Honey Bee and Indian Retail Market

What Happens when Corporate Come to Indian Retail Market!

There is heated discussion regarding multinational companies coming to Indian retail market. There are people on both sides. This video is an expression of my opinion on the issue.

This small honey bee was taking a bit of honey from the water lily in my garden. It went around the flower to take the pollen also on to its legs that could be used to pollinate another flower. It does not harm the flower in any way, rather it helps human to get honey from the honey bee hive and also help the plant keep its race through pollination.

Then comes from no where this beetle. It was attracted not only by the honey but the tender petals of the flower also. It takes the honey and eats the tender parts of the flower. The flower becomes ugly and unattractive. It does not preserve the honey for people to use. It does not pollinate also.

The honey bee tried to chase the beetle away, but was too small to be successful. Finally gave up and went away. Later I had to chase the beetle and it fell in to the pond for the fish to swallow. Can you do the same?

When the big foreign companies come to retail market, it chases the small vendors away and takes control of the market to take all the profit away without leaving any thing for the people’s welfare or for reinvestment. Now you decide whether it is good or bad for us and for the market.

Now watch the video on Youtube:



6 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. T John
    May 11, 2013 @ 05:32:47

    To me this is an utmost skewed and selfish comparison.

    Let us start with Honey Bees, the poor creatures work hard to make amazingly intricate hives, collect nectar, convert it into long-lasting honey and meticulously stores it for rainy days and for the benefit of their newborns. Man acting like the lord of all things on earth, drives the bees out by smoking their hives then thoughtlessly chop down them down to loot the Honey and Wax. In the process they kill many a bee and newborn. How can you assume that the bees are working for the benefit of mankind? Think from their perspective, they will see man exactly as you have described the Beetle if not worse!

    Coming to the Beetle, yours is a typical reaction to its ugliness, to which you have unfairly attributed many characteristics. This is a bane of all ugly looking creatures be it snakes, vultures, crocodiles and even human beings. Traits are imagined and labelled on them. The depiction villains in Indian movies of yesteryear is a fall out from this outlook. The fact was that these persons in actual life were better behaved than some of the heroes to whom success had gone to head. Yes, many types of Beetles are pests from our perspective because they cause damage to our crops and gardens. But spare a moment for the many creatures we hunt or slaughter every day. To them mankind is the biggest pest of all. Look further, to the damage he is inflicting on our fragile ecosystem purportedly for development. Hills are being razed overnight with modern machinery, a train ride in Kerala will show you many. Has anyone thought of the long-term effects of such activities. I think we should be more concerned about that than whether a few foreign investors would be harmful.

    Now to globalisation. It is a word used by many to take advantage of the ignorance of what forms the majority of mankind. Did anything happen to LIC from the competition it received from all the major global players. The reality is that many of these Global players had to leave in a huff. Indian economy has enough industrialists and businessmen who now even do reverse globalisation. So what the public needs to do is to wait and watch. In the process, in my experience, the consumer is ending up with quality products at very reasonable prices. To illustrate, last year at the peek of mango season in India, Reliance Fresh was offering Banganapally for Rs.25/- a Kg with an offer of 3 Kilograms for Rs. 60/-. Even today ordinary people have a mind block about entering these supermarkets. Taking advantage of this there was this street vendor a few blocks away, briskly selling the same mangoes for Rs.40/-

    Everyone talks about the annihilation of the small businesses and of course the heart touching term, “Pa & Ma” Stores. Have you thought of how many people in say, a million of any local population, would fall in that category. So does that mean that the huge majority should cough up higher prices to sustain a micro segment when they can so easily be rehabilitated if matters come to that. Procurement strategies of these giants are such that middle men are completely eliminated. So the producers and consumers get better prices. To get a feel of what I said, try selling a homegrown bunch of bananas to one of these local shops. He will offer you half of what he is charging his customers!


    • Yuhanon Meletius
      May 13, 2013 @ 05:46:38

      Thank you for following my blog and taking time to comment on it.
      I think you are not seeing the whole pictures. It is not just about selling and buying. It is much more than that. I will come to that in a minute.
      If your theory with the honey bee work every where there will be nothing for any one to eat. Every thing living, including plants, make things not just for themselves. Where does the bee gets the honey from? It is from the flower. Is the flower makes honey for the bee? I do not think so. It is just to attract the bee that the pollen can be distributed. Then why the bee takes the pollen home for its infants to eat? Why vegetation makes seeds and fruits and store food in roots. Not for human or any animal. It is for its progeny only according to your theory. Yes the bee take the honey for its new born and human and some animals take part of it. If human intervention annihilates the race of bee by taking every thing it preserves, then they are at fault. Otherwise it can be considered as mutual help.

      I did not say the beetle is ugly, I only said, it eats up the flower and makes the flower ugly. You are reading some thing what is not in my post. That is not fair in an intelligent dialogue. There is no ugliness in this world. I strongly believe that every thing God created is good and beautiful. This is not a note with aesthetic point of view primarily which is always subjective. I am talking about with a functional point of view. I am student of Old Testament in the Bible and I preach this understanding of mine.
      You further built a case on ugliness and attributed all of it on me. I have no part in it. I am a habitual viewer of Animal planet channel on TV and get so much fascinated by the wonderful life and behavior of these creatures whom you call ugly. I don’t call them ugly. They are magnificent creations of God.
      I do subscribe to your statement that humankind (I would not say mankind and I consider it a male dominated society’s expression) is the worst pest. I keep trees, bushes and flowers in my garden to keep the natural environment where I live. I do not keep the mango trees for mangos, but for its own sake. I keep these flowers not to pluck them and keep them in my vase on my table, but for their own sake. Of course there is a bit of selfish element in it, that I get joy watching them and taking care of. I also provide water to the birds with water in those water lily ponds. I preach on things you mentioned, as a matter of fact, I did that even last Sunday, as atrocities of human upon nature. However, I do not like any other pest coming and destroying the beauty of my garden.
      I think you are just looking at the present scenario in India. Look at the world where this so called ‘globalization’ has successfully put to practice. Now US has no production sector except in weapon and automobile. People on a daily basis are being laid off. China is making every thing, except humans, for US and US is not making any thing for China. Where is this mutuality working. The corporate go to places where wage is minimum and bring products made there to countries where living standard is much high and sell them in high price with heavy margin for them. The profit is not shared in the country where it is consumed or produced. It goes to the luxurious life of top brass in the corporate. Yes Indian companies are going abroad to take over companies. But who benefits out of it? Indians? I do not think. It again goes to luxurious spending. The profit does not come to investment sector that will find more work. I work with LIC people very closely. As a matter of fact I am a regular speaker at Alappuza unit 2 LIC employees’ family get together. I also converse with them on issued you mentioned. Yes LIC has not been affected so much and several foreign insurance companies are not doing good as they expected. It also helped LIC to be more people oriented and efficient. But what about few ill-famed like Metlife and prudential? They under the umbrella AIG caused the crumbling of American and consequently world economy? Can you assure me that it will not happen in India?
      Again what happened in US in agricultural sector during Ronald Regan’s time is a caution for every country that is moving in that line. The small farmer lost their land to big corporations. They are cultivating the land not to feed people healthy food, but to make profit at any cost. So genetic engineering , excessive use of hormones and pesticides to boost the output are applied without minding the health of people who consume them. What happened in American Samoa is an example where America, to keep that Pacific military base, give people all the Jung food in much cheaper rate and they are obese and unhealthy now (I am a personal witness to that). They get sick at a very early age. Same is the case in US. By the time they reach 40, they have to be a patient for some reason. Ayurveda would say most of the ill health come from un healthy diet. Slowly we are also moving towards that. Globalization is not all that bad. As a matter of fact there are areas where globalization can be applied. Sharing of know how in medical engineering is one of them. We in our culture always said “loka samsta sukhino bhavantu”. Globalization should be for the welfare of humanity with their natural environment. But that is not what is happening. I hope you heard what BBC and CNN commented on the building collapse in Bangladesh. Both were accusing corporations that look for cheap labor for cloth making to sell it for big profit in developed countries. Of course you may say that it is the duty of the local government to look for the safety of its citizens. I admit that, but when local governments are also bought by the corporate, who will save the citizens? (Have you forgotten the case of Raja who sold telecommunication facility to corporate without auction and causing big loss of revenue to Indian exchequer and probably gaining some commission for himself?). What I said in my posting was just an echo of what the father of the nation Mahatmaji said three quarter of a century back. Again, with many others including our prime minister, you may say that globalization can not be stopped now. Yes and no, I would say. Globalization in its good sense need not be stopped. But its adverse effects have to be, and can be, stopped. Look at some of the Latin American countries.
      The mango you referred to, of course Reliance can sell for cheap. Because it produces bulk and to do that they use all kinds of chemicals which are harmful to the health of the people and which destroys the natural flavor of the soil. You may remember what happened to the cotton farmers in Andhra Pradesh. Corporate has no soul and has no feeling. It accounts only the fluctuation in the stock market. This is what bothers me. I can not deal with some thing that does not have feeling and does not take in to account me as a human being.
      I am not worried about how many people are in the retail business. I am worried about how many are affected adversely by the market. If there are more people as customers, there will be more people to sell. But I want to see the customers getting nothing that has health hazard hidden in it and I do not want any exploitation behind what I buy.
      You may have a million reasons to believe in what you think right. But this is what I believe and I have the right for that. Of course it will be time that will tell us what is finally.
      Yuhanon Meletius


  2. T John
    May 13, 2013 @ 09:36:38

    Oops! My apologies for striking a nerve. Along with the “U” word I did mention “bane” too. Any story has a good guy and to highlight his goodness there is always a bad guy or two around. Usually, in milder terms, this bad guy is not ‘good looking’ and always much bigger than the good guy. When you said a story these undercurrents have, oblivious to you, crept in to take their rightful places.

    Yes you are right about the chemicals that go into our food. Unfortunately, ever since man started using his prowess at making and evolving tools and machines, the playing fields are no longer level. He doesn’t have to physically work to be fed. Only a few manage to exercise and keep fit. One doesn’t even have to bear the extremes of nature. To cap it all, he now lives longer! The culmination being, ‘humankind’ is over-populating itself. Together comes the need for more food and water. Unfortunately, the pests don’t allow viable organic farming to feed such numbers. So cheaper options will feed the lesser privileged.

    Yes you are right. China is probably holding more Dollars what the US does. Not too long ago the British found themselves in a similar situation when they became addicted to tea to such a extent to cause a trade deficit with China. Hope there are better methods today than those times when they shipped Opium back!

    Globalisation need not be stopped. But good governance should be ensured. Any consumer will opt for the cheapest supplier as long as he gets the quality he wants. If this cheapness is achieved by poor working conditions or through child labour, the buyer cannot be blamed. It is poor execution by a distant government. You mentioned equal sharing of profits and mutuality. The reason that it works the other way is because the cost of living in such countries is only a fraction of what it is in the US. But as the living conditions and lifestyles of these workers improve, the scales will start leveling. The flip side being, when the scales even out so does the need for outsourcing from that country. Then they will hop to the next under-developed country. This process, in time will consume all available options at which point probably many countries will be profitably outsourcing from the US.

    The American crisis you mention is purely man made again on account of poor governance and greed. Bill Clinton left their economy in its pinkest of ever health. It took only one Bush to put it where it now stands.


  3. T John
    May 13, 2013 @ 09:42:25

    By the way, nectar is converted to Honey in a laborious process where the bee regurgitates it several times to semi digest it to the form we get it.


  4. Yuhanon Meletius
    May 13, 2013 @ 16:34:37

    Leaving aside all you said in your second and third comments, I must place a correction. It was Mr. Bill Clinton who started the American crisis that eventually grew to a global crisis, I might say. I was a regular visitor to US those days. He asked the banks to give 80% of the value of the houses as loan who wanted to refinance their buildings. He did not say how many times one can remortgage his/her house. The mortgage agents to get commission refinanced two or more times the same building. The banks never said no since they also got commission points. The insurance agents did not say any thing. They also got their share. The banks put those bonds in foreign financial institutions. The owner had no way of paying it off. The bank had to take the house over, but it was not worth what they had to get from it. They passed it on to the foreign banks and financial institutions and everybody went down except those agents and the bank top brass with the insurance CEOs. Same thing happened in Greenland which never knew what poverty was.
    I must add, however what I said about Clinton does not make Mr. Bush Jr. a better person. He had his share too.


  5. T John
    May 14, 2013 @ 01:57:03

    To quote Clinton from his speech at the Labour Party Conference in Blackpool, U.K in 2002:

    “If I might say it worked pretty well in America too. We had a 30 year low on unemployment, we had a 32 year low in welfare roles, we had a 27 year low in the crime rate, all directly tied to policies we adopted. We had three years of surpluses in the budget for the first time in 70 years and the biggest increase in aid to university students in 50 years. And the thing that means the most to me is the comparison of our economic recovery with the Republican recovery of the 1980s. They had 14m jobs and only 70,000 families move out of poverty. We had 22m jobs, 50% more, but 7m moved out of poverty, 100 times as many”

    The full text is available at:



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: