It has always been the hallmark of human civilisation to care for those who are less capable, less fortunate and less powerful. The word 'humane' stands testimony to that fact. A humanitarian is one who partakes in, and shares the burden of those around him. As we become more and more civilised, this fact is always reinforced in stronger terms.
Coloured people, who have endured white supremacy for ages are now respected for who they are, so much so that doing or saying anything that would remotely hint otherwise is seen as taboo. Women, having been treated as the weaker sex through the centuries, are now recognised to be equal to men and the number of instances where they are being oppressed is steadily reducing world over, more so in the developed world. People who were historically seen to be handicapped, invalid and retarded are now being seen as differently abled and special people. The champions of these causes have always been held as examples for humankind to emulate.
The reason for change in this direction is the ever increasing ability to choose, that has resulted as a consequence of our progress. The desperate thief, who in his need cannot afford to be compassionate to those who he steals from, doesn't have a choice. But on progressing as a race, our choices have ever been on the increase. Earlier, we all had to roam about, foraging, hunting and living off the land. Today, the choices we have on both, making a living and consuming for living, are unlimited in their variety.
Which brings me to vegetarianism. Very frequently have the people around me put forth the question as to why I do not consume meat, so much so that they sympathise with my having to forgo the often pleasurable experiences that accompany its consumption. I never had a clear answer to that question. I somehow managed to shrug it off by saying that it was an inherent tendency.
It is not that I've never tasted meat. I've consumed enough of it in the days of early childhood. I can even vaguely remember what it tastes like. However, even as a little child, I had been shocked to learn about how silk was extracted by boiling silkworm cocoons and had told my parents categorically that I was never going to be wearing any silk all my life. One morning, when I was probably in Std 5, I attended a birthday party where I decided not to eat the cake that was on offer for its containing egg, even though I have always been very fond of cake. This was the beginning of my life as a vegetarian. On introspection, it becomes amply clear that this choice is based on an inclination towards non violence, followed by the development of a rationale that reinforces this inclination. Also, I've been born in a race, I'm proud to say, is known for having advocated vegetarianism centuries ahead of anywhere else world over. In this aspect, I deem that we are an advanced race indeed.
I'm not one of those who is for strongly enforcing vegetarianism (at times this is done even violently), for such an act would defeat the entire purpose of being vegetarian. Unlike plants, we cannot produce our own food and have to rely on the consumption of other forms of life for our living. But unlike carnivores, who cannot but eat meat, we have the power to choose what we eat. I just choose to do it in a manner as to cause a lesser amount of pain to things around me.
"What pain?," one might ask. "Animals are slaughtered with one flourish of the knife so that they don't feel pain at all."
Well, have we really thought about the conditions in which they are bred and subsequently slaughtered for our pleasure? Do we not see how chickens are cooped up in poultry farms, so much so that their coops lend to us the phrase? Don't we see them being transported, strung up mercilessly by their leg, upside down and slung across scooter seats? A lamb being led to slaughter. Butchered mercilessly. Dead meat. The phrases that turn to animal slaughter for expressing savagery are endless. Even the word massacre has its roots in butchery. These words arise from western civilisation which is only just exploring vegetarianism.
There is another school of thought that holds, very naively I must say, that if we all became vegetarians, this world would be flooded with animals and that we'd all starve to death because we'd run out of plant based food. The amount of grain and feed that goes into making meat is mind boggling. Animals could live off pastures and not consume any grain, but the lack of pastoral land and the difficulties associated with adopting that approach are formidable. It takes 16 kilos of grain to produce 1 kilo of meat. It takes nearly 1000 times the amount of water to produce one Kg of meat as opposed to wheat. Between May 2000 and August 2006, Brazil lost nearly 150, sq km of forest, an area larger than Greece, 70% of this going to cultivate soya beans to be fed to a burgeoning pig cultivation market in China. There are many more staggering facts that one can discover with a very simple search string online. In effect, the production of meat is proving so wasteful that a day might come where we are all forced to turn vegetarian. A love for nature goes very much hand in hand with vegetarianism.
But these are just facts to silence ill informed critics. The essence of vegetarianism, for me, stems out of the inherent disposition to live and let live, that has guided human civilisation ever since man ventured outside of his cave. As I question my stand, it only becomes clearer to me that it is one that I will always adopt. The variety offered by vegetarian food, seen better in India than anywhere else, is abundant. Though one can point out that it can only increase when you include meat, I'm wholly satisfied with what it has on offer, for a lifetime's worth.
6 comments:
As you said, OR principles and engineering public policies can always be worked out towards keeping the eco-system under control in the event that the whole world decides to go veggie, countering those naive naysayers with their own science and commerce. But what does one say to douche bags who cry "But you're killing plants"? Although as you say, its purely one's choice and that we don't have to defend or justify ourselves to anyone else (and I couldn't agree more), at some level, I suppose they have a point because, although consuming just the flower/fruit of the plant is in-fact a means of healthy vegetative growth for the plant (which those same naive naysayers stupidly turn against us as "How do you know that it doesn't hurt the plant to have a part of itself cut off, how would you feel if your little finger was cut off for someone else's feeding"), in the extreme case, one would have to refrain from eating carrots, onions and beetroot as well (which some Jains actually do), since its essentially cutting off the heart of the plant. But again, as you said, we have to depend on other life forms for our survival. That said, if for some reason, you were forced to live in siberia or northern greenland, the same argument would apply, and you would have to eat meat and drink brandy to survive.
Vegetarianism goes beyond food. Again in the extreme case, one would have to refrain from wearing leather jackets, fur coats and silk sarees. But you see way more "vegetarians" indulging in these than not.
I guess its really up to the individual to choose where to draw that line. The bias towards animals over plants, and the sensitivity towards food over clothing, however, are curious.
Hi , THe question of being taking up vegetariansim or not is a by product of several fatosrs, mainly amt of arable land, climate and culture. For eg here in Finland where I study now, the growing season is very short max 3-4 months in summer and when it is dark, btterly cold subzero temps and snowbound for 6 months in a year, people are forced to either import stuff and survive with the other resources available ie sealife, reindeers, etc. And if I want to step out of my home in winter here, I cannot even dream of thinking about the animals skins whch were used for my winter clothing coz here you need layers upon layers to survive the -25 December cold,
But I do agree that excessive usage of a resource is definitely harmful. For eg in that Brazil example you pointed out in your blog, for that 150 sq km forest which was converted to crops for animals, the Government should ensure that ther is equal or more land set up for afforestation, so that the balance is the ecosystem is maintained.
Ultimately, you cannot force this on anyone, it is a question of personal choice. We have been forutnate enough to grow up in a warm country where there s abundant plant life, thus you find more vegetarianism in India.
I'd like to add that you should read this book: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fast_food_nation
While the halal and kosher practices attempt to make the slaughter more humane (the kosher practice even standardizes the knife used to make the cuts), the source of fast-food non-vegetarianism is, more often than not, a macabre set of practices. Real horror show.
@ Amrut, Bravo! I agree with what you've to say. About plants getting hurt in the process, that is a lot less likely considering the absence of a central nervous system.
But then again, that is only small consolation. It is all about where one chooses to draw the line, whose boundaries can thin down in the event of life or death situations, but seldom otherwise.
"Vegetarianism goes beyond food." Golden words indeed!
In our society, a lot of vegetarianism is forced upon by religion. Naturally, those people aren't going to expand it beyond that.
@ Milli, I've always held that the copiousness of the tropics is the mother of vegetarian thought.
@Slime, The practices that fast food chains adopt to sell at their "cut throat" rates are extremely harrowing.
WTF is this whole post in random big-font bold???
No, I did read it as well. :)
@ ubbus: I have very less control over the font and style on the composing. Most of my posts are haphazard.
Either the blogger composer sucks, or I'm grossly inadequate in this respect. (It's more likely the latter)
Post a Comment