To the protesting cooks

There was a country where the slogan was that everyone had the human right to food.

From an early age, even before they were taught to read, children were told about this fundamental human right. Without food there would be no life, no dignity, no equality, no progress. People without access to food, hungry, malnourished, cannot lead a dignified life. It is obvious. It requires no further analysis or discussion.

There was then a great consensus: we must, among all of us, ensure the right to food for everyone.

The constitution and the laws of this Social and Democratic State of Law enshrined the right to food and the consequent state obligation to ensure it, in an efficient, equitable and fair manner. Not just any type of food, but of quality, in sufficient quantity for everyone. The production and distribution of food to all, equally, was the great state mission. What was spent on food was not to be understood as an expense, but as an investment. No budgetary item was greater.

In pursuit of this objective of general interest, public policy was the direct or indirect control of land, seeds, crops, harvests, hunting, fishing, livestock, in short, all agricultural activity. Also food processing and manufacturing, as well as transportation and distribution to the final consumer.

For these purposes, and to avoid unfair inequalities, large buildings were constructed to serve as public dining halls. They were centers where hundreds or thousands of people could be served daily, with breakfast, lunch and dinner. Their management was in the hands of the authorities, who, through mandates and controls, not only decided which foods were the most adequate, but also made sure that they reached everyone, with priority given to the poorest. The entire population had to go to these canteens to receive quality food. More than 85% of the right to food was provided through these canteens. Only 15% were able to meet their entitlement through private concessionaires. They were very expensive. They were highly supervised in order to ensure, there too, the common good.

A legion of public employees was in charge of the administration of these large canteens. The cooks were officials certified by the State to handle the food, after passing a program designed for such purposes. Only they could prepare, cook and serve them.

That was the plan. This ensured for all inhabitants their fundamental right to free, quality food.

But it did not work. Despite the millionaire investments, a detailed legislation that left no margin for error, the countless public officials and employees involved and the cooks' vocation of service, the plan did not work.

The public canteens soon began to show inefficiency and entered a process of deterioration. Many of the ingredients were in short supply, the food was damaged, the diners complained, the cooks became frustrated and, finally, no one was satisfied with the food they received.

In the press there were reports of corruption, overpriced products, abuse of power by the authorities, poor service, inadequate food. Each denunciation had its reply, its explanation, or rather some excuse. The voices that, from the beginning, predicted that such a centralized system was unsustainable, were getting louder and louder. Its bankruptcy was becoming more evident every day.

For the Greeks it was already known that democracy degenerates into demagogy. The less unscrupulous politicians tend to manipulate people, take advantage of mistakes, create groups, confront them and polarize society. They make promises they know they will never keep, as well as denunciations they will never prove. They put on the garb of saviors. Many times, through revolts or elections, they come to power. From demagogy to tyranny there is only a small step. That is written.

And in that country, in that social democracy, the path of destruction was followed time and again. In a short time, a new political class came to power and, immediately, put an end to any vestige of democratic play. They used the very broad powers for their own interests. Not only did corruption condemn the soup kitchens, but they also became a means of social control. A hungry society is a blind instrument of its own destruction.

The people, desperate, protested. They rebelled. But they were brutally repressed.

The political use of soup kitchens became more notorious. Woe to him who bites the hand of the master who feeds him!

Eventually, the people, frustrated, began to work it out for themselves.

They sowed, harvested, raised and exchanged food. They cooked for themselves. Some certified cooks abandoned the large, decadent soup kitchens and created their own micro-kitchens. They sold their expertise, their work. People went to these parallel canteens and, although they paid, they left satisfied. A growing informal food market was created. Many learned to cook, while more cooks took up their profession.

The richest, as well as the members of the ruling party, none of them would stoop to going to the soup kitchens. And there came a time when even the poorest stopped going to the soup kitchens. They fed themselves.

It was only a matter of time. People had begun to decide freely where and how to feed themselves, from a myriad of options. The large public canteens would be replaced by micro-private canteens, all in competition, specializing in different foods, seasonings, ingredients, techniques. Each one striving to attract diners in the middle of the competition; offering their best dishes, the best service, at the best price.

One day, when more people were convinced that their food was too important to be left in the hands of politicians, when micro-private canteens were springing up everywhere, just then, a group of cooks from the public canteens took to the streets to protest low salaries and poor working conditions. It was a just complaint. The state was mistreating them.

But few supported them. Even among the cooks there was no expectation of change. Many didn't even hear about it. Why? Because nobody expected miraculous improvements in the public canteens. Because people were already solving their own food problems.

Antonio Canova González