By Chris Lang
In March 2022, an Indian mystic called Sadhguru set off from London on a 30,000 kilometre motorbike journey to Coimbatore, India. He is travelling through 24 countries in 100 days and is doing the trip as part of a campaign to Save Soil.
He received lots of media coverage. He went on The Daily Show with Trevor Noah, and had a nearly three-hour-long conversation on Joe Rogan’s podcast. Sadhguru’s Save Soil video has been viewed more than 5.5 million times on YouTube.
Sadhguru is correct that the threats to agricultural soils around the world are real. Healthy soil is absolutely crucial to life on earth. Soil erosion is a serious problem. A 2015 paper estimates that 12 million hectares of agricultural land are lost every year to soil degradation.
The solutions could include agricultural practices, such as cover cropping, limiting the damage from ploughing, agro-forestry, contour cropping, and increasing the amount of organic matter in the soil. But solutions to soil erosion cannot just be tacked on to existing destructive agricultural systems – and that is precisely what Sadhguru is proposing.
As a recent article on the website “A Growing Culture” which aims to confront unjust power in the food system, notes:
Most popular environmental movements today possess certain underlying characteristics of what we like to refer to as shallow regeneration. Although these can appear as genuine attempts at regeneration, they are in fact designed and co-opted by capitalism to greenwash existing exploitative systems. At their core, these movements are all overwhelmingly apolitical and do not address the legacies of exploitation and colonisation that have deteriorated the environment. Moreover, they are centred around the participation of elite groups, unconcerned with the transfer of resources back to the communities who have dedicated lifetimes to protecting the environment and developing regenerative practices. . . .
The Save Soil movement is a classic case of shallow regeneration; championed by an oppressor-caste Indian “godman” who has built his entire empire on the economic and social profits from fraudulent campaigns that have profoundly harmed the environment and Indigenous communities.
Sadhguru’s motorbike trip from London to Coimbatore is little more than a publicity stunt aimed at promoting a top-down, elitist campaign.
Who is Sadhguru?
Sadhguru, or Jaggi Vasudev to give him his real name, is a “Motorbike riding, golf playing, English speaking, cryptic-advise giving, dimension expanding, self styled godman,” as the Indian watchdog news website Newslaundry puts it.
Writing in The Wire Angshuman Choudhury, a researcher at the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, describes Sadhguru as “a blessing for India’s hypernationalist, pro-BJP cabal”. Similarly, Girish Shahane, in a 2019 article for Scroll.in says he expected Sadhguru’s talks on YouTube to contain “a few green shoots of insight amidst a desert of tiresome platitudes.” Shahane adds that, “I got those, but also irrationalism, superstition, and Hindutva philosophy hiding under a cloak of reasonableness.”
Hindutva is that ideology of the Hindu right in India, represented by the political party Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Narendra Modi, India’s prime minister and leader of the BJP, was chief guest at the unveiling of the giant Adiyoga statue on the Isha Foundation’s campus.
In 2021, Newslaundry wrote a three–part series of investigative articles about Sadhguru. Among other things, the articles explore how Sadhguru’s Isha Foundation built a 60 hectare campus in an ecologically sensitive area, without obtaining Environmental Clearance, as required under Indian law.
The Isha Foundation campus is next to the Bolampatty Reserve Forest, an elephant habitat. The campus is built along an elephant corridor. As a result of Isha’s illegal constructions, including electric fencing to keep the elephants out, human-wildlife conflict in the area has increased, affecting the livelihoods of the Adivasi (Indigenous People) living near to the campus.
In 2018, at one of Sadhguru’s events called Youth and Truth, at Nalsar University, Sadhguru was asked about the Isha Foundation’s illegal constructions. Some of the audience cheered and clapped after the question. “OK,” Sadhguru said, laughing. “There is a fan following for that also.”
Sadhguru denied that the Isha Foundation campus is built anywhere near an elephant corridor, claiming that the closest elephant corridor is 100 kilometres away.
And then he threatened the student who asked the question:
I know where this is coming from. There are some activists who are going on publishing this endlessly, you’re reading the social media trash, and you’re coming to conclusions. Anyway, I want you to know, today, if I want, by tomorrow evening, I can file 100 cases against you. All kinds of things. It’s for you to come out of it in the next 20 years. This is the country you’re living in. I want you to know.
After Newslaundry published its articles about Sadhguru, the Isha Foundation responded with the claim that, “all the buildings in the Yoga Center are legal and are not in violation of any laws.” In a response, Newslaundry wrote that this is “Not true”, and provided the documentary proof in the form of a 2018 letter from the Isha Foundation to the State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority that states:
We wish to inform you that we have constructed our Yoga Center at the above mentioned Survey nos. We have constructed our development without obtaining prior Environmental Clearance, thereby violating the EIA notification 2006.
Trillion trees and Cauvery Calling
In a December 2021 video about the Save Soil campaign, Sadhguru tells us that, “It’s very, very important that soil becomes the focus. Because if you put one-third to forty percent of the land, especially in the tropical world, under tree shade your climate change could be easily reversed.”
The myth that planting trees will reverse the climate crisis is a dangerous distraction from the urgent need to leave fossil fuels in the ground. It is, of course, a myth that the global elites love, because it gives the impression of excusing them from taking structural, systemic action to reduce emissions from burning fossil fuels.
In his Save Soil video, Sadhguru even says that “Land is getting hot, simply because it is ploughed or it is paved. Land has to go under vegetation, whatever kind, natural grasses, bushes, trees, whatever, because all these are serving the ecological activity. And we must also understand, soil is a very significant carbon sink.” Needless to say, Sadhguru makes no mention of the role that burning fossil fuels plays in driving the climate crisis.
Sure enough, in February 2020, Sadhguru was in Davos for the World Economic Forum. He was on the panel that launched the trillion trees initiative, sitting between Marc Benioff of Salesforce and Jane Goodall.
Obviously, the elites that gather every year in Davos have no interest whatsoever in changing their luxurious lifestyles, or risking the political fallout from suggesting that the rich might be responsible for the climate crisis. For the Davos elite, tree planting is the perfect distraction from the need to leave fossil fuels in the ground.
Sadhguru has his own tree planting initiative: “Cauvery Calling”. This initiative aims to plant 2.42 billion trees in the Cauvery river basin. The Isha Foundation’s campaign makes no mention of the dam construction projects in the Cauvery watershed that divert the river’s water to support industrial agriculture, generate electricity, and bring water into urban and industrial projects. Neither does the campaign talk about the polluted water from cities and industries that is drained into the river. And on the destruction of the forests in the Cauvery watershed in the name of “development”, the Isha Foundation is silent.
Instead of facing up to the threats to the Cauvery River, the Isha Foundation and Sadhguru assume that the river can be saved by planting trees. To make matters worse, the Cauvery Calling campaign promotes tree planting as monocultures, as the Environment Support Group points out in a letter, signed by more than 90 Indian environmental and rights groups, asking Leonardo DiCaprio to end his support for the Cauvery Calling campaign.
Not surprisingly, the Isha Foundation did not take the criticism seriously, describing the letter as “baseless opinion”. The Isha Foundation argues that it is promoting agroforestry on “private agricultural land”.
But the target of 2.42 billion trees remains a red flag. If the Isha Foundation were serious about helping farmers to plant trees on their land, why would they announce a campaign goal of planting so many trees? Planting large numbers of trees can deplete ground water and lead to streams drying up, as the trees suck water out of the soil. So far, the campaign has planted 62 million trees.
Rajendra Singh, an Indian water conservationist and environmentalist, known as a “waterman of India” describes the campaign as being, “for the land, for money, for power, for fame and for name”. Rajendra met with Sadhguru to talk about the Cauvery Calling campaign, but Sadhguru and the Isha Foundation ignored his concerns. Rajendra is not convinced that tree planting is the solution to reviving India’s rivers. In 2017, he told the The News Minute:
“You need to make the flow of the river slower, and not use dams to stop it altogether. Once it’s slowed, it prevents erosion in the upper riparian areas, and silting in lower ones. Stopping erosion and silting is what rejuvenates rivers and gets it flowing again, not tree plantation.”
Don’t mention Monsanto
Sadhguru’s conversation with Joe Rogan is fascinating more for what Sadhguru didn’t talk about, although Rogan does get him to talk at length about aliens. It gets pretty weird.
But let’s focus on what Sadghuru says about saving soils. Sadhguru talks about the debt crisis faced by many Indian farmers.
“There was also some sort of an issue with Monsanto, correct?” Rogan says.
“Those things are there. But, er . . . ” Sadhguru replies.
“You don’t think that’s a big deal?” Rogan asks.
“It would be if it became big time,” Sadhguru replies, “but, er, Monsanto is not so big time in India, yet.”
“It’s not?” Rogan asks.
Monsanto, of course, is a major promoter of industrial agriculture and genetically engineered seeds. In 1998, The Ecologist magazine put out a special issue titled “The Monsanto Files”. The printer pulped all 14,000 copies, presumably out of fear of legal action from Monsanto. The Ecologist found another printer and the special issue appeared several months later. The issue was reprinted several times and The Ecologist distributed more than 100,000 copies.
Monsanto is the company that produced glyphosate herbicides. By the late 1990s, glyphosate accounted for about one-sixth of Monsanto’s annual sales and half the company’s operating income. One of Monsanto’s key products is genetically engineered seeds that are resistant to glyphosate – meaning a massive increase in the use of glyphosate on these crops. Glyphosate is toxic to earthworms, soil bacteria and beneficial soil fungi.
In 2015, the World Health Organisation declared glyphosate a likely carcinogen.
In 2018, Monsanto was taken over by Bayer for US$63 billion and became the world’s largest seed and agricultural chemicals corporation. The company is sufficiently big in India that the Competition Commission of India ordered Bayer to “divest the certain businesses to an independent entity. It also ordered Monsanto to divest its shareholding in Maharashtra Hybrid Seed Company Limited (26%) to an independent entity.”
It is precisely the Bayer / Monsanto model of industrial agriculture, reliant on chemical fertilisers, pesticides, fossil fuels, genetically engineered crops, and endless amounts of water for irrigation that is destroying the soil that Sadhguru is supposedly so keen to save.
But Sadhguru told Rogan that Monsanto is not a big deal:
No. The policies have kind of blocked it and made it regulated. So we have not taken to GMO crops in a big way. Only a few items we have taken, even that, people are protesting, and generally what farmers are aware and most people, large number of farmers have rejected it. So that’s a different aspect.
See the problem is always, we are always saying home to hit. All right. This is a movement which is not against anybody because in this one thing we can all come together as one. We may be of different nations, we may be of different racial backgrounds, religious backgrounds, caste, creed, gender, whatever, and political ideologies, whatever, but we all come from soil, live off the soil, and when we die we go back to the soil.
The only question we have in our life is will we get this that soil is the basis of our existence here will we get this now, or will we get it when we’re buried. That’s the only choice we have. So having said that, see people are talking about organic farming, these are all urban people talking about it. They’ve never farmed in their lives. They don’t know what it means to do organic farming. Right now if the world shifts to organic farming, 100%, let’s say tomorrow morning, our food production in the world will come down to 20 to 25% of what it is right now. So that is death for most of the population.
I don’t know where Sadhguru gets his statistics from about what would happen if we shifted to organic agriculture overnight. He’s right though to point out that organic agriculture is not a silver bullet. Organic agriculture requires more land, for example.
But the key factor in the amount of land used for agriculture is the meat industry. It requires 163.6 square metres of land to produce 100 grams of protein by farming beef, compared to only 2.2 m2 for soybeans. And 100 grams of beef protein emits almost 50 kilograms of greenhouse gases compared to less than 2 kilograms for soybeans.
Sadhguru mentions organic agriculture as a diversion from talking about Monsanto. And any campaign to “Save Soil” that ignores the impact of an industrial monster like Monsanto on the world’s soil, is, at the very least, guilty of an extraordinary level of naivety.
Later on in the Joe Rogan podcast, Sadhguru comes back to Monsanto. “When you mentioned the company and said is it them, this is why I don’t want this narrative to grow,” he said. “It has not happened because of some evil plan, this has happened in search of human well-being.”
“In search of human well-being?” Joe Rogan replies.
Here’s how the exchange went. Rogan does his best to point out that Monsanto is a predatory corporation, without actually mentioning Monsanto’s horrific record of manufacuring extremely dangerous products such as: polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs); dioxin; Agent Orange; Glyphosate; Bovine Growth Hormone; and glyphosate resistant genetically engineered crops.
I’m posting this part of the conversation in full because it demonstrates the lengths that Sadhguru will go to in order to avoid any criticism of gigantic industrial corporations such as Bayer / Monsanto – and how he continually brings it back to individuals, complete with a ridiculous story of a fictional potato farmer.
Sadhguru: Yeah. Human beings trying to be happy. Human beings trying to live well. That is why they’ve turned the planet upside down, isn’t it?
Joe Rogan: In some ways, but it’s also profit. Human beings trying to profit, they are doing thing that aren’t so sustainable.
Sadhguru: No. People want profit because that is the only way they can be well. Those who are making losses, are they well?
Joe Rogan: Yeeeaaaaahhhhhh. Sort of. But a lot of them, they’re already well. They’re greedy, they’ve gotten past the point of being well and now they’ve gotten connected to the idea of accumulating vast sums of money.
Sadhguru: No, that is being judgemental, calling somebody greedy. Because, see, if I have one meal a day, which is my normal, I think I’m doing fine. If somebody else has one meal a day he thinks he’s very poor. He wants two. The guys who’s having two thinks he’s poor because somebody else is having three. One who has a little home he thinks he’s poor because somebody has a big home, like this. So what is greed and what is not greed?
Joe Rogan: I’ll tell you what greed is. If you make choices where you know that the thing that you’re doing whether you’re distributing a product, or whether you’re causing an action that is going to be detrimental to human beings but you cover up the data to hide the fact that it’s going to be detrimental because you want to maximise your profit and you don’t care about the negative impact it has on people because you’re only thinking about money. And you’re already substantially wealthy. That, by definition, is being greedy. Right?
Sadhguru: Oohh. See by definition, it’s like this. Somebody is dreaming of a million dollars, he thinks that is the ultimate goal in his life. But a guy who has a million is wanting to be a billionaire. One who is a billionaire, he looks at somebody who has a hundred billion dollars, he thinks at least that much he must have.
So I’m saying instead of being judgemental about this, human well-being is sought from outside. That is the whole problem. See, human experience essentially happens from within. Whether it’s your joy or misery. Comes from within you, isn’t it? Maybe something or somebody can stimulate it from outside, but still it happens within you. Joy and misery happens from within you. Pain and pleasure happens from within you. Agony and ecstasy happens from within you. Every human experience happens from within you. But in pursuit of happiness we’re turning the world upside down.
Because this is the case of, you know there was an old potato farmer, one day he wanted to eat apples so he went to an apple tree, but by habit, he started digging for the apples, till the tree came down on him, because he’s a potato farmer.
So right now, human beings have become like this. They’ve gotten used to this that they think by getting this, by getting that, by having one more thing and one more thing they’re going to be happy.
But human experience happens from within. If you take charge of your interiority being peaceful and happy is a natural consequence of that. But for convenience and comfort we do things outside. To create impact we do things outside. So this experience of, if human being were naturally joyful by their own nature, they would only do what is needed, nothing more, nothing less. But right now, they’re in pursuit of happiness, you can’t stop them.
Joe Rogan: Yeah, they are in pursuit of happiness, but they are also in pursuit of profit because it’s a number based system so it becomes like a game and you get connected to corporations. When you’re in a corporation, there’s a diffusion of responsibility, because you don’t think about you’re own involvement and what the corporation is doing, you think about your role, what you do as a job, and then you try to maximise profit, and it’s a game that people get wrapped up in. It doesn’t make them happy, you’re absolutely correct.
Sadhguru: No, no, it’s in pursuit of happiness, but.
Joe Rogan: It’s in pursuit of success.
Sadhguru: See, most human beings cannot be happy if they are not successful, isn’t it?
Joe Rogan: There’s a lot of that, yes. Then they get medicated to help them get happy. That’s a lot of people.
I think Rogan made a reasonable effort of trying to get Sadhguru to acknowledge that Bayer / Monsanto is actually at least in part responsible for the destruction of the world’s soils by promoting an industrial model of agriculture that is based on profit, and not the interests of either farmers or people buying food. Sadhguru could have talked about the issues of a handful of transnational corporations exercising undue control over the world’s food production and agriculture. But he didn’t.
When Rogan mentioned medication, it was all over. Sadhguru moved on to drugs and how the people he speaks to no longer believe in heaven.
Incidentally, Sadhguru was on ITV’s This Morning show before he set off on his 100-day motorbike trip. He told the story about the potato farmer and the apple tree, and that “pain or pleasure, joy or misery, agony or ecstasy, only happen within you.”
As Prakash Kashwan, professor of Political Science at the University of Connecticut, told DW, “The campaigns that Sadhguru and celebrities run can contribute positively only if they are tied to institutional arrangements that hold public and private institutions accountable.”
And that is precisely what Sadhguru is determined to avoid doing.
Forty-five to sixty years of agriculture remaining?
Sadhguru tells us that “The United Nations says we have soil left only for approximately eighty to hundred harvest, which means another forty-five to sixty years of agriculture. After that, we will not have the soil to produce food.”
But Sadhguru doesn’t say where or when the United Nations said this. He doesn’t give a link to any UN reports.
On the Daily Show, Trevor Noah says that “Some people are estimating that if we do nothing, in 50 years time we may not be able to grow anything because we may run out of soil.”
Sadhguru replies that this has happened in the past 50 to 100 years of industrialised farming – which makes it all the more odd that he won’t criticise Monsanto and the other corporations that profit from industrial agriculture. “The organic content in the soil is going away because there is no replenishment,” he says. Desertification is one of the most serious problems. “As you said, 50 years, or 60 years’ time, after that there’s not enough soil to grow crops.”
But is there any basis for this claim in science?
In 2021, Farmers Weekly, a UK magazine, reported that “Claims that the world may only have 60 harvests left because of poor soil management are ‘overblown’ and ‘nonsensical’, according to new research from Oxford University.”
The research was carried out by Hannah Ritchie, and published on the website Our World In Data. Ritchie writes that although soil erosion is an important problem,
The stark claim that the world has only 100; 60 or even 30 years of harvests left often hits the headlines. Although they continue to be repeated, there is no scientific basis to them.
As far as I can tell, the first time a claim along these lines appeared was in December 2012, when Time magazine and the World Economic Forum interviewed John Crawford, a University of Sydney professor about soil erosion. “A rough calculation of current rates of soil degradation suggests we have about 60 years of topsoil left,” Crawford said.
In December 2014, Reuters ran an article under the headline, “Only 60 Years of Farming Left If Soil Degradation Continues”. The article attributed the statement to Maria-Helena Semedo of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation, who made the comment at an FAO forum organised to mark World Soil Day.
But there was no scientific research behind this claim.
To add to the confusion, in 2014, the Independent reported that “Britain has only 100 harvests left in its farm soil”. This claim was based on a study in the Journal of Applied Ecology that compared the soil quality in agricultural fields, urban greenspaces, and allotments in “a typical UK city”.
But the study makes no mention of how many harvests are left. In a 2019 article in New Scientist looking into the claim that there are only 100 harvests left, James Wong writes,
Now, before we question whether the results of this single, small study can be extrapolated to represent all of England, let alone the whole UK or even the whole world, let us take a look at their findings: basically, some urban soils in Sheffield are higher in carbon and nitrogen than some nearby agricultural ones. OK, but where is the 100-year statistic? It turns out that nowhere in the study was there any calculation, prediction or even passing reference to the claim. None whatsoever. Perhaps not so much shaky evidence to support this assertion as much as non-existent.
A 2020 study published in Environmental Research Letters assessed the threat of soil erosion globally by looking at data from 255 sites around the world. “Human-induced soil erosion is a serious threat to global sustainability, endangering global food security, driving desertification and biodiversity loss, and degrading other vital ecosystem services,” the authors concluded.
But as Ritchie writes,
But the ’60 harvests’ claim is quite clearly false. More than 90% of conventionally managed soils had a ‘lifespan’ greater than 60 years. . .
There is no single figure for how many harvests the world has left because there is so much variation in the types, quality, and management of our soils. It’s just implausible that they would all be degrading at exactly the same rate. As these results show: some soils are eroding quickly while others are thickening.
Sadhguru: “Well, do whatever”
During his motorbike journey, Sadhguru is holding a series of public events. At an event in the Netherlands, a woman asked Sadhguru, “What is the thing I can do to help to save the soil?” She has no garden, not much money, and only 20 followers on Instagram.
It’s a good question. And it’s one that Sadhguru utterly fails to answer in any meaningful way:
You sit down. You have so much energy. We could definitely use that. Well, do whatever. In you neighbourhood, do a jig. Initially, people will think, what is wrong with her? After some time kids will come and dance with you. Tell them, just go and tell your parents they must talk about this. Go to a school and do the jig, they will love you.
And, er, that’s it. The rest of Sadhguru’s reply is woo-woo mumbo jumbo about conflict being “just a step away”, and soil being “one unifying force” that “unites the whole universe”.
As if to prove that this an elite focussed initiative, Sadhguru took a break from his motorcycle journey to fly to Davos to take part in a “Wisdom Panel” on the Future of Cities at the World Economic Forum. Also in May 2022, he flew to Côte d’Ivoire to take part in the COP15 of the UN Convention to Combat Desertification.
At the Davos meeting, Sadhguru announces he is 65 days into his motorcycle trip. He says he’s done 467 events during that time, which gets him a round of applause. He claims that the “social media metrics” show that 2.1 billion people have “addressed soil” in the last 65 days.
The idea of this movement is to move at least 60% of the adult population on the planet to be concerned about soil, to say something about soil, because in a democracy the only currency is numbers. If the numbers are there, every government will move.
The campaign has written to 730 political parties “to include soil as a part of their manifestos, soil ecology as part of their manifestos”. The campaign has written 193 policy handbooks for 193 different nations, “considering their latitudinal position, their soil types, their economic conditions, and their agricultural traditions,” Sadhguru says. “Because even if you have all the science, you cannot turn the agricultural traditions around overnight, it takes a certain amount of time. You have to work for this.”
What’s missing from all of this is the expertise of farmers, local communities, and Indigenous Peoples. Any measures aimed at conserving soil can only possibly work if they are developed together with the people who are farming the land – in particular the small-scale farmers and peasants who provide food for 70% of the world’s population.
In Davos, Sadhguru mentions the climate crisis:
Everybody’s busy talking about carbon dioxide, I know it is an issue, I’m not saying it’s not an issue, that is also a significant issue. But if we put fair measuring mechanisms over 40% of the global warming and climate change is happening because of ploughed lands.
As usual, Sadhguru doesn’t say where he gets his numbers from. An Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change presentation based on the IPCC’s sixth assessment report, Working Group III, that came out in April 2022, includes a graph showing that CO2 emissions from fossil fuel and industry account for 64% of greenhouse gas emissions. CO2 emissions from land use, land use change, forestry (LULUCF) accounts for 11%:
54% of the earth’s land is ploughed. Seriously ploughed. Another 18% or 20% is partially done. So nearly 71% of the land is under agriculture.
Once again, Sadhguru doesn’t tell us his sources for these figures. The World Bank has a website with a chart that shows arable land as a percentage of total land area over time. In 2018, arable land covered 10.83% of the world’s land area, up from 9.7% in 1961. Why make things up?
The facilitator of the meeting asked Sadhguru what everyone in the room could do on an individual basis to save soil. This time around, Sadhguru didn’t suggest that anyone should “do a jig”.
Instead he replied as follows:
The moment you say that, everybody wants to roll up their sleeves and go and fix their kitchen garden. That’s very cute. But that is not a solution. We’re past that stage. We’re past that stage where I do something wonderful, you do something wonderful, and there’ll be a solution. We are well past that stage. We should have done this in 70s. You can’t be talking about this in 2022, let’s do something little and be happy.
If you’re doing this for your personal satisfaction, that’s different. If you’re doing it for a solution, right now unless this is enshrined in the policy of the world, there will be no solution because you’re addressing 71% of land that’s geography. This is not going to be fixed by me doing something cute in my house and you doing wonderful things.
Even if you have 10,000 acres of land, if you fix it it’s still not a solution, because there is no guarantee the next generation will do the same thing for you, unless it is made a law. When I say a law, see in urban land there are laws. If you have 10,000 square feet of land you cannot build a 10,000 square feet of building. They will allow you to build six, seven, eight thousand square feet. But if you have 10,000 acres of land, you can plough every inch of it, turn it into a desert in 10, 15 years’ time, nobody will ask you why have you done it. Should this change or not?
A more disempowering message is difficult to imagine. Fortunately, Sadhguru has a cute Soil Song for us. “La la le la le la le”: