Here in the US, we might struggle through the issues, yes. As that cigar-chomping English racist remarked, Americans will always do the right thing, only after we have tried everything else. Makes me wonder why we always have to take the long, long, long road to do the right thing.
But, at least here we end up doing the right thing. I increasingly worry that the trend in the old country is one of doing the wrong things. Today's exhibit: vegetarianism.
Of course, this is not the first time that I am blogging about the vegetarian existence. But, here is an important distinction to keep in mind: I don't make an "ism" out of a preferred way of life. The moment an "ism" is framed, it immediately leads to an us-versus-them, which is what is rapidly unfolding in India.
The problem is that when vegetarianism—and what you eat in general—is associated with morality, it serves to strengthen distinctions, marking class, education and other indicators of status.Any holier-than-thou approach, especially in the political space, is bound to be disastrous.
In a national landscape moving towards a narrow definition of what it means to be Indian—specifically, Hindu and high caste, and specifically not Muslim—such distinctions have potentially serious consequences.Ah, yes, the caste issue comes up again. The religion issue comes up again. And you thought food is an easy topic, eh!
We can already see its effects in cities such as Mumbai, where the discourse of purity and pollution around what you eat is so powerful that certain groups are denied access to the housing market on account of their dietary choices. If you belong to the “non-vegetarian” groups—including anyone from Muslims to Christians to Maharashtrians to Dalits—it can be difficult to purchase or rent an apartment. Potential buyers are turned away, presumably, because smells from their kitchen might pollute a neighbour’s flat. With vegetarianism used as a distinguisher between “us” and “them”, Mumbai is becoming an increasingly hostile place for religious minorities.The struggle will not be resolved anytime soon in the old country. Nor here in the US. When individuals claim that their "faith" prevents them from supporting a commercial transaction, societies will have quite a struggle trying to resolve the incompatibility between a secular political democracy with those faith-based practices. Here in the US, chances are high that the food fight will end up in the Supreme Court. Remember the bakery here in Oregon that refused service to a same-sex couple? The baker in Colorado?
The ACLU (yes, I am a card-carrying member) argues:
There’s a growing body of court decisions saying that while religion is central to what makes America America, religion can’t be used as an excuse to discriminateThe other side argues:
Government has a duty to protect people’s freedom to follow their beliefs personally and professionally rather than force them to adopt the government’s viewsHere it is cakes. There it is meat. All I know is this: we Americans will always do the right thing, only after we have tried everything else. I can't say that about the old country, however.