Your hero is a scoundrel || Acharya Prashant, at IIT-Bombay (2022)

Questioner (Q): There is enough evidence these days that the people who are unhappy with their jobs are having more carbon footprint on nature. I have been listening to you for over a year, and I have listened to your videos on climate change where you said that the only solution to climate change is spirituality alone.

I have been reading books on climate change and one such book is—‘Less is More’, where they talk about ‘de-growth’ to be the solution. And in the book, they also talk about dualism being the reason why we exploit nature and why we take nature for granted. The solutions to climate change also being lesser animal exploitation and lesser population. But we also have influential leaders like Elon Musk who essentially support population growth without caring about this.

So, my question to you is about this de-growth and non-dualism. Whatever the actions that we do, we use natural resources and they leave behind a carbon footprint. So, what is meant to be non-dualistic in that aspect, and how can society be non-dualistic with all these influential leaders talking to you against what science is talking to you? And in this capitalistic world, what is it meant to be de-growth?

Acharya Prashant (AP): What is duality in the first place? The feeling that there are two truths—This (pointing towards self) and the world; and both these truths are incomplete and dependent on each other, that’s duality. That there definitely exists two, and of the two I am one and I am incomplete. How do I become complete? By feasting on the world, by exploiting the world. That’s the reason the book you have read, says that duality is one of the reasons behind climate change.

Climate change is nothing but a crisis of consumption. We are so terribly incomplete and hurt and restless that we want happiness at any cost. And to get happiness, we exploit everything around us—we exploit our own bodies, we exploit the ones we are related to, and obviously we will exploit the animals, the birds, the trees, the forests, the rivers, the atmosphere; we exploit everything.

We are so crazy and so deeply in pain. Think of a person who is both in agony and in illusion, suffering deeply and also crazy. What will he do? He will do anything to get rid of his pain, no? And that’s what mankind is doing. All kinds of unthinkable stuff so that we can somehow feel happy. Kill, eat, exploit, plunder, rape—do whatever can be done just so that you can have a fleeting glimpse of happiness. And because that is fleeting, so you have to do more and more of it to sustain even the semblance of being all right.

So, you said that anything that we do has a footprint. See, climate change is not caused by all the little things that you do, you can relieve yourself of that guilt. It’s not you and me who are responsible for climate change. If just to exist is to contribute to the climate crisis, then we would all be guilty, but that’s not really the case. There is a perfect balance that nature provides. You have agents that emit carbon and equally, you have agents that absorb carbon. What are those agents known as?—Trees and the oceans, they absorb these gases.

What’s happening is that you have crossed all limits by a long distance—280 ppm to 440 ppm and increasing and increasing at an accelerating rate. Who’s doing that? Not the common man, though there are vested interests that are trying to put the guilt of climate change on the common man. No, the common man is not really responsible. The common man is responsible but in some other way, indirectly, we will come to that.

The richest ten per cent of the world’s population is causing ninety per cent of the carbon emissions. And if you bring that down to the richest one per cent, that still remains close to thirty to forty per cent. It’s so skewed. The per capita emissions of an Indian are only a small fraction of those of an American or a Briton, it’s coming from there. There is enough allowance for everybody to peacefully survive, what we do not have is the allowance to consume endlessly.

So, it’s not as if doing anything contributes to carbon emissions, no, not that way. And if it does, then there is stuff to take care of that—trees and other physical mechanisms, natural mechanisms. But when you are burning oil endlessly so that you can have physical comforts and all kinds of vanities, then there is obviously no solution. How do you take care of that?

Now, here comes the role of the common man. This has to be turned into an electoral issue. You have to elect governments that are prepared to tax vulgar consumption. You have to have governments that are prepared to tax the ultra-rich. You cannot let them go scot-free with all the damage they are causing to the environment and to the planet itself. We were talking of the sixth mass extinction, that sixth mass extinction is not being brought about by the lower middle-income countries and the middle-income countries, that is being brought about by the first world, the developed world. They are the culprits and they will have to bear the burden.

And even in countries like India, if the per capita emissions are rising, the responsibility lies only with a handful of people compared to our population. They are the ones who have to be singled out and taxed. It is a very clever ploy to make the common man feel responsible. So, what does the common man start doing to alleviate his guilt? He says, “Fine, I am recycling, I am not using plastic that much now. Or I am turning Organic, or I am reducing my electricity consumption by fifteen per cent.”

The question is, “Dear, how much electricity does the common man anyway consume?” It’s not the common man who is causing all this, I will tell you who is causing this. Your role models are causing all this. The influential fellow you referred to is causing all this, and it’s a great tragedy when the ones who are influential are neither intellectual nor spiritual. Think of it. A brain-dead fellow is so influential just because he has so much money. And you can have a lot of money without being intellectual at all, it is possible, it is happening.

Your role models are very unworthy people, and they are role models exactly because you find them consuming a lot, and you all aspire to consume that much, so they become your role models. You say, “Wow”. Somebody asked a famous soccer player and he says, “I have twenty cars, all luxury ones.” And that simply charms you so much, wins you over—twenty cars, five Rolls Royce! He does not even want to own a cheap thing like Mercedes. Not one, but multiple private planes. Super expensive Yachts, Yachts to take care of Yachts.

And that’s what we all aspire for. Why? That brings us to the point we started from—our dualistic philosophy of life. We all have been taught wrongly, we have been trained wrongly. Life education, we have been deprived of. So, all that you want through all that you do is consumption. What do you live for?—Consumption. How do you know a fellow is doing well in life? He’s able to consume a lot. When consumption is the ideal, climate change is the result.

And all these role models—people you follow, the ones who have fifty million on Instagram and places—what are they displaying to you except their ability to consume? Either they display their own ability to consume or they present themselves in certain cases, as stuff to be consumed. For example, a voluptuous female model—why does she command that kind of a following? She is saying, “I am available to be consumed, at least optically. Consume me.” Or you will follow a billionaire, a millionaire or somebody.

We have been taught the wrong purpose of life and the results are catastrophic. We do not know why we exist, and climate change, therefore, is a result of a totally wrong kind of education, the wrong fundamental philosophy of life.

Is all this coming together and making sense, or is it appearing too scattered? Do you see how it is all integrated? Do you see how the one you follow on Instagram and the rising ppm levels are directly correlated? Do you see all these things? In general, they will appear as different issues, not related, but they are very much related. The very concept of a good life is a carbon-intensive one, the very concept of happiness is carbon-intensive.

When you become richer, you typically become a meat eater. Do you know how much animal agriculture contributes to climate change? Just as much as fossil fuels do. Everything that makes you happy is actually something that is destroying the Earth. The saving grace is, as Indians—as middle-class Indians—you still are not in a position to consume too much. Therefore, you are still not directly responsible for destroying the Earth.

But there is an indirect culpability, which is that you are following and admiring the ones who are in fact destroying the Earth. And if you keep following them, you will become like them; that’s the whole purpose of being an admirer, right?—I want to be like him. You want to be a murderer? You want to be like someone responsible for genocide? You want to be like someone responsible for wiping out hundreds of species of organisms per day? It’s a sad commentary on our times that people who should be behind bars are actually helming top positions in industry, in government, everywhere.

Choose your role models very carefully, it’s got something to do with Love. Be very careful about the ones who appeal to you. Don’t be just driven to anything that appears attractive. We do not know whether much can be done to save the planet. Probably, we all are inexorably on our way to extinction. But still, you have a life to live; be very careful. Most people we follow, we admire, we respect are terribly unworthy. Don’t fall for the gloss.

Even if you find you are being left alone, that aloneness has a dignity. Learn to enjoy that dignity.

show_less