Murdered for eating beef - this is where polarization leads

Ironically, I am writing this post which is related to mob violence on the day of the birth anniversary of the two most peace-loving leaders from India M K Gandhi and Lal Bahadur Shastri. I was deeply shocked and disturbed to read the news of the mob lynching of a man because of suspicion that his family consumed and stored beef in their home. This incident happened in a village called Dadri in Uttar Pradesh. I wonder how come many people in India don't find this news deeply disturbing, I still remember the protests and public outrage when the Delhi gang rape and brutal murder happened, this incident is equally bad if not worse than that. A person's house was attacked by a mob, they beat him and his son brutally, the man succumbs to injuries and his son is recovering in hospital. Shockingly, the reason for all this was that people had a doubt that this person ate and stored beef in his home. Assuming that he did eat beef, who are these people to kill him like this?

Who is to blame for all this? The mob that became violent for such a trivial reason? Few people who actually attacked and killed that man? Politics of polarization which most political parties of India have been playing for decades to create such a divisive atmosphere? Administration and law and order that fails repeatedly to investigate such incidents and punish the culprits? Bystander's attitude of people who prefer to watch such things in silence rather than raising their voice against it? Or all of this? One can keep on playing the blame game but the the truth is that one innocent human lost his life for no reason. If only a few people were involved in attacking that family as many villagers claim, then how come a mob of almost a thousand people couldn't stop these few people from committing a murder? If most of the mob was non-violent then why did they allow lynching to happen in front of them?

Such mob violence or riots are heinous acts like terrorism. Terrorists also kill innocent people and rioters also do the same thing, but in India rarely do people responsible for riots get caught and punished. Very often riot or mob violence cases result in very shabby investigations and a very poor rate of conviction. This happens mainly because of the heavy political interest involved in such incidents. Political parties reap heavy political benefits from such tragic incidents, but I am surprised at how long people want to go on with such nonsense. I wrote a post about how a meat ban or beef ban in India is not at all about meat, it has some deeper political meaning than the claim of saving any animal. Such bans are intentional political ploys specifically designed to create polarization in society. The Muslim community is not the only community in India that consumes beef, rather many Muslims don't eat beef as it is not easily available in India, but still, somehow they are targeted every time for eating beef because of some malicious propaganda by certain right-wing organizations. These organizations are only interested in creating a deep rift between two communities, they don't care if this results in some riot, lynching, or murder, they just want to spread hatred. They want to create a homogeneous and non-diverse society where everyone follows the same religion, diet, dress code, and thought process. Any deviation from this is a problem, if you dare to object or question, then it doesn't matter who you are, you will be targeted and silenced if necessary. Such mentality was there in the past also, but it seems these people are getting more powerful day by day and others keeping silent is serving their purpose. Disturbing silence from the top leadership of India is puzzling, in the US the Presidents at least share their thoughts in the wake of any such tragedy, but in India, any such expectation is like living in a fool's paradise, and this seems especially true with the current government. Based on history, I know that nothing much will come out of any investigation of this incident, the government will give some monetary compensation, there will be communal politics played over this death, and then everyone will go back to their usual business until the next death or riot. This is somewhat becoming a routine, just like mass shootings in the USA. I hope people dare to look beyond politics on this issue and punish the culprits to make sure such incidents don't happen in the future. After all, we humans create these problems so we should be able to find solutions for them. I am deeply hurt and ashamed by this incident and hope there is some lesson for everyone to learn from this incident. If not, then we all are going to suffer, remember intolerance can affect each and every one of us who love our freedom, it is just a matter of time. Please fight to protect the freedom of others if you want to be free, today it's them, but tomorrow it can be you.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

Links:

1. Dadri: Mob kills man, injures son over ‘rumours’ that they ate beef
2. Hindu man brutally killed for marrying a Muslim girl in Bihar
3. प्राइम टाइम : अफवाह पर एक शख्स की हत्या

It's not about meat ban silly!

The recent controversy about the meat ban in Maharashtra is an ideal example of how appeasement politics works in India. Actually, this is not the first time anything has been banned in India, we have a long history of banning books, movies, authors, different types of meats, etc. This is all done by different governments in the name of not hurting the sentiments of a particular community or religion. Sometimes it is about sentiments attached to some animal like a cow. Sometimes it is about the insult of some revered historical figure like Shivaji. Sometimes it is about the insult of some religious icons like Mohammad or Jesus or some goddess. And sometimes it is about some religious festivals or rituals. In the current case, it is about respecting the Jain ritual called 'Paryushan', as Jains are vegetarians and are against any type of violence some municipal corporations in Mumbai imposed a ban on the butchering of animals and selling meat for a few days during Paryushan time to respect their sentiments. Surprisingly killing and selling of fish is not included in this ban, so, I wonder if Jains consider fish as living things or not, or is there any different logic that allows fish killing but not of chickens or goats? One can find many technical mistakes in these types of bans, but this is not the main point, this particular incident along with many other similar incidents in the past exposes the prevalent hypocrisy of our society. 

The same political parties who were supporting the beef ban to its core are now on roads opposing this particular meat ban, they are so adamant in their opposition that they are going to the extent of selling meat on their own on streets to register their protest against this ban. Now just imagine what would have been the reaction of the same people if beef eaters who are again a minority in India had done the same thing. But we can ignore this for the time being as I already said this is not about a meat ban at all, people who think the issue is about meat or religious sentiments are living in a fool's paradise. There is already freedom to practice any religion guaranteed by the constitution in India. This is all about appeasement politics, not about any meat. Every political party has played this game and shamelessly says that they don't do any appeasement politics. Each one of them makes a huge hue and cry if someone else does this for political gains, but shamelessly justifies their own similar acts that too by citing instances in the past which they opposed. NDTV anchor Ravish has coined the very proper term "is equal to theory" for all these actions where every political outfit tries to justify their acts by claiming that in the past so and so has also done this. The sad part is that supporters of these parties participate in this drama without even realizing that they are becoming a part of a deeply hypocritical and regressive system.

These types of bans set up another dangerous precedence, if you ban one book to appease a certain section of society then what is going to stop some other communities from asking to ban another book or attack another author for hurting their sentiments? If you agree to one unreasonable or stupid demand to ban anything then automatically you give legitimacy to many other similar demands. This drama has been going on from last so many years without any interruption. India is already facing so many problems because of appeasement politics but still, people are refusing to learn from their past mistakes, rather, they are adamant about committing the same mistakes just because someone did it and got away with it. Every time it is expected from courts to bring some sense in such matters and unfortunately, they are also not very consistent on these types of sensitive issues. But I have to agree that they are doing a much better job than all political parties who are only interested in exploiting public sentiments.

Divide-and-rule politics is not new, Britishers used it to create a rift between Hindus and Muslims as well as between different castes of Hindus for their own benefit. All these bans are part of the same legacy and mindset, the intention is to appease certain sections by doling out certain unreasonable favors or to hurt some sections by banning something, which in turn creates polarization, and reaping the political benefit of this polarized atmosphere. There is no exception, all political parties are guilty of playing appeasement politics. Only common people, if they want, can stop this nonsense. But if they are okay with it, then this stupid drama will continue endlessly. This is not at all about any book or meat or movie this is about liberty, freedom, and appeasement. Religion is a very personal matter and everyone is free to practice their own faith, but no one has the right to impose their own beliefs or lifestyle on others. This is a simple fact that everyone should understand in any tolerant and progressive society. If they can't stop this nonsense, then at least please stop claiming that you are a tolerant nation. There are Islamic countries in the world where there is a ban on eating food in public places during the month of Ramadan, this is a very regressive thing, but if people think this is wrong, then please explain to me on what basis this meat ban or beef ban can be justified?

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic.

[Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing]

Holy cow - myth or reality?

I get regular posts on my Facebook wall from some of my Indian FB friends about their anger against cow slaughter. How we need to save cows from getting slaughtered, how it is evil to eat cow meat, and so on. Basically, all these posts say that it's our (all Hindus) duty to save the cow because she is a sacred animal in the Hindu religion. Eating or selling cow meat (beef) is a big no-no in most parts of India. A cow is considered a sacred/holy animal by most Hindus and killing her is considered a big sin. Above that selling her meat is a greater sin and then eating that meat is an unforgivable sin. But this should not give anyone an impression that Indians are vegetarians or they don't eat any meat or they are very protective about all animals. Believe me, many foreigners do get the impression that if you are from India you must be a vegetarian. I still wonder how and why they get this impression. So the the question to ask here is if many people in India are not against eating animal flesh then why they are so against cow meat? What is so special about this animal?

If any country, religion, or community is against animal slaughter or using any animal products (as vegans are) then one can understand their opposition to eating animal flesh, but here opposition is not about eating animal flesh but flesh of only a particular animal, a cow in case of Hindus and Pig in case of Muslims. The question is what is the logic or rationale behind it? I understand that Muslims or some Christians don't eat pork just because it's mentioned in their holy books (Qu'ran and Bible) not to eat that meat. So it's a very simple thing, there is absolutely no logic behind this, just follow the instructions, don't ask why, just follow the book, very simple. Even if this instruction was given in a book written several hundreds of years ago, just follow it without questioning. So, people are not against eating pork because they are against animal killing or care about these animals but just because some book (and remember this is not any medical or diet book) says not to eat it without giving any logical reasons. Now, what is the reason for Hindus not to eat beef? Well, for Hindus there is no single book that can be called a Hindu religious text. There are many books and some of them even clearly indicate that cow sacrifice was a very common practice in those days when these texts were written. So the origin of this belief (sacred cow) is not some particular book but there must be some other factors also.

So for me, the question was how the cow became holy or sacred in India or Hinduism? I think the main reason why cows attained this holy status was because of the agriculture-based economy. The cow is a very useful animal in the agriculture-based economy as it can provide milk, cow dunk (used in dried form as fuel, insect repellent), and ox/bullocks were used for farming. A cow was a very important animal in the economic and social life of any family in an agriculture-based economy. It was a very useful animal and if people killed it just to eat her meat then it would have reduced their number and in turn, harmed the economy. It was economically more productive to use them as agriculture and dairy animals rather than killing them for their flesh. But then the problem was, how to convince people to stop their killing for meat? How to solve this problem? A difficult option was to explain to people the importance of cows for the welfare of their families and tell them to follow a sustainable lifestyle where they can strike a balance between the number of cows so that their ratio is not adversely affected. A lot of economics and complicated stuff that common people don't want to listen to. We all know from experience that this strategy is very difficult to implement, we see many species becoming endangered (plants as well as animals) and some even getting extinct because of aggressive hunting or killing by humans for so many reasons (flesh, skin, or for any other body parts). The easier option was to declare the thing holy or sacred, this automatically protects that object (animal, land, tree, or anything). This practice is still used in India, any land or tree or anything one wants to protect or occupy, built some temple or mosque or any religious structure there, and one can see that people of that religion are willing to sacrifice their lives to protect that object. But if one tries convincing people about the necessity of having a sustainable lifestyle hardly anyone pays any attention. It sounds ridiculous but it's the reality. I am sure this will change in the future but right now this is the case in most parts of the country.

People who are against cow slaughter or think she is a sacred animal equate cows with their mothers. The reason they give is we drink her milk like we drink our mother's milk as an infant. Note that they don't give the same status to other animals or nuts from where we get milk for human consumption, for example, buffalo, goat, soybean, or almonds. Why preferential treatment only to cows but not to other animals or plants? Shameless use of double standards. I know that they may not like my questions but I am curious to know if they have any logical explanation.

Some of these people are willing to massacre people who kill cows and all this in the name of saving the holy cow. Does this make any sense? What's the use of killing poor people who are trying to earn their living by doing their job to support their families. I used to feel really gross when I used to see people drink cow urine. I still can't understand the logic behind it. I know the uses of cow dunk but I never saw people eating it, but drinking the urine of some animal was a totally illogical and foolish act, but people do it. The book "The Myth of Holy Cow" written by D. N. Jha, where he discussed various aspects related to this issue is already banned in India (as expected, no surprise) and even the author was threatened, and anyone can guess the reason. People just don't want to read about the other side of the story, it hurts their religious sentiments? The opposition to cow slaughter is not at all related to Hinduism, this religion is much more than that but somehow few people are using this issue for their personal and political benefit. If people are so against animal killing then they should request the government to ban all meat-based products and make a law to enforce this action, but to create a drama using cow slaughter as a religious issue is just pathetic.

People of that time found this easy solution (declaring the cow a sacred or holy object) to protect cows. They also did with some trees (in India especially in villages still some species of trees are not cut just because people believe that they are sacred and cutting them will bring bad luck to them or their village). It was the need of that time and I think this trick worked very well and served its purpose. The question now is, do we still need this same trick to maintain the number of cows in India? After so much progress in animal husbandry and science do we have any logical reason to stop people from eating beef or pork? I am not advocating a non-vegetarian diet (especially eating beef) or slaughtering of animals for food here. This post is not in support of any particular form of diet. I am just asking a question, why a meat of only cows forbidden for people who want to eat it? People who don't want to eat that meat should not eat it, no one is forcing them but they should allow others to eat, the same way they allow others to eat chicken, duck, or deer. We should learn to respect each other's dietary choices.

People who oppose cow slaughter for whatever reasons put the argument that then people will also demand human meat, will that be okay? This question doesn't have any logic, people say this just for the sake of argument. Cannibalism was never part of our history or culture, but eating animal meat was and still is, it is stupid to argue that eating human meat could be a dietary choice. People don't have any right to dictate what others should eat, diet is a personal choice like clothing. There is nothing wrong in encouraging vegetarian or non-veg diets by showing their merits and demerits but to ridicule one form of diet for some illogical reasons doesn't make sense. Whatever food we eat, it should be healthy food, it is hypocritical to kill and eat some farm animals of our own choice (like chicken  goat, sheep, deer, pig, duck, etc.) and force others not to eat animals of their choice (pork or beef).

I also don't accept the logic of vegetarian people that their diet doesn't involve the killing of living things. A vegetarian diet just doesn't include animal flesh and doesn't involve animal killing, but all plants are living things and people do kill them to consume them. These two categories are named according to their origin or source from where food originates and there is nothing pro or anti-life in both of them. There is simple rule in nature, every living thing survives at the cost of another living thing. I hope that people around the world realize and acknowledge this fact and learn to respect each other's dietary choices. We need to adopt a sustainable lifestyle that is good for the health of our body, and our planet.

Thanks for reading and please share your views on this topic. 

References:
1. The Myth of Holy Cow- D. N. Jha (http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Holy-Cow-D-Jha/dp/1859844243)
2. http://www.ted.com/talks/christien_meindertsma_on_pig_05049.html 
3. http://themuslimvoice.wordpress.com/2009/05/17/why-is-pig-haraam-in-islam/ 
4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unclean_animals
5. http://my.opera.com/liquid%20snake/blog/pork-forbidden-but-why (another example how Dr. Zakir Nayak uses his medical degree to fool people)
6. http://ebooks.iskcondesiretree.info/pdf/Voice_of_Cows/Voice_of_Cows_-_Newsletter_Vol-01_-_Issue-05_-_2010-02.pdf
7. http://books.google.com/books/about/Hindus_Ate_Beef.html?id=PjLxHAAACAAJ

(Copyright: Vinay Thakur. Please contact the author for re-posting or publishing)