ONLY CONNECT!
There are many practical ways of living more in harmony
with nature, and I'll be looking at some of these in the
next chapter.
But living in harmony with nature is inseparable from
living in harmony
with each other. It's not just a question of somehow
bolting environmental
awareness on to our existing lifestyles. Environmental
problems, with
their roots in greed, hatred, and unawareness, should cause
us to
question our whole way of being in the world. When the
Buddha saw
that we are not ultimately separate from the universe or
from others,
it was not just an intellectual observation. His
realization that
all things are interconnected was something
felt in his heart as much as his head, and it moved him to
live out
the rest of his life helping others.(footnote 13)
If we experience a desire to do something to help the
environment,
it is probably because we ourselves have to some extent
understood
interconnectedness. According to the Buddha, this is
something we
can grow to understand more and more deeply. We can do this
by trying
it out, little by little, through individual acts of
kindness. If
we are truly interconnected, these will make us on the
whole freer
and happier. In this chapter, I'd like to examine how this
sense of
exploration might bring to life our whole approach to the
environment.
The Armchair Society
In the West, people have become ever more
oriented to material consumption, and
live in smaller and smaller units. The average number of
people in
each household is steadily declining. If the trends
continue much
further, we will soon all be sitting in our own armchair,
in our own
house, watching our own television. The information
age, progressing through the successive technologies
of radio, television, the Internet, and mobile phones, is
reaching
the point of saturation, where everyone has instant access
to virtually
unlimited information. We have televisions in the kitchen
and the
bedroom, computers on our palms, and telephones in our
pockets. In
turn, each new technology has become the object of
fetishistic desire,
as status symbol or fashion statement. All too often, the
actual content
of the information having been transmitted, the quality of
our communication
becomes of secondary or no importance at all. Indeed, the
very quantity
of information at our fingertips can numb our minds to the
whole notion
of quality. The television addict, the computer nerd, and
the loud
but vacuous mobile phone user have become the successive
icons of
the passing decades.
It is not just information that we expect to have at our
command.
We expect fast food, fast transport, fast service. We
expect a wide
array of choices of even the most everyday products. I
heard a story
of an East European woman who was visiting England. Faced
with the
bewildering array of different kinds of shampoo on a
supermarket shelf,
she burst into tears. Yet choice is what we've come to
expect and
consider normal. We would probably like to think of
ourselves as an
exception - it's other people who are the rampant
materialists,
who are obsessed with information and gadgets. But I wonder
whether
it might apply to all of us more than we'd like to
acknowledge. When
you are brought up within a particular culture, you
unconsciously
imbibe its values and habits. We can come to consider the
strangest
things quite normal.
The writer Helena Norberg-Hodge lived for
many years in the Himalayan kingdom of Ladakh. It is a
place
that had, until the advent of the Westernized economy, a
very strong
sense of community and co-operation. Despite living in a
land with
few resources and a harsh climate, Ladakhis have a
reputation for
irrepressible happiness and laughter. Norberg-Hodge relates
how, when told that many people in the affluent West were
so unhappy
they had to go to see their doctor, the Ladakhis' mouths
dropped open
in astonishment.(footnote 14)
How have we so spectacularly failed to build a happy
society despite
our material wealth? How can we begin to move forward? What
are the
unconscious assumptions that are holding us back?
We carry a model in our heads about the way we function in
society,
one that most of us rarely question. We see ourselves as
tightly defined
units, either individually or in households. To put it
crudely, money
comes into the unit at one end when we receive our wages
and it goes
out of the other when we buy things. Compared to other
societies,
our actual experience of being connected with others
is slight. The advertising industry, which equates
consumption with
status, and the job market both promote an essentially
competitive
relationship between units. Somewhere along the line we
have lost
the art of living together.
In the post-industrial era, many of the
cohesive forces in society have been weakened. There is
much more
geographical and social mobility - there are few who live
and
work with the same people, and families and friends tend to
live further
apart. Traditional rural communities and industrial
working-class
neighbourhoods have largely dispersed. There are few
communities left
where a unifying ideology, such as Christianity, socialism,
or nationalism,
can be taken for granted. The ideal of democracy, in so far
as it
is shared, allows us to live together but does not provide
a common
purpose, something higher than our private economic
interests.
Our problem is that we are living as though disconnected.
We think
we are disconnected from our neighbours, from people in
other countries,
from the natural world. But this isn't in accord with
reality -
it doesn't work. Everything we eat and drink comes from the
earth.
We depend on others in countless ways even for the most
basic necessities
of life. But, too often, we just want to look after our own
little
unit. And the more we have withdrawn into our own private
sphere,
the more boredom, loneliness, or desire for status has
driven us to
consume.
We now have a choice. One option is to sit in our armchair
and accept
the ascendancy of untrammelled capitalism, with all its
social and
environmental problems. Another is to try to escape to an
imagined
utopia away from it all, a rustic idyll where we can turn
back the
clock. A third option is to begin to build within our
society a new
cohesion, co-operation, and trust from first principles,
based not
on an imposed ideology but on our common humanity. This
means patiently
beginning the work of rebuilding. It means connecting with
people,
as a way of trying out the truth of interconnectedness.
To begin this patient work of rebuilding, we can reflect on
how we
affect other people individually and on how we affect the
world as
a whole. Having done so, we can make a conscious effort to
connect
with people in a more positive way by giving.
How do I Affect Other People?
Every time you speak to someone, buy something from them,
or just sit opposite them on a train, you are sending out
ripples
of cause and effect into the world. The effects
are sometimes positive, sometimes negative. Being
preoccupied with
our own concerns, we all too often forget this, but as part
of the
process of learning and awakening, we can train ourselves
to think
more about it. I'll come back to this later. The point I
want to make
here is that it's not just our deliberately willed actions
that affect
others. We are constantly communicating with others
across a much broader spectrum than simply our words -
through
every minor detail of our body and speech. We communicate
who we are
as well as what we do; we communicate our lifestyle, our
state of
mind, our values. The Vietnamese monk Thich Nhat
Hanh illustrates this with an image of some refugee 'boat
people'
adrift on the ocean:
"Often the boats are caught in rough seas or storms, the
people
may panic, and boats can sink. But if even one person
aboard can remain
calm, lucid, knowing what to do and what not to do, he or
she can
help the boat survive. His or her expression - face, voice
-
communicates clarity and calmness, and people have trust in
that person.
They will listen to what he or she says. One such person
can save
the lives of many."(footnote 15)
When we talk with other people about environmental issues
or the state of the world, it is not just what we are
saying that
makes a difference, but how we are saying it. We can
communicate panic
and despair, or clarity and calm. The communication of
panic and despair
follows from a desire to take from other people a sense of
reassurance
or comfort. The communication of clarity and calm follows
from a desire
to work with others to find a solution. These are two very
different
kinds of environmentalism.
We can see this even in very ordinary circumstances. If you
have ever
worked with someone in a very negative state of mind, you
will know
how this casts a cloud over everyone. Conversely, just the
occasional
friendly word on a train can dispel the atmosphere of
reserve and
make for a more relaxed and enjoyable journey for everyone.
A Reflection
Take some time to reflect on what you communicate to
others, how you connect to others across this broad
spectrum through
your body language and tone of voice. You may be fortunate
and know
someone whom you could ask and who will give you an honest
answer.
Consider in particular whether you transmit calm or
anxiety, clarity or confusion, friendliness, reserve, or
ill will.
Communicate a natural concern when talking about
environmental issues,
rather than despair. Think back to people who have had a
positive
influence on your life. What was it about their
communication that
affected you? Could you affect others in a similar way?
How Do I Change the World?
As well as thinking we are disconnected
from others, we very often think we are disconnected from
the world at large. To use the words of the political
thinker Andre
Gorz, we feel 'impotent in the face of autonomized
processes and faceless powers'.(footnote 16) We tend to
think that the
world is only really changed by people in positions of
wealth and
power. This is certainly the view perpetrated by the news
media, which
can often whip up the most trivial murmur in circles of
government
as if it were a matter of great national import.
But this is a very narrow way of thinking about how change
occurs,
and one that makes us feel so marginal and unimportant that
we can
be misled into thinking that our own actions don't have
consequences.
An alternative view is that acts of parliament or
international treaties
come about because of the forces of public opinion
- or perhaps something deeper than just opinion. People's
values
and perceptions, individually and collectively, can shift
in quite
mysterious and unpredictable ways. The sum total of the
broad spectrum
of communications going on, by which people communicate
their values and states of mind, will have an effect. In
this light,
formal politics can look more like what the writer Tor
Norretranders has described as 'tardy rationalizations of
what
has already taken place'.(footnote 17) He cites as an
example the end
of the mutual paranoia that underpinned the Cold War.
In the mid-1980s, he argues, even before the break-up of
the Soviet
bloc, there was a defusing of tension that could not be
explained
by any formal political process. He speculates that this
was the result
of millions of ordinary people, persistently, over the
decades, talking
about the unthinkable nature of nuclear war. In unseen
ways, they
brought about a phase transition that changed history. In
this perspective,
politicians just bumble along a few years behind the
cutting edge
of change. Human society is as complex and chaotic
as any ecosystem. We may think that our behaviour,
conversations,
and transactions are our own private business, but, in
aggregate,
they are constantly bringing about changes in ways we don't
even suspect.
You don't have to win an election or stage a revolution to
change
the world. Our actions do have consequences.
This isn't to say that political activity, such as
environmental campaigning,
isn't necessary, but we shouldn't lose sight of how we
affect people
in very ordinary ways. Having high ideals about saving the
environment
is not necessarily enough; one could spend one's whole life
talking
and thinking about ideas, bold plans, utopian visions, but
without
a way of putting them into practice - at least to some
extent
- they have been not the slightest bit of use to anybody.
There
is a danger with big issues such as the global environment
that you
lose yourself in abstractions. You might even entertain
private fantasies
about saving the world single-handedly. You can convince
yourself
that you have great concern for the world, when actually
you can't
even get along with the people you see every day.
A Sharing Revolution
What are the ordinary individual words and deeds that
will bring about a phase transition towards an
environmentally sustainable
future? If lack of connection lies at the heart of the
problem, it
follows that the most direct antidotes are things that
start to reconnect
us, such as giving and sharing. The quality of generosity
is rarely mentioned in environmentalist writings, yet it
has never
been so indispensable. Giving material things reminds us
that happiness
comes from connecting with others. Sharing things breaks
down the
barriers of our isolated consumer units.
Giving and sharing are powerful acts because they undermine
the notion, taken for granted by some economists, that we
all act
out of economic self-interest and that economic growth
is the greatest good. On a world scale, these qualities
will be expressed
as a global vision of fairness and security, which will
counter the
attitude, still advanced by leading politicians, that the
national
economic interest should always take precedence over global
concerns.
Economists can only measure financial transactions and too
easily
forget that happiness does not equate with how much money
we spend.(footnote 18)
Generosity is a kind of liberation movement. Liberation
movements
arise when people refuse to assent any longer to whatever
regime or
ideology is oppressing them. The idea of freedom becomes
contagious
and pressure for change becomes irresistible. If
materialism and isolation
are the great oppressions of Western society, then
generosity is liberation.
So the first step forward can be taken through the very
ordinary and
simple act of generosity. Anyone can do it. Even someone in
the most
self-absorbed state, if they put their mind to it, can find
some way
of giving, even if it's just a tiny gesture of
friendliness. This
is the first step towards rejoining the human race,
connecting
with others. It relieves us from the narrow, constricted
pain of selfish
isolation.
Progressively, starting from wherever we are and working
upwards,
we can try out more ways of freeing ourselves. At each
stage, we can
reflect on how generosity feels, not in a self-righteous
way, but
feeling what it's like to be more connected to other human
beings.
If you have ever worked in a situation where everyone is
pulling together,
or played in a band, or been part of a sports team, you may
recall
sometimes thinking in terms of 'us' rather than 'me'. We
can look
to develop this sense of 'us-ness' in our everyday lives,
beginning
with those around us, then including more and more people.
Here are
some examples of giving and sharing, many of which have an
environmental
flavour:
- Give a gift to your neighbour.
- Pick up a piece of litter every day.
- Share garden tools.
- Start a car-sharing scheme.
- Adopt a development charity to give to, or volunteer
for.
- Offer your services via a local or international
volunteer
bureau.(footnote 19)
-
Adopt a local green space and help to improve it.
- Become a conservation volunteer.(footnote 20)
- Join a lets (local exchange trading scheme)
or a skills co-operative.(footnote 21)
There are many other things we could do, of course.
Perhaps
as we go on, we'll find that we want to increase the amount
of time
and energy we give to them. This is one way of responding
to the environmental
crisis - learning to connect with others more and more. A
sharing
society will tend to live in greater harmony with
nature.
In the Buddhist scriptures there is a story about three
disciples
of the Buddha who were living in a wooded place called
Gosinga.(footnote 22)
One day, the Buddha came to visit. He first enquired after
their physical well-being and then asked whether they were
living
together in harmony. He was pleased to find that they were
bearing
each other in mind so naturally that no words about
practical tasks
were needed. The first to return from the almsround would
fetch drinking
water, and the last would wash the refuse bucket. Whoever
noticed
that the washing water was low would fetch more. Each would
maintain
the attitude that while they were different in body they
were one
in mind. Being sensitive to nature, they took care that no
waste was
discarded wherever there was greenery or water that
supported life.
For the three disciples, devoted to simplicity and
meditation, complete
harmony with each other and with their environment was the
foundation
of a truly human existence.
Notes
13: The chapter title is the epigraph in E.M.Forster's
novel, Howard's End
14: Helena Norberg-hodge, Ancient Futures: Learning
from Ladakh, Rider: London 1992
15: Thich Nhat Hanh, Being Peace, Parallax:
Berkeley 1987, pp. 11-12
16: Andre Gorz, Capitalism, Socialism, Ecology,
trans. Chris Turner, Verso: London 1994, p.4
17: Tor Norretranders, The User Illusion: Cutting
Consciousness Down to Size, Penguin: London 1999
18: There is a growing amount of work to replace the
Gross National Product, which only measures financial
transactions, with a measure that takes account of social,
cultural and environmental factors. The Government of
Bhutan, for example, has introducted a measure of Gross
National Happiness - see www.neweconomics.org
19: See www.idealist.org for a wide range of
international volunteering opportunities
20: For information on becoming a conservation volunteer
in the UK, contact the BTCV at www.btcv.org.uk
21: For information on LETS schemes in the UK and
elsewhere, see www.letslinkuk.org
22: Culagosinga Sutta, Majjhima Nikaya 31
Buy this book