On 24 March 2020, the central government declared a nationwide lockdown to deal with the spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which caused the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic in India. The lockdown, implemented without the necessary social and economic support by the state, represented a harsh ‘tradeoff’ in favour of public health. The country’s already sluggish economy took a massive hit due to the global pandemic and the near complete closure of international and domestic trade of goods and commodities. However, when the government began its unlocking efforts, it relied on incentivising highly environmentally damaging extractive projects to stimulate the economy. This article analyses the environmental and mining sector reforms and the key legal amendments proposed by the government as part of its post-COVID-19 economic recovery plans. The process, timing and content of these legal changes show that the government used the COVID-19 lockdown as an opportunity to push through undemocratic legal changes that would result in more long term environmental and social costs to society.

The Pandemic and post pandemic phase will be testing for the G20. With India holding the G20 in 2022, it will be for the Indian leadership to deliver on the aspirations of a range of stakeholders invested in development initiatives. Indian Civil Society will be mobilizing itself to interact with the Government of India to submit recommendations through Civil 20, a unique platform and one of the many engagement groups of the G20. It is for India to rise to the occasion and provide the wherewithal for Civil Society to flourish. Heinrich Boell Stiftung’s partner organization VANI has published three reports highlighting the role and urging for a stronger engagement of Civil Society as part of debates around G20.

Nature is the only refuge for humans and only in nature can one find the solutions to the problems in the post coronavirus pandemic and in the age of climate emergency. No matter how advanced a society has become, it cannot claim to be free and independent from nature. The interaction between the people of the wealthy and advanced societies and the ones who are still living close to nature is not on equal footing. The Northeastern region of India has a unique system of growing food called ‘jhum’, around which evolved the upland communities. This was evolved over thousands of years of living in the mountains, where making a living is tough work. The practice itself is the embodiment of a people living in close harmony with nature and has produced a body of knowledge about life and nature that is irreproachable. Increased populations, privatisation of tribal lands and development projects have, however, squeezed the lands available for jhum cultivation reducing the jhum cycle and degradation of the jhum lands, and endangering the survival of both the practitioners of jhum and their way of life. In the final analysis, the survival of the jhum fields is linked to the survival of not only the indigenous way of life but also the advanced societies as they are interdependent.

This reflection piece attempts to illuminate different ways of being and relating in the world while reflecting on the essay by Andreas Weber titled “Sharing Life. Animism as Ecopolitical Practice.” It attempts to compliment Weber’s essay by illustrating a few examples from India and rest of the world that evoke animistic cosmologies or reverence to the rest of nature and how that has informed their struggles against destructive development. From Adivasi communities in Central and Eastern India to the Sioux Tribe of North Dakota and many others, this piece weaves together visions of ‘wellbeing’ that are guided by the rhythms and moods of the natural world. Towards the end, the piece makes a few suggestions of how some recent events on rights of nature across the world could open up the opportunity of reversing our current destructive relationship with nature to that of harmony and respect. Stressing on the need of acknowledging and respecting different ways of knowing and being in this world, this piece supports the articulation of such alternative worldviews where they exist as crucial in defining, living, supporting and propagating the paradigms of well-being that are just, equitable and ecologically wise.

Located in the frontier state of Meghalaya, in the Northeast of India, I have a unique position, a liminal one – of being between multiple worlds and therefore worldviews. On the one hand, it is the era of surveillance capitalism still taking shape from a techno-military-corporate complex. On the other hand is an indigenous world of the Khasi-Jaintia people steeped deep in myths, stories with no separation between human and non-human realms. This makes for a diverse yet seamless weave with an effortless disappearance of consciousness as the direct perception of phenomena that inform us of our own existence. Multiple, shape-shifting worlds open up.  Ansell Pearson argues that “in constructing a posthuman paradigm that makes the logic of capitalist biotechnology integral to the plan of human history”, there is a “disabling (of) alternate stories of human pasts and human futures” and therefore the urgency for telling of and re-telling of our stories. Through stories that are deeply embedded in a landscape and location I explore a sense of place, which connects us to and restores one of our deepest needs, a sense of identity and belonging. And in turn this becomes a “psychologically healing journey” in the way Andreas Weber talks about it in his paper, "Sharing Life. Animism as Ecopolitical Practice".

Traditional knowledge systems are local knowledge systems specific to a particular geographical context, explicit to a particular society and culture. They can be seen as a framework for local decision making for natural resource management, agriculture, settlement, housing, healthcare, handloom and handicraft. Traditional knowledge systems provide a source of ecological, economical, social, technological and philosophical learning for practitioners and act as signifier and metaphors. In the contemporary context, with the challenges of changing perspectives of geo-environmental conditions, they often could be considered as one of the sources for alternative ways to face such challenges. There is scope to learn collectivism, mutualism and minimalism, apart from acquiring ideas for adaptations and resilient development. Accordingly, traditional knowledge gets a distinct focus in contemporary discussions and it is approached through steps of de-learning, relearning and new learning. However, the state of wellbeing, identity, right and autonomy of holders and practitioners of traditional knowledge is in doldrums with challenges cropping up with fear of exploitation of their knowledge by others. This situation also prevails for the indigenous peoples of Northeast India.

This article has a dual focus. It seeks to revisit the epistemology of the indigenous people in the Northeast but it also examines this issue in the context of Andreas Weber’s eclectic and profoundly insightful essay, which echoes the worldviews and cosmo-ecological thoughts of the various communities of the region. Like the indigenous people around the world, the storytelling tradition and ecologically sustainable practices have kept the people of the Northeast of India strongly connected to their land as also to their ontology and epistemology. The Northeast is a diverse mosaic of ethnicities and cultures and the various indigenous groups have preserved traditional knowledge through oral narratives, cosmological observations, and cultural and ritual practices. This knowledge has been passed on to generations through storytelling, both literal and metaphorical, song and dance as well as rituals. Weber describes animism as the “cosmology of the indigenous people”. While animism is widely prevalent in the North East, there are huge diversities in terms of the region’s deities, oral traditions, rituals and festivals, environmental ethics, sustainable agricultural practices and their taboos about certain plants and animals. Weber’s perspectives and insights about aliveness, ecopolitics and rules for behaving well in the society of being are very edifying but they also raise many questions. A whole new range of vocabularies and narratives for the Anthropocene epoch that Weber uses in his essay is still evolving. All the same, by not over-emphasising the solution, the essay doesn’t lose the sense of the narrative, even the reflexivity of the narrative.

The Power of Many Stories is a conceptual reflection reciprocating to Andreas Weber’s invitation to think, explore and imagine together in a dialogical discourse that questions the Western Cognitive Empire and its impact on humanity. While upholding Weber’s openness to embrace inclusion and to put into praxis indigenous worldviews and values, this reflection is mindful of how colonial and neo-colonial forces have hijacked, subjugated and diverted indigenous thought processes and worldviews from their natural path. Despite the existing dichotomy of humanity, this reflection elicits the idea that Western Cognitive Empire and Indigenous Worldview need to engage and eventually partner in a mutual process of self-decolonisation. By harnessing critical solidarity, the relationship between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples can make a paradigm shift to one that is reciprocal, shared, sincere, dignified and respectful. The Power of Many Stories is an ongoing dynamic that brings to public expression notions of ‘shared language’, ‘self-decolonisation’, and a ‘shared ecology’ where these multiple stories will be interwoven into a vibrant web that reflects the deeply interdependent, interconnected and interrelated nature of humanity.