A right-wing political party in Italy (Lega Nord) endorsed a series of laws in the city of Lucca, Italy, which ban ethnic foods. Their slogan, "we want polenta, not cous cous" only allows the service of such ethnic foods (like kebab) if it is served with a "traditional" Tuscan dish, including polenta (that corn is not native to Northern Italy but was also once an "ethnic" food seems to not be of concern). American burgers, French crepes, and Japanese sushi,
the article on i-Italy reports, are not included in this ban.
While this seems to be a clear sign of racism, the article complicates the matter by asking how/where this might be seen as running parallel to some aspects of the Slow Food movement. So, my question to you: at what point does preservation of a food culture become racism?
With regards to the spreading of islamic law and the fear of Sharia Law the Italian right and the American right have the same ideology. The fear of "the other" and the defining of a nationalized permanent identity brings the fear and loathing of a new or outside idea, cuisine or identity. For this article it seems that the basis is not any foreign idea however, just anything tied to Arabic culture and especially the religion of Islam. The Italian people are free to exercise choice and in that can choose what they eat. To outlaw a food specifically tied to a certain religion and culture is atrocious and against the notions of human rights. Discrimination that is geared around the preservation of a host or centralized identity (non indigenous) is a function of racism that is the same as any ideology behind the Klu Klux Klan and the Nazi socialism party.
ReplyDeleteThe acceptance of "the other", to go beyond tolerance and the fictional race identity, is the only way to peace. It is not that I condone the enculturation of a collective identity, instead I believe in the cosmopolite, and this is why this notion of pure identity and purification of identity angers me so. Culture is never going to remain a constant, it is alive as humans are alive and follows along the same evolutionary path. To try and stop the change in culture is ridiculous and dangerous. I wish that social acceptance could be strong enough to allow for the change and adaptations in culture, but society is made of humans, and we are dumb animals.
Andrew Irvin-Erickson
I agree with Andrew, I especially dislike the fact that Polenta is allowed even though it is not indigenous to Italy. It is also disgusting how they still allow American burgers, French crepes, and Japanese sushi yet they have banned kababs. If they really feel that strong about the food, culture, religion or what ever it may be, they just shouldn't eat those foods. They have the choice to not eat it but to ban it completely is totally wrong. This is hypocrisy on Italy's behalf and makes them look extremely racist, if they don't want to look this way they should also ban sushi etc. and not single out Middle Eastern food.
ReplyDeleteThe people of this small Italian town strike me as quite ignorant. It is ridiculous to ban ethnic foods, but allow all foods alien to itlay minus middle eastern food. How rude and racist can they get. Equally it shows the whole world that such ignorant countries do still exist. Either way, they should think this over because whoever came up with this makes no sense.
ReplyDeleteI'm very proud to be an American when I read about political insanity like this. The banning of a specific food of a culture, seems like the first step in a sytematic process which will eventually lead to a ban on an entire culture. I believe the intentions of the Northern League of Italy are to promote ignorance and fear, like any other terrorist organization.
ReplyDeleteAlthough, our congress did rename "French Fries" and "French toast" to "Freedom Fries" and "Freedom Toast" when they were displeased with the French gov't. a couple of years ago. They did the same thing with German foods during WWII. So, one might say that instead of banning a food, they tried to co-op that food into "our" culture. Do you think that is similar? And, of course, we Americans have [marginal] political groups that are not inclusive and would attempt to ban dissimilar cultures (does American have one dominant culture?), so I think some people might suggest that we have our insane moments, as well.
ReplyDeleteIn answering the first question as to when food preservation becomes racism, I would suggest that this is a perfect example. No doubt that the slow food movement, and food preservation, have become hot topics in the last few years. However, preservation has no need to exclude, instead it is meant to keep something alive. There is no reason for those ideals to be mutually exclusive of one another.
ReplyDeleteAs for America, I see certain parallels, but also absolute differences. Parallels in that America is wholly inclusive. However, the way that this country seems to go about being inclusive is exactly what you said, we steal. When we as Americans conjure thoughts of Italian or Mexican foods we think of spaghetti and meatballs, pizza and burritos. We think of those things we felt comfortable with, prepared in our way, and then declared we had a wealth of culture. This is quite the same when it comes to people. This country clearly has the idea that it has a dominant culture, and is steadfastly continuing to believe in that falsehood. Even as media becomes more diversified in color, there have yet to be any significant shifts in lifestyles portrayed.
The Freedom Fries and Toast is a separate ordeal, one in which I think people are quick to forget. This is a reactionary nation. We are the instant gratification types. And when we are angry we tend to leash out in ineffective and often offensive ways. Leading us to internment camps and wars.
All cultures have their issues. For those with family in Italy (And Trieste at that!), it's fairly well known that their politicians are notably ineffective and useless.
ReplyDeleteKeeping that in mind, there is a general fear in most Italians that they believe they are losing what makes them unique through immigration and emigration. Their birthrate is extremely low, their unemployment is high, and the average 20-30 year old can expect to make under 30k euros for a very long time (unless they move to a different country).
Of course the actual problem comes from lack of strong national industry, stable and uncorrupted government, as well as world pressures including competition in the global economy, (and maybe slightly immigration).
Since the politicians wont fix themselves, the world isn't going to wait for Italy to catch up, and the more famous Italian companies are bankrupt (Parmalat), they see the only solvable problem is immigration.
Will their current solution be effective? I doubt it, but as Professor Forrest mentioned, who are we to judge when we build fences, have much more dominant political parties that support racially charged statements even in the face of data that shows American's conception of immigrants is mostly incorrect, and that they tend to be less of blue-collar minimum wage workers than they are managers and leaders.
Immigration in Italy is a growing issue and because most of the industry is in the North (more job opportunities) the people there have been seeing some major changes in a short period of time. Thus they tend to react without thinking and tragicomic stuff like this happens. In any case I would prefer Italian food to street kebabs in Italy any time.
ReplyDeleteThis brings up one of the big contradictions that makes me agree with Churchill's famous declaration "Democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." A representative government is always in conflict between enacting the will of the majority and protecting the rights of the minority. If seventy percent of Luccans want to live in a town with "Polenta, not Couscous" (I don't know if this is the case, just using that number for the sake of argument), it's not entirely clear to me what the correct decision is here. It's a pretty dumb attitude, and going after only Muslim specialties is transparently racist (along with a few other related incidents mentioned in the article, which are even more disgusting and definitively immoral), but on the other hand nobody is being forced to stay in Lucca. I don't think you can argue that easy access to kebab stands is an inalienable right, so there is some traction to the viewpoint of "this is how most of us want to live in our town, if you don't like it you can move." America, being a very young country insulated by oceans, doesn't really have the sense of ethnic/national identity that many older countries do, especially when constantly in conflict with neighbors who look and act differently. The original system of states' rights in this country was actually a pretty ingenious way to allow people to live in the type of society they were accustomed to and still co-operate on a national level. For smaller European, Asian, or African democracies with distinct ethnic identities, the balance between the will of the majority and the rights of minorities is even more tenuous (i.e. Israel, an extreme case, can continue to be either an open democracy or a Jewish state; probably not both). Blacks being legally treated as property is an inexcusable and immoral imposition of the majority's will on a minority, which is why we amended the constitution to make slavery always illegal everywhere. People wanting to live/associate with others just like them is a pretty basic human urge with murkier moral value (just google "self segregation" if you don't believe me). I'm not saying that this is right; I actually think it's terrifically stupid and people end up poorer if they shut out other cultures (Italy, ironically, owes a lot of it's modern culture to Arab influence in the middle ages), but I'm not sure it's so clearly oppressive. On the other hand, if the majority of Luccans actually want it to be illegal to buy kebabs and couscous, I'm gonna stay as far away from Lucca as I possibly can. My real objection to this law is the same as my objection to the proposed NY salt ban and the drug war: THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO PLACE TELLING US WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT PUT INTO OUR BODIES!!!
ReplyDeleteFirst off, Anne's a great writer. Secondly, I think the issue of banning kebabs in Italy is quite absurd and obviously not well thought out. I wouldn't claim it to be American 60's racism, but I'd give it a title of racism sorts. Obviously its crazy, wrong, and seriously questionable. I agree with Omer- we should look at the social influences in Italy. If we did, we would see a lost nation full of ever-influenced diversity similar to what is happening in France. However, I disagree with Anne- comparing it to 'freedom fries.' I would say that both are politically based, both have and will be forgotten, and that they both share a fundamental flaw in the government of today that is easily swayed by crazed citizens influencing their representation.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the people of that town are trying to preserve the staples of that area. Food can bring people together and tear the same people apart. The deciding factor is the intent of the people who are making the judgment. I think that the concept of preserving is good and keeps food sustainable but if the law doesn't say all food not from that region,then it borders on prejudice.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree that these laws are considered to be racist. The Italian people are not trying to outlaw certain cultures or their food, they are simply trying to preserve their Italian culture and heritage. They are only trying to maintain their own culinary traditions and practices. However, the idea to ban some cultures food but not others seems questionable and I can understand why some would think it to be racist.
ReplyDelete