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

Re: The Cheese vs Onion uttapam debate - part 2



---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
naveen, 
Its true that i picked on your cheese example a little too much.  I
understand what you are saying though and i partially agree with you.  Esp,
in the farming sector.  I still think free markets is the answer.  However,
we have to fully include the cost of all inputs.  When excessive fertilizer
use degrades the land, there must be an appropriate costing done and there
should be a tax on fertilizers to account for that degradation, instead of
the current subsidy.  When pesticides harm the environment, or cars pollute
for example, the appropriate cost of the commons used (air and ground water
quality) has to be included.  This is extremely difficult, and the large
corporations will definitely oppose it.  At the same time, you should agree
that there is no way to practically build a non-free market system.  How
will you force environmentally sustainable farming practises if unsound
practises are profitable.  The "unsoundness" has to be included in the cost
of the article.  I think if you read "small is beautiful", the author
explains it very well.  I do not agree with everything the author says, but
I strongly agree with his opinion that the cost of environmental damage is
not going into the products.  The markets are skewed by all sorts of taxes
and subsidies.  Often these subsidies are at odds with good environmental
habits.  IMHO, all human activity causes some pollution and hence
degradation of the environment (which is common to all of us).  Those who
earn the most (tobacco companies, petroleum companies, autos etc) also
pollute the most.  Essentially, when an accurate cost of pollution is
included, the market will automatically veer to the most sustainable and
environmentally optimal solution.
AP



--- Naveenkj@aol.com wrote:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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 
> exclusively.  
> 
> 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.  
> 
> Peace,
> 
> Naveen     
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
> Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------


=====
Ah, Love ! could thou and I with Fate conspire, To grasp this sorry scheme
of Things entire, Would not we shatter it to bits ---- and then, Re-mould
it nearer to the Heart's Desire !

Jab purdah nahi koi khudah seh, to bandhon se purdah kya.

Abhijeet A. Pradhan, 44J, Reading Rd, Edison, NJ 08817
Tel #: 732-452-1157      email: perdi420@yahoo.com
http://www.geocities.com/perdi420/       http://www.thethinkingindian.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/


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