Dr. Rudi Jansma
The experts in the philosophy and knowledge in economy and ecology should work together, not as opposing parties, but as partners for global well-being. Laws should be based on their combined insights. It is outrageous that we cut our forest which produce the very air we breath, or that we can not even drink from the rivers which, according to Indian and other mythologies, are sacred and divine in origin.
Nature provides us, for example, unending solar energy: warmth, light, electromagnetism; near infinite sources of healthy air, water, and land to live on; examples of near infinite generosity in the form of (vegetarian and mineral) foods - which do no effort to avoid our use of their bodies but make themselves freely available; materials for shelter, entertainment, for training of our skills, our mind, our intelligence (by investigation), expansion of our knowledge by showing us its superhuman technological, chemical and psychological accomplishments and processes, its inexhaustible playfulness and diversity in evolution, and in providing us a body to live in; and last but not least the possibility to recognize the divine, in the form of beauty, its mystical moods, and the pure soul essence in each living being.
So our economy should only use natural energy, provided by the sun, the earth (gravity: streaming water; and warmth), the moon (tides, and its influence on plant growth, etc.), perhaps Uranium or other sources of nuclear energy, which, if handled in the right way and with care, is by far the most environment friendly source of energy, even compared to any from of 'alternative' energy[1] We may use the land, but not exploit it (Jainism and Aboriginal Australians, for example, forbid digging in the ground out of respect for mineral lives and for the earth, or for the Mind who "dreamt" her, as the Aboriginals say. From this point of view, mining and oil distraction should be rejected as a means for acquiring energy.
Trusting Nature's wisdom also in the field of our physical health we should use natural food only (without killing insects or disturbing the soil's clay-complexes with fertilizers, and without gene manipulation which hampers the natural way of evolution of the plants' souls), and we should do so in much smaller quantities - just what our bodies need. In other words, food in which no violence is involved. We should also try to avoid artificial factory-made food mixtures, as well as food in excessive packing materials. Unclean foods caused by hygienic indifference should be avoided by mindfulness and alertness. A natural way of living improves our physical, psychological and mental condition, prevents very much suffering in the animal kingdom, and almost all diseases. Our body possesses, after millions of years of evolution, of its own more wisdom than our doctor, and doctors should merely help the body in case of unbalance or disturbance.
The medical costs in our times place a heavy load on the economy, including the individual economy of households, and on the ecology of the earth and on the natural equilibriums of our bodies. These are three unbalances: economic, ecologic and physical which affect our happiness negatively.
[It may well mean the downfall of the pharmaceutical industry which thrives on our unhealthiness, on animal experiments, big financial interests, all that which is very polluting to the environment and detrimental to the natural restore capacities of our bodies. Pharmacy is violent because it suppresses the natural process of what we label "disease" and kills the germs fulfilling their task.]
Does it destroy the economic balance?
Yes, sure. We are aware that many of the good things of the world, such as wireless communication, education, healthcare and the near absence of famines have been accomplished thanks to the development of our economic systems and the great thinkers who designed the groundwork for it. We do not want to go back to a world of isolation and ignorance, we don't have the diseases without cure of former centuries, nor feudalism, dictatorships, power structures and wars as in the past. We do not want to return to a society based on a caste system or racial inequality and slavery. An economy can not be sound without taking human psychology into account. Merely preaching ethics does not erase the presence of our animal impulses and desires which are so deeply engraved. If we change overnight, economic balance will be disturbed to such an extent that our present system collapses. Ultimately that would be the best thing to happen. But first we would see wars and all the worst properties of human nature surface. And, as always, the already deprived will suffer most - they probably will not survive. Transition in our time should take place step by step, quietly if possible - once the inner mentality has changed, and people have become aware of some wisdom, the transition can take place naturally - if it is not already too late for the smooth path. If not, we'll learn the hard way, and either survive or not.
We can however replace polluting industries by nature and human friendly industries. We can replace weapons industries by industries making wonderful instruments for scientific research. We can gradually turn away from the emphasis on allopathic medicine towards a nature-based health care system, and prevent diseases rather that operate them. Allopathic medicine can be applied as a quick helper, sometimes, but basically as a last resort, and this take a secondary place in health care. Healthy foods are at least as economic as unhealthy foods. And how much loss suffers the global economy due to unnecessary illnesses of people who could normally work? We could do with much less so-called 'comfort,' than is now the habit in some parts of the world and on which we spend billions only to weaken our natural physical qualities. We can often see that people in the parts of the world who are deprived of much of such comforts are healthier and happier than those who have. For humanity at large there is a middle way. We should rationalize which 'comforts' actually increase human happiness and optimal functioning in the long term individually and holistically, and balance the benefit of each product and the totality of products against its 'costs' (ecologically, medically and ethically).
We could do away with our mentality of grasping and collecting material goods, with 'wanting more', as soon as we see that these things are psychological addictions which, taking them in total consequence, lead to unhappiness in stead of happiness. We should fight for these ideas. But how to convince the addicts - which includes almost everyone - of the existence of greater freedom and happiness? Would they still care as far down as they have gone now? Time will unveil the truth.
