[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

The Cheese vs Onion uttapam debate - part 2

Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
I think the principle of Democratic Socialism that I was advocating through 
the example of Cheese uttapam vs. Onion uttapam has been widely misunderstood 
by many of you.  I do not believe in restricting peoples' freedoms.  If 
Prakash chooses to eat cheese uttapams that should be his prerogative.  
However, I was speaking on behalf of the onion uttapam sellers who should be 
given a fair chance to compete against the introduction of a new commodity in 
an equal playing field.  By this I do not insist a ban on cheese uttapams nor 
am I relegating the monopoly of the uttapam industry to onion uttapam sellers 

I think instead of viewing this issue on terms of uttapams, a better example 
of farm production might prove potent in expressing my point.  Soon after 
Indian Independence the introduction of Ford Food processing in India 
resulted in the destruction of the traditional methods of farming and 
instituting mechanized farming systems.  This led to the displacements of 
many farmers and rural communities.  High chemical use on these farmlands to 
produce crops not indigenous to the native soil also resulted in further 
destruction of the environment.  Moreover, the farming industry was utilized 
by these foreign cartels to produce crash crops not in producing the 
necessary food needed to feed the Indian population, even when chronic hunger 
was on a steady rise and there was clear need for production of more food.  
Even when surplus food was produced they were often exported rather than 
serving the Indian hungry.  (Whatever happened to market economics?).  As it 
is the case with capitalism, the market does not respond to the demands of 
everyone, it only bends to the demands of those with the most $$.  The 
bourgeoisie Indian elite gained through this measure, as big landowners and 
as consumers of Raymond Suits and Shirts, at the expense of poor farmers and 
local ecological destruction.  

Drastic changes such as this to the local economy and production values must 
be discussed in full detail with the local community and should only take 
place upon the approval of the autochthonous people.  Unfortunately through 
globalization decisions are being made by a group of elitists in Geneva 
without giving much attention to the social, political, and economic well 
being of these communities.  Their actions have thus far produced negative 
ramifications, and therefore should be stopped. 

I frequently see market economics and globalization floating around IPI as 
the Holy Grail for India's issues with poverty and chronic hunger.  How wrong 
they are!  How blatant it is to see the effects of capitalism: leading to 
further poverty and malice and not equality and justice.  Economic democracy 
is the answer; hoping to bring economic justice.  Individualism should be 
marked with socialism.  No, they are not contradictory terms.  
Individualism's respect for the freedom and sanctity of an individual should 
be coupled with the same respect given to others of the community.  When one 
interest of an individual, say the desire to eat a cheese uttapam, conflicts 
the desires of the other 99% of the population it must be made clear that the 
sanctity of those other individuals should also be respected.  In which case 
there must exist a system that can accommodate the need of ALL individuals 
and not simply those with high capital to invest (in the supply side), and 
those with high buying power (on the demand side).  

I hope I have cleared up my contentions quite a bit

I welcome your constructive criticism.  



This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/