Tree cover vs Tree as a cover

In the midst of recent cries to save trees in Auroville, a deeper examination reveals that the issue isn’t about the removal of the tree cover per se; instead, it’s a dismantling of the symbolic role trees played as mere placeholders in the city’s development. The initial understanding, widely known among residents, was that once the City was ready, these trees would be cut down.

The current uproar for tree conservation appears to be a smokescreen, concealing the true motives of those resisting the positive changes underway. Behind the veil of environmental concern lies a struggle to maintain the status quo—retaining control over encroached lands, power structures, positions, and carefully guarded possessions that were acquired at the expense of the Founders’ vision, the efforts of newcomers, the labors of volunteers, the goodwill of locals, and the contributions of donors.

The affected parties, unwilling to admit the loss of their grip on encroached lands and privileges, have resorted to desperate measures. Exploiting ecological concerns and manipulating local sentiments, they have stooped to name-calling officials, planting rumors and misinformation in the media, and even blacklisting fellow residents. All these tactics are employed not to safeguard the trees but to protect their own vested interests.

The truth lies in the larger picture—the untouched and thriving green belt that still surrounds Auroville. The real challenge is not the removal of trees but the strategic use of the tree cover as a guise to obstruct the planned development of the city. The authentic tree cover, representing the spirit of Auroville’s environmental harmony, remains intact and flourishing beyond the deceptive smokescreen erected by those resistant to positive transformation.

Recommended Posts