Progressive Utilization Theory

[marxist_ghost]

What do you guys think of it? Is it any good? Or just another one of those useless theories to divert people away from communism?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROUT

[Forward Union]

without hurting anyone

Impossible.

Next.

[marxist_ghost]

The Five Fundamental Principles

The founder of Prout, P.R. Sarkar initially summarized Prout in sixteen verses, five of which are regarded as the most fundamental. The first principle is a challenge to basic capitalist notions.

"1) No individual should be allowed to accumulate any physical wealth without the clear permission or approval of the collective body."

In this, Prout holds that the most important point to recognize is that ownership lies with the collectivity. As such, the individual has a right to usage only. Sarkar believed that society should have the right to determine the extent to which private ownership is accepted. The over accumulation of wealth by one individual, he explained, is the scarcity of wealth of others. Due to this, Sarkar believed that there should be a limit to the amount of wealth which may be accumulated. He explained that such an idea represented that individual economic/financial liberty must be in harmony with the collective interest. He felt that such an approach would provide for more success than other systems in including every citizen in the rise of a standard of living.

He made a point of refuting both capitalism and communism. Sarkar observed that capitalism allows unlimited liberty for accumulation while communism prescribes uniform salaries for all regardless of merit and labour.

Prout explains that absolute uniformity of wealth is an unhelpful delusion. Prout prefers a subjective approach holding that the notion of ownership may vary considerably according to the collective psychology of a given society. In order to appropriately and flexibly meet the needs of each society, Prout gives no specific mechanism for determining ownership. Rather, Prout provides general guidelines to reinforce the notion of collective ownership, a democratic approach to the utilization of resources, and economic democracy.

"2) There should be maximum utilization and rational distribution of all mundane, supra-mundane, and spiritual potentialities of the universe."

This principle begins Prout's process of defining resources and capacities that can be utilized and distributed. This definition process, as explained in Prout, must be aware of the economic value as well as the more qualitative, life-appreciating value. For instance, the aesthetic and environmental value of a forest is no less important than its economic value once converted into Christmas trees. Prout clarifies that utilization implies the opposite of misutilization and non-utilization as occurs during periods of resources stagnation. As such, Prout opposes hoarding resources for purposes of market value manipulation. Prout explains that maximum utilization of physical resources provides the means of properly generating basic social requirements and amenities. Prout explains that rational distribution refers to providing access to subtle resources as well as an equitable and constantly adjusted income policy. In Prout, the minimum requirements must first be guaranteed to all and then the surplus can be distributed to merit, provided that the differential gap is progressively closed and the minimum level adjusted upwards.

"3) There should be maximum utilization of the physical, metaphysical, and spiritual potentialities of the unit and collective bodies of human society."

This principle refers to Prout's preference for the humanitarian, efficient use of different human qualities. Sarkar explained that the physical, intellectual, and spiritual potentialities should be expressed in a constructive way and effort should be made for all-round development. Prout seeks for the strengths of each to be utilized according to their particular unique character. Prout encourages those with outstanding abilities to be given maximum support in order to meet their potential of work, boosting their confidence, and providing the best service for society. Prout similarly seeks to provide maximum support for the development of the innate potential of the common mass. In order to develop the potential of all, Prout seeks to eliminate fear for basic needs by guaranteeing the minimum requirements of life such as food and shelter. Prout believes that only with these necessities can people have the mental ease to develop their mental and spiritual capacities. Prout also encourages free, high quality educational opportunities to be made available to all, and for consistent opportunities be made for the development of professional skills.

Prout also believes in the importance of having the education system teach socio-economic consciousness, ethical conduct, community-service mindedness, social awareness, and spirituality.

"4) There should be a proper adjustment amongst these physical, metaphysical, mundane, supramundane and spiritual utilizations."

Prout's fourth principle asserts that the previous two principles must be applied in a manner in which they are balanced with one another. Prout explains that the lack of this balance will cause society to become disturbed, endangering it to degradation and degeneration.

In order to maintain this balance, Prout suggests that increasing the people's purchasing power is the best method of meeting people's needs on the physical level. Prout argues that routine handouts encourage dependency and are destructive to initiative.

Proutists have used the example of a society automatically providing food and housing without prior or ongoing requirements. They explain that this causes the people's individual initiative and responsibility to become retarded; people will gradually become lethargic. Therefore, the Proutists continue, society has to make such arrangements so that people, in exchange for their labor according to their capacity, can earn the money they require to purchase the minimum necessities. They imply that there should be 100% employment.

Prout suggests that people's role in society should also be determined in a balanced way. Prout explains that employment should draw on people's inherent talents and interests. According to Proutist perspective, at present, intellectual and artistic skills are comparatively rare compared to physical skills. Spiritual awareness is yet rarer still, Prout observes. Prout believes that the remedy for this can be in supporting those who hold advanced mental or spiritual faculties so that they can benefit the greatest number of people who take interest in their guidance. Thus, multiple faiths and philosophical inquiries would be supported. The only instance in which Prout would not support a given faith would be in the case that it infringed upon obvious human rights or forced adults to join the faith. Additionally, Prout believes that it is important to allow and require the leaders of a society to develop their skills intellectually, spiritually, and physically.

"5) The method of utilization should vary in accordance with the changes in time, place, and person, and the utilization should be of a progressive nature."

Prout's fifth principle urges the importance of changing to the times. Prout observes that keeping policies and practices solely for the sake of familiarity often leads to the suffering of many people. As Prout believes that all activity should be mindfully done with the aim of mass-human development, Prout rejects sticky dogmatic attitudes. Prout similarly encourages such open-minded flexibility for a given area where policy is being created, and for each separate individual unto who policy is being applied.

Sarkar once explained, "Take a particular example. Suppose a physically strong person serves the society as a rickshaw puller or a market porter. As the rickshaw may become out dated some day, the method of utilizing their physical strength should vary. If a person is intellectually developed but has the same physical strength as others, their intellectual potentiality should be utilized. Thus the process of utilization will not be the same for all people. Better methods of utilization should be continually developed, but the process of utilization should be progressive in nature. " This is to say, everyone's skills should be utilized. If only some of a person's skills are being actively utilized by the society, their other skills should be practiced and developed for their own personal enrichment and for preparation to contributing those skills to society.

As change occurs, the benefit of everyone should be placed first and foremost in policy changes, believes Prout. Prout also encourages the use of technology to support these aims, and encourages ecologically friendly ways in which the technology is used.

[Forward Union]

I've already pointed out that it's impossible.

[marxist_ghost]

Originally posted by Urban [email protected] 20, 2007 05:33 pm
I've already pointed out that it's impossible.
I understand comrade. But PROUT supporters and the capitalists claim, that communism is impossible.

[Whitten]

The key dfference is that communists openly admit our intent to use force, no group of people can change the socio-economic structure without the use of force.

[bezdomni]

It sounds more like cultish dogmatism rather than a coherent social/political position.

[synthesis]

It strikes me as more half-assed hippie collectivism without any real appreciation of the objective necessity of struggle in progressive movements, but I'm open to being proved wrong.

[onehumansociety]

Originally posted by Kun Fanâ@October 03, 2007 03:18 am
It strikes me as more half-assed hippie collectivism without any real appreciation of the objective necessity of struggle in progressive movements, but I'm open to being proved wrong.
Hello Kun Fanâ and everyone.

I have seen the last few replies to the post about PROUT (Progressive Utilization Theory). As I have studied it and observed practical efforts to implement this system since more than 12 years, I should reply to some misconceptions posted here.

The suggestion that PROUT gives no appreciation to struggle and concrete social movements could not be farther from the truth. This Wikipedia entry is a very short presentation, prepared for those who have never heard of PROUT, and so it is a very limited source to really understand the history of the proposal and its living movement.

This system is deeply founded in grassroots' collective and individual struggle to establish a balanced society in all spheres. It has nothing to do with mere theoretical analysis or narrow speculations. Its founder, Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar, was persecuted in the 70's by the Indian government when various political and bureaucratic forces in the country felt threatened due to the straightforward message of morality, anti-exploitation, anti-dogma and nuclear revolution of society that PROUT defended.

The movement became so popular amongst the youth of India, who started denouncing various corruption cases within the government, that false charges were fabricated against P. R. Sarkar. The emergency regime of Indira Gandhi took him as a political prisoner for over 7 years, during which he fasted through the last 5 years as a protest to an attempt from the secret service of India to kill him through poisoning. Finally he was acquitted of all charges by the Supreme Court of India when the corrupt leaders of the Indian government got exposed and the emergency period came to a dead end. With the help of the sympathy from the progressive community all over the world, due to the inhumane and unjust treatment he received, PROUT grew stronger and was propagated over dozens of countries during the years he was in jail.

PROUT's activists and students, also called Proutists, are working at grass root level through maintaining and supporting hundreds of holistic community projects and in connections with all sorts of social welfare institutions to raise the social consciousness of the world population as a whole. For example, the Prout Research Institute of Venezuela (www.priven.org) has been invited and given training in economic democracy, economic decentralization, cooperative development and the comprehensive model of PROUT to leaders and officers of state companies of the country. The President Hugo Chavez has met personally with Proutists and given his support in national television to the views presented to him through the book "After Capitalism: PROUT's Vision for a New World", by Dada Maheshvarananda (The author's blog is www.aftercapitalism.blogspot.com)

About the impossible "without hurting anyone" comment :o , let me make it clear: PROUT is not a pacifist or goody-goody movement, but rather stands for a revolutionary transformation of the whole society, by application of spiritual, moral, intellectual or physical force, whichever more appropriate and necessary, or all of them combined. It does not at all encourage bloodshed when it can be avoided, as this is against the very nature of society, but it does not discard the possibility of violence happening when the roots of exploitation are too deep and the oppression of the people becomes unbearable. The revolutionary methods may vary according to the character of the social exploitation, the historical period, the place and the level of consciousness of those involved in promoting the change against social staticity. What the article in Wikipedia was trying to say is that the goal of PROUT is to establish a society where no one is forced to suffer due to the pressure of circumstances. In that sense it means that no one should be neglected by society and allowed to live in unnecessary torture due to a defective social system.

Today PROUT is a dynamic and growing movement in every region of the world. There are many interesting ideas and examples I could maybe share later. Shrii P. R. Sarkar left 26 volumes outlining the main ideas of PROUT in a series called "PROUT in a Nutshell", besides various other works. Some of it is available online. You should do some research and check it by yourselves. I would be happy to try my best answering any questions regarding PROUT that may arise in this thread. :)

www.proutworld.org
www.worldproutassembly.org

[onehumansociety]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20, 2007 04:51 pm
What do you guys think of it? Is it any good? Or just another one of those useless theories to divert people away from communism?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROUT
Hello Marxist_ghost.

I have just recently joined this forum and found your post about PROUT. I am not sure if "opposing ideologies" is the best place for it though, and I tell why.

PROUT includes the study of social dynamics as a science of how social movements and events emerge and how society evolves (or gets degraded) through this process. It is a huge subject, but in summary it deals with the four main directions of the social body: evolution, counter-evolution, revolution and counter-revolution. The fundamental principles of PROUT give a short definition for these terms.

Communism evolved as an antithesis to capitalism. Capitalism was the thesis, the mainstream set of policies guiding social development in western countries since a few centuries. When through the Industrial Revolution the influence of the capitalist mindset created greater oppression and exploitation of the people, social reactions started to emerge to counteract it, and Communism developed as the antithesis to that.

Now, according to the science of social dynamics, thesis and antithesis will strike each other and eventually lead to a new synthesis, that is, a new set of ideas will emerge to solve the problems which the conflict between thesis and antithesis have been unable to tackle. PROUT is presented with this vision, a new synthesis to overcome the knots and lack of vigor or contemporary fitness of the past thesis and antithesis. This new synthesis should be able to provide answers and solutions to the deepest urges of the people and to pull human society to a new phase. It it the thesis of a new turn in the social cycle. If in some place, through the application of PROUT, there would again emerge exploitation of the people, naturally counter movements will develop and fight back. And so the social dynamics move on. Knowing that, PROUT provides fundamental principles that are carefully planned to prevent exploitative and oppressive practices to remain in power once an if they take place, and this is only possible through the constant cultivation of a higher level of consciousness in all spheres of life. PROUT is a shift to a new paradigm. Of course that there are so many factors involved, as in each part of the world the adherence to a new or old mindset is different, etc, but this is just an example.

So, as I said, PROUT is not simply an opposing ideology to left movements or communism, but rather it is also called by some as progressive socialism. The way of PROUT is neither against capitalism nor communism, but it is a step forward from both. It is not a rightist or leftist movement, but a balance correcting the weaknesses from both sides and bringing a new understanding which also includes the strong points of each, with fresh new ideas to advance humanity through the momentum of our age.

As you can see when you study P.R. Sarkar's original writings, they offer a comprehensive and holistic approach with insights from the historical opposition of social forces. There are much better sources to PROUT than the Wikipedia article, which is just a basic introduction for those who never heard of it. (In my opinion, that article can be much improved, but I didn't get the chance to discuss it with the editors yet).

I suggest you check some of the original articles from Shrii Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar posted in:
www.proutworld.org
www.worldproutassembly.org

Personally, my interest in PROUT started when I learned of the original works of P.R. Sarkar and, specially, his life example. He lived a life of struggle with the oppressed people of India and much opposition from corrupt and immoral private and public institutions. He was put in jail for 7 years under a oppressive dictatorship as a result of propagating PROUT. His words and actions stood directly against dogma, religious fundamentalism, exploitation, narrow sentiments and groupism, suppression, oppression, repression, immorality and irrationality. From reports of many people who witnessed and were present in many events that confirm his personal example, I understood he was not just another intellectual trying to cheat the masses with strategic theories. P. R. Sarkar was a strong man of high principles and incredible genius. His life is yet relatively unknown due to the fear of the establishment, controlling the corporate media, etc, that his straightforward ideas will inflame the people of the world with revolutionary spirit. But as we see more and more, people are tired of lies and deception, so gradually I am observing a greater interest in PROUT arise in whomever I meet.

I appreciate very much the anti-exploitation spirit, the empathy with the people and the fight for justice of the leftist movements, and so I joined this forum website to interact, learn and share with all.

[marxist_ghost]

@onehumansociety

Thanks a lot for your detailed explaination. But can you shed more light on how PROUT is superior to communism? What weakness do you find in communism and how does PROUT rectify it?

[onehumansociety]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15, 2007 08:27 pm
@onehumansociety

Thanks a lot for your detailed explaination. But can you shed more light on how PROUT is superior to communism? What weakness do you find in communism and how does PROUT rectify it?
I think it is well understood in the leftist community that communism has developed into so many branches that even its origins are often unclear. So i would like to know which trend you refer to when mentioning communism.

However, in reply to your question, I will give a general note on what communism became in practice when applied in countries such as China, URSS, East Europe, East Asia, etc... The main defect of communism in this sense is the lack of recognition for the higher and subtler pursuits of human life, which were tremendously and violently suppressed, for example due to the inflexible belief that religion is the opium of the people, or by the massacre against intellectuals which were against the regime and the destruction of uncountable works of art and pieces of immense historical and archaeological value. It is true that most of the powerful religious institutions became great brainwashing and exploiting machines, but that cannot justify the purely materialistic approach adopted by the communist governments. This happened because, as I wrote before, communism was born as a reaction to capitalism (thesis and antithesis), and as capitalism is based on material wealth accumulation, its reaction could not sublimate the same cycle surrounding matter or capital.
PROUT however is based on spirituality (which is a complete different matter than what is religion today, or one can say, spirituality is the essence of religion which was forgotten and neglected for millenia, and very seldom practiced or taught by any religious institution know today).

In theory one can use authors such as Gramsci to say that communism gives recognition to human liberty and creativity, but in practice the fundamentals of the communist understanding were insufficient and incomplete, the base was weak and the goals unpsychologically created and pursued through brute means, and that is why its development became narrow and harmful to human nature; although they had many positive points such as the anti-exploitation struggle. PROUT advocates a balance between the guarantee of the minimum necessities of life, such as food, shelter, clothing, health care and education, and the dedication to mental and spiritual development. This balance in PROUT is summarized by the concept of "subjective approach through objective adjustment." No one should be denied the minimum basic needs, but in the same way, no oppression, repression or suppression should be accepted in the name of a forced and artificial equality. Diversity is the law of nature, no single atom in the universe is the same to another, and so the uniqueness of each individual should be totally acknowledged in order to promote the true collective welfare.

In order to provide a solution to the tension between the social justice sought by communism and the individual freedom defended by capitalism, PROUT was created, while emphasizing at the same time that the balance between individual and social welfare is best achieved through a much deeper cultural basis, which is spirituality applied and consciousness reflected in all spheres of life.

Of course that this is a long topic, and there are other defects of communism which I could discuss, but I would like to encourage you to look for PROUT's original writings from Shrii P.R. Sarkar, where he also acknowledges the positive developments presented by Marx:

"In the [present] capitalist age, religious exploitation is more psychic than physical, because the capitalists use the intellectuals to try to spread intellectual propaganda among the masses to prevent them from finding any philosophical justification for their suppressed grievances against the capitalist structure. This intellectual propaganda aims to convince people that they are the victims of circumstance. It argues, “Everything is destiny. Everything is preordained.” Such doctrines help the capitalists to perpetuate their structure. They destroy the personal force of people and make them the playthings of fate. People accept the idea that everything is preordained, and support the status quo. Those who try to break the structure of the capitalist age and show the downtrodden the path of liberation, will have to advise the people to free themselves from the intoxicating effect of the opium of religion; otherwise how will they be able to serve the downtrodden people? A group of exploiters loudly object to a remark that was made by the great Karl Marx concerning religion. It should be remembered that Karl Marx never opposed spirituality, morality and proper conduct. What he said was directed against the religion of his time, because he perceived, understood and realized that religion had psychologically paralysed the people and reduced them to impotence by persuading them to surrender to a group of sinners."

[hajduk]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20, 2007 04:50 pm
What do you guys think of it? Is it any good? Or just another one of those useless theories to divert people away from communism?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROUT
always there is to bee good people and bad people and that is beyound of our control