar Gupta
———————————————————————————————
https://youtu.be/5FuElTft_e4

———————————————————————————————

Exclusive content, special privileges & more – Subscribe to ThePrint for Special benefits: https://theprint.in/subscribe/
———————————————————————————————
Connect with ThePrint
» Subscribe to ThePrint: https://theprint.in/subscribe/
» Subscribe to our YouTube Channel: https://bit.ly/3nCMpht
» Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/theprintindia
» Tweet us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/theprintindia
» Follow us on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/theprintindia
» Find us on LinkedIn : https://www.linkedin.com/company/theprint
» Subscribe to ThePrint on Telegram: https://t.me/ThePrintIndia
» Find us on Spotify: https://spoti.fi/2NMVlnB
» Find us on Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/3pEOta8

source

29 thoughts on “What’s common between Netflix Chamkila and Trudeau’s trouble-infested Canada? They don’t get Punjab”

  1. I didn’t find this analysis by sir as correct. Because the movie was from chamkil’s perspective. He was not interested in politics, he wanted to sing and died. The film never conclusively says why he dies. All the encounters with seperatist people shiwn in the film is documented. However the film never ans why he was killed. The film focus was on freedom/desire to sing and success by a poor non priviledge person. Because you are go political person you think this way.

    Reply
  2. He conveniently ignored the killing of Hindus not only in Punjab but in Haryana also, when he tried to give eg all of them are either local Hindus or labourers from Bihar (mostly hindu).
    Majority of Sikhs dies in police encounters, when they were attacking police and public with 47.

    Reply
  3. The whole truth is of course bigger than the sum of its parts. Thank you for contributing with your first hand, on-ground knowledge.
    Let us hope that serious unbiased research in the contemporary history of India is taken up while the likes of you are still around.

    Reply
  4. Till delhi ruling govt does not fulfill the promises done to punjab and sikhs since 1947…. Nothing is going to solve..by suppressing forcefully will only bring back the retaliation much stronger… u can keep tagging them terrorist, khalistani , separatist … it does not matter.

    Reply
  5. Isn’t your distillation of the film also damn simplistic and convenient to your narrative? Come on, the movie is not a thriller or a whodunnit. And btw, it blames everyone, not just 1 group of people or just because of 1 reason. Be more nuanced while criticising art!

    Reply
  6. कोई आश्चर्य नहीं कि पंजाब से संबंधित विषय होने के कारण शेखर जी इस पर गहराई से चर्चा करते हैं

    Reply
  7. This was an interesting episode, this situation with Canada and some parts of Bollywood is a classic example of since I was never effected by something so it never happened and is not happening & you know both Imtiaz and Canadian politicians especially Trudu (this is a deliberate mistake) & his party both will be called progressives.

    Reply
  8. Shekhar what you have said during this podcast , you should say it major forums around the world. This information which was collected by journalist/reporters like you and others like you need to be discussed in larger forums

    Reply
  9. at 6:35 you state that the separatist movement "has the fullest political support" in Canada. Can you please elaborate? Freedom of speech does not equate to support. The same freedom of speech exists in the US and UK and a small group in these countries does speak up about their objectives. What is the basis for your statement that only Canada provides 'the fullest political support' for a separatist movement?

    Reply

Leave a Comment