Is this heat still “summer” or are we normalising collapse?
I got sick recently in this peak Indian summer.
I was not running. I was not working at a construction site. I was not climbing a mountain or doing anything extreme. I just went outside and existed in the heat for some time, and my body started asking for water again and again and again, as if some internal alarm had gone off.
And I genuinely want to ask is this still normal summer or are we slowly being trained to accept an unlivable condition as “weather”?
Because this is not just about one person feeling dehydrated. Everywhere you look, people are tired, irritated and drained.
In Mumbai, even when the temperature number does not look as terrifying as North India, the humidity and trapped heat make the body feel punished. You step out, travel, come back, and somehow even ordinary movement feels like a negotiation with your own biology.
Mumbai used to be livable in a very different way. Juhu and Bandra were once outskirts. When Amitabh Bachchan built his bungalow in Juhu, that area still had some sense of distance from the crushing centre of the city. Now the city has stretched and swallowed everything till Mira Road and beyond, and we call it growth, development, opportunity, progress.
And this is not just Mumbai.
Across India, people are talking about heat like it is some unavoidable cultural inheritance. “India hai, garmi toh hogi.” But was it always like this? Were cities always this airless? Did stepping outside always feel like your skin and lungs were being punished?
At what point does a city stop being a place to live and become a machine that processes human beings?
We keep talking about development as if taller buildings, longer roads, bigger markets, more towers, more malls, more concrete automatically mean a better life. But if people are getting sick just from just stepping outside, if children cannot play comfortably, elderly people are trapped in rooms that don’t cool down, workers are expected to stand in heat that should honestly be illegal, then what exactly are we developing?
A country is not developed just because its skylines are changing. A country is developed when the body can live there without constantly fighting the environment.
This is where I think we have made a huge mistake. We treat nature like scenery. Trees are scenery. Soil is scenery. Rivers are scenery. Open land is scenery. Breeze is scenery. Shade is scenery. These are not decorative things.
They are infrastructure.
Soil is infrastructure. Water is infrastructure. Trees are infrastructure. Shade is infrastructure. Breeze is infrastructure. A body that can step outside without being punished by the air is also a piece of infrastructure.
This is why I think Sadhguru’s Save Soil movement deserves more attention than it gets. He brought attention to something brutally basic - Soil. The living foundation of food, agriculture, water retention, temperature balance and human nourishment.
Because if soil dies, heat rises. If trees disappear, cities cook. If water disappears, the body panics. If food comes from depleted soil, health suffers immensely!
If everything natural becomes weak, then human life becomes more artificial, more expensive, more dependent, more fragile.
And then we will still call it development because the buildings are taller and the roads are wider.
But is a city really developed if people cannot walk outside without getting sick?
True progress is not stopping development, but learning how to develop without exhausting the land, the city, and the human body. So the question is not whether India should develop, but can we develop in a way that keeps our cities livable, our soil alive, our water secure, and our bodies capable of simply existing outside?