http://freedomteam.in/
ECONOMICS
Pages
Stay In Touch
More
© 2012 Sanjeev Sabhlok's revolutionary blog
Here's a conversation with Harsh Vora which is worth posting as a separate blog post, given it is a separate topic and raises fundamental issues in relation to liberty in India, and puts to question the capacity or knowledge of Baba Ramdev to elevate India to a major superpower. He does need to learn some basic economics. Yoga is not good enough to run a modern nation successfully.
HARSH
Hmm, what do you think about banning cow-slaughter in India? Swami Ramdev has been consistently rallying against cow-slaughter in India. He explains it well, "These politicians have no limit of wickedness. They ban the slaughter of tigers (which are carnivore), and allow free killing of cow (which are herbivore, and which have been considered as mother since ages). No animal should be allowed to be killed in Bharat Varsha, for all of them have the right to live."
He emphasizes the importance of cow not merely on the religious basis, but on moral and well as scientific grounds. Moral ground: They provide us milk. Until we are a certain age old, our biological mother breast-feeds us. And after that age, our cow feeds us with milk. So, they are are second-mother, and deserve to be respected. Scientific ground: Cow manure has been used as a beneficial fertilizer in farms. Cow urine helps us cure many diseases of the body. For example, the pH value of cow urine is 8-10 so it is a sure shot medicine for indigestion. Cow urine is anti-neoplastic which helps to cure cancer. These are just a few of the many benefits. Thus, cow should be given better if not less importance.
This, I strongly believe, is a legitimate reason raised by Swamiji. I fear we might not be on the same page, so far as this matter is concerned. Note that this has to do least with "organized religion," for conscience surely dictates that ALL beings have the right to live.
MY RESPONSE
Dear Harsh
My view is very simple. The cow is food in all parts of the world (except for a few Hindus and Jains in India), and Hindus ate the cow for thousands of years till the influence of the Jains made them change their mind.
Regardless of that, I don't expect the state to dictate what food a person may or may not eat. I don't expect it to create a law that you SHOULD eat beef, for instance.
The ONLY reason the state can impose its views on such matters is if you harm others in this process, or if doing so will harm the environment.
The cow is not a scarce animal. Plenty of cows exist and plenty more can be produced as needed. The tiger is a genuine scarce animal and being at the top of the ecological food chain of the jungle, the dying out of tigers can severely damage the natural environment. For instance if tigers die then all forests will be ravaged and destroyed by plant eating animals. Hence for tigers a different policy applies.
But the policy on tigers (see my article on the environment) does not ask that you don't kill tigers. It asks for tigers (indeed jungles) to be privatised and reared just like any other animal. Wherever wildlife has been privatised (Coase theorem will show you how it works), it has flourished.
There are innumerable instances of the truth of this theorem. There is, for instance, no threat of extinction of crocodiles in Australia since crocodile farms are licensed to grow them and sell their meat and skin. It is a highly profitable business. Eg. see this.
I respect yours or Baba Ramdev's right NOT to eat beef IF you so feel (on any ground, call it moral if you wish), but I REFUSE to have you impose your will through the state on this matter. That involves the TOTAL DESTRUCTION of freedom.
You will first have to prove to me that eating beef is harmful. The entire world except a few Hindus in India eats beef, and they haven't died. Note that Indians ate beef for thousands of years till the Jain influence grew strong. They didn't die. And I know of MANY MANY Indians who eat beef outside India. They aren't dying. So what's the problem? Food is supposed to nourish. What you or I or anyone else puts into our own mouths is none of the business of others.
If eating beef is not lethal and it doesn't kill others, then there is no cause to interfere in the freedoms of others to eat beef. I think Baba Ramdev is trying to impose HIS version of morality on the rest of the world. That amounts to dictatorship. Let him learn to respect others.
He is welcome not to kill cows for food. But let him please learn the basics of freedom.
Regards
Sanjeev
ADDENDUM
1) That Indians ate beef in the past is well documented, e.g. by Gandhi, Nehru, and also in a detailed book: Jha's Myth of the Holy Cow.
2) I believe animals must be treated respectfully and have clarified in detail in Chapter 4 of DOF. That does not mean that we elevate them to a pedestal equal to us.
3) It is a huge disincentive for farmers to raising cows in India (and hence most are KILLED UPON BIRTH) because they can't sell them freely in the market, except for milk, which they hardly produce any. What the Baba Ramdev policy will do is to ensure that MORE COWS ARE KILLED AT BIRTH. Is that what he wants? And why does he want to harm the Indian farmer who may well earn a decent livelihood by selling cows for meat?
4) Do you want to see how a cow should be treated and respected? Then visit Australian farms. You'll find cows allowed to roam freely and widely over a vast expanse of grass; their needs catered to carefully; their health monitored by veterinarians (who are paid MORE than doctors). And when they are taken to abbatoirs, the regulations require a very specific and humane way of killing them for meat. Compare with the way cows are often treated in India – with the GREATEST DISRESPECT, driven from one garbage heap to another, forced to live a sad and tragic life before finally being sold in underhand ways to people who will kill them without the slightest mercy and without access to modern machines. Want to show respect for something? Then privatise it. The owner will show it respect if it becomes an economic good.
ADDENDUM
I wasn't aware that this is a hot topic in India. E.g. http://www.mynews.in/Blog/Anti_Cow_Slaughter_Legislation_B942.htmlC
Chanced upon this: http://www.agriculturalproductsindia.com/meat-poultry-food/meat-poultry-food-beef.html
Facebook discussion: http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2212358147&topic=12702
If you found this post useful, then consider subscribing to my blog by email:
Join the Freedom Team of India or become a Freedom Partner.
Related posts:
- Now I’m concerned! Baba Ramdev’s ideas must change.
- Baba Ramdev needs to think more deeply
- My initial views on Baba Ramdev's movement
- Baba Ramdev a good man, but how does one get him to understand good policy?
- Is Baba Ramdev wasting everyone’s time!?
- There is no option but to stop Baba Ramdev’s fast unto death
- Baba Ramdev is turning out to be a godsend for the Congress
- India – you get the media you deserve. Demand More. और मांगो!
- Are we rational or irrational?
- The irrational fear of deflation
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
Dear Abhishek
Re: “From generations we are vegitarians and healthy as well, I don’t need to take lessions on what to eat.”
Did I EVER ask you to become a non-vegetarian? I have not only many (!) vegetarian friends but also many (!) vegetarian relatives. I don’t ask them to change their personal choices.
This is not about health, either. Health is determined by too many factors. Vegetarians can be happily as healthy (or more) than non-vegetarians.
This is about scientific facts: (a) acknowledging that our ancient ancestors were GUARANTEED to be meat eaters (that’s why those who eat meat can digest it); that (b) about 80% of the world’s humans eat meat; that (c) animal milk products (e.g. cow milk) are PURELY NON-VEGETARIAN, etc. etc.
Then this is about choice. All I say is that Baba Ramdev has no business imposing his religious and other dietary preferences on India. He should work to reform governance, not create a policy on what someone can eat in India. That’s not relevant to India’s prosperity.
Regards
Sanjeev
Dear Sir,
I am observing you are adamant for supporting cow’s killing not because of any logic but it is just because you think so. Since you are highly qualified you try to share your information as logic. (It is said brain with overloaded information looses its natural creativity. Scientists have observed a five year old child does 105 creative things in a day while a 40 years old only 5.) Whenever one raises any valid point you overlook the same & try to put your own point whether not aptly related.
Just referring a funny T-shirt quotation, “I was born intelligent but education spoiled me”. Sometimes unknowingly people become victim of these kinds of irony.
Winning an argument is not a solution to any problem. Let’s try to conclude the debate. Can’t we restart the debate point wise and pick the next one only after the previous is concluded. You may add points of your choice as well.
Animals are human food.
Animal flesh is inevitable in human diet.
Animal flesh is inevitable for maintaining good health.
Killing for food is nature’s law.
There is no significance of human sentiments/religion/tradition against the utility.
Killing an animal is not violence.
Killing an animal with less painful method is not violence.
Animal do not have the basic right to live.
Ban on cow’s slaughter will be interference into the basic right of freedom of the people.
Ban on cow’s slaughter should be taken as entire interruption on one’s freedom of what he/she wants to eat.
Since Hindus of Vedic times had been eating beef (so called history) they can’t ask for a ban now.
State can not interfere in people’s personal life.
Since 80% of the world population is non vegetarian we should follow them.
Since we drink cow’s milk hence we can kill her for flesh also.
Since our ancestors of primitive ages were guaranteed non vegetarians, civilized should continue the same habit.
Eagerly waiting your affirmation.
Regards,
Abhishek Vaishnav
Dear Abhishek
A number of things you’re suggesting have been invented. I never said nor even remotely suggested them. You are welcome to your views, but don’t distort what I say, please. I trust that you will do me that much favour, even if you don’t agree with me.
At this point the discussion is going at cross purposes. You are starting to get personal, making false claims about me and about what I said, etc.
Do you think it is worthwhile discussing this further with you? Would you like to have a discussion where people start saying false things about you, and about what you never said? How you would feel?
Can we please revert to a discussion based on what I have said, not what you imagine I’ve said? And leave aside my “qualifications” and all that. That has nothing to do with this issue (or indeed any other).
Regards
Sanjeev
Dear Sir,
I am not against any individual. I am against the thought. A thought that is causing killing of millions of innocent animals. The points is raised seem to be personal because thoughts belong to you.
Compation is human and I am not ashamed of beinng sensitive towards others pain. My humanity includes all creatures.
If one is not reday to understand others point of view; thinking stops progressing.
I offered you to debate on clear cut points.
Anyway I got the answer, I was expecting the same your side. Now no need waste my time here any more .
You are going to see complete ban on cow's slaughter very soon.
Regards.
Abhishek Vaishnav
Dear Abhishek
Foolish Indians have done worse. If this is what India wants – to remain a desperately poor nation – so be it. At every point, the idea of reason is trashed, and “belief” raised to the pedestal.
Sure a ban can be imposed on cow slaughter or anything else, but the underlying idea – of opposing human freedom – will continue to take India down the drain of deep poverty.
Regards
Sanjeev
Hi everyone,
I was reading comments on this thread and I got interested in the topic. Yes its a controversial matter, whether or not non-vegetarianism is Humane. I agree upto a certain extent that food is subject matter of personal interest. I am not really much into radicalism and I feel that personal freedom should be respected.
I loved eating meat and sea foods. Nonveg wasnt any taboo in our family so I enjoyed it. I usually ate outside but sometimes enjoyed cooking it myself. Once I showed up a little early at the butcher’s place. He asked me to wait. I was a little impatient but still decided to wait. As he was taking the animal (goat) out for the job, I saw that the animal was braying out loudly and trying helplessly to escape. Butcher had to forcefully drag him. His feets were brushing against the soil, creating lines. Somehow, butcher’s hand slipped and the animal was released for a fraction of a second. Dont know if it was any coincidence, but he started to run in my direction. Almost immediately, the butcher grabbed him again from his hind legs. I could see his eyes glaring at me and blinking while butcher was dragging him back (I know they have kinda short eyesight that too b/w but it really felt as if he was staring me). Butcher soon finished the job and asked us to take-pay-and-leave. I did. While walking back I was slightly disturbed… It was a very awkward feeling. I mean I ate and cooked meat several times before and never felt a thing… Probably coz it was just served onto the plate without me caring for background details.
While preparing meat this time, I just couldn’t stop reckoning that incident… His eyes were so real… Dont know if I was being sentimental, but somehow I felt guilty when I saw the meat lying in front of me. It was kinda strange feeling that this meat was alive a few hours back and trying helplessly to escape. I asked myself a simple question that day “Can I live without eating nonveg to avoid that guilty feeling that an animal was butchered because of me?” I felt I could… Its been over 5 years now since I left nonveg. Yes there were cravings at first but really switchover wasn’t like too difficult.
I dont know if carnivores or eskimos are doing the wrong thing by eating nonveg, especially considering the fact that possibly they dont have any other option. Thankfully, I am not in that position, and I have plenty of vegetarian substitutes. I am leading quite healthy and peaceful life.
Not sure if my version is any relevant here in this discussion, but it was just my experience…
Thanks, Radhika
In 1980 or 1981 I personally raised about a dozen chicken at home and after they were grown up, slaughtered and ate them. A Kashmiri friend from Deccan College showed me how to cook them in the Kashmiri style. And indeed, that is the only thing I know how to cook, so far (apart from an omelette and cup of tea).
Later, I bought chicken in Assam from shops where they freshly kill chicken before your eyes to ensure its freshness and quality. And I have taken it home and eaten the chicken.
I do not feel any negative emotion about food. I am 100% aware that chicken meat is not a vegetable, but comes from a real, living, breathing bird that has been killed before the end of its natural life. But I know that this is highly beneficial to the chicken species. Because we eat chicken, therefore we breed more chicken, and chicken population (as a species) has therefore sky-rocketed by a thousand-fold. It is therefore a win-win situation for the species and for mankind. That is how nature works. We need to avoid getting emotional about the ways of nature.
As part of the government funded IRDP and other programs, I have gone about establishing small chicken farms, pig farms, etc. in households in villages. We funded people to rear livestock. That is government policy even today.
Note that I’m perfectly happy with each of us having the freedom to choose, and to learn the way we do. You have “learnt” something based on India’s terrible regulatory framework for animals, but also on the basis of your lack of awareness that meat comes from animals. So the idea that something is actually killed before you eat its meat came as a shock to you (In the West, no one ever sees the actual animal slaughter which is highly regulated. All you get are packets of meat, so perhaps you’d not have thought this way, but that would have been a shame, because we disrespect the animal that feeds us if we imagine it was magically produced on our plate). Yes, animals are KILLED before we eat them. We are not scavengers. We don’t eat dead animals.
Note also that we are all different. Some of us can’t stomach blood and gore, but others can. Only someone who understands the real nature of reality can take up the challenge of becoming a soldier, butcher, or even doctor (surgeon). The higher one’s knowledge of reality the less we devote emotional energy to such things. I come from a science background (mentally) and see the world as a bunch of energy, in its different forms and shapes. We don’t control nor own this world: it owns us. We are part of it, not sitting in judgement over its rules and laws.
What are you doing to do about the major religions like Judaism (kosher) and Islam (halal) where animals (including cows) are required to be killed with great brutality (by today’s standards)? Are you going to re-write their scriptures for them? And what are you going to do about animal sports (e.g. bullfighting/cock-fighting, etc.) that involve great cruelty? You’ve got a lifelong task cut out for you, trying to change 80% of the world, and fighting reality.
It is true that on many of these thing the world is changing. We demand less cruelty and more stringent regulatory standards today (that are not found in India). And that is what I recommend. I advocate increasing the regulatory standards for animal slaughter, and eliminating brutal animal “sports”, while leaving the option of eating whatever they wish, to the people.
I would suggest that unless you are God yourself with the power to completely change (a) nature, and (b) major non-Hindu religions, you ought to be happy with choosing your way of life, while encouraging others to see the world your way. Be a Jaini monk, if that’s your wont, and persuade others. But no imposition, please! That’s all I’m saying, no more.
I’m NOT writing against vegetarianism, nor am I advocating non-vegetarianism. I’m simply advocating freedom and non-violence. But Baba Ramdev is not using this language of freedom and respect for humans. He talks of killing those who slaughter cows. I find such a thought obnoxious and abhorrent beyond imagination, where someone values human life less than the life of a chicken, fish, or cow.
Regards
Sanjeev