|
Chandra Muzaffar
International Movement for a Just World, Malaysia
We shall begin by defining terms. By worldview one means a comprehensive philosophy or conception of the world and human life. By ethics one means a system or code of morals. Worldviews shape our moral attitudes and our ethical standards. They exert a decisive influence on how we relate to our environment and how we approach the question of development. There are perhaps at least four worldviews associated with development and the environment. We shall explore the strengths and weaknesses of each of these worldviews. There is the view that our natural environment is sacred, that its preservation is an end in itself. Because every tree and every river is precious, the adherents of this worldview are often extremely suspicious of any form of development. For them preserving the treasures of nature is sometimes far more important than improving the standard of living of the poor. While their protective attitude towards the natural environment is laudable, their antipathy towards the developmental process is regrettable. It may be necessary for instance to clear trees to build houses for the poor or divert a river in order to harness hydro-electric power for some isolated rural community. Respect for the environment should not degenerate into some form of irrational worship of nature -- as it has begun to happen among some environmental groups in the West and their camp followers in the East. There is another view which was much more prevalent at the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century -- the view that Man has the right to dominate nature and the environment, that the natural resources of the earth and the oceans are there for Man to exploit to his heart�s content. The principal purpose of science and technology, according to this worldview, is to enable Man to conquer and subdue his sometimes capricious physical environment. The advocates of this worldview are so confident of the efficacy of technology that they are convinced that even the problem of environmental degradation is amenable to some �technical fix.� The grave environmental crisis of the latter half of the twentieth century has demolished the legitimacy of this worldview. For if there was any set of ideas which provided the justification for the wholesale plunder of nature and its resources it was this notion of Man�s god-like greatness -- a Prometheus unbound -- endowing him with the power to dominate his environment. It is a matter of some significance that secular Western civilisation which spawned this ideology of dominance, the epitome of which was of course Western colonialism, has, in the last two decades of the twentieth century, become a little less aggressive towards the environment. While trial and tribulation has made many Western societies aware of the importance of environmental protection, certain rapidly growing economies in East and Southeast Asia appear to be negligent of fundamental environmental concerns as they pursue development with single-minded passion. Indeed some of them have adopted such a myopic view of development that they are prepared to sacrifice the long-term well-being of both environment and community in the interest of short-term gains for the wealthy strata of their societies. In their rapacious attitude to the environment, the elites of some of these Asian economies seem to show some affinity to the worldview of the ruling classes of early twentieth century Europe and North America. This brings us to our third worldview which is reflected in the public policies and programmes of a number of present-day Western governments. As we have suggested, they have become more caring, less callous towards the environment. The multitude of laws and rules promulgated every year to check various forms of pollution and the vigorous promotion of environmental consciousness through both the school system and the mass media especially in countries such as Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Holland and Austria testify to this. In essence, this new worldview is a practical, pragmatic response to a crisis and for that reason embodies an element of expedience. It is not the product of a major shift in worldview emerging from a holistic, integrated consciousness that comprehends the intimate bond between the human being and his natural environment. This is why there is still very limited support -- alternative groups notwithstanding -- within the influential segment of Western society for curbing conspicuous consumption which is essential for a balanced, harmonious relation-ship with our natural environment. Only if there is a radical change in consumption patterns at the middle and upper echelons of Western society will a more moderate lifestyle emerge. But will a moderate lifestyle emerge unless there is a fundamental transformation in the worldview of Western society? Our fourth and final worldview seeks to address many of the flaws and fallacies found in the other three worldviews. It is a worldview that centres around the oneness of God. Nature is God�s creation. In fact, it is through the wonders of nature that one begins to appreciate the unique power and singular majesty of God. It is incumbent therefore upon the human being to treat nature and the environment with love, respect and care. But, it must be stressed, it is God and God alone that one worships, not nature or the forces of nature. Similarly, the vast resources found in our physical environment are God�s gifts to humanity. Human beings are expected to utilise them for their individual and collective benefit. The knowledge human beings acquire -- in the realm of science and technology for instance -- should be directed towards the creative development of God�s gifts. This is a worldview which, in other words, visualises a dynamic relationship between the human being and nature, a relationship which must result in the enhancement and the enrichment of his environment for the larger good of humanity and the greater glory of God. The idea that nature is inert, static beauty or that the environment should be preserved in its pristine purity is alien to this worldview. Nonetheless, the human being must ensure -- as it should be obvious by now -- that he does not defile or degrade the environment. He must ensure that natural resources are used in a judicious manner so that even unborn generations of some distant future will benefit from God�s bounties. The human being must do this because he is God�s vicegerent, God�s trustee. It is his responsibility to God. In order to fulfil God�s trust vis-a-vis both environment and community, the human being has to abide by those values and principles of life and living which are at the very core of God�s eternal message to humanity. What this means is that justice, love and compassion should guide the human being in his interaction with community and environment. He should hold in check greed and avarice and that all-too-human tendency to pursue his own selfish interests to the detriment of his fellow human beings. If he succeeds in doing that, he will be able to eschew excess and maintain a moderate lifestyle in harmony with community and environment. A moderate lifestyle which reflects balance and equilibrium is the cherished ideal of this worldview. From our description of the fourth worldview it is clear that its power and potency lies in the pivotal position of the concept of God. Because nature is God�s creation, it deserves utmost respect and reverence. At the same time however because there is God one does not go overboard in one�s celebration of nature and the environment. Since the human being is God�s vicegerent on earth, he has a responsibility to develop the environment, to harness its wealth -- but strictly in accordance with God-based values and ethics. Spiritual and moral values rooted in immutable faith in God thus help to check development from becoming an obsession that destroys the environment and everything else that stands in its path. Once again, therefore, because there is God, development, within this worldview can never become another god. Thus God as the ultimate focal point of faith and loyalty connects the environment to the human being through spiritual and moral values and helps to balance the integrity of the environment with the demands of development. The fourth worldview, it should be emphasised at this point, is not some esoteric theology of life and the environment. Nearly everyone of its central ideas -- God, nature as God�s handiwork, harmony with the environment as a spiritual ethic, developing natural resources within a spiritual-moral framework, moderation and balance as guiding principles of life -- are not only integral to almost all the world�s religions but what is more important have been practised in one form or another since time immemorial. Ancient Taoism for instance produced beautiful architecture which was at the same time in total harmony with the environment. The Buddhist kingdoms of Kandy (in Sri Lanka) were renowned for their irrigation systems which gave meticulous attention to environmental needs. We are told that in the Hindu Empires of ancient India there were elaborate cities which merged naturally with their environs. The Benedictine monastic orders of early Christianity (around the sixth century) took great pains to live in accordance with environmental ethics since they regarded harmony with nature as an essential part of Jesus� teachings. Like the other religions, Islam, too celebrates nature and urges humankind to appreciate its bounties and live in harmony with the physical environment. This is beautifully articulated in the Quran. It says, for instance, "Do they not look at the sky above them? - how We have made it and adorned it, and there are no flaws in it? And the earth - We have spread it out, and set thereon mountains standing firm, and produced therein every kind of beautiful growth (in pairs) - To be observed and commemorated by every devotee turning (to God). And We send down from the sky rain charted with blessing, and We produce therewith gardens and grain for harvests; And tall (and stately) palm trees, with shoots of fruits stalks, piled one over another;- As sustenance for (God's) Servants;- and We give (new) life therewith to land that is dead: thus will be the Resurrection." In another verse, it reminds humankind: "Have We not made the earth as a wide expanse, And the mountains as pegs? And (have We not) created you in pairs, And made your sleep for rest, And made the night as a covering, And made the day as a means of subsistence? And (have We not) built over you the seven firmaments, And placed (therein) a Light of Spelndour? And do We not send down from the clouds water in abundance, That We may produce therewith corn and vegetables, And gardens of luxurious growth?" It will be observed from these verses that nature and its bounties are presented as a gift from God. It is, in fact, a God centred worldview which subordinates nature and the human being to the power and majesty of the Almighty. It is a worldview which enabled Muslims between the eighth and thirteenth centuries to apply science and technology to the dramatic transformation of relatively backward societies into sophisticated centres of civilisation -- without harming the physical environment in any way. Magnificent cities such as Samarkand, Bokhara, Allepo, Damascus and Baghdad grew and developed, complete with hospitals, universities, libraries, parks and gardens. It is worth observing that Baghdad at the acme of its glory had a population of perhaps a million living in relative peace without the problems of pollution and environmental degradation associated with many modern cities of that size. If there wasn�t some understanding of the human being�s relationship with environment and God among the elites -- an understanding which no doubt conditioned their attitude towards technology -- Baghdad and the other Muslim cities of antiquity would have developed differently. This essentially religious worldview which established a just equilibrium between progress and the environment has declined within the Muslim world and indeed within all other civilisations. What are the reasons for this decline? Very briefly, we could outline five main reasons. One, ossification within religious civilisations which very often creates a situation whereby the underlying values and worldview are set aside and instead static laws, outmoded rules and antiquated practices are projected as the defining characteristics of a particular faith. Historically speaking, both internal factors and external causes would be responsible for this rigidity and decay in most religious civilisations. Two, the dominant, pervasive power and influence of Western secular civilisation in the contemporary world. The secularisation of society which has its early roots in the European Renaissance reached its peak in the twentieth century with the general acceptance in the West of the idea that religion is a private matter confined to the individual and has nothing to do with issues in the public realm, including the community�s relationship with the environment. The environment, science, technology, economics, politics and other areas of public life should not -- from the standpoint of secular philosophy -- be guided by values and ethics derived from religion. If this secular worldview holds sway in most places today it is partly because the major centres of power in the West have been able to perpetuate their dominance acquired during the colonial epoch through newer, more sophisticated forms of control and dictation. Three, as significant as the spread of the secular worldview has been the dramatic expansion of a global economy which gives so much emphasis to the maximisation of profits, the penetration of markets and the attainment of high growth rates and accords so little attention to environmental protection , balanced development and ethical values. While this drive towards globalisation is propelled to a great extent by powerful multinational corporations in the North, it is also aided and abetted by national elites in the South who regard the �growth at all costs� approach to development as the only salvation for their societies. Often, such elites have no qualms about sacrificing environmental ethics at the altar of lopsided development. Four, apart from everything else, many of the elites in the South who are either the direct products of colonial education or the indirect products of neo-colonial cultural and media indoctrination, possess scant, meagre knowledge of what their religious philosophies say about the environment or about the human being�s role as God�s vicegerent on earth, or about the nexus between values, environment and God. This lack of awareness and understanding of the worldview embodied in one�s religion is by no means an elite phenomenon. It manifests itself at various levels and within different sectors of society. As a result, many planners, public administrators, academics, professionals, teachers and journalists in the South, among other influential groups, are in no position to address issues of environment and development from a religious perspective. Five, even if there are groups capable of articulating the religious worldview, there is no guarantee that they will always rise to the defence of the environment or espouse the cause of balanced development -- especially if their own interests, or the interests of others associated with them, are also involved. For vested interests linked to wealth, power and status have always subverted sublime values and altruistic ideals -- even when these values and ideals are rooted in religion. This is why, today, as in the past, one of the greatest threats to the principle and practice of harmonious relations with the environment is the demon of self-serving interest appearing in some guise or other. Though self interest will always challenge our endeavour to enforce environmental ethics, we should not lose faith in that God-centred vision of life which we have presented in this analysis as perhaps the only philosophy capable of checking the rampant consumerism that symbolises elite lifestyles today and of establishing an equitable balance between environment and development. For it is a worldview which -- unlike most secular philosophies -- commands the sort of emotional and psychological power that is imperative for the transform a t i o n of human character and social attitudes. This is the indisputable strength of a faith based worldview. This is why there should be a concerted effort to educate society on the importance of this worldview -- not just for the sake of the environment or for the sake of balanced development but also for the sake of the future of humanity itself. After all, the attempt by a small but powerful segment of the human family to live without God has proven to be catastrophic. The environmental crisis and indeed all the other grave tragedies which confront humankind at this juncture in history compel us to re-appraise the very basis of our existence. It is time to return to that Ultimate Truth. As the late Dag Hammmarskjold once put it in such simple language: �On the bookshelf of life, God is a useful work of reference, always at hand but seldom consulted.'
|