Hindu Vivek Kendra
A RESOURCE CENTER FOR THE PROMOTION OF HINDUTVA
   
 
 
«« Back
Are green activist the new imperialists?

Are green activist the new imperialists?

Author: Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar
Publication: The Times of India
Date: January 7, 2001
 
Prof. Deepak Lal's inaugural Julian Simon Lecture at liberty institute in Delhi last month was scintillating attack on the new cultural imperialism of international Greens and their local compradors. He says the Green movement is a secular religion filling the void created in the West by the retreat of faith in God. Its aim is to assume a new 'white man's burden' and impose its values on the world.

The old Christian crusade for supposedly saving souls has given way to the new Green crusade for supposedly saving the earth. This new imperialism needs to be resisted as sternly as the old Christian-colonial one. Its professed aim is to save the environment, but its practical effect in many instances may be ruinous for poor countries.

Deepak Lal enjoins us, first Of all, to stand up to local converts, the modem descendants of what the Chinese called 'rice Christians' and 'secondary barbarians', such as Vandana Shiva, Medha Patkar and Arundhati Roy. He says the claim that green goals are in keeping with Hindu cosmology is reminiscent of the attempt of Christian missionaries in the 19th centuries to smuggle the caste system into Christianity to encourage more conversions. This produced a unique bunch of caste-ridden Christians that would have horrified both Jesus and Manu.

Second, Lal argues cogently that India must refuse to sign a series of proposed treaties and conventions promoted by Greens, especially those aimed against the use of DDT, genetically modified foods. and trade in supposedly hazardous substances. Further, India must resist the inclusion of Green standards in WTO which will open up Third World countries to trade sanctions.

Lal says, pithily, that on finding themselves unable to get elected in democratic countries, Greens now use agitations to pressure international development agencies like the WTO and World Bank to carry out their agendas. What cannot be achieved through democratic means can be achieved by street power. Certainly NGO demonstrations at the Seattle meeting of the WTO changed the whole direction of the trade debate.

The Green position on genetically modified food is especially outrageous and unscientific. Nothing is commoner in nature than crosses across genomes. and doing it in the laboratory simply mimics nature. Genetically modified 'golden rice' is rich with beta-carotene. and can greatly help millions suffering from Vitamin A deficiency, yet Greens oppose this as a Frankenstein food. The Greens are the monsters in this case. They coolly ignore the elementary scientific truth that all the cereals we eat represent trans-genomic combinations over thousands of years, and that man has modified cereals beyond all recognition.

There is no such thing as natural farming: agriculture is a manmade activity not found in nature. The future of agricultural productivity, and hence of poverty alleviation, lies in genetic modification, and we must not allow Green imperialism to come in the way.

I agree entirely with Lal that we are witnessing a new 'white man's burden'. Perhaps we should call it the 'white NGO's burden'. But while we need to be on our guard, I think we must recognise that the new white man's burden, like the old one, carries with it much that is desirable. The British Raj brought in, along with colonial exploitation, modern notions of democracy, republican values, civil rights, gender rights and other enlightenment values. We got rid of the white man, Yet kept much of the White Man's Burden. We refused to have it imposed on us, and refused to accept it wholesale. But we recognised that many parts of it did indeed have value, and incorporated it within our own ethos.

We need to do the same with the white NGO's burden. Like its predecessor, it has much that is breathtakingly arrogant, ignorant and racist. Even so, there is much to be learned from the rest of the world in regard to ecology, and the imperialist tone of the white NGO's burden must not produce a knee-jerk rejection from us. Like. all crusaders, white NG0s exaggerate and invent, and present only those facts convenient to their crusade. But so too do our own politicians, academics and journalists.

Instead of rejecting wholesale what green imperialists say, we need to extract what is of value and reject the dross. Nor should we underestimate possible gains from international conventions.

For instance, the evidence on global warming is far from conclusive. The world experienced global cooling from the 1940s to the 1970s, leading to predictions of a new ice Age.

Subsequently, temperatures rose. Any credible theory of climate change must explain the period of cooling as well as warming. I have vet to hear any theory of greenhouse gases that does so, and so I remain a sceptic.

Yet I think Lal overdoes his attack on the precautionary principle proposed by Greens. This principles urges precautions that may ultimately prove unnecessary just in case the outcome is really bad.
In other words, let us incur some costs today to avoid a small possibility of catastrophe later. In many cases I would agree with Lal that it is riot worth paying the upfront costs. but global warming is an exception. The greatest security threat India faces is not from China or Pakistan. It is from the possibility that global warming will raise the sea-level by two metres, inundating one-third of Bangladesh.

That will send up to 100 million Bangladeshis across the Indian border in search of land and jobs, changing the demography of the eastern region and causing ethnic and economic conflict.

It will raise the Assam problem all over again on a horribly magnified scale. So it is in our national interest to encourage international treaties to stem global warming, even if it means agreeing in to some carefully limited curbs on our own emissions. Maybe this will turn out to be unnecessary. But the potential cost-benefit ratio is such that, in this case, we should take up the white NGO's burden.
 


Back                          Top

«« Back
 
 
 
  Search Articles
 
  Special Annoucements