 So welcome everybody to a deep adaptation Q&A today with Satish Kumar. My name is Jim Bendell and I'll be chatting with Satish for about half an hour before then inviting your questions to him. I'm honored to be joined by Satish whose book Radical Love came out yesterday and he's probably well known to many of you as an elder in environmental activism. And I only actually recently learned that Satish first came to fame for his walk for world peace back in the 60s all the way from India to the capitals of Moscow, Paris, London and Washington DC. Those were the capitals of the nuclear powers at the time and so it was a walk for world peace with a concern about nuclear proliferation and nuclear war. And obviously after traversing all those landscapes Satish realized there's no better place to settle in the world than North Devon, not far from my mum in fact. And that's where, near where he founded the important Schumacher College, which is his world famous in environmental studies. And he also founded Resurgence magazine. And certainly now that Satish is in his 80s, it's a relief that he doesn't have to do that walk again because all the world leaders, leaders of the nuclear powers have become wise and peace loving, and there's no threat whatsoever about nuclear holocaust anymore. But I'm digressing. I know a radical love is just now I haven't read it but I love to the description that it's an exploration of the transformative power of love in all its forms ranging from romantic love to love a family community, love of the planet and all beings so I'm going to really go into hearing about Satish's philosophy and how in the face of so much that we love being lost. And obviously fearing the future loss as well. How one remains open hearted and retains that loving consciousness and applies it in daily life so Satish Kumar welcome. Thank you for joining us. It's my pleasure, Jim, to be in conversation with you. And I have always admired the work of deep adaptation, and therefore having conversation with you is a great pleasure and honor. Thank you. Thank you Satish. Yes. It's super to conclude this series of deep adaptation Q&A with you, because I think for me. Back in 2018, when I shared the deep adaptation paper and there was this unexpected response, which was very emotionally charged people are very affected by it. I don't know what to suggest people do. But I thought, well, we, whatever it is, let's try and meet in a spirit of compassion, kindness, forgiveness. And I talked about it the love and deep adaptation being where we should start from as we try and work out what to do in the difficult years ahead. So yeah, I was very attracted by the fact that that's the topic of your book. So to get it started, obviously there's so much we could talk about. But as it's hot off the press, what is it what do you mean by love and what do you mean by radical love. Yes, I mean there are two kinds of love you can say, what is moderate love, which is you love somebody who is dear and dear to you. And there's some conditions you have to be nice you have to be friendly you have to be good. So there are some conditions, but you love your husband wife children, parents, maybe friends. But that's a moderate love. And, and we have that. It's not always enough. Not even moderate love is not much in practice, but still there is. But then radical love is love without any expectations. You drop all expectations in return you don't expect anything. And so it's unconditional and radical love is even loving person who you may not like. So for example, people like Mahatma Gandhi, or Martin Luther King, or people who are fighting against imperialism colonialism racism, sexism, all these other things. And yet they were embodiment of love. I had a great honor and a privilege of meeting Martin Luther King in his 10 years of activism. He was arrested for 29 times. And yet, when I met him, he was loosing with love kind of embodiment of love. So that's like I would call radical love that you can stand for your values for ideals. And you can challenge racism, sexism, imperialism, colonialism, industrialism, modernity, all these things you can challenge. And yet you have no hatred in your heart. That I call that total acceptance of reality as it is, and then participating in the process of transformation with bigger picture with magnanimous magnanimous mind, a big kind mind, and you act. So that's I call radical love. That's great to hear the love without expectation. And of course that could apply at the interpersonal level, but also in terms of how we relate to society or how we relate to the natural world. I'm just thinking a love without expectation in, in terms of the natural world that means that you, you love all beings, and you're not expecting that to mean that Mother Earth is stays friendly to homo sapiens. You're not, you're not, you're not thinking I'm doing this because then we fix things. The thing is about Mother Earth and nature and environment is that love is a kind of based on the principle of reciprocity. Now, if you give Mother Earth your love, you get love back. If you harm, hurt, damage injure your Mother Earth, then Mother Earth comes back with climate change or pollution or waste, or, or that, and that will harm you so without reciprocity. So love is without expectations, but at the same time is as a reciprocal. So if you have a love for Mother Earth, you don't damage the earth, you don't pollute the earth, you don't waste anything, you don't create global warming, carbon emission, etc. Then it's a love, but if you are. Yes. So I'm just thinking then so is the ecological crisis a crisis of a lack of love. Exactly. Crisis of ecological crisis environmental crisis climate change global warming. These are because we have looked at nature as if it is a kind of inanimate object. Nature is a kind of resource for our use and our economy and our production, our consumption and our materialism. All those things are we are using nature without loving, just exploiting radical love will be that nature is not inanimate object, but it is a living organism. And you treat nature as you treat your mother your father your brother your sister your wife your husband your children your neighbors and so on. So please our neighbors and animals our neighbors, and we have to love them as we love our neighbors. So the reason we have climate change and global warming is because of lack of love. So why do you think that lack of love has become so widespread systematic intense, because we all have the ability to love nature, love all beings, but the systems we live in the way we live doesn't seem to look like we're loving planet Earth. Why is that happened. Yeah, it's a good question. And that can be many opinions and many views about why that happened how that happened when that happened. All these are very big questions and there can be different opinions. In my view, people who preached love, religion, religions, Catholic, Protestant, Hindus, Muslims, whatever the religions are who preached love, they did not practice love, they just talked about it but they became very dogmatic and very ritualistic. And, and, and a kind of you can say dominating without reason without understanding. And so there was a great reaction against religious dogmas, and therefore people like René Descartes and so on, they became very rationalist. And from that pure reason and pure rationalism and the mind and matter separate and nature and human separate. And so how we can be away from this idea of love, which is more religious idea, and, and, and the dualistic Cartesian sort of philosophy became very popular. And, and people felt that they are going to be liberated and free from this dogma of religion. And therefore, all our universities and schools and educational system, they have been pushing this pure intellectual and academic and the reason rationality is the, the controlling factor and heart and consciousness and the soul and the spirit and love, they became kind of sideshow or not at all important. So education and all over the world now the education is conditioning people's mind that only thing what matters a rational intellectual academic and a reason science and modernity and then industrialism and then kind of all these things followed. So that's how it happened. And why we took it over because we thought was a comfortable we can use nature for our comfort this economic growth and living standards and, and more material possessions. So that's a kind of looks very kind of comfortable. And so greed was promoted instead of love. And it's interesting how you describe the, the, yeah, the way that people rebelled against religions because they became so ritualistic and lost the heart the spirituality the love, but then created these, what seemed to be empowering alternatives with rationality the love, but then they became so heartless. So yeah, we can read papers on climate science, which clearly if, if the people who've done the work and written the papers are like you and me then it hurts to be studying what they're studying and exasperating painful grief involved a lot of fear. But we're not allowed to communicate that that's not seen as scientific or scholarly. And I know quite a few climatologists now that's why they've started to communicate in new ways and become activists as well. Yeah, yeah. Another thing is that the people like Joanna Macy, who you interviewed, and, and the people like her, and, and also others. They have said that we must be allowed to feel our grief for planet Earth, and and feel our kind of sorrow and anxiety. But of course they also Joanna Macy in particular have said that we also need to empower ourselves with other emotions of compassion and love, so that we are not all the time stuck in our grief and our anxiety. So equal grief, equal anxiety are natural. And I'm very pained and my heart bleeds and my I sometimes I'm in tears to see what we are doing to our planet Earth, or what we are doing to our humanity, what we are doing to people in Ukraine, hundreds of thousands of people are becoming refugees for no reason for no purpose just a kind of ego, ego, a collective ego of one nation or the other nation and two egos are crashing against each other. There are so many examples of that kind where we are not able to to live in harmony with our friends and neighbors and nature. And so that anxiety and grief should lead to empowerment, and that empowerment should lead to action, and that action can transform our society. And I've, I've been on a bit of a journey because I growing up as a British guy, and then becoming an academic. I think I was had some of an awkward relationship with my emotions. And, and I thought that certain emotions, fear, anxiety, anger, sadness, all these, all these things were things that were not good to feel in various different ways like sadness will be debilitating or fear men you weren't tough enough or anger men that you weren't civilized enough or you might hurt someone and what I've come to now is, is to, it's okay those emotions when they're there to notice them to not feel bad about them not fear them. I also find it helpful to be able to express them privately sometimes with some people, but then to not decide from them and not to act from them and actually always trying to think well. Why am I hurting or why am I angry and then try and get that broader perspective and always also remind myself that something else is true something else that's good is also true to whatever it is I'm stressing over. And then that's then how I then think about what to do next. Yeah, yeah. I mean, we are humans. And so as humans, we have many, many different kinds of emotions and the fear and anxiety are there and and they are natural. But at the same time, we also have emotions of compassion or kindness of generosity of love of many other emotions we have. But those emotions are also suppressed in our modern world. And we are not expected to express our love and our, our compassion and kindness. We are supposed to be greedy and successful and want something more for ourselves and more name, fame, power prestige and position status money houses cars possessions. We are encouraged to do that, rather than celebrate our emotions of every kind and live in balance and live in harmony with nature that's not encouraged. So this human ego, we have to move from collective ego to ego, which is a more home more relationship. So we have lost the idea of relationship and we have got this idea of separation. I'm separate from nature humanity separate from nature and Europeans are separate from from Africans and Chinese are separate from Americans and Russians are separate from Ukrainians, the idea of separation rules the world. And out of that separation, we are creating trying to create a uniformity. So modernity, industrialism, market economy, all these ideas are to create a uniform world, a whole world should be like Europe and America. Everywhere McDonald everywhere Coca Cola everywhere high rise buildings, this kind of uniformity and a monoculture in position of that and if you don't follow like our way, you are not democratic you are not free if you don't follow our way, then you are not among with us or one of us. So that kind of separation is the dominant philosophy and love is a philosophy of relationship that we are all interconnected we are all interrelated we are one humanity we have one planet Earth we have whole cosmos is our country, whole planet is our home nature our nationality love is our religion that unity of life interconnectedness interdependent. Those are the values of love, whereas values of hatred and separation and division and conflict are becoming dominant. And this is why my book is challenging that separation. So, when I hear you I, I, I'm still scared of the idea that rather than publicly lamenting and worrying about the collapse of modern societies industrial consumer societies. Actually, it's about time like this this drive, what we call progress perhaps rather stupidly what we call modernity perhaps rather stupidly is a drive towards separation and and and and it's. Disconnection and disconnection and therefore there's the possibility of a breaking up of what we consider normal, particularly those of us who live sort of consumer lifestyles is also an invitation into a different way of thinking and being. You mentioned the word progress, you mentioned the word progress. Progress is a linear word. Development is a linear word. Growth is a linear word. Nature is not linear. Nature has no progress. Nature has no development. Nature has no growth. Nature is cyclical. What is born will live, thrive, blossom and then fruit and then die. So birth, death, coming, going is moves in a cyclical way. Systemic, systemic nature is this circular and a kind of kind of not linear, not progress, not development, not growth. Go, go, go. I mean, America is number one economy in the world. And yet they have not enough growth and progress and development. They want more economic growth. Britain is a fifth or sixth economy in the world. And yet they want more growth. There's no end to it's very linear. So nature is not linear. So what we have to do is to learn from nature. Nature is our teacher. Nature is our mentor. Nature, our spiritual guide. And we learn from nature to live more cyclical. Something is born, something will thrive, something will flourish and then we'll die and then born again. Start again, cyclical approach has to be part of radical love. So for you Satish, this, this is wisdom that you grew up in your, your, I believe, Jainism is, is your sort of cultural heritage and you grew up in India and this cyclical view of life, and what will the work you've been doing. You've been communicating this philosophy now for so long. And the news is so bad. Or what, what's the, what is it about you that there seems to be a sense of deep down. It's still all okay. No matter, no matter how much silliness and abuse through this linear, unloving, separative, disconnected hallucination that humanity stuck with, you still have this inner joy. Because at the same time, I have inner joy, but because at the same time as our planet is being kind of messed about and being polluted and almost sort of being destroyed. At the same time, nature is the reliance and it's still, we get rain and we get sunshine, and we get seeds put in the soil and the soil produces food, and the trees produce fruit. Birds are still singing to celebrate nature. And there are many, many humans also creating beauty, art, craft, poetry, music. So there are these positive aspects which gives me joy. So I just don't look only on the negative side. We also look on the positive side to balance the same. But what we need to do in order to to practice radical love, all of us, whether you are a politician, or a business leader, or an economist, or a factory worker or a farmer, all of us need to take the Hippocratic out. Like the doctors take Hippocratic out. We all need to take, and that is out of loyalty to nature, loyalty to environment, loyalty to our planet earth and loyalty to humans. So do no harm. That is the Hippocratic out. Do first do no harm. At the moment we are doing harm to nature, harm to many millions of people are suffering because of exploitation, social injustice. And we are doing harm to ourselves because there's so much ill health in the world, and you cannot have healthy people on a sick planet. This is the truth of it. And therefore, we take Hippocratic out and say we'll do no harm. That is the kind of Jane Indian tradition that I was brought up. The fundamental violence is the fundamental principle of nature, and we feed each other, we nourish each other, soil feeds, rain feeds, sun feeds, please feed. We all feed each other, life feeds life. That's a cyclical nature of nature. Unless we understand that and live in that reciprocal, systemic, cyclical way. I don't think this continuous linear economic growth is going to make us any happy. Yes, we've, we've, as you mentioned your book there have you have you shown us it yet to show that it's already out now it exists. Show it, show it here on my, my desk, and it's out. And, and you can order it through. I mean, I edit or I'm a little emeritus now of resurgence magazine, and you can order that book through resurgence.org. We sell directly, but also I mean I don't like Amazon, so I don't encourage people to order on Amazon. But if you have a local bookshop, then you can order through your bookshop have a patience to wait for few days is better than supporting Amazon, Amazon is dreadful. And so, so I would encourage you to either order through researchers or through your local bookshop. And if you do it now it might arrive by Valentine's Day. Yes, yes, absolutely. So as we're talking books, I mean I was very happy you wrote an endorsement and also read the deep adaptation book that I co edited with with Rupert Reid so you're aware of the ethos the taking the anticipation of collapse of modern society seriously and still within that framework wanting to find ways of doing useful positive things in the world. Yes. And so, what, when you read that, and the, the, the framework of asking for questions to, you know, what, what, what do we want to keep what do we want to what should we give up, what can we bring back, what do we have to make peace with I think your deep adaptation is a kind of precautionary principle, even if you don't believe in what is happening in the world, and what you are analyzing and I'm analyzing even if some people don't believe it. So, the remedies you have suggested in your, in your article, which perhaps you can explain, better than I can do for resilience and kind of all those four principles that you have that they are good, whatever the situation. They are good principles. So I admire and support deep adaptation, because of those four principles which you have stated and perhaps you can explain those four principles are so good that if we live by them, that to me is a kind of foundation of radical love. Can you tell those four principles. Yeah, sure. So the, well, really it was a, I, I offered a framework for conversation because I thought the, the, the breaking of societies as we experienced in today is going to be affecting everyone in a different way. So rather than me saying what you should do it was, how do we start to talk about this. And I imagined it as a framework which was post progress was beyond that so none of the questions were about what do we need to invent in order to fix going forward they were deliberately conversations about well, what do we have now that we believe in and value that we wish to keep what's most important. What is it that we should relinquish relinquish more to let go otherwise if we try and hold on to that aspect of our standard the living or identity or worldview will actually make matters worse. The third one was, well, we didn't used to live like this. What is what are the ways of living and producing and consuming of the past that actually we need to bring back to help us through this rather disruptive future where we're facing. Restoration restoration yeah and then reconciliation was to retain the idea that things don't look very good at all going forward in terms of food energy climate biosphere. And so there may be increasing real difficult situations for people and so that is a reminder of our mortality. And therefore so as we recognize our mortality, what do we what or who do we want to make peace with. And then that was, that was because I think, yeah, a lot of people wanted to get busy on deep adaptation in a way where we could somehow park our fears about death. And I wanted to say well no like this is if you're going to work on this then then then loss and death and grief is going to be a companion for the rest of your life more explicitly. So what can that invite us to do will make peace in many different ways with many different people and with those four hours. Yes, those four hours that you have presented. I think are kind of based in wisdom. Those I think they are very important whether climate change or no climate change or whatever those perennial wisdom is the kind of relevant and useful and helpful to everybody, any situation at the moment. Our society is living on kind of principles of waste and pollution and greed, and all those things and then causing climate change and the climate catastrophe, and then resulting in floods and forest fires and all that. So we are living in very difficult circumstances. So those four hours should be made popular and available to everybody so we can practice them. Okay, thank you for saying that that's very, very, very positive feedback and I'm sure also all the people on this call who are part of the deep adaptation forum or the deep adaptation movement more generally can relate to what you're saying because I think what people get from being in these in this network is is a framework for having conversations which help them think what's doing their own lives and also professionally and in their community. We're going to questions now. So, so hello. Hi there. Yes. Yeah, I don't think I've actually spoken to you in the flesh for about 4050 years but my, my, my main question is radical love sounds wonderfully aspirational. And I'm asking how can we make acknowledge the meaningfulness of the current crisis in the bigger picture. So many extinction events have happened before, and life has always come back more diverse afterwards. The cyclical nature of what you talk about includes the acceptance that we may be dying not as a planet, but as a species. And that if that is so and we don't manage to stop it. Life, the planet will be all right, the life will come back as that bush so often reminds us more diverse. Yes, we don't want that time. No, I, I, you are you have a good point I think it's a very good point that the cycle of extinction continues is a kind of part of birth and death. So my personal feeling is that what we are going to see will be the end of this industrial model, mechanistic civilization. But soil and land is not going to stop producing food. Yeah, and the, and the rain is not going to stop bringing water, and the sun is not going to stop creating photosynthesis synthesis and trees are not going to stop producing food and taking our carbon and giving us oxygen. So nature and humans still will live in my view. What will come to an end, which cannot be sustained anyway, is this very kind of mechanistic and heavily dependent on energy. How kind of energy you even renewable energy if you are too much dependent on endless growth and endless energy, how much energy can you get from some and the wind, and if our greed does not stop. And we don't stop our cyclical nature and don't stop our linear progress. My view is that if the industrial system materialistic mechanistic system come to an end, we will celebrate that we will celebrate that, and we will say a humanity will adapt and adopt a new way of life, life is more simple more elegant, more caring, and more sharing. And of course, there is no utopia, we are not going to be utopia we will always have fear, anger, anxiety, some conflicts, some, some problems in our, our lives and on our planet. Never, I don't believe in kind of that we can have everything perfect. So, but in that situation, nature will still give life, and humanity can learn to live in harmony with nature, that's my hope. And I'm working in that sort of way that let us, let's reexamine our relationship with nature, and live better. And I want to teach within the recent in my perception of modern environmentalism is that that is not such a welcome view anymore. There's an emphasis on technology and entrepreneurship and strong leadership somehow fixing the problems. And there's some dismissal of the kind of views you've expressed as naive. And when you hear those criticisms, or even some people would say those views are privileged, such as, like, it's nice to have those ideas, but in the real world, we need all kinds of technological ideas to keep people fed and watered. We just need to keep people away from nature, which we will rewild and in that sort of again that sense of separation, how do you respond to those criticisms. Yes, yes, I mean, I, those who talk about the real world and realism and call me utopian or idealistic. I asked them, you have been creating the real world for centuries, or hundreds of years. You've been realist and people like me are idealistic and utopian. But look what you have achieved. What have you there to show us for your realism is Ukraine war as a result of realism is climate change. The result of realism is, is the poverty and exploitation of humanity going on in Africa and many other countries, even in America, the homeless and poor and beggars is that the result, not the result of realism. So realism has failed, totally and utterly failed. So I would say, give idealism a chance, give this kind of utopian idea a chance and see if love can help hatred have been practiced by the realist and realist have failed the humanity. I challenge the real, the so-called real world and realism. And I say, people who have made better impression on the world, Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King and and and Simone de Beauvoir, and many other people who have been a bit more idealistic and ecological and so on. They are, they have something, they are two realists. So I wouldn't, I wouldn't want to be an eco modernist arguing with, with you there. But I wouldn't, wouldn't mind seeing some, some, some, some discuss with you on that. So Susan, if you have anything to add, otherwise we'll move to Kristina. Thank you. Yeah, I just satish have you changed your thinking and your philosophy one eye out since we were building huts with and digging wells with the tribal people in the International School of Nonviolence and they stole from us. Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, the thing is, they think it's Susan that one is always evolving. And, and I was not thinking in terms of radical love at that time, but still, the influences of those cultural values, and particularly indigenous wisdom, which is a kind of perennial wisdom is still with me. Although I am changing, I'm evolving. I'm not just stuck with any, any particular situation. So it's a both, I still carry some continuation of cultural values, but I'm also evolving and learning new ideas. Thank you. And thank you. So, now we're going to go to Katarina with your question for satish. Hi everyone. Thank you Jim. Thank you satish. Hello from Portugal today. I try to keep it brief satish. Would you say that the crushing the deliberate crushing of the feminine values from from society but also from religion has maybe contributed seriously to loss of love and compassion and connection to nature. And if so, would you agree that by elevating feminine values that that elevating feminine values should be a priority in everyone so that we can be more connected to each other and to nature. Yes, yes, you're absolutely right that we need to embrace feminine values. And in our in India we say that in our men and women in our body, we are embodiment of both receiving and giving and receiving is feminine and and article giving is is supposed to be masculine. For example, I'm speaking to you now. And listening. Now listening, we have two years. So, really, and the ears are feminine and mouth is masculine. I kind of metaphorically speaking. So, we need to listen twice, meaning feminine two part and masculine one part like water is made of H2O human should be F2, F2M two part feminine one part masculine F2M so here more listen more. And that's a two part. So feminine principles of caring sharing loving radical love. Looking after each other. That's a very important two part. And then of course, we do sort of things which are a bit more masculine much kind of sort of outgoing and so on. So it's a balance of the two dance between the masculine feminine is needed. What has happened in our culture in industrial culture is very mechanistic and also very masculine. We have valued masculine principles of controlling organizing etc, much more administration and so on. And we have lost the feminine principles in our culture. And so the balance has been lost. So if you take Chinese principle of Yin Yang, Yin Yang are in balance with each other, and then the black had a white dot in it and white has a black dot in it. And that dance between masculine feminine and a balance together. That is a kind of traditional Chinese idea, same with Indian idea. And but we have lost in this modern industrial mechanistic worldview, we have lost that balance and we have promoted more masculine controlling going out exploring exploiting nature that's all very masculine that has gone too far. So I need, we need to retreat a little bit in our masculine adventures and more caring and more taking relationship and all that needs to be promoted for two parts feminine one part masculine F2M. Thank you. Yeah, thank you Katarina. Yeah, I realized that that although patriarchal monotheisms don't seem to have a place for the divine feminine. As much as say for example Hinduism, obviously, patriarchal culture also exists in within Hindu cultures and so it does seem to be something which is a is a widespread problem. But if you take Hindu culture, all the names of gods and gods and goddesses we have thousands of goddesses. Yes, and all the names of God start with goddess first. So Citaram, Radhakrishnan, they are feminine first. And so the goddess and the kind of Gaia, the earth of Gaia also Sanskrit word Gaia three mantra is a mantra of the goddess Gaia three, three is the goddess and Gaia. So Gaia in Greek Gaia in Sanskrit. So that's a very strong culture in India, but also like in the West everywhere in India too. We have been influenced by this mechanistic and masculine kind of adventure, and we have lost our own culture and and now India is going kind of in a berserk way to industrialization and mechanization and the kind of exploitation of nature in and no less than Europe and America. So I'm not admiring what is happening in India now, but I'm saying that you're going to roots of Indian philosophy, in which I was brought up in Jane and Hindu and Mahatma Gandhi. And so the way the land gift movement, all those things had a very important and a strong place for the feminine. Yeah, thank you. I'm because of where I live I know quite a lot of people who are locally Hindu here in Bali but also a lot of foreign people who've chosen Hinduism, and also some people who've chosen shamanism. And there is a much, so a reverence for the natural world is, is, it's pretty obvious and straightforward for them. And yeah, absolutely. So, thank you. We're going to go to now. A question please from Sukema. I'm sorry if I pronounced your name wrong. Through all this talk I'm trying to remember but my question is, is to do with suicide. To what extent are we human beings on a path towards collective suicide. Perhaps unconsciously we realize that us homo sapiens are really had enough. And, you know, you know, maybe maybe it's time for us to go and allow the rest of all other sentient beings to recover and flourish again. I know that seems like a little bit pessimistic view but it's certainly a view that is around for me, being a sense of the lemming nature of us. As we keep on pushing there won't be much air to breathe soon. There won't be much water to drink. Yeah, it's absolutely it's a it's a point I often hear which is that maybe the time of homo sapiens is up. And then that often leads to a very interesting conversation I'd love to hear your response Satish. Yes, now I'm, I respect your view. And, and there's no one view which is one truth that prevails everywhere. But my personal view is I'm more an optimist. So I'm an activist. And I want to, and I have an active hope. So Joanna Macy has a book called active hope, and Jane Goodall and two great feminine kind of heroes of mine. And, and the genre and Jane Goodall has a book called book of hope. So I am an optimist and I have an active hope, because I say that never too late. When you are at the brink of disaster, when you are at the kind of cliff, cliff edge, still you can return take a step back. So I'm an activist. And if you are a pessimist you cannot be an activist. And I've been an activist since I was 18 years old, and I'm 85 now, and I want to remain an activist until the last breath of my life. So I don't want to give up. I say yes, we humanity is not bad. There are many, many small fathers who produce good food that many, many craftsmen and women who produce artisan materials. There are many, many indigenous people who live in harmony with nature. It's not just America and Europe and so on, that they are the only world that is another world, which gives me hope. There are indigenous people in Brazil and in, in, in, in our original people in Australia, and we have to honor them. So I am an optimist. If you are pessimist, you might become a journalist, but not an activist to be an activist you have to be an optimist. Read Johanna Macy's Active Hope, read Jane Goodall's Book of Hope and be an active to the last breath of my life. I will try to do my best. And then what happens is not in my control. It's not in my hand. I'm not predicting that humanity is doomed. I'm not predicting the earth is doomed. I'm not in control of the world, but I'm in control of my action and my thinking, and I want to remain active to do whatever I can do in the service of our precious planet earth and the service of humanity. I'm an activist. I'm an optimist. But I honor as a fact your view. I'm not saying that you are wrong. I'm not saying that. But this is my view. Matish, what you're saying reminds me of how we started when you talk about love, a radical love that doesn't have expectations. So you don't need to know that homo sapiens will live for millions of years in order for you to passionately do your best to help all flourishing, that flourishing of all life on earth, including homo sapiens. So there's that. And that relates to your philosophy. I don't know how to pronounce it is apigraha, the non grasping you don't you don't need because you're just living from love so you're not, you're not, you're not needing to know that it will all This is a very beautiful word apigraha, which I think you have pronounced correctly apigraha. I mean snow. Parigraha. Graha means grasping. Parigraha, they strongly grasping very kind of tightly grasping. So a parigraha, the three words made into one word. And this is one of the five cardinal principles of Jane tradition, non violence, truth, non stealing, and a kind of right relationship and not grasping or not being grasped by your material possessions, and your greed, and your ego and desires to have more and more and more. So elegant simple. The other one, another my book is called elegant simplicity. So a parigraha is the principle that have enough, but not more than enough, have what is beautiful, not ugly at the moment our civilization creating a lot of ugliness. So a parigraha promotes beauty, and a parigraha promotes restraint, because if you have a flowing river, river can flow freely only within the two banks. So those two banks are a parigraha, they hold the water together, without limit without restraint without constraint, if you're total freedom, like this material economic growth and modern society the total freedom, no restraint, that disaster, that's a flood. A river without banks becomes a flood and creates problems. So a parigraha is that principle beauty, elegance, simplicity, living within your means and celebrating what you have rather than greedy for what you do not have. And then going for something non-material things such as poetry, music, art, culture, dancing, walking, family, friendship, there are lots of good things which you can have in a parigraha. But what you've described there is a beautiful right way of being and living, which would not have led us to this catastrophic situation, but it's also important to do, no matter what it adds up to in the end, it's just a good in of itself. I just want to come to this issue of, so quite a lot of people in the so-called doomsphere talk about human extinction or even inevitable and near-term human extinction. And for me, that can be said in a way which is inviting open-heartedness and staying loving or it can be said in a way which is about becoming numb and turning our back on suffering and possibility. So some people who think, wow, it looks like humanity might be going extinct, that inspires them to be more loving, more truth-seeking and live in their power. Other people say it as a way of, why should I even bother showing up at a meeting like this? Who cares? We're all going to die anyway. I'm just going to go and have fun in some other more superficial way than this conversation. So in a way, what you are saying is a crisis is also an opportunity. And if there's a possible extinction looming out there, then we take that opportunity to love more, to care for more, those four hours that you presented, those four hours are a kind of positive action. So you can build those four hours and be more loving, more caring. And as I said, have no expectation. We don't know. We are not the prophets of the world. We don't know for sure. But precaution principle that if we go on this way as we are, it's bound to bring extinction, bound to bring an end to everything that we have. And therefore, let us change our way. And even if we are going to extinct, love each other and have celebration and joy at the same time. So I think that crisis and opportunity is a good thing. I think I can't remember now it keeps going up, but there are at least 14 homonyms or homonyms that didn't evolve into us. So I guess if we, if we value big brain bipedal apes like ourselves, then in a few million years, there'll be those things again, even if we disappear. So it seems to be a tendency, the world people's people doesn't it over millennia. So we're going to have our last question from Mary. Again, I hope I pronounced your name right, please unmute and ask your question to Satish. Thanks, Jim. It's Mary. Hi Satish. Yeah, I'm interested in very similar ideas. I'm, I talk about radical self care. And I'm wondering, and when I'm thinking about learning to really take care of ourself in the context of the larger self, because the two are the same thing. And so my question is about the need for us to learn to love ourselves first, because this industrialized system that we live inside is creates and contributes to our mental and physical ill health. And understanding how to recover. You know, we begin with ourself, and that also then teaches us about living in a different way. So that's a very good last question. That is a very good last question. And I think loving yourself is the first step to love the world, because we are the world. Everybody is in us. We are made of each other. And so I see the whole universe in me and myself in the whole universe like William Blake said that you see the universe in a grain of sand. And so William Blake had a kind of same idea that we need to see our, that we are a microcosm of macrocosm. If we love the world, we have to love ourselves. If you don't feed yourself, if you don't take care of yourself, how are you going to love somebody else? So, and if you don't love yourself, who is going to love you? So being a lover is to love yourself and being a lover is to love others. So, so being a lover, rather than having a lover, that's another Eric Fromm has talked about it differently in being and having. So rather than having a lover, radical love is to being a lover. And being a lover starts with yourself. Love yourself as you love your neighbor. Love yourself as you love anyone. And there's no enemy. There are no enemies. There are no, we have just created this in our mind that Putin is my enemy or black people are my enemy or white people are my enemy or somebody else is my enemy. Which are causing many, many problems of industrialism, materialism, statism, all these isms. So let all isms become wasms. And love is not ism. Love is a freedom and liberating force. So starting to love yourself is the first step. And you are microcosm of macrocosm. Love yourself. That's absolutely good way to end this session. Yeah, thank you. Thank you very much, Satish. I'm just thinking also that, Mara, you work on this. So if we only have a minute, but if you wanted to add any reflections, I'd like to keep this slide, you know, get some reflections back if you have anything to share. Yeah, it's just an area that I've been thinking about and exploring for a few years and try to write about and that exactly what Satish is saying that we are the microcosm of the macro. And, you know, really a totally physical level, you know, we are full of bacteria and fungi as the world is. So I think about us as being just as each of those things and the human cells are all, they're all these individual cells make up the whole of a human body. And mind and spirit. So too, we are a cell in the body of the earth. And so we have something to contribute something to offer. And but we have to be well, you know, and the more well we are happier and healthier, then we can do that because we naturally want to. Thank you. Yes, thank you for that. Thank you. And thank you very much, Satish. And Duke. Yeah, I hope I hope this has been great. A great warm up for you and Russell later today. If anyone wants to order your book it's resurgence.org I think it's the best link. Also, if anyone wants to share a video recording of this conversation then I'll put it tomorrow on jen bandel.com. And if you want to continue to have these kinds of conversations and don't already connect with people who want to approach the difficult predicament we're in in this kind of way. I recommend the deep adaptation forum. You can discover more about that through deep adaptation dot info. And if you just want to dip your toe in then you can just go and check out the deep adaptation Facebook group and see the kind of things that people talk about. So, Satish, and everyone, and thank you very much for joining us today. And thank you, Jim and Stuart for organizing and coordinating this wonderful conversation. Thank you. Thank you.