Ronald Bailey | February 28, 2006
A group of French nativists are feeding the homeless of Paris with soup made using pork. According to the New York Times the recipe for the soup includes smoked bacon, pig's ears, feet, and tails combined with vegetables and sausages. The group also includes cheese, dessert and a glass of red wine with each meal. Evidently, the idea is to send yet another message that Muslims and Jews (non-pork eaters) are not welcome in France.
It is certainly a churlish and mean-spirited gesture, but does the French government really need to try to close down the soup kitchen citing the "discriminatory nature of the soup"?
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
Mr. Bailey, how could you forget to mention the obvious pop-cultural reference?
I can't read the article without registering, but I'm curious:
the title implies that these people are making pork soup
specifically as a stick in a muslim's eye. True? Or are we dealing
with some well-meaning people who backed into a "you can't offend
me like that" tantrum?
Personally, I think it sounds delicious.
I think I read about this elsewhere, that it was a deliberate
stick-in-the-eye to Muslims.
I personally file it under "rather a dicky thing to do, but they
should have a legal right to do it."
On the other hand. Who cares if they are trying to stiff homeless muslims and/or jews (full disclosure, dad jewish, mom catholic, I'm confused)? If private individuals only want to give charity to non-pork-eating people -- they're jerks, but so what? The non-pork eating community can step up and serve non-pork-containing soup to anyone they want. Or if the people are really hungry they'll eat pork (judaism at least always has dispensation for emergencies -- like starving. I;m not sure about Islam).
Excerpt:
February 28, 2006
Paris Journal (New York Times)
Poor and Muslim? Jewish? Soup Kitchen Is Not for You.
By CRAIG S. SMITH
PARIS, Feb. 27--More than 200 political demonstrators defied a
police ban here on Thursday, scurrying across Boulevard St.-Germain
and under the sycamore trees of Place Maubert to engage in their
forbidden action: eating "pig soup" in public.
With steaming bowls of the fragrant broth soon passing through the
crowd, Odile Bonnivard, a short-haired secretary turned far-right
firebrand, climbed atop a dark sedan with a megaphone in hand and
led the crowd in a raucous chant: "We are all pig eaters! We are
all pig eaters!"
Identity soup, as the broth has come to be called, is one of the
stranger manifestations of a growing grass-roots backlash against
the multiculturalism that has spread through Europe over the past
20 years. People are increasingly challenging the care taken in
Nazi-chastened Europe, and in France in particular, to avoid the
sort of racial or religious insults that led to widespread protests
in the Muslim world this month after wide publication of cartoons
considered offensive to the Prophet Muhammad.
The movement began in the winter of 2003 when Ms. Bonnivard, a
member of a small far-right nationalist movement called the
Identity Bloc, began serving hot soup to the homeless. At first,
she said, the group used pork simply because it was an inexpensive
traditional ingredient for hearty French soup. But after the
political significance of serving pork dawned on them and others,
it quickly became the focus of their work.
Made with smoked bacon, pigs' ears, pigs' feet and pigs' tails
together with assorted vegetables and sausages, the soup is meant
to make a political statement: "Help our own before others."
The "others," Ms. Bonnivard explained, are non-European immigrants
who she and her colleagues on the far right say are sopping up
scarce resources that ought to be used for descendants of the
Continent's original inhabitants. In other words, the soup is meant
to exclude those who do not eat pork--for the most part, Muslims
and Jews.
Damn you, linguist, you beat me by two minutes.
Heehee! That's right! Because I have nothing better to do than sit
here hitting "refresh" every 3 seconds. :-)
brian 423:
I would have thought *this* was the obvious pop-cultural
reference:
Homer: Are you saying you're never going to eat any animal
again? What about bacon?
Lisa: No.
Homer: Ham?
Lisa: No.
Homer: Pork chops?
Lisa: Dad, those all come from the same animal.
Homer: Heh heh heh. Ooh, yeah, right, Lisa. A wonderful, magical
animal.
We have refrigeration; what's with following a pre refrigeration desert dwelling edict on pork...really; time to move on.
Just because I'll never get a better chance, let me recommend Tom T. Hall's "Who's Gonna Feed Them Hogs?" as both appropriate to this thread and a great song in general.
On the other hand, if French chateaus had used pork fat to seal their bottles in the 1800s, that would probably be legally required today...
Um if someone wants to give out free food why are they stopping
them? They aren't actually harming anyone, and one can even make an
argument that they are helping the nonpig eating imigrants by
removing some of the demand for nonpig food.
True there is also an implied political statement, but if your
going to ban free pork soup because of that you might as well just
ban all expression of anti jew-muslim sentiment and be done with
it.
Does this mean that France will ban Emeril T-shirts printed with
"Pork Fat Rules"?
Perhaps there's a solution to the housework wars of recent years.
Convince all the talk-radio lunatics that cooking with bacon is a
statement in the war on terror against "them Ay Rabs." Then,
provide recipes for cassoulet, spaghetti carbonara, Bolognese sauce
with sausage, dirty rice, anything that uses pork. Suddenly, he-men
everywhere are wearing aprons and making delicious pig-meat meals
while their wives watch figure skating.
Hey, it's at least as logical as anything else about the Middle
East, France's immigration policy, or the war on terror, not to
mention talk radio.
Islam also has a "if you're starving, eat the pork - Allah
doesn't want you dead" clause, IIRC. So, both Jewish and Muslim
homeless could, within the terms of their religions, eat it to
avoid starvation. They likely wouldn't be happy about it.
I just can't sympathize with either group in this conflict. It's
utterly wrong to close down the kitchen, but it's just fucked to
deliberately make food that would humiliate someone who would eat
it.
I just can't sympathize with either group in this conflict.
It's utterly wrong to close down the kitchen, but it's just fucked
to deliberately make food that would humiliate someone who would
eat it.
I think it the article they stated the soup was made with pork to
make it hearty and pork is cheap. Only after the political
implications of an already made decision had become clear, did they
attempt to exploit it.
I agree though that is it fucked up to exploit this. Shouldn't
non-profit soup kitchens attempt to serve as many homeless as
possible?
But for Christ's sake - close it down?!?!?!
First they came for the free-pig-soup makers, but I didn't stand
up...
I agree, Eric. However, you're forgetting the third group here
besides the mean cooks and the busy-bodybureaucrats, viz. the
people who still believe in these stupid, millennia-old caveats
like the dangers of pork.
This is a bigger topic than that addressed in the original post,
but why do we continue to humor these people? I am so friggin sick
and tired of all this bowing and scraping for people who cling to
the ridonkulous beliefs of their forebears. Call me a heathen
infidel, but I can't help but feel that the world would progress a
little quicker and smoother if all of us non-believers were willing
to call 'bullshit' when we hear about it.
There's no point in shutting this down, but as I understand it
they are doing everything in their power to turn what could be an
act of charity into a giant "FUCK YOU!"
However, having worked in labs with many Frenchmen, I'm pleased to
report that the French are actually infinitely more polite than
this incident, or other threads on Hit and Run, may lead you to
believe. My French colleagues have, without exception, been
incredibly hospitable people.
Eric, like you I can't sympathize with either group. It's
interesting for me to read news on European politics, because I
keep waiting for a context of freedom, since they claim to be
living in free democracies, and I as an American expect conflicts
over what we can and can't do to be a matter of freedom.
For the establishment-bureaucracy-police side of the conflict, they
were only interested in social order, though. They never attempted
to defend their laughable ban on free food as an overstepping of
bounds -- it wasn't that the soup-servers had overstepped their
rights, or had infringed on others'. For example, I was amazed to
read that the police "[shut] it [the kitchen] down only once[,] to
avoid an altercation with a group of indignant French leftists."
They had done nothing illegal, in fact someone else might have been
preparing to commit crimes against them, but the government rolled
over the individuals to preserve social calm.
And, on the nationalist soup-servers' side, though they did offer
complaints about "freedom," what it really came down to was 'the
"persecution" of the soup kitchen [is] a "betrayal of the French
identity."' By "identity," I initially thought that meant "free
democracy" ... then I realized it was a racial-nationalist kind of
identity.
I was also amused by the transparent tactics of the police when
they "initially granted permission" for a feast the group wanted to
hold, but then, uh, decided to change their minds right before the
event, showing up that morning to say so. Clever move: if you (the
gov't) want to deny a request, wait until right before the relavent
point in time and announce your decision through the police, and
you're less likely to get a meaningful argument.
I agree that exploiting this as a political statement is wrong, but what about the Jewish and Muslim immigrants who are not on the soup lines? Are they fixing Matzah or Lamb-Lentil soup for the non-pork eaters? I see no reason for the government to become involved in this, only a reason for more citizens to become involved. Charity starts at home and then moves to the street.
When will the French ban fruit of the vine to comply with Muslim
Halaal?
What about rabbits and hares? (leviticus bans 'em)
Horse meat?
Shellfish, Eels and Catfish?
Fish in general are taboo in parts of Africa, do we want to offend
Africans?
Camel?
Will they now ban root vegetable to avoid offending Jains?
Beef to avoid offending Hindus?
Lettuce to avoid offending Yezidi Zoroastrians?
How about pasta and meatballs? Are we allowed to eat them in
celebration of the FSM or will that offend all abrahamic religions
as apostatsy?
I find Bologna offensive, the smell alone makes me gag. I demand
that be banned!
We will end up as a race of deceased breatharians
So what if there's a political angle?! They're feeding hungry people! And to say the content of one's food should be altered because it's insulting to others is a form of tyranny. If a certain group doesn't like it, they don't have to eat it, do they? It's not as though they shut down a Muslim free-meals program to set up the " identity soup" project. If the Muslims and French nationalists wish to compete, wish to demonstrate that their groupcan feed more indigents... well, who loses by that?
Why is it a "certainly a churlish and mean-spirited gesture" to
serve soup that includes "smoked bacon, pig's ears, feet, and tails
combined with vegetables and sausages" as well as "cheese, dessert
and a glass of red wine with each meal."?
Sounds fuckin' delicious!
What?!!! The starving, homeless Muslims and Jews in France can't
(won't) eat pork?
Then let them eat cake!
I like serving a glass of red wine with every meal for the
homeless. Remember the stink about "beer for the homeless"?
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/07/02/1056825441944.html
"Sounds fuckin' delicious!"
I'm a vegetarian, and that menu is making my mouth water. Honestly.
I think I would pretend pigs were vegetables just to get a bowl of
that stuff. Of course I'm no religious fanatic, either.
linguist:
Because I have nothing better to do than sit here hitting
"refresh" every 3 seconds. :-)
Me, neither. Every three seconds? Thanks, now I know what to
do.
What?!!! The starving, homeless Muslims and Jews in France
can't (won't) eat pork?
Methinks this wasn't directed at the Jews. They aren't wandering
around Paris looking for handouts, much less pork soup.
re: What should have been titled No Soup For Jews (and
Muslims)
Banning hate doesn't work. But what do you expect from people who
think the government is the solution to _____?
Once upon a time there was such a thing as public shame and
shunning. I remember when David Duke ran for office as a Republican
even though (or because) he used to be a KKK member. The fact that
he belonged to such an overtly racist organization allowed people
to realize exactly what he was, and he got voted down as a result,
whereas he likely would have gotten elected otherwise. It is
exactly this sort of thing that not allowing scumbags to express
their hate prevents, namely the proper marginalization of their
kind.
By the way, the French are serious morons for disallowing private
individuals to help feed the hungry. As someone mentioned, their
mean-spirited soup kitchen feeds non-Muslims and non-Jews, thus
supplying some demand and making the rest of the supply stretch
further.
Religion is a choice. If you freely choose to follow a religion
that requires you to voluntarily forsake certain foods, well, sucks
for you, but I don't have the slightest sympathy.
Besides, what good is a religion if you can't suffer for your
faith?
"Besides, what good is a religion if you can't suffer for your
faith?"
Well, doesn't that just sum up about 90% of the world's
problems.
Well, doesn't that just sum up about 90% of the world's
problems.
That religious nuts cause their own problems?
It is certainly a churlish and mean-spirited
gesture,
Mulsims looking a gift pig in the mouth is indeed churlish and
mean-spirited. They should say "thanks" (or "No, but thanks
anyway"). Sounds a bit like like anti-pig racism.
(Keeping in mind that the article didn't actually say anything
about Muslims, just "leftists" imposing their silly ideas by force
in order to make a political statement.)
but does the French government really need to try to close down
the soup kitchen citing the "discriminatory nature of the
soup"?
The government is stupid. Details at 11.
We will end up as a race of deceased breatharians
Breath? How dare you breathe? We are deeply offended! Just you
wait...
However, having worked in labs with many Frenchmen, I'm
pleased to report that the French are actually infinitely more
polite than this incident, or other threads on Hit and Run, may
lead you to believe. My French colleagues have, without exception,
been incredibly hospitable people.
Yeah, but you know they spit in your general direction when you
turn your back and walk away from them, thoreau. :)
Besides, what good is a religion if you can't suffer for your
faith?"
Well, doesn't that just sum up about 90% of the world's
problems.
Everybody wants to be a martyr.
And for your reading pleasure, a repeat of one of my favorite
quotes (attributed to Red Foxx):
"I drink and smoke. Some people don't drink. Don't smoke. Some
people they don't eat butter. No sugar. No lard. No salt. Because
they want to live. Give up all that good stuff. Neckbones,
pigtails.... You're gonna feel like a damn fool layin out there in
the hospital dying from nothing."
Also, I haven't heard this one on this thread yet:
Ham is good. Porkchops are good.
"You don't frighten us, English pig dogs. Go and boil your
bottoms, you sons of a silly person."
See? Even in medieval times, the French were shoving pork in
people's faces.
Great that these Frenc patriots distribute food made of pork.
For the same money more people are fed.
Kosher and Halal meat is considerably more expensive.
Yes, Jews and Muslims should not eat.
Less Christians will come to the Jewish and Muslim free kitchens,
and these kitchens will feed those that need such food.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245