🎓 Michael Briefs im Gespräch mit Bulu Imam (geb. 1942). Bulu Imam ist ein indigener Philosoph. Seine Philosophie dreht sich um globale Gerechtigkeit, selbstverwaltetes Leben indigener Völker und Fragen sozialer Differenz. 2012 wurde Bulu Imam im House of Lords in London mit dem Gandhi International Peace Award ausgezeichnet. /🎓 Michael Briefs in conversation with Bulu Imam (born 1942 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulu_Imam). Bulu Imam is an indigenous philosopher. His philosophy revolves around global justice, self-governing indigenous peoples and issues of social difference. In 2012, Bulu Imam was honoured with the Gandhi International Peace Award at the House of Lords in London. / বুলু ইমামের (জন্ম ১৯৪২) সাথে কথোপকথনে মাইকেল ব্রিফস (অডিও আর্কাইভ)। বুলু ইমাম একজন আদিবাসী দার্শনিক। তার দর্শন বৈশ্বিক ন্যায়বিচার, স্ব-শাসিত আদিবাসী জনগণ এবং সামাজিক পার্থক্যের বিষয়গুলিকে ঘিরে আবর্তিত হয়। ২০১২ সালে বুলু ইমাম লন্ডনের হাউস অফ লর্ডসে গান্ধী আন্তর্জাতিক শান্তি পুরস্কারে ভূষিত হন।.माइकल ब्रीफ्स (ऑडियो आर्किव) / बुलु इमाम (जन्म 1942) के साथ बातचीत में। बुलु इमाम एक स्वदेशी दार्शनिक हैं। उनका दर्शन वैश्विक न्याय, स्वशासित स्वदेशी लोगों और सामाजिक अंतर के मुद्दों के इर्द-गिर्द घूमता है। 2012 में, बुलु इमाम को लंदन में हाउस ऑफ लॉर्ड्स में गांधी अंतर्राष्ट्रीय शांति पुरस्कार से सम्मानित किया गया था।.
📚 Veröffentlichungen / publications o.a.:: - Bulu Imam: ”Antiquarian Remains of Jharkhand- Documentation of 520 archaeological sites in Jharkhand.” INTACH, Aryan Books International, New Delhi, 2014. - Bulu Imam: The Nomadic Birhors of Hazaribagh: Their Life, Art, Songs, Folklore & Ethnobotany.” Deutschland 2015. - Bulu Imam: ”The Manjhi Santals of Hazaribagh: Their Hunt Rules, Songs, Lifestyle, Folklore & Hunting Dogs.” Deutschland 2015. - Bulu Imam: ”Hazaribagh School of Painting & Decorative Arts.” Deutschland 2015. - Bulu Imam: ”Oraon Songs & Stories by Philomina Tirkey- Edited by Bulu Imam.” Deutschland 2015 - Bulu Imam: ”The Flowering Branch- Songs of the Manjhi Santals of Hazaribagh.” Deutschland 2015.
👍 audio archiv is self-financed. All podcasts are free of charge. If you like the podcast, leave us your comment 🪶 and give us your like 🫶. Or make a donation: Become a patreon.... ... or buy us a fresh ➙ coffee ☕. Thank you for your support 🌏🦋🙏
Every Friday a new interview. Follow us & Subsribe. Never miss an episode.Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Bulu Imam (00:00):
Welcome to audioarchiv, the channel for historical interviews with writers, philosophers, activists
and intellectuals from all over the world.
(00:34):
Hello Bulu Imam, like so many philosophers of indigenous peoples, is largely unknown in the West.
Neither what he says nor how he says it fits into Anglo-European categories of thought.
Bulu Imam has also not produced a comprehensive written compendium, nor has he increased his
(00:56):
daily market value through lectures, YouTube appearances or talk show appearances.
The indigenous political philosopher Bulu Imam is like all other indigenous philosophers (01:03):
Wikipedia
describes them as environmental activists who campaign for indigenous rights.
Wikipedia also perpetuates the colonial experience of the world (01:16):
as in each of us who grew up in Europe.
Our culture of domination dictates what philosophers have to write so that we can recognise them.
(01:40):
Thus, even the European discourse of the Enlightenment remains nothing more than an elitist
appropriation of the world on the basis of colonial world domination.
Anglo-European philosophy is based on an imperial pedestal of Greek and Roman thought and, at
the same time as the enslavement of three-quarters of humanity, is rising to become the world
(02:14):
spirit. “The energy for this,” says Bulu Imam, “was cynically supplied by the subjugated themselves.”
It is this energy that European thinking needed to justify the destruction of culture and nature
in the name of civilisation and continues to do so to the present day.
(02:35):
But who is Bulu Imam, someone we recognise as not belonging.
Someone who does not fit in.
Someone from the bush who is cut off, who is not understandable, who reduces, denies or even devalues.
(03:09):
Bulu Imam's philosophy is wrested from his own experience of inscribed domination thinking.
Perhaps this is why Bulu Imam speaks about the European, Western, American appropriation of
history that is still taught in every European school today.
Then was where die Lehre onee schuler was der Lehrer 1 Die energiede Unterwoffnen was der postmoderne
After all, what would teaching be without students, what would the teacher be without the energy
of the subjugated, what would the postmodern philosopher be without the applause of the national audience.
The philosopher Bulu Imam sat in front of his house in the Indian state of Jharkhand in 2004
and spoke to Michael Briefs.
Bulu Imam (03:31):
I think at the present moment the problem with the world is that we are not concentrating on
the real problem, which is the people who have got developed societies in ancient environments
are being treated now like wine glasses which have got their mouth on the table that don't have
the wine going into it.
And the purpose of globalization is to just keep the mouth of the wine glass on the table so
(03:54):
that the wine doesn't go into it.
So people just want the wine more and more and that serves the ends of globalization.
The simple thing as far as I can see, is to just turn the wine glass around and open it out.
So when the wine fills up and the wine glass can't take anymore, the people just enjoy a good glass of wine.
One good glass of wine is all that you need.
I think we in the new globalization so-called alternative movement are still following the old
(04:21):
pattern and that is more production and more consumerism.
Even environmentalists have become now heavy consumers, very heavy consumers, and they are unable
to fill the wine glass.
And what I find with third world societies is that they have very little.
But what they have is wine glasses that are full of good wine.
(04:41):
And the beauty of it is the wine that they've made is the wine that they have produced themselves.
And when people produce their own wine out of their own grapes, well, then what they're creating
is a wine glass of their own culture.
They drink their own culture.
I can tell you the tribal people in India are a very fulfilled lot.
(05:01):
And the globalization movement is not going to be able to upset that, because these people are
filling up their own wine glasses with their own produce. There's nothing new.
I'm saying I believe it's extremely old.
And they're satisfied and content societies.
And you bring globalization into that sort of a scenario, then you make them into consumers.
And the way to create a consumer is to turn the wine glass upside down so that it cannot contain the wine.
(05:28):
So people want more, and they buy more glasses and more wine bottles.
They never fill up the wine.
Sorry, it's very abstract, but I believe that that is the problem that we are facing in the world today.
The second point I think that we did discuss a little while ago was what is this phenomenon
of the Adivasi that we are dealing with?
What does this Adivasi offer to the present globalization movement?
(05:51):
To try and in some way contain it or control it when it is coming into the third world?
It sounds a little corny to say, well, let's go back to wearing traditional handspun cloth.
I do agree with that.
In the world of change, you will want the change should come in.
But the people, I think, who should be the judges, the people who are going to give the final
(06:13):
verdict on whether they want globalization or they don't want globalization, will have to be
people who have lived in alternative environments ever since we can remember, who have got alternative
systems of soul satisfaction, body satisfaction, of mind satisfaction.
(06:33):
These are the indigenous societies around the world.
I'm not speaking about rights over here because rights is not my subject at the moment. My subject is values.
When we are speaking about a value system and we are trying to see what alternative we can give
to the globalization value system.
Well, I believe we should give a value system which is a real alternative to the globalization value system.
(06:54):
We shouldn't use the tools and technology of globalization to fight globalization.
I believe that we should give a proper alternative to globalization.
The proper alternative to globalization is to give societies that have developed their own value
systems which are an alternative to globalization.
Globalization means production, while in traditional societies we also have production in globalization.
(07:18):
You have got value systems which lead to mental and physical and spiritual satisfaction. No doubt about it.
I mean, you have the wonderful music of Europe, which I am not.
I am a lover of Beethoven and Tchaikovsky, as you know.
I am not in any way going to say that that is bad.
What I'm just going to say is that I don't think that Beethoven would be impressed unduly by technology playing his music.
(07:40):
He would much rather hear it from a good orchestra.
Now, what I'm talking about something very refined which only the wealthy can afford.
It's something which poor people in Europe certainly cannot afford to have personal orchestras
or the luxury of developing their own talents to become musicians or artists.
But in the old days in Europe, and I'm speaking to a European audience.
(08:01):
We are finding that the culture of Europe was very much a cottage cult.
It was very much a forest culture.
It was very much a Druidic culture.
It is very much a culture of individuals.
It was a culture of people who created their own pastimes and enjoyments and satisfactions.
And when I see Europe today, I feel very sad because I think people now feel that they can take
(08:25):
it out of a machine.
I disagree over here because I find the people who are doing that are again just simply consumers.
They're consumers of things for their own satisfaction.
But when I find people in so called third world countries like India or the Adivasis, we are
dealing with people who have their own methods of expression of soul satisfaction, of mind, enrichment of spiritual discovery.
(08:52):
People who have reached enormous eminences sitting very quietly in little villages.
And I think that this is the crux of my argument.
That if we're going to build up an alternative, I don't think that it's necessary that we're
going to bring Gandhi into this, Schumacher into this, or Goldsmith into this.
(09:14):
I think the real gurus of the future are going to be the simple people who've developed simple
methods and systems of developing themselves or developing their societies.
Now, we will find that such people are people who have actually come out of the real alternative.
And the real alternative is societies and environments that are conducive to creating such cultures.
(09:41):
Because I believe that the individual is actually the product of his environment.
Now, when I speak about environment, I don't just speak of an ordinary environment.
I speak of a social environment.
I speak of a physical environment.
I speak of a psychological environment.
I speak of a spiritual environment.
I speak of an intellectual environment.
(10:01):
And I speak about an environment that has organically evolved over time.
I mean, the way wine becomes good wine, it depends on the sun, it depends on the weather, it
depends on the soil, it depends on the person who is managing the vineyard.
What you get over there is a wine which has organically taken the flavour of the land, of the
(10:26):
atmosphere, the seasons, of the countryside, of the soil which has created it.
Sorry I'm being abstract, but I think that it's worth it at the moment.
Leichgets weiter mittim interview Leicht undefeld.
What you get over there is something which is not only refined, but something which has been
(10:50):
tested over time by many, many societies all around the world.
And they have brought things to a state of complete perfection.
I deal with art, for example.
I've been known for my work on Adivasi art.
Now when you look at Adivasi art or indigenous art around the world, you will find it has been
(11:16):
the inspiration of the art movements of the 20th century.
Picasso, Matisse, Gauguin, to name a few of our modern masters, created the great art movements
out of which we have developed this era of globalisation were people who were calling upon very
(11:41):
deep subterranean sources of inspiration, which were in turn drawn from the indigenous or aboriginal
or primitive societies of the world.
At a very crucial period in human development, when the camera had replaced the visual need
(12:03):
for art, Pre Raphaelitism suddenly disappeared and we found it replaced by Cubism.
What was it that Cubism had which the indigenous societies could enrich?
The thing it had was the indigenous temperament, it was the indigenous environment.
(12:31):
The Benin masks, for example, that inspired Pablo Picasso, were creations that came out of a very primitive African society.
When we look at Gauguin, for example, we find that his inspiration was drawn from another source, it was Polynesian.
(12:57):
We are able to study the indigenous input into modern creativity in Latin American poetry, for example.
Wherever we see these new so-called babies of globalization coming and creating wonders in front
of us, we'll be able to find that the roots and sources of that culture, that Western culture,
(13:23):
the Western culture of today, its so-called development, has been based upon very ancient root sources.
I call this the root culture.
And I believe if we just for a little while consider the excellence of what we have today, I
mean, whether it's in the architecture of Corbusier or Frank Lloyd Wright or any other great
(13:48):
masters of modern architecture, they have not been able to ignore the indigenous sources of architecture.
The great modern poets, for example, have always drawn themselves instinctively to the indigenous
sources which have come from tribal roots.
(14:10):
Today, perhaps you think that the Japanese are a very modern society, but it wasn't like that.
I mean, the Haiku itself is an expression of a very ancient tribal form of expression. It's almost shamanistic.
(14:31):
And when it goes into the hands of a great poet like Ezra Pound, you can get the peace in Canto.
So what I'm basically trying to come to, I mean, I'm trying to see an alternative into this.
And I have found in my own personal life, living in India, being born and brought up in India,
living with aboriginal societies in India.
My own family is, as you know, both my wives, Elizabeth and Philomena, are Adivasis.
(14:55):
My children are partly Adivasi.
I myself am partly French and partly Persian, I would say.
So when I look at myself, I have had to go through a catharsis to come where I am today.
I have had to give up chosen values.
I have had to analyse my chosen values.
I've had to see the values which my children have adopted, which are different to me.
(15:16):
I've been critical in a non-critical manner to try and understand something.
And I found that the indigenous inspiration in Indian society, even developing Indian society,
if it can be kept away from the dangers of globalization, which is simply consumerism, which
has got nothing to do with genuine genesis of genuine evolution and genuine development, which
(15:41):
are just things that have been brought as inputs into our society.
I do not feel that those extraneous forces that have come with all their wonderful technology,
I have to admit it, if today we are finding ice on Mars, it's the development of technology.
But we have to at the same time not forget that if we have those wonderful discoveries or products
(16:04):
of our technology, we must not forget that at the same time we are burdened with enormous stigmas,
like the discrimination which we find around the world today.
Power sources which are able to subdue large masses of the human population, where weapons which
were made originally for the survival of the human species, have become weapons of destruction of the human species.
(16:31):
The utilisation of weapons has been put into a wrong direction.
Weapons are things which are for the human and not for the destruction of the human.
And when I say the human, I also mean the animal.
Because man is only an animal.
He's a part of the same human kingdom.
We go back to life itself.
I do not see how you could develop technology for the destruction of life when the whole process
(16:56):
of evolution is the construction of life.
You cannot have a contradiction like that.
And in the Western paradigm of globalisation and development, it is implicit and inherent in
the whole structure of globalisation that destructiveness is a part of construction.
Now, if destructiveness itself is going to be a part of Construction, this is just the old Western
(17:22):
agenda of development where you can't make an omelette without breaking an egg.
So therefore, destruction of the environment and destruction of human societies is a method
to a new form of construction.
Now, that form of construction which you're seeing, which you feel is construction, is an illusion.
It is actually not a construction.
(17:43):
It is a remodelling of something by destroying it and making it into a new thing.
And if you should take anything and break it, you will always be able to make something new out of it.
The new thing that you are getting, you think is a development.
Now that is not a development.
It is a development in the context of the developer.
The developer is the person who has got the designers, he has got the bankers, he has got the
(18:07):
workforce which is designing that development.
And we are thinking that if we bring that development and we can somehow amalgamate that to
the root cultures of the Third World, we are going to now develop the Third World.
We are not going to develop the Third World.
This is not just a new industrial revolution that we are looking at here.
I think it's something a little more sinister.
(18:30):
The Industrial Revolution was something else, as far as I can believe.
It was in another era of colonisation.
What we are seeing here is the actual destruction of the human spirit itself.
The destruction of the human spirit, which is of the many by a very few who have got control
over technology and who have understood that that technology can be used for the improvement of existing structures.
(18:57):
And they use that argument that just because they have this technology and they can bring in
better surgery, and they can bring in better energy systems, and they can bring in better housing,
and they can bring in better roads, and they require coal mines, and they require nuclear energy,
and they require uranium mines, and they require the displacement of people to fulfil the dreams
(19:21):
and ambitions of the downtrodden root cultures of the Third World.
And without the European or the Western inputs of technology, the Third World itself cannot develop.
I completely oppose that and I offer an alternative.
The alternative is that we have in the Third World root cultures.
I'm not going to say that the tribal ethnobot, the Adivasi, is as good as the medical system of the West.
(19:47):
But what I am trying to say is that the systems that we have are sufficient unto themselves.
And that if we put this up against the West, we are probably going to be seen as inferior.
Accepting the fact that we are inferior, I would like to draw to your attention that in obtaining
the so-called benefits of the technology of Western civilisation, we stand to lose much greater
(20:14):
things than we stand to gain.
The things we stand to lose are the environment which produces our individual societies and culture.
We stand to lose the traditional systems which have actually given us our value.
Systems out of which the whole spirituality of the Third World has developed, out of which the
artistic consciousness of three fourths of mankind has evolved.
(20:37):
We are going to risk this entire treasure of human society simply because we are going to say
that we are developing better methods of technology for medicine, for roads, for housing.
Well, I would like to, at this point in the discussion on the alternatives, make a small statement
(21:01):
that in the ultimate analysis, I do not believe that human longevity is the criterion of human destiny.
I believe the criterion of human destiny is the fulfilment of the human spirit.
If a man lives another 10 or 20 or 50 years is not the criterion of a civilised society.
The criterion of a civilised society in the context of infinity and eternity is the development
(21:28):
within individuals of their spiritual, mental, psychological and physical substances that those
people will be able to, within their span of time, explore the limits of human consciousness.
If we go back a hundred years in Europe, we will see that longevity was much less than it is today.
But those were the periods that produced your Gathe, your Beethoven, your Handel, even your Wagner.
(21:54):
And in India, it produced Akabir.
It produced the great writers of the Veda.
It produced the Sanskritic civilisation of India.
It produced the Adivasi culture of India.
It produced the aboriginal societies of Australia whose art today rules the world.
It produced the societies of Latin America.
(22:14):
It produced the North American Indian.
Here were people who developed cultures which today are the epitome of civilisations in those continents. It produced European culture.
It produced the roots of your European culture, which actually led to the discovery of your
wonderful era of colonisation, which led to the development of your wonderful industrial revolution,
(22:37):
which led to the enlightenment of Europe, which led to the mastery of mankind, which led to
the destruction of the very sources which created your greatness.
Are you today prepared to cut the branch upon which you sit?
Are you today prepared to destroy the very roots of the things that have given you sustenance,
the things that have created the sources for the genesis of European civilisation?
(23:01):
Today, India stands at the same place where Europe stood three centuries ago.
Today we stand in the same root cultures which Europe had, which lay dormant during the Middle Ages.
The same root cultures which were there in the 8th century in Germany, when Saint Boniface came from Ireland.
You are speaking about a culture in India today which you should be jealous of, which you should
(23:23):
be happy to associate with, which you should be proud to be invited to, to be a part of.
You should not come here with the view to develop us, to destroy us.
You should come here to welcome our ideas, to understand from our ideas, to be inspired by our ideas.
So that we can teach you something.
Speaker 1 (23:43):
Regarding globalisation, regarding the WSF, anti-globalisation movements and here the context, the mining plants.
More and more mines are planned in different places of Jharkhand.
What in your view can be the form of resistance?
Also, seeing that we may have a ruling system without using power like it is done by empires,
(24:10):
how can we resist and rule?
Bulu Imam (24:12):
If we go back again to Gandhi and his concept of the village Republic for India 56 years ago,
we will find that Gandhi had understood the self-sufficiency of the village.
He had understood the culture which created what Jawaharlal Nehru called unity in diversity.
(24:33):
Now I would like to point out that if diversity has to be kept in unity with a centralised,
parliamentary, democratic system, as we have in India, where the diversity is actually threatened
by the structure which is giving it its so-called unity, which means the homogenisation of the
(24:58):
diversity, in order to keep the unity from a militaristic point of view as a republic today,
India has to be independent in the Committee of Nations.
It has to follow the United Nations system.
It has to have a military base for peace.
(25:19):
It has to follow the Western pattern.
And if we look back on the old culture of India, if we look upon the original culture of India,
which held that India was superior among all the civilisations far back at the time of Fahian,
going back to the time of Huen Sang, if we go back 2000 years and come forward to 1400 years
(25:43):
ago, the time of Fahian, during the Mauryan period, during the Gupta period, we will find that
India was these little villages, these small isolated root cultures that hung together, that
had been organically evolved, that was self-administered, that had their own systems of government
(26:05):
where policing was not necessary, where large military forces were not necessary.
Even the Mauryan Empire never tampered with the social structure of India.
The Mughals too to a large extent understood the old Chinese dictum of the Way of the Tao that
do not interfere too much with the people.
(26:26):
Let them develop according to their own genius.
In the context of development today, I think we must not forget that China and India constitute
enormous cultural diversity and patterns of existence in root cultures, which is not the case with Europe or America.
As poignantly and pertinently as we will find it in South Asia.
(26:48):
In South and Southeast Asia, you're dealing with small groups that have indigenously evolved,
that have their own systems of governance and development.
Now I'm going to pose a question.
Interview liked Unsvens if you think that you can improve this now I'm really coming.
I'm taking the bull by the horns.
(27:09):
If you really believe that you can improve these people and as Mark said, you're going to bring
electricity to every village of the Soviet Union, well go ahead and bloody well do it.
And if you can't do it, then don't interfere with me.
I am coming up with my own argument.
I'm coming up with the argument that an oil lamp burns in every village of India.
An oil lamp burns in every home.
(27:31):
And when you bring in your false promises of electrification and development, what is the result?
The result is we have displaced over 70 million people in India today.
We have destroyed thousands of villages.
We are going on in the same pattern.
We are promising that we are going to improve society.
Okay, if you want to improve society, then damn well go ahead and improve society.
(27:54):
I want to see the improvement.
I want to see the electrification.
I want to see your wonderful advances in medicine and technology brought to every individual whom you have displaced.
But the fact of the matter is that you are not being able to do it because as Gandhi pointed
out, it would take several planets to follow the western pattern in India.
We just do not have those resources.
(28:15):
We do not have that type of resource.
We don't have that type of money.
We don't have that type of technology.
All we can do is we can displace millions and make a few thousands better off.
The fact of the matter is that this whole development scenario today on the western pattern
of technology is not going to suffice in the third world.
(28:36):
It is not going to improve the living standards of the local people.
Now, in the context of this coming to the refined human values of psychological, social, mental,
spiritual, intellectual development, I think that the people of the third world as they stand
today with their own poor energy resources, it's comparative with their poor energy resources,
(28:57):
with their poor medical facilities, with their poor production systems.
I believe that these people are better off than they will be if technology is brought in to develop and improve them.
So I'm actually arguing on a very firm foundation because we have the facts and the figures
with the civilized world can take and compute and they can come to a clear understanding that
(29:18):
the development of the past 56 years in India has not been for the development of the people or the environment.
We have lost more than half our environmental resources, we have displaced 70 million people
through big dams, mines, industrialisation.
These people have become a working labour force.
There are ghettos in the city today, there are urban slums.
(29:39):
I know it is a phenomenon of the first world also.
But what I'm trying to point out, this has been the result of a production system which has
a gargantuan appetite that has been eating up the poorer and the weaker sections of society,
whether it is in America, whether it is in Brazil, whether it is in India.
You are actually using this ploy, this lame duck excuse of development and technology to develop so-called underdeveloped societies.
(30:09):
What I'm trying to argue is that these societies of the so-called undeveloped Third World are
absolutely wonderful examples of the most highly developed forms of human civilization ever
witnessed, which have created such cultures.
We go back, you know, at the time of David, Jerusalem was only about 5 acres in extent.
(30:31):
Today, Jerusalem is a very large city.
But don't we have the conflict of Palestine and Israel when we refer back to the civilization of Babylon?
Don't we find that it was a civilization which has been celebrated in the Bible, and today we
see it as a wreck in the aftermath of the Iraq War?
I mean, I'm going to ask some brutal questions here (30:49):
have we actually developed?
Have we actually done anything of importance with our enormous skyscrapers and our descent on Mars?
Does that justify the fact that we have destroyed 9/10 of human civilization?
(31:09):
I do not think that this is any argument.
I cannot see this as a way to justify anything.
You do not kill five of your children to make two of your children into business magnates. You don't do it. No father does it.
If there is a father in the world today, even if he is George W.
Bush, what type of father is he that would kill three out of five children in order to make
(31:34):
two into great men or women? What type of parent? This is not development.
This is an excuse for building power structures, nothing more.
Power structures have developed in India.
We have very strong power structures which are being funded by Western technology sources.
(31:57):
I'm not against Western technology, you must believe me.
I'm speaking into a microphone that connects to a highly civilised, highly developed system;
rather, I apologise for using the word civilised, but development and civilisation today seem to have become complementary.
This highly developed machine that I'm speaking into, for example, I'm not against this, but
(32:20):
I do not want to sacrifice something for something which is, in fact, spurious and not the solution
to the ills that we are facing.
Today, which in itself may be acceptable.
I mean, let me give you an example.
If the wheel was used for putting people on the rack and wheel, Well, I don't think that the
(32:44):
wheel was being used properly.
I mean, if the wheel is used for transporting things, it is acceptable.
But if the wheel is used to power engines of destruction, well, I think that we are misusing it. Misusing the wheel. It's a simple thing. Fire.
It is one of the things which brought civilisation to mankind.
(33:04):
But if we should use fire for incendiary bombs that are going to destroy entire cities, I do
not believe it is the proper use of fire.
I do not think that we can justify destruction just because we are bringing in constructive principles.
I think we are standing at a turning point in human civilisation at the moment.
(33:25):
Because the development of the last century has been more than the last 10,000 years.
And at this particular moment, at the speed at which we are going, the plateaus which we are
reaching, I believe a certain turning point has arrived.
We have arrived at a turning point where the survival of human civilisation, society. I'm not talking civilisation.
The survival of human society today depends upon what our leaders do just now.
(33:52):
And if we do not check ourselves, we are in the full stride of destroying the whole world.
And if we do not stop and think there is a grave danger, the small errors may take place.
For example, we were on the hinge of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan.
Today, India and Pakistan are embracing themselves.
Millions of pounds were spent absolutely unnecessarily by those who are running a big country like India today. They're embracing each other.
(34:18):
Yesterday they would have blown each other up.
This is totally neurotic behaviour which we are witnessing. It is not.
They say we have leaders and statesmen.
I refuse to accept it.
Somebody who could have completely destroyed cities yesterday, today they are embracing.
This is a sign of psychological neurosis in our society and in our leadership. It does not. Ring of maturity.
(34:41):
Now, if you talk of the ring of maturity, I will take you to the little village councils where leadership takes place.
I will take you to the little hamlets all over India where people for thousands of years have administered themselves happily.
Where they have developed cultures and agrarian systems.
We're talking about agriculture in India today and the development of agriculture.
(35:01):
And the Finance Minister has given 56,000 crores for the development of agriculture.
But do you know that we have already lost two thirds of the agricultural potential of India?
We have destroyed the best agricultural lands.
We have destroyed the best rivers.
We have destroyed the best catchments and watersheds of the country.
How can I accept that we are actually promoting the agriculture of the country?
(35:24):
We are not promoting the agriculture of the country by destroying the land which produces the agriculture.
We are not improving the society of India when we are in a state of mass destruction of societies.
I mean, it's totally contradictory and it doesn't make good sense.
So the alternative, now, if you speak of an alternative, what's the alternative that we can offer?
(35:46):
Well, I would say the alternative is just to take a good look at the old pattern.
You do find there are deficiencies in it.
Plug the holes where you can.
If you've got leaks in the bucket, plug them.
You find your boat is leaking. Plug the leaks.
Nobody says don't plug the leaks, but you don't plug the leaks at the cost of the boat.
You don't plug the leak at the cost of the boat or the bucket.
What we're trying to do is justify destroying the boat, so we're plugging the leaks in the boat.
(36:10):
I mean, this is ridiculous. It's absolutely ridiculous.
Anybody can plainly see that a big lie is being spread all around the world.
Host (36:18):
Thank you for being part of Audioarchiv.
Follow us, then you won't miss an episode and don't forget the Like button.
Bulu Imam (36:23):
See you next week, your Audioarchiv team.
Welcome to audioarchiv, the channel for historical interviews with writers, philosophers, activists
and intellectuals from all over the world.
(00:34):
Hello Bulu Imam, like so many philosophers of indigenous peoples, is largely unknown in the West.
Neither what he says nor how he says it fits into Anglo-European categories of thought.
Bulu Imam has also not produced a comprehensive written compendium, nor has he increased his
(00:56):
daily market value through lectures, YouTube appearances or talk show appearances.
The indigenous political philosopher Bulu Imam is like all other indigenous philosophers (01:03):
Wikipedia
describes them as environmental activists who campaign for indigenous rights.
Wikipedia also perpetuates the colonial experience of the world (01:16):
as in each of us who grew up in Europe.
Our culture of domination dictates what philosophers have to write so that we can recognise them.
(01:40):
Thus, even the European discourse of the Enlightenment remains nothing more than an elitist
appropriation of the world on the basis of colonial world domination.
Anglo-European philosophy is based on an imperial pedestal of Greek and Roman thought and, at
the same time as the enslavement of three-quarters of humanity, is rising to become the world
(02:14):
spirit. “The energy for this,” says Bulu Imam, “was cynically supplied by the subjugated themselves.”
It is this energy that European thinking needed to justify the destruction of culture and nature
in the name of civilisation and continues to do so to the present day.
(02:35):
But who is Bulu Imam, someone we recognise as not belonging.
Someone who does not fit in.
Someone from the bush who is cut off, who is not understandable, who reduces, denies or even devalues.
(03:09):
Bulu Imam's philosophy is wrested from his own experience of inscribed domination thinking.
Perhaps this is why Bulu Imam speaks about the European, Western, American appropriation of
history that is still taught in every European school today.
Then was where die Lehre onee schuler was der Lehrer 1 Die energiede Unterwoffnen was der postmoderne
After all, what would teaching be without students, what would the teacher be without the energy
of the subjugated, what would the postmodern philosopher be without the applause of the national audience.
The philosopher Bulu Imam sat in front of his house in the Indian state of Jharkhand in 2004
and spoke to Michael Briefs.
Bulu Imam (03:31):
I think at the present moment the problem with the world is that we are not concentrating on
the real problem, which is the people who have got developed societies in ancient environments
are being treated now like wine glasses which have got their mouth on the table that don't have
the wine going into it.
And the purpose of globalization is to just keep the mouth of the wine glass on the table so
(03:54):
that the wine doesn't go into it.
So people just want the wine more and more and that serves the ends of globalization.
The simple thing as far as I can see, is to just turn the wine glass around and open it out.
So when the wine fills up and the wine glass can't take anymore, the people just enjoy a good glass of wine.
One good glass of wine is all that you need.
I think we in the new globalization so-called alternative movement are still following the old
(04:21):
pattern and that is more production and more consumerism.
Even environmentalists have become now heavy consumers, very heavy consumers, and they are unable
to fill the wine glass.
And what I find with third world societies is that they have very little.
But what they have is wine glasses that are full of good wine.
(04:41):
And the beauty of it is the wine that they've made is the wine that they have produced themselves.
And when people produce their own wine out of their own grapes, well, then what they're creating
is a wine glass of their own culture.
They drink their own culture.
I can tell you the tribal people in India are a very fulfilled lot.
(05:01):
And the globalization movement is not going to be able to upset that, because these people are
filling up their own wine glasses with their own produce. There's nothing new.
I'm saying I believe it's extremely old.
And they're satisfied and content societies.
And you bring globalization into that sort of a scenario, then you make them into consumers.
And the way to create a consumer is to turn the wine glass upside down so that it cannot contain the wine.
(05:28):
So people want more, and they buy more glasses and more wine bottles.
They never fill up the wine.
Sorry, it's very abstract, but I believe that that is the problem that we are facing in the world today.
The second point I think that we did discuss a little while ago was what is this phenomenon
of the Adivasi that we are dealing with?
What does this Adivasi offer to the present globalization movement?
(05:51):
To try and in some way contain it or control it when it is coming into the third world?
It sounds a little corny to say, well, let's go back to wearing traditional handspun cloth.
I do agree with that.
In the world of change, you will want the change should come in.
But the people, I think, who should be the judges, the people who are going to give the final
(06:13):
verdict on whether they want globalization or they don't want globalization, will have to be
people who have lived in alternative environments ever since we can remember, who have got alternative
systems of soul satisfaction, body satisfaction, of mind satisfaction.
(06:33):
These are the indigenous societies around the world.
I'm not speaking about rights over here because rights is not my subject at the moment. My subject is values.
When we are speaking about a value system and we are trying to see what alternative we can give
to the globalization value system.
Well, I believe we should give a value system which is a real alternative to the globalization value system.
(06:54):
We shouldn't use the tools and technology of globalization to fight globalization.
I believe that we should give a proper alternative to globalization.
The proper alternative to globalization is to give societies that have developed their own value
systems which are an alternative to globalization.
Globalization means production, while in traditional societies we also have production in globalization.
(07:18):
You have got value systems which lead to mental and physical and spiritual satisfaction. No doubt about it.
I mean, you have the wonderful music of Europe, which I am not.
I am a lover of Beethoven and Tchaikovsky, as you know.
I am not in any way going to say that that is bad.
What I'm just going to say is that I don't think that Beethoven would be impressed unduly by technology playing his music.
(07:40):
He would much rather hear it from a good orchestra.
Now, what I'm talking about something very refined which only the wealthy can afford.
It's something which poor people in Europe certainly cannot afford to have personal orchestras
or the luxury of developing their own talents to become musicians or artists.
But in the old days in Europe, and I'm speaking to a European audience.
(08:01):
We are finding that the culture of Europe was very much a cottage cult.
It was very much a forest culture.
It was very much a Druidic culture.
It is very much a culture of individuals.
It was a culture of people who created their own pastimes and enjoyments and satisfactions.
And when I see Europe today, I feel very sad because I think people now feel that they can take
(08:25):
it out of a machine.
I disagree over here because I find the people who are doing that are again just simply consumers.
They're consumers of things for their own satisfaction.
But when I find people in so called third world countries like India or the Adivasis, we are
dealing with people who have their own methods of expression of soul satisfaction, of mind, enrichment of spiritual discovery.
(08:52):
People who have reached enormous eminences sitting very quietly in little villages.
And I think that this is the crux of my argument.
That if we're going to build up an alternative, I don't think that it's necessary that we're
going to bring Gandhi into this, Schumacher into this, or Goldsmith into this.
(09:14):
I think the real gurus of the future are going to be the simple people who've developed simple
methods and systems of developing themselves or developing their societies.
Now, we will find that such people are people who have actually come out of the real alternative.
And the real alternative is societies and environments that are conducive to creating such cultures.
(09:41):
Because I believe that the individual is actually the product of his environment.
Now, when I speak about environment, I don't just speak of an ordinary environment.
I speak of a social environment.
I speak of a physical environment.
I speak of a psychological environment.
I speak of a spiritual environment.
I speak of an intellectual environment.
(10:01):
And I speak about an environment that has organically evolved over time.
I mean, the way wine becomes good wine, it depends on the sun, it depends on the weather, it
depends on the soil, it depends on the person who is managing the vineyard.
What you get over there is a wine which has organically taken the flavour of the land, of the
(10:26):
atmosphere, the seasons, of the countryside, of the soil which has created it.
Sorry I'm being abstract, but I think that it's worth it at the moment.
Leichgets weiter mittim interview Leicht undefeld.
What you get over there is something which is not only refined, but something which has been
(10:50):
tested over time by many, many societies all around the world.
And they have brought things to a state of complete perfection.
I deal with art, for example.
I've been known for my work on Adivasi art.
Now when you look at Adivasi art or indigenous art around the world, you will find it has been
(11:16):
the inspiration of the art movements of the 20th century.
Picasso, Matisse, Gauguin, to name a few of our modern masters, created the great art movements
out of which we have developed this era of globalisation were people who were calling upon very
(11:41):
deep subterranean sources of inspiration, which were in turn drawn from the indigenous or aboriginal
or primitive societies of the world.
At a very crucial period in human development, when the camera had replaced the visual need
(12:03):
for art, Pre Raphaelitism suddenly disappeared and we found it replaced by Cubism.
What was it that Cubism had which the indigenous societies could enrich?
The thing it had was the indigenous temperament, it was the indigenous environment.
(12:31):
The Benin masks, for example, that inspired Pablo Picasso, were creations that came out of a very primitive African society.
When we look at Gauguin, for example, we find that his inspiration was drawn from another source, it was Polynesian.
(12:57):
We are able to study the indigenous input into modern creativity in Latin American poetry, for example.
Wherever we see these new so-called babies of globalization coming and creating wonders in front
of us, we'll be able to find that the roots and sources of that culture, that Western culture,
(13:23):
the Western culture of today, its so-called development, has been based upon very ancient root sources.
I call this the root culture.
And I believe if we just for a little while consider the excellence of what we have today, I
mean, whether it's in the architecture of Corbusier or Frank Lloyd Wright or any other great
(13:48):
masters of modern architecture, they have not been able to ignore the indigenous sources of architecture.
The great modern poets, for example, have always drawn themselves instinctively to the indigenous
sources which have come from tribal roots.
(14:10):
Today, perhaps you think that the Japanese are a very modern society, but it wasn't like that.
I mean, the Haiku itself is an expression of a very ancient tribal form of expression. It's almost shamanistic.
(14:31):
And when it goes into the hands of a great poet like Ezra Pound, you can get the peace in Canto.
So what I'm basically trying to come to, I mean, I'm trying to see an alternative into this.
And I have found in my own personal life, living in India, being born and brought up in India,
living with aboriginal societies in India.
My own family is, as you know, both my wives, Elizabeth and Philomena, are Adivasis.
(14:55):
My children are partly Adivasi.
I myself am partly French and partly Persian, I would say.
So when I look at myself, I have had to go through a catharsis to come where I am today.
I have had to give up chosen values.
I have had to analyse my chosen values.
I've had to see the values which my children have adopted, which are different to me.
(15:16):
I've been critical in a non-critical manner to try and understand something.
And I found that the indigenous inspiration in Indian society, even developing Indian society,
if it can be kept away from the dangers of globalization, which is simply consumerism, which
has got nothing to do with genuine genesis of genuine evolution and genuine development, which
(15:41):
are just things that have been brought as inputs into our society.
I do not feel that those extraneous forces that have come with all their wonderful technology,
I have to admit it, if today we are finding ice on Mars, it's the development of technology.
But we have to at the same time not forget that if we have those wonderful discoveries or products
(16:04):
of our technology, we must not forget that at the same time we are burdened with enormous stigmas,
like the discrimination which we find around the world today.
Power sources which are able to subdue large masses of the human population, where weapons which
were made originally for the survival of the human species, have become weapons of destruction of the human species.
(16:31):
The utilisation of weapons has been put into a wrong direction.
Weapons are things which are for the human and not for the destruction of the human.
And when I say the human, I also mean the animal.
Because man is only an animal.
He's a part of the same human kingdom.
We go back to life itself.
I do not see how you could develop technology for the destruction of life when the whole process
(16:56):
of evolution is the construction of life.
You cannot have a contradiction like that.
And in the Western paradigm of globalisation and development, it is implicit and inherent in
the whole structure of globalisation that destructiveness is a part of construction.
Now, if destructiveness itself is going to be a part of Construction, this is just the old Western
(17:22):
agenda of development where you can't make an omelette without breaking an egg.
So therefore, destruction of the environment and destruction of human societies is a method
to a new form of construction.
Now, that form of construction which you're seeing, which you feel is construction, is an illusion.
It is actually not a construction.
(17:43):
It is a remodelling of something by destroying it and making it into a new thing.
And if you should take anything and break it, you will always be able to make something new out of it.
The new thing that you are getting, you think is a development.
Now that is not a development.
It is a development in the context of the developer.
The developer is the person who has got the designers, he has got the bankers, he has got the
(18:07):
workforce which is designing that development.
And we are thinking that if we bring that development and we can somehow amalgamate that to
the root cultures of the Third World, we are going to now develop the Third World.
We are not going to develop the Third World.
This is not just a new industrial revolution that we are looking at here.
I think it's something a little more sinister.
(18:30):
The Industrial Revolution was something else, as far as I can believe.
It was in another era of colonisation.
What we are seeing here is the actual destruction of the human spirit itself.
The destruction of the human spirit, which is of the many by a very few who have got control
over technology and who have understood that that technology can be used for the improvement of existing structures.
(18:57):
And they use that argument that just because they have this technology and they can bring in
better surgery, and they can bring in better energy systems, and they can bring in better housing,
and they can bring in better roads, and they require coal mines, and they require nuclear energy,
and they require uranium mines, and they require the displacement of people to fulfil the dreams
(19:21):
and ambitions of the downtrodden root cultures of the Third World.
And without the European or the Western inputs of technology, the Third World itself cannot develop.
I completely oppose that and I offer an alternative.
The alternative is that we have in the Third World root cultures.
I'm not going to say that the tribal ethnobot, the Adivasi, is as good as the medical system of the West.
(19:47):
But what I am trying to say is that the systems that we have are sufficient unto themselves.
And that if we put this up against the West, we are probably going to be seen as inferior.
Accepting the fact that we are inferior, I would like to draw to your attention that in obtaining
the so-called benefits of the technology of Western civilisation, we stand to lose much greater
(20:14):
things than we stand to gain.
The things we stand to lose are the environment which produces our individual societies and culture.
We stand to lose the traditional systems which have actually given us our value.
Systems out of which the whole spirituality of the Third World has developed, out of which the
artistic consciousness of three fourths of mankind has evolved.
(20:37):
We are going to risk this entire treasure of human society simply because we are going to say
that we are developing better methods of technology for medicine, for roads, for housing.
Well, I would like to, at this point in the discussion on the alternatives, make a small statement
(21:01):
that in the ultimate analysis, I do not believe that human longevity is the criterion of human destiny.
I believe the criterion of human destiny is the fulfilment of the human spirit.
If a man lives another 10 or 20 or 50 years is not the criterion of a civilised society.
The criterion of a civilised society in the context of infinity and eternity is the development
(21:28):
within individuals of their spiritual, mental, psychological and physical substances that those
people will be able to, within their span of time, explore the limits of human consciousness.
If we go back a hundred years in Europe, we will see that longevity was much less than it is today.
But those were the periods that produced your Gathe, your Beethoven, your Handel, even your Wagner.
(21:54):
And in India, it produced Akabir.
It produced the great writers of the Veda.
It produced the Sanskritic civilisation of India.
It produced the Adivasi culture of India.
It produced the aboriginal societies of Australia whose art today rules the world.
It produced the societies of Latin America.
(22:14):
It produced the North American Indian.
Here were people who developed cultures which today are the epitome of civilisations in those continents. It produced European culture.
It produced the roots of your European culture, which actually led to the discovery of your
wonderful era of colonisation, which led to the development of your wonderful industrial revolution,
(22:37):
which led to the enlightenment of Europe, which led to the mastery of mankind, which led to
the destruction of the very sources which created your greatness.
Are you today prepared to cut the branch upon which you sit?
Are you today prepared to destroy the very roots of the things that have given you sustenance,
the things that have created the sources for the genesis of European civilisation?
(23:01):
Today, India stands at the same place where Europe stood three centuries ago.
Today we stand in the same root cultures which Europe had, which lay dormant during the Middle Ages.
The same root cultures which were there in the 8th century in Germany, when Saint Boniface came from Ireland.
You are speaking about a culture in India today which you should be jealous of, which you should
(23:23):
be happy to associate with, which you should be proud to be invited to, to be a part of.
You should not come here with the view to develop us, to destroy us.
You should come here to welcome our ideas, to understand from our ideas, to be inspired by our ideas.
So that we can teach you something.
Speaker 1 (23:43):
Regarding globalisation, regarding the WSF, anti-globalisation movements and here the context, the mining plants.
More and more mines are planned in different places of Jharkhand.
What in your view can be the form of resistance?
Also, seeing that we may have a ruling system without using power like it is done by empires,
(24:10):
how can we resist and rule?
Bulu Imam (24:12):
If we go back again to Gandhi and his concept of the village Republic for India 56 years ago,
we will find that Gandhi had understood the self-sufficiency of the village.
He had understood the culture which created what Jawaharlal Nehru called unity in diversity.
(24:33):
Now I would like to point out that if diversity has to be kept in unity with a centralised,
parliamentary, democratic system, as we have in India, where the diversity is actually threatened
by the structure which is giving it its so-called unity, which means the homogenisation of the
(24:58):
diversity, in order to keep the unity from a militaristic point of view as a republic today,
India has to be independent in the Committee of Nations.
It has to follow the United Nations system.
It has to have a military base for peace.
(25:19):
It has to follow the Western pattern.
And if we look back on the old culture of India, if we look upon the original culture of India,
which held that India was superior among all the civilisations far back at the time of Fahian,
going back to the time of Huen Sang, if we go back 2000 years and come forward to 1400 years
(25:43):
ago, the time of Fahian, during the Mauryan period, during the Gupta period, we will find that
India was these little villages, these small isolated root cultures that hung together, that
had been organically evolved, that was self-administered, that had their own systems of government
(26:05):
where policing was not necessary, where large military forces were not necessary.
Even the Mauryan Empire never tampered with the social structure of India.
The Mughals too to a large extent understood the old Chinese dictum of the Way of the Tao that
do not interfere too much with the people.
(26:26):
Let them develop according to their own genius.
In the context of development today, I think we must not forget that China and India constitute
enormous cultural diversity and patterns of existence in root cultures, which is not the case with Europe or America.
As poignantly and pertinently as we will find it in South Asia.
(26:48):
In South and Southeast Asia, you're dealing with small groups that have indigenously evolved,
that have their own systems of governance and development.
Now I'm going to pose a question.
Interview liked Unsvens if you think that you can improve this now I'm really coming.
I'm taking the bull by the horns.
(27:09):
If you really believe that you can improve these people and as Mark said, you're going to bring
electricity to every village of the Soviet Union, well go ahead and bloody well do it.
And if you can't do it, then don't interfere with me.
I am coming up with my own argument.
I'm coming up with the argument that an oil lamp burns in every village of India.
An oil lamp burns in every home.
(27:31):
And when you bring in your false promises of electrification and development, what is the result?
The result is we have displaced over 70 million people in India today.
We have destroyed thousands of villages.
We are going on in the same pattern.
We are promising that we are going to improve society.
Okay, if you want to improve society, then damn well go ahead and improve society.
(27:54):
I want to see the improvement.
I want to see the electrification.
I want to see your wonderful advances in medicine and technology brought to every individual whom you have displaced.
But the fact of the matter is that you are not being able to do it because as Gandhi pointed
out, it would take several planets to follow the western pattern in India.
We just do not have those resources.
(28:15):
We do not have that type of resource.
We don't have that type of money.
We don't have that type of technology.
All we can do is we can displace millions and make a few thousands better off.
The fact of the matter is that this whole development scenario today on the western pattern
of technology is not going to suffice in the third world.
(28:36):
It is not going to improve the living standards of the local people.
Now, in the context of this coming to the refined human values of psychological, social, mental,
spiritual, intellectual development, I think that the people of the third world as they stand
today with their own poor energy resources, it's comparative with their poor energy resources,
(28:57):
with their poor medical facilities, with their poor production systems.
I believe that these people are better off than they will be if technology is brought in to develop and improve them.
So I'm actually arguing on a very firm foundation because we have the facts and the figures
with the civilized world can take and compute and they can come to a clear understanding that
(29:18):
the development of the past 56 years in India has not been for the development of the people or the environment.
We have lost more than half our environmental resources, we have displaced 70 million people
through big dams, mines, industrialisation.
These people have become a working labour force.
There are ghettos in the city today, there are urban slums.
(29:39):
I know it is a phenomenon of the first world also.
But what I'm trying to point out, this has been the result of a production system which has
a gargantuan appetite that has been eating up the poorer and the weaker sections of society,
whether it is in America, whether it is in Brazil, whether it is in India.
You are actually using this ploy, this lame duck excuse of development and technology to develop so-called underdeveloped societies.
(30:09):
What I'm trying to argue is that these societies of the so-called undeveloped Third World are
absolutely wonderful examples of the most highly developed forms of human civilization ever
witnessed, which have created such cultures.
We go back, you know, at the time of David, Jerusalem was only about 5 acres in extent.
(30:31):
Today, Jerusalem is a very large city.
But don't we have the conflict of Palestine and Israel when we refer back to the civilization of Babylon?
Don't we find that it was a civilization which has been celebrated in the Bible, and today we
see it as a wreck in the aftermath of the Iraq War?
I mean, I'm going to ask some brutal questions here (30:49):
have we actually developed?
Have we actually done anything of importance with our enormous skyscrapers and our descent on Mars?
Does that justify the fact that we have destroyed 9/10 of human civilization?
(31:09):
I do not think that this is any argument.
I cannot see this as a way to justify anything.
You do not kill five of your children to make two of your children into business magnates. You don't do it. No father does it.
If there is a father in the world today, even if he is George W.
Bush, what type of father is he that would kill three out of five children in order to make
(31:34):
two into great men or women? What type of parent? This is not development.
This is an excuse for building power structures, nothing more.
Power structures have developed in India.
We have very strong power structures which are being funded by Western technology sources.
(31:57):
I'm not against Western technology, you must believe me.
I'm speaking into a microphone that connects to a highly civilised, highly developed system;
rather, I apologise for using the word civilised, but development and civilisation today seem to have become complementary.
This highly developed machine that I'm speaking into, for example, I'm not against this, but
(32:20):
I do not want to sacrifice something for something which is, in fact, spurious and not the solution
to the ills that we are facing.
Today, which in itself may be acceptable.
I mean, let me give you an example.
If the wheel was used for putting people on the rack and wheel, Well, I don't think that the
(32:44):
wheel was being used properly.
I mean, if the wheel is used for transporting things, it is acceptable.
But if the wheel is used to power engines of destruction, well, I think that we are misusing it. Misusing the wheel. It's a simple thing. Fire.
It is one of the things which brought civilisation to mankind.
(33:04):
But if we should use fire for incendiary bombs that are going to destroy entire cities, I do
not believe it is the proper use of fire.
I do not think that we can justify destruction just because we are bringing in constructive principles.
I think we are standing at a turning point in human civilisation at the moment.
(33:25):
Because the development of the last century has been more than the last 10,000 years.
And at this particular moment, at the speed at which we are going, the plateaus which we are
reaching, I believe a certain turning point has arrived.
We have arrived at a turning point where the survival of human civilisation, society. I'm not talking civilisation.
The survival of human society today depends upon what our leaders do just now.
(33:52):
And if we do not check ourselves, we are in the full stride of destroying the whole world.
And if we do not stop and think there is a grave danger, the small errors may take place.
For example, we were on the hinge of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan.
Today, India and Pakistan are embracing themselves.
Millions of pounds were spent absolutely unnecessarily by those who are running a big country like India today. They're embracing each other.
(34:18):
Yesterday they would have blown each other up.
This is totally neurotic behaviour which we are witnessing. It is not.
They say we have leaders and statesmen.
I refuse to accept it.
Somebody who could have completely destroyed cities yesterday, today they are embracing.
This is a sign of psychological neurosis in our society and in our leadership. It does not. Ring of maturity.
(34:41):
Now, if you talk of the ring of maturity, I will take you to the little village councils where leadership takes place.
I will take you to the little hamlets all over India where people for thousands of years have administered themselves happily.
Where they have developed cultures and agrarian systems.
We're talking about agriculture in India today and the development of agriculture.
(35:01):
And the Finance Minister has given 56,000 crores for the development of agriculture.
But do you know that we have already lost two thirds of the agricultural potential of India?
We have destroyed the best agricultural lands.
We have destroyed the best rivers.
We have destroyed the best catchments and watersheds of the country.
How can I accept that we are actually promoting the agriculture of the country?
(35:24):
We are not promoting the agriculture of the country by destroying the land which produces the agriculture.
We are not improving the society of India when we are in a state of mass destruction of societies.
I mean, it's totally contradictory and it doesn't make good sense.
So the alternative, now, if you speak of an alternative, what's the alternative that we can offer?
(35:46):
Well, I would say the alternative is just to take a good look at the old pattern.
You do find there are deficiencies in it.
Plug the holes where you can.
If you've got leaks in the bucket, plug them.
You find your boat is leaking. Plug the leaks.
Nobody says don't plug the leaks, but you don't plug the leaks at the cost of the boat.
You don't plug the leak at the cost of the boat or the bucket.
What we're trying to do is justify destroying the boat, so we're plugging the leaks in the boat.
(36:10):
I mean, this is ridiculous. It's absolutely ridiculous.
Anybody can plainly see that a big lie is being spread all around the world.
Host (36:18):
Thank you for being part of Audioarchiv.
Follow us, then you won't miss an episode and don't forget the Like button.
Bulu Imam (36:23):
See you next week, your Audioarchiv team.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.