主题：【原创】印度崛起：神话与现实 -- 晨枫

In western and middle-eastern cultures, usually the first desire plays a more significant role then the second and there is a historical basis for this. Most western countries are extremely cold and historically it has been difficult to grow food or gather plant food there (same with middle-eastern countries). So survival ensured, that one had to kill other animals and eat their flesh and also use their hide as clothing. One could not survive without doing so. Survival also ensured that one had to find a suitable shelter against cold and be able to protect it against other humans and animals.

In India, we have historically been blessed with an extremely conductive environment for human living. Rivers in India don't freeze up, plants don't necessary die over the winter, forests don't necessarily shed all their leaves and go into hibernation, historically one can easily live of plant food all year round, the function of clothing is generally to cover yourself rather than to protect yourself against elements of nature, and if you don't find shelter you can just sleep outside for most of the year.

I guess what I am saying is that historical and evolutionary factors have ensured that western and middle-eastern cultures are conditioned towards exploiting nature around them for their survival and growth. Those same evolutionary factors have been absent in much of Indian subcontinent and upto the extent that historically one has been survive and grow without the need for exploiting nature and hence Hindus in general have this whole philosophy and lifestyle live in sync with nature.

So, now that we live in modern times, somebody basically needs to teach these people (middle-east / western cultures) to toss aside their mindless evolutionary reaction to conquer and dominate around them.

At the same time, we ourselves need to get more proactive in defending our turf against our evolutionary reaction which basically tells us that there is really no need to do so to guard against cultures whose survival has depended upon exploiting nature around them. Usually in modern times there is a balance between human impulse to "dominate, exploit, and be greedy" vs. "live in sync with nature". Its just a matter of which side India will put more weight on as it develops.

So where does this leave China? Not sure, but I can tell you for sure that some of the oldest philosophy on "authoritarianism" originated in China. Like we have multiple works focusing on Dharma, the Chinese have multiple works focusing on authoritarianism. Authoritarianism is not just a CCP trait, its a Chinese trait. I am sure their must be evolutionary reasons for this, but again, we need to be more proactive in guarding against this Chinese inclination towards authoritarianism.

So if someone tells me that one needs to be greedy and exploitative to survive and grow, I would tell them this is a western/middle-eastern trait. If someone tells me that one needs a strong central authority in to survive and grow, I would tell them that is a Chinese trait. If someone tells me one needs to live in sync with nature without exploiting nature, I would tell them that's an Indian trait.

I don't necessarily claim this to be "absolute truth" or the "entire complete truth", but I hope I am making sense