The Samvad Document was put forth as an example by Neo-Khalistanis of an already well established document that invalidates the necessity of any other project or approach.
So when the Azadism project was started to detail how a Sikh state could work, primarily focusing on the economic system, they claim that this is "deliberate erasure of Sikh political thought on governance". They further claim that:
“For decades, Sikh intellectuals, activists, and Panthic scholars—including Bhai Daljit Singh Bittu and various militant leaders—have extensively outlined models of Sikh governance that move beyond the Western nation-state paradigm. Yet, the manifesto pretends these discussions never existed.
Bhai Daljit Singh Bittu’s Samvaad document (2020) provides a Panthic governance framework rooted in Sarbat Khalsa, Gurmatta (collective decision-making), and the principles of Halemi Raj and Begampura—all of which reject Western governance models.”
The Azadist Manifesto did not ignore they existed, the author was adding their contribution since there was no evidence that they actually had "extensively outlined models of Sikh governance".
This was apparent when the author and others would ask proponents of Khalistan the question "how would it work" and then one of the following things would happen:
"We'll figure it out after we get Khalistan".
"It would be like Maharaja Ranjit Singh's Raaj", which is a deeply flawed answer for a number of reasons — we'll cover it in upcoming posts (and have explained before).
Some sort of socialist model or Keynesian type "middle-grounding" would be suggested, which is also problematic and has been exposed as why in many posts Bunga Azaadi has produced in the past.
No coherent answer would be given and the discussion would be abstracted to generic anti-western rhetoric, rather than any actual policy planning or practical suggestions. We will also address the blind aversion to anything "western" in another post as well.
When you ask most people who are put off Khalistan, why they are, the number one reason is due to a lack of practicality.
No wonder, when the above are the types of answers being put forward. If governance models have already been established for decades, why are modern Neo-Khalistanis unable to provide sufficient answers when asked, and why are most people who reject Khalistan doing so on the basis of a lack of viability?
The Samvad Document
Lets move on to the Samvad Document. We may do a more comprehensive breakdown of the document if there is interest*, however for brevity, I'll just give my thoughts on it as related to the claim that it is an example of an "extensively outlined model of Sikh governance".
*We would love to speak with anyone about the document live on our Discord if they have read it and can explain it. A discussion based review would be preferred.
The document itself is 27 pages long which should be an immediate red flag to suggest that it perhaps is not enough to "extensively outline models of Sikh governance". I know this is not enough, because the Azadist Manifesto was 277 pages and that was primarily only focused on the economics, and even that was not enough. Hence why we expanded upon it via further Vichaars with the development of Bunga Azaadi.
Unless… the purpose of the document is not for Sikh governance in the sense of a government for a state ran as per Sikhi, but instead for the purpose of outlining how Sikhs should govern themselves as a religious community. These are two different problem sets and the Neo-Khalistanis failure to recognise that is quite hilarious.
The Azadist Manifesto was dealing with how a Sikh State would work, not how Sikhs should make decisions amongst themselves. I have written about the latter outside the Manifesto however, and it is available in Bunga Azaadi's Vichaar Repository with the Vichaar labelled "Sarbat Khalsa".
I am also currently reviewing a set of suggestions proposed by the Free Akaal Takht team on this as well, which I respect the effort of a lot. Both subjects are important, and can be related, but they are not the same thing, nor does the presence of one invalidate the necessity or "erase" the other.
No where in the Samvad Document does it talk about tax structures, minimum wage policies, positions on price controls, inequality management strategies, poverty alleviation methods, education systems, healthcare frameworks or anything you would expect to see from a "extensively outlined model of Sikh governance" as applied to a Sikh State. Which is fine if that was not its purpose (and NKs have a clear habit of missing the point of things). Yet, you will find details of all those above examples in the Azadist Manifesto.
Further work still needs to be done however, hence the point of Bunga Azaadi and our regular invitations to Sangat wishing to contribute their ideas, debate and do Vichaar.
Join The Bunga Azaadi Discord Server To Take Part In Our Sangat
The Samvad Document also highlights how it is also just a starting point as well and not a final conclusion. Both us as Azadists and the actual (classic) Khalistanis behind the Samvad Document and Sikh Siyasat seem to share that in common with our works, as we are just trying our own ways at advancing the cause of Sikh sovereignty.
Neo-Khalistanis, on the other hand, are only good for being “Keyboard Kharkus” with their victimhood narratives, sowing division and keeping projects apart. I was approached by a Neo-Khalistani very early on when I first released the Azadist Manifesto who was making similar claims that I didn't engage with the stuff being worked on in Punjab (he also did not seem to realise the point of Azadism). To which I simply said to him, "please put in me touch with them in that case".
They never did this, and instead later on I had members of other Sikh organisations tell me how Neo-Khalistani groups were spreading lies about our project behind the scenes and warning them not to interact with us. This I suspect was because the contents of the manifesto went against a lot of their radical leftist leanings and so they thought to suppress it.
I also did try reaching out to Sikh Siyasat myself and heard nothing back during a period where I was trying to reach out to every organisation I could think of, who you would expect be interested in doing Vichaar on Sikh statecraft, to present them Azadism. But ultimately I gave up on all that and just focused on the actual Sangat instead as much as I could and just build from scratch on my own (which in hindsight was a much better way given how much of a swamp the “Panthic” org space is).
So the real reason why the Bunga Azaadi project seems outside of the conventional self-proclaimed "Panthic" spaces, is simply because those spaces didn't make the effort to reciprocate. Collaboration and working together requires both sides to want it. Too many simply can’t see past their Sampardaic biases and political allegiances.
Lastly, the actual authors of the Samvad Document do seem to be open to hearing new ideas and are distinct from the group of Neo-Khalistanis claiming them in the west. My sources also tell me that the groups working on these efforts in Punjab do not even take these Neo-Khalistanis all that seriously either. So if any of them are interested in hearing proposals and feedback from Bunga Azaadi to improve processes or consider new perspectives, please get in touch. We would be happy offer our contributions professionally and rationally.
Share this post