Editor,
This is in response to the editorial titled ‘Food habits should not be interfered with’ (28 September).
What is the definition of ‘mainstream’ in the Indian context, and who defines its parameters?
Perhaps the advocates and votaries of muscular dominant ‘ideology’ named ‘Hindi-Hindu-Hindustan’ form the ‘mainstream’ and they define the parameters of being ‘Indian’, ‘patriot’ or ‘nationalist’.
Surely this is the reason why we witness scenes of the ‘mainstream’ bursting in joyous celebration (following any decision/verdict revolving around Kashmir, be it on 2019 or 2023) with the valley remaining indifferent stoic or ‘philosophical’.
What would have been the reaction of the dancing brigade had their respective states been divided into two without their consultation and relegated to mere union territories? Surely Gujaratis to Uttar Pradeshis would have shattered the sky in protest, crying foul how the Indian state has made a mockery of constitutional values and federalism.
In the same vein, how can a certain group dictate who would consume which food or not? Or what one would wear talk think or believe.
In a heterogeneous democratic land, whose Constitution vouches for equality, not a single religious/ethnic/cultural/linguistic group can dare to express audacity to claim that their way of living or thought process forms the ‘mainstream’. So a single offence towards the identity and sentiment of a single individual also forms an assault upon the very idea of India itself.
The earlier the ‘mainstream’ learns to appreciate this simple truth, India would take the first step to reach a better place.
Kajal Chatterjee,
D-2 /403,
Peerless Nagar,
Kolkata