Fast Food Chains in India
The articles both discussed why India opposes to bringing the huge multi-national fast-food chain McDonalds but have different arguments. The article Say No to McDonald’s and KFC talked about economic and environmental consequences of bringing junk fast-food chains in India including the killings of chickens and some unhealthy effect of eating fried foods which as Gandhi the author stated, such foods are the “worst combination possible for the body”.
Gandhi was pointing to the ugly effects of eating food from fast-food that its effect isn’t only applicable to customers from India but all those who eat there as well. She stated that instead of making fodder, it should be given to directly to humans for “it would nourish five times as many people as it does” when it has become agricultural products. The article Mcdonald’s in India, on the other hand, tackled both the positive and the negative side of bringing fast-food chains particularly McDonald’s to India.
The article was pointing to the fact that bringing in multi-national companies can mean being part of the globalization which is a threat for many Indians. Gurcharan Das, the author, also debated that McDonald’s had the ability to become localized as it has been to other neighboring countries that it had catered and can adapt to the culture and to the taste of the local and it would not “Americanize” India. As stated in the article, “American fast food seems to have… adapted to local ways”.
Das presented the argument that McDonald’s will not Americanize India. Das made this statement as Das made examples of how McDonald’s has made an effort on itself to adapt to the culture of the people bringing local food to their menu and adapting to the behavior of the local people. This is one possibility but it is not a sufficient assurance to India that it will not Americanize the people because there will definitely be American food that the fast-food chain will offer.
Plus, the ambience will surely resemble a little of what America is, so it will not be as local as it promises to be. It would surely introduce American living by the food that it sells so it may Americanize India, little by little. Gandhi’s article was the one which best understood which is good for India because the argument of the author is based on effects which are realizable and which are definite. By this, I mean, that the argument of Gandhi was based on consequences which would definitely be experienced and will be felt by many people who eat at fast food chains.
It is also to say that Das’ argument was based more on presumptions and we can never be one hundred percent sure that this will be the case. Of course, effects of globalization and social changes are realizable too but they are not definite and the effects are just what people predict so the outcome may be different. Besides, Gandhi’s argument shows economic, environmental and health effects of eating food from fast-food chains and directly concerns the people. The effect of it is not debatable and the likelihood that these problems would take place is very high.Sample Essay of PapersOwl.com