An alternative to consumerism

I think Vandhana Shiva was right when she said colonialism, development and globalisation are synonymous - although they have consequences of differing levels of severity.

The colonial masters were very skilful in creating the image of the empire as a valuable system, whereby the Europeans had the right to rule other parts of the world for the benefit of the natives, who could not run their own countries or maintain justice and peace. It was the so-called aristocrats of Europe, or those who aspired to the upper classes, who accepted the "burden" of providing, outside of their countries, western administration, education and technology for various parts of the empire, so that the natives would be "civilised" in the European sense of the word.

In the case of the British Empire, all natives were treated as British subjects, and English training was provided for those fortunate enough to have access to education.

One might well be justified in claiming that the beginning of the decline and fall of the British Empire began with the "Swadeshi" movement started by Mahatma Gandhi, especially after the Salt March in 1930. India's independence in 1947 made "colonialism" a dirty word, even for some Labour leaders in London.

When Harry S. Truman became president of the US, in his inaugural speech on January 20, 1949 he clearly stated that the word "development" must replace the word "colonialism" meaning that the white man didn't need to occupy land overseas anymore, but rather needed to use psychological warfare to brainwash the natives, especially the leaders of the newly independent countries, to feel "underdeveloped". To this end they should be brought to join free trade (which is not fair trade) and free democracy in the American fashion; meaning that if right-wing dictators follow American free trade and became junior partners of the US, they were "democratic" and on the road to development. This was the case with Thailand, Pakistan, South Korea and the former South Vietnam.

The Americans introduced the "Decades of Development" to the UN in the 1960s and 1970s; as a result, many refer to these years as the Decades of Shame. Because of this, the American neo-colonialism in the name of development is on the decline. The trans-national corporations are now our new masters; they rule the world.

It is not too late, however, to look back to Gandhi and learn from him, from his thoughts, his works, his action, and his lifestyle.

Ashish Nandi stated clearly in The Intimate Enemy that Gandhi's victory over the British Empire was due largely to the extent to which his genuine spiritual and moral commitment appealed to the hearts and pricked the consciences of religious leaders in the West, with their ideal that one should serve the universal God of truth, sacrifice, love, compassion and equality, and not the tribal God of the empire, where the white men had special privileges over the natives.

The faulty logic of resource exploitation, integral to the classical model of economic development based on resource-intensive technologies, led Gandhi to seek an alternative path of development for India. He wrote: "God forbid that India should ever take to industrialism after the manner of the West. The economic imperialism of a single tiny island kingdom (England) is today keeping the world in chains. If an entire nation of 300 million took to similar economic exploitation, it would strip the world bare like locusts."

In this desire for a new way of life, an alternative to the prevailing one, Gandhi resisted the status quo. He not only denounced imported British clothes, but called upon people to bring out all their British-made clothes and burn them. This was resistance against the global, exploitative economics of the British empire. He also boycotted English education, which was brainwashing the natives to admire the British establishment, and teaching them to become clerks or employees, to respect their superiors, without any spiritual dimension or critical awareness of the unjust structural violence of the empire.

While resisting the most powerful empire of the day, Gandhi also started constructive programmes for his people. Not only should people burn British clothes, he said, but they should start using the spinning wheel, to make their own khadi. Not only should people refuse British education, but he provided alternative schooling for them, as well as alternative food and medicine. Indeed, the spinning wheel became the symbol of home economics and home rule.

Spinning your own clothes meant the alternative economic belief of self-reliance, for every household and every village.

We are now confronted with a new form of empire, configured by the transnational corporations. This empire is dependent upon the media to disguise its true purpose, and to promote the fiction that development is good and that globalisation is beneficial to all, which is in fact, a lie.

The G-7 group of industrialised countries, which have now enlarged to eight, is not itself a new empire, but rather a rich man's club and an oppressor's club, which is designed to serve the interests of the trans-national corporations. The mainstream media are instruments of their policies, and are effectively manipulated by the corporate interests. It is very clear how the media are captivated by luxurious or violent events and led to focus on the top politicians, who serve the rich and the powerful.

David Korten was right when he entitled his book, When Corporations Rule the World, and Bishop Desmond Tutu rightly said about the book, that it is "searing indictment of an unjust international economic order." Yet the big industrialised countries are supporting this unjust economic order, as their leaders support the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Trade Organisation. These are linked to the trans-national corporations, and together they harm our environment, our mother Earth, and our people - not only the indigenous peoples and other poor people in the South, but even the labourers and the middle classes in the North are being increasingly exploited.

If we emulate the American and the G-7 life styles, there will not be sufficient natural resources for all of us. Most of us will not be happy with this mode of life, which is harmful to ourselves, our family, our society and our natural environment. If, however, we follow the way of the indigenous peoples, we can all live simply and have time to enjoy ourselves and be part and parcel of the community, as well as of our mother Earth.

We should also learn from Gandhi, especially his deep spiritual commitment to truth, Satyagraha, his deep vision, nonviolent resistance, and practice of an alternative lifestyle. In this way we would achieve wholeness of life, and maintain the sanctity of the natural order.

We should learn to be alone with nature, to live with birds and deer, to appreciate nature and respect nature. Only then can we realise that intellectualism and social engineering cannot liberate us from suffering.

We need to return to the best of our spiritual tradition, to shamanism, to mythology, to traditional rituals, songs and dances, to experience life as it is still alive and available in many indigenous communities which are being threatened by big corporate entities, which are supported by states in the G-7 and others, in derogation of the interests of their own people and natural resources.

For the corporations, natural resources are only a source of economic gain; when one area has been exhausted, they will move on to another. The people are relevant only to the extent that they serve to generate income, either as labourers or consumers. For spiritual people and those who follow the essence of Gandhi's teaching, money is less important; of greater significance, for them and for us, is to be self-reliant; to have home economics; to live happily, with dignity, with a sense of the sacred, with a spiritual dimension to our lives, and in harmony with the earth; with reverence for our ancestors, respect for our communities, and with a commitment to the generations to come.

If we care for our survival, we must not only question G-7 economic policies, but also the political structure that has emerged, and which is no longer accountable to the people, as well as the legal and judicial systems which serve to maintain the status quo.

We need alternative economic and political strategies designed as if human beings matter. We need alternative educational programmes which encourage us to integrate the manifold aspects of our being. We must be able to link our head with our heart, so that we can escape compartmentalisation and develop the capacity to grow seeds of peace and seeds of joy within ourselves. And from this, we can bring about change; not by hating the oppressor, but by challenging the structural violence. Through non-violent means, we can seek a transformation to a just and peaceful world.