Editor,
Where I come from, we have lost a lot of our trees and hills and rivers to failures of the imagination. And I am afraid for Meghalaya, whose clear streams and forested hills brought tears to my eyes. I could not tell whether they were from the joy of knowing nature still existed in such form, or from a sense of its impending loss.
The most common response I received when I asked why the people here allow such mining and polluting go unchecked, was that ‘land is privately owned and the owners can do whatever they want with it.’ This is where I believe the imagination fails first. They do not ‘own’ the air or water they affect, do they?
A ‘piece’ of land may be fenced or walled in and legally attributed to somebody. But surely this piece of land does not exist in isolation, as a merely legal entity? It is connected inextricably with the other land and water bodies and air around it. So, mining or other activities carried out there evidently affect land, water and air that the respectable ‘private’ owner has no rights over. And this affects all the people living in the place, as well as other less visible but crucial living organisms, who together form a web of life that has long existed in some kind of balance. What is worse: the effects of such activities spread not only over space, to neighbouring places, but also over time, affecting generations to come.
A second failure happens when we change the way we see the hills and trees and rivers — and ourselves. As repeatedly noted by the philosopher Akeel Bilgrami in his essays on the Radical Enlightenment,
the crucial shift happens when people start seeing nature as ‘natural resources.’ That is, from existing in a relationship with nature where we see ourselves as a part of it, to seeing nature in a utilitarian,
‘use-and-throw’ way. So, sacred forests come to be seen as rich sources of timber, hills with long histories as profitable limestone ores, rivers as easy dump sites, and so on.
I have heard that despite being ‘privately owned,’ land is still held by communities of people here. Perhaps older values and traditional explanations for why things should be protected are slowly
disappearing. However, the strength of the community could still be leveraged — if there was greater awareness of the implications of such ‘land use.’ Collectively, people can reject this encroachment
upon their land, culture and imagination that a few individuals or groups perpetuate for short-term gains. Alternatives to this destructive mainstream model of development should come from the
people themselves. Why wait for the State to frame laws?
Yours etc.,
Javed Imthiaz
Lecturer, Dept. of Sociology
Jyoti Nivas College, Bangalore – 95
Great work, Nongrim Hills
Editor,
It was so good to see the picture of the fence over the bridge at Nongrim Hills in Shillong Jottings (ST April 21, 2014). It is one of the many innovative ideas and concepts of Dorbar Shnong Nongrim Hills. I am a resident of Nongrim Hills and it gives me immense pleasure, really, when something like this is seen and recognized. I take this opportunity to say to all that Nongrim Hills has to be one of the best localities to live in Shillong and this feeling did not come overnight but gradually and steadily from the past 12- 13 years. Dorbar Shnong Nongrim Hills is one of the most efficient, vibrant and best, undoubtedly. I mean look at the roads, street lamps, cleanliness and the latest which adds to the glamour of the locality is the welcome note encrypted on the wall of Nagaland House which says “Welcome to Nongrim Hills”. I have not seen such a welcome board anywhere in Shillong and please correct me if I am wrong. I am proud to be a part of Nongrim Hills.
Yours etc.,
H. Saikia
Nongrim Hills, Shillong