Political differences exposed in BC South Asian Museum consultations

The BC NDP government may not have anticipated the blowback when it made a campaign promise in 2020 to create a new BC South Asian Museum. The Ministerial Advisory group, appointed by Arts and Culture Minister Lana Popham, created to guide the implementation of the museum promise has been called “insensitive”, and a “shit show” reflecting “incompetence”. A “predominantly Punjabi” group has been formed in opposition to the process which has named itself the Museum Liberation Force (MLF). The MLF, at a meeting held on April 2, 2024 at Surrey City Hall, is seeking $100 million to “get things started”. The MLF alleges that it has a right to these funds and that the term “South Asian” contains “violence”.

In response to increasing questions about the scope of the promised museum, in early April, the Minister announced that the BC Museum Association (BCMA) would manage a $500,000 consultation fund to which community groups could apply for up to $5000 each, to hold a community consultation.

Rungh News attended an official BCMA funded public consultation meeting held at the Port Coquitlam Community Centre on August 16, 2024. Hosted and moderated by Mithila Karnik-Adarkar, the panel of “community experts” noted on the event poster included Ravi Safaya, Nina Buddhdev, Asmita Lawrence, and Madhavee Inamdar. Inamdar is a member of the Ministerial Advisory group though her name does not appear on the government site related to the museum. Approximately 30 attendees wondered if the new museum would be based on the model of a multicultural quilt which was broadly inclusive or the model of a pie, where each specific community would have an equal share of the space.

As with the earlier Museum Liberation Force meeting in Surrey, the term “South Asian” was seen as not being appropriate for the proposed museum with one panelist stating that the “government has not fulfilled its responsibility” to understand South Asian diversity in British Columbia. The same speaker echoed a sentiment that was not challenged in the room, that the term “South Asian” was something that belonged in “Surrey”. The consultation included speakers who referenced the term “Bharat”, “ancient Aryavarta”, the Sanskrit language, and an ascendent Indian state which needed to be acknowledged in the museum.

One attendee named Ranjita, who disclosed that she had recently moved to British Columbia from India, switching between Hindi and fluent English, made disparaging comments about Pakistan, the Komagata Maru memorial sculpture near Coal Harbour, and “those who come to Canada from bad roots” and bring their problems here. Another attendee made a disparaging gesture referencing the dastār or turban associated with those of the Sikh faith. The moderator and others made attempts to create a more civil and inclusive conversation.

One attendee Neeraj was adamant that he did not want to be called “South Asian” because of how South Asian’s were perceived. While fluent in English he chose to speak in Hindi, and suggested that the museum should be named “Bharat Bhavan”. While “Bhavan” means “house or building” in the Hindi language, Part 1 of the Constitution of India, titled “The Union and its Territories”, begins with the statement: “India, that is Bharat, shall be a union of states.” Though India and Bharat are used interchangeably, the ruling Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has made a concerted effort to promote the use of “Bharat” in English over “India”. Hindu nationalists argue that Bharat is the Sanskrit term for the country found in ancient Hindu texts. However, minorities (Muslims, Sikhs, Christians) and linguistic groups are concerned that this shift signals a move towards transforming India from an inclusive nation into a Hindu-centric one with Hindi as the official language.

On the topic of politics, Madhavee Inamdar, a member of the Ministerial Advisory group noted that the “idea of the museum was a very political concept”. She disclosed that the conversations at the Ministerial Advisory group meetings were “very political”, and “very communal” where “some people think they own history”. She noted that the “Sikh community is really dominant” and she expressed a desire for a museum where history and values where shared and which extended beyond India to include Fiji, the diaspora in East Africa, and other South Asians.

The community consultation funding process being led by the BC Museum Association has ended. Funded community consultations are still ongoing and a final report will be prepared for early 2025, after the provincial election, which is to be held on October 19.