Different social structures to bring balance in the multi-cultural and multi-ethnic country
Many of developed countries are multi-cultural and multi-ethnic. For example, US is multi-cultural and multi-ethnic. The complexity often creates number of social problems, so US has decided to separate church and state since the founding of the country. The country has made its complexity one of its appeals, and the separation of church and state has worked positively for the country over all. Many other developed countries, in particular, many western European countries such as UK, France and Holland, are also multi-cultural and multi-ethnic today as a result of immigrants’ settling in those countries; they are essentially adapting the same approach as US in order to bring balance in their societies. However, this is not the only model of the multi-cultural and multi-ethnic country, nor is it the oldest model. India is actually multi-cultural and multi-ethnic (official languages alone count more than twenty two languages, and a number of different religions are practiced including Hinduism, Islam, Sikhism, Christianity and Buddhism); India has developed and maintained its multi-cultural and multi-ethnic environment a little differently. When we look at three major functions of the society, the food distribution, marriage and the judicial system, we find that developed countries’ approach and India’s approach are very different.
We need to eat to live; therefore, the food distribution is a major function of the society and it is developed to accommodate everyone in the society. In cases of multi-cultural and multi-ethnic developed countries, they supply all kinds of food that they can physically supply. They supply all kinds of meat including beef, pork, chicken and fish. They also supply all kinds of vegetables and fruits. They also supply bread, pasta, rice, plain flour, potatoes and tacos. Given the food distribution system, everyone in those countries can get whatever he/she wants. If he is a Muslim and does not eat pork, then he can get beef, chicken and fish. If he is a vegetarian, then he can get all vegetables that he wants. This is not exactly how the food distribution system is structured in India; the food distribution system generally limits its supplies in terms of variety so that it serves everyone. Hindus do not eat beef and Muslims do not eat pork; as a result, butcher shops generally sell only chicken, mutton and fish; this creates no conflict. Also most Indians eat vegetables primarily; roughly 60% of Indians are vegetarians and they do not even eat eggs.
Many developed countries around the world promote the idea that any two people ought to be able to get married; inter-racial marriages are becoming very common. However, marriage in India is not quite like that. Even today, it is very common that family members arrange marriages. Two people, a bride and a groom meet just once or twice after their family members make the arrangement, and they decide to get married; something like this is very common. Religions and social classes play very important roles in marriage, and two people of the same religion get married commonly. Marriage is to preserve the existing social structure to a large extent.
Developed countries generally believe in the separation of church and state, and they define laws accordingly. In principle, laws should not reflect religious beliefs or practices. This is not the case in India. India has Indian Civic Law and each religion has its specific laws; there are separate laws governing Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and other religions.
Before I learned that India actually has a multi-cultural and multi-ethnic environment, I personally believed that the model that multi-cultural and multi-ethnic developed countries promote is the right model, but now I do not have as strong conviction as I used to. India’s model seems to be working fine at least in India, and I personally do not believe that it needs to change radically any time soon. It seems that both models have merits, and they can improve as they learn from each other.
Edit: The article is written by J. Watanabe.