Fwd: Fwd: A Sociological-Historical Reading of the Prout, Ananda Marga and Renaissance Movements

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: parvatee deveesree
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 08:31:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Fwd: A Sociological-Historical Reading of the Prout, Ananda
Marga and Renaissance Movements
To: discussonprout@googlegroups.com

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dharmadeva
Date: Sat, 8 May 1999 00:00:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: A Sociological-Historical Reading of the Prout, Ananda Marga
and Renaissance Movements
To:

A Sociological-Historical Reading of the Prout, Ananda Marga and
Renaissance
Movements

Sohail Inayatullah

Traditional accounts of the Prout, Ananda Marga and Renaissance
movements
take a number of positions. Most of these accounts are ahistorical
seeing
these movements as only reflective of the genius of the founder, of
his
prophetic words and visions. The future of these movements is destined
- the
task ahead is to operationalize them: at the material level through
socio-economic revolution; at the intellectual level through the
writing of
treatises that show Prout's natural superiority as compared to other
theories, largely Marxist and capitalist; and, at the spiritual level
through meditation practices.

While to some extent this is a fruitful endeavor, what is missing is a
sociological approach which compares the characteristics of Prout and
its
membership to other similar and dissimilar movements and a historical
approach in which Prout is seen in the context of the contributions of
sages
and revolutionary movements of the past. In this article, I attempt
such an
approach, arguing that the richness of Prout can be better gleaned by
locating it in sociological and historical discourses.

How different?

While Prout is certainly different, the question is how is it
different?
Clearly the founder, Shrii P.R. Sarkar, irrespective of his unique
role in
human history, is still a historical figure, that is, even while he
sought
to create a new discourse, a new way of seeing the world, indeed a new
world
itself, he still existed and lived within other contexts, in real
material
and historical conditions. For example, we know that from Islam he
borrowed
ideas of fraternity, of the idea of an ummah, a universal community;
from
Gandhism, ideas of localism, of empowerment at the village community;
from
Marxism, a committment to distributive justice; from Hinduism, varna
(but
now transformed as cyclical social history); from Confucianism, the
importance of discipline and the family; from Christianity, the
centrality
of love in spiritual life; and, from capitalism, the necessity of
growth, of
an increasing purchasing capacity for the world's population.

Moreover, the deeper metaphors behind Prout and Ananda Marga, that of
a
family traveling in a caravan together, are similar to the ideas of
ohana in
Hawaii, of the extended family that includes the animate and the
inanimate,
gods and angels - and within this family, each one cares for the
other, and
ensures that all move forward.

While one can argue that Sarkar has not borrowed but in fact his ideas
are
entirely original, certainly they are original, but the originality is
in
the organic and civilizational integration, the reinterpration of
them, and
their realizability through his social movements. One cannot divorce
Sarkar's ideas from human history, all ideas grow up in certain
epistemes -
the boundaries of knowledge that define what is knowable and what is
not -
even as they, as in the case of Sarkar, transform these epistemes.

This said, we can move to a more archetypical level of analysis and
ask what
are the guiding stories of humanity, here concerned with deep
metaphors and
not particularly with religions or ideological social and political
movements. These stories, in our case, will serve to highlight both
Prout's
singularity as well as its similarity to other grand stories of what
it
means to be human and what the future can and should be like.

Contesting Stories

The first story is the cylical story. The underlying metaphors are
derived
from nature - the seasons, the tree of life or the river. There is a
time
for everything, a time for life, a time to rejoice and a time for
death.
There are clear boundaries in this story. Civilizations that tresspass
these
boundaries either through technologies that disrupt the natural
(genetics or
nuclear) or through size (violating the natural carrying capacity of
the
planet or by extending their imperial reach) are bound to decline.
Indeed,
history is but the rise and fall of civilizations, with the fall often
occuring through a loss of morality (tresspassing inner or outer
rules) and
through the natural dialectical dynamics of the rise. Prout has a
cyclical
dimension, most precisely in its theory of history, wherein each varna
declines once it limits the possibilities of other varnas, that is as
it
expands its own potentials, it limits others. Massive exploitation
results
and there is a revolution leading to the new varna's reign.

In Sarkar's model - here taking a structural approach to his
macrohistory -
this is the order of shudra (controlled by the environment), ksattriya
(dominates environment trough military and technological might), vipra
(controls others and environment through a strategic intellect) and
vaeshya
(dominates others by extracting value from them and accumulates
capital in
this process). Each varna goes beyond its natural social limits and
eventually the new one comes in.

However, Sarkar, unlike the Green movement and most religious
perspectives,
believes that there is a factor that can overcome many of these
natural
borders. This is humanity's creativity, which is often inspired by the
Supreme consciousness. There is, for Sarkar, an attraction to the
great, to
a greater mind, a desire for a better society, that allows for the
metaphor
of progress in human history - not all processes are cyclical.

At the same time, Sarkar does use environmental metaphors. He imagines
future civilization like that of a garden with each particular culture
creating a cultural ecology wherein all benefit from the other, a true
global conversations of ideas and their implementation. And Sarkar is
very
clear that while technology can and will do marvelous things, there
are
certain cyclical processes that cannot be breached. For example,
humans will
not be able to live forever, the brain can only manage up to 120 or so
years. There are limits. Each person's own life is limited and death
is a
certainty - death, unlike in technological stories of reality, is not
something to be beaten back, to be feared; rather, death is the
bringer of
wisdom, the point of spiritual transformation. The death of death can
only
occur through spiritual realization, through an ontological
identification
with the Supreme consciousness.

However, even as Sarkar posits limits he does not reify traditional
concepts
of what is the natural; for example, he fully believes that in the
future,
babies will be created without male-female sexual intercourse and that
we
will travel to other planets.

Thus while Prout has some similarities to the linear story of history,
it
also has cyclical componenents. In addition, in Prout there is a
dramatically different approach to the theory of progress. Sarkar
contests
the linear Social Darwinian and Enlightenment view, which asserts that
the
pattern of history is from barbarism to civilization, from magic to
science,
from the aborigines to Europeans and from women to men - that is,
classical
imperalistic modernist European readings of history and future.
History to
Sarkar has been a tragic, wherein cultures have lost their confidence
when
conquered by the dominant. Women, in particular, have suffered at the
hands
of warring ksattriyas, cunning vipras and rapacious vaeshyas, as have
peasants/workers and the natural environment itself. The purpose of
the the
Prout movement is create conditions in which women, labor, nature and
others
marginalized gain their spaces back. Ananda Marga is a social and
spiritual
organization linking the individual spiritual dimensions of life with
the
social service needs of the larger society. Renaissance movement
intends to
create the intellectual conditions wherein an ideological struggle can
occur. In this article we see these movements along a continuum, all
equally
necessary for global transformation.

Shrii Sarkar in society

Taking a sociological approach towards Sarkar himself, we should not
be
surprised at his convictions. Sitting from Calcutta, having
experienced the
brutality of the British Raj, we should not be surprised at his
alternative
reading of history. As an Indian, with India's ancient history, the
rise and
fall of empires, from the Guptas to the Mugals, we should also not be
surprised that Sarkar has cyclical elements in his social history.
Living as
well in a land where death is everpresent, not hidden as in the West,
again
we should not be suprised at his acceptance of death in life.

However, and this is crucial, Sarkar does have a linear element,
wherein
human beings can move toward a better and more fair society. However,
progress is ultimately spiritual, and to some degree, psycho-spiritual
and
not physical or intellectual. That is to say, whereas in the linear
story,
technology, more complex organization, and human ingenuity leads to
progress
at material and intellectuals levels, Sarkar is quick to point out
that for
every forward movement there are accompanying problems, increased
neurosis,
for example, as human's increase their intellectual complexity. There
is no
free lunch at material and intellectual levels.

But perhaps the biggest difference with Sarkar's Prout and other
stories is
that for Sarkar, perfection is only possible at the spiritual and the
individual level. An individual through spiritual practices can attain
moksa
or salvation but a society cannot nor can a civilization. Within the
cyclical story, nature itself is perfect, the dream is to return to
this
perfect state, when humans existed in community with each other.
Within the
linear story, perfection of society is possible, either through
science,
technology and through the correct organization-ideology (nazism,
fascism,
socialism and capitalism have been some not so successful experiments,
to
put it mildly).

But for Sarkar, the "state of nature" is problematic, humans have
always
struggled with nature and our memories of community often avoid the
violent
social stratification that traditional and feudal societies exhibited.
History has always been unkind to the weaker. Finally social
perfection is
impossible since humans are different. Moves to perfection necessarily
mean
the elimination of difference and thus are authoritarian and
totalitarian in
nature.

Whereas God is perfect, Sarkar's idea of the supreme consciousness
does not
exist in history as with the Hegelian weltergeist - rather God serves
to
inspire humans to be more then their limited ego/family/nation/race
conceptions - and there is no endusztand in human history, the cycles
will
continue. However, through Proutistic intervention, Sarkar hopes to
create a
new form of spiritual-holistic leadership that can minimize the
exploitive
dimensions of the cycle and create a spiral in human history, thus
effectively combining the cyclical and linear story.

There is a however a third story. This is the story of chaos, most
recently
returning to currency through the Postmodern fracture. In this story,
all
stories are considered more than fictions but dangerous lies. What is
needed
is not another story, like Prout, but rather a focus on local
knowledge and
not on attempts to universalize from particular experiences. Thus, in
the
postmodern, while Sarkar might certainly be sensible in his own
historical
and cultural context (Tantra and Bengal), his works should not be
generalized to other systems. Indeed, the future, more and more, is
difference and not unity. It is through difference that individual
humans
rights and local economies can flourish and not through claims of
globalism
or universal spiritualism.

For Sarkar, the story of chaos is the predictable type of story one
gets at
the end of one yuga, one era. Difference and chaos are especially
important
at this juncture to destroy the old and create the new. But neither
skepticism and cynicism nor localism can create a future society. They
cannot create, only destory. Localism, again while a worthy
oppositional
strategy to break the hegemony of capitalism, is unable to create a
world
civilization that guarantees rights for all nor can it deal with the
fluidity of global capital flows or global culture. Localism easily
succumbs
to racism and other narrow tendencies. The challenge is, of course,
the mix
of the global and local, which Prout claims it has right.

But like postmodernists, Sarkar does contest traditional definitions
of
rationality. But while postmodernists see the rational as dependent on
particular discourses, Sarkar priviledges the spiritual. He redefines
rationality, seeing it in spiritual and social justice terms. He
places the
subtleness of inner love at the centre of his cosmology. But while
love was
the base, he does not neglect the harsh realities of the world system.

Certain recent thinkers have argued for a new story to end all
historical
stories, a New Age. What is needed is a new myth, a story of stories,
it is
believed. However, for Sarkar - here a critical traditionalist -
stories are
not merely imaginations created by intellectuals in libraries (or
through
channelling) but are hard fought struggles of meaning and vision, of
life
and death. Stories come through trauma - as we struggle against power
- and
transcendence, as we touch the face of the divine. They cannot be
simply
invented. Thus, now returning to our earlier point, even as Sarkar
creates a
new discourse, he does so in the context of the indigenous tradition
of
Tantra. He, borrowing from other traditions, revitalizes Tantra
civilization
but does so not in a simplistic mythified manner (in which the past is
seen
as lost paradise, as satya yuga), rather, he does so in a critical
manner in
which the past spirals into the future. Thus, while certainly a new
story is
needed, its generation must be historical, grounded in the stories of
the
past and be part of a real living tradition - Shiva's Tantra for
Sarkar -
and not merely in the fantasy of intellectuals, who imagine virtual
worlds
with no real life correspondance.

Who will provide the story?

While it is easy to state the Prout itself is the old/new story, this
is too
myopic a reading. Sarkar himself, has argued that Prout, Ananda Marga
and
Renaissance cadres, must unite the various moral forces. By moral
forces,
what exactly was Sarkar hinting at we can ask? Certainly this was not
a
facile claim to search out those who are personally following ethical
lifestyles, rather it is more a call to search for those who are
challenging
the deep codes of the current capitalist (and previously communist
system as
well) system as well as challenging those religous systems which cease
to be
consistent with basic human, community and environmental rights.

One way to come to terms with this issue is to borrow the analysis of
the
Tunisian 14th century philosopher, Ibn Khaldun. For him the key factor
in
human history is asabiya or the sinews that bind. A people rise in
power
through struggle with the environment. This is similar to Toynbee's
challenge/response hypothesis, in which a creative minority succeeds
by
meeting various enviornmental, political, economic or cultural
challenges.
For Khaldun, those that had the most unity, here speaking of the 14th
century, were the bedouins. They lived outside of official power,
official
descriptions of knowledge and had not been seduced by the sedantary
lifestyle of the city - they had retained their moral and physical
strength.

In more recent times, for Ashis Nandy it is the shaman, outside of
official
knowledge and outside of official dissent, that can provide the
impetus for
new social Imaginations. But for Sarkar, it is the shaman-in-society,
living
in a mystical world and yet active in society that can create a better
society. A shaman, while avoiding the virus of cynicism, is also
materially
inactive and thus unable to understand the vaeshyan and ksattriyan
impetuses. But a shaman-in-society in her or himself both challenges
current
discourses and aids in creating new ones.

The question for this period in human history is who are the bedouins,
where
are the shamans-in-society? Uniting the moralists means uniting these
Bedouin- shamanistic forces that exist outside of contemporary power.
If
rereading Sarkar, we see the world as situated in four types of power
-
warrior (national militaries and police), intellectual (universities
and
their religious counterparts, the mosque, temples and churches),
merchant
(the market place, the transnational corporations) and the underclass
(women, nature, children, the aged, the disabled) all existing in the
context of an interstate system of nations, the future than at one
level
will come from those outside of the official vision of the future. If
currently power, while largely merchant, is corporatist in its
orientation,
with the intelligentsia and warriors providing legitimation and
coercive
support, certainly we should not expect alternative futures to come
from
these groups. Thus it is from the underclass, women, nature, children,
and
others we can expect alternative visions of the real and the future to
come
forth. But this is too simplistic a reading. World power works by
seducing
the poor and weak into believing that they all benefit from the
system, that
they will one day make it, either through hard work (the Protestant
Christian formulation), by following their dharma (the Hindu
formulation
where they will make it in the next life) or by following their
husband, or
brother or father (the patriarchal formulation). Given the naturalness
of
the capitalist system, it would be rare to gain a unified vision at
these
lower levels of the world system, certainly rare to find one that can
destablize the entire system. Labor movements certainly to some
disagree
have asabiya but only in the context of nation-states - transnational
labor
movements do not exit, workers of the world have not united, nor have
women
or children or the disabled. The women's movement certainly challenges
patriarchy throughout the world, however, since it begins with an
essential
sovereign view of gender, it has been unable to unite other movements
equally committed to system transformation. Third World unity has also
fallen apart. East Asian have quickly followed the path of capitalism
and
having succeeded, barely see themselves as part of the non-aligned
movement.
Moreover, other Third World nations are either too poor or too
concerned
with dissent in their home to be concerned with a global movement -
they
have not yet achieved national sovereinty, it would be too much to
expect
them to jetson national sovereignty for some idea of world culture or
planetary progressive civilization. The world socialist movement is in
shatters, with the talk of the second world or the third way been
thrown out
with the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Still some hope might come from the social movements. They are a
diverse
range of, often, voluntary transnational movements. Some of the
problems
they address are environmental (the ozone, protection of endangered
species,
and animal liberation groups); others are gender-based (against wife
abuse,
wife burning, female circumcision and for equal pay and equal rights
for
women), others are culture-based

against the gross forms of foreign culture as in dolls that reflect
only
Western culture or movies that deride non-Western cultures, that
create
homogeneity where there is authentic difference); some of these
concerned
about future generations (against short termism in governmental
decisionmaking and providing a voice and forum for future generations
not
yet born); some are federalists (arguing for a world government, or a
strengthened United Nations); some are human rights-based (hoping to
eliminate the worse of human rights abuses); others are concerned with
minorities (suppressed by each nation); some are focused on
governmental
corruption (hoping to increase transparency throughout the world);
and,
others are economic (joining together producers and consumers in
cooperatives, ethical finance). While the list is almost endless, all
hope
to reduce injustice and enlarge inclusiveness towards others, be it
nature,
the future, women, children, and minorities. They are historically
unique in
that they are non-governmental, arguing for a global third force
focused
neither on the prince nor the merchant but on the citizen - a citizen
that
has rights and responsibilities and is culturally diverse. They take a
range
of forms from preserving or enhancing the local (as economy,
evironment or
culture) and as national, international and transnational pressure
groups
fighting for major causes of justice.

Most of these social movements (currently of the 18,000 non-
governmental
organizations 1800 are recognized by the UN) are Western, highly
participatory, goal oriented, short term and single issue based. They
are
certainly bedouin in that they are not part of government or state nor
of
church or academy and they also fulfill our criteria in that they
reject
conventional difinitions of knowledge - they desire to create a new
discourse. All would agree that a new moral discourse is needed to
save the
planet and create a new bright future. However, while Prout fits into
this
mode, it is somewhat different.

Sarkar's movements are unique in that they are:

1) Third World oriented, hoping to be the carriers of oppressed yet
also
seeing the oppressors in neo-humanist terms (differentiating, for
example,
the capitalist system and the capitalist, between structure and
individual);

2) Tantric, focused on reinvigorating mystical culture and not
necessarily
on immediate efficiency (and thus movement members spend a great deal
of
time in meditation both for their own spiritual growth but also to
change
the vibrational level of the planet);

3) Civilizational, meaning based on a historical culture and not
intellectually fabricated, that is, fetishizing the modern or the new;

4) Comprehensive, working on many issues (and not just on the issue of
the
day) from students' rights, farmers' rights, womens' rights and
workers'
rights to the prevention of cruelty to animals and plants (and thus
unlike
the shaman, movement members are socially active directly concerned
with
human suffering) and thus synthetic, visioning and creating an
alternative
future that is not merely anthetical, arising out of an oppositional
dialectical need;

5) Very very long term oriented, hundreds of years, that is,
structures and
processes that cannot fulfil their goals for generations ahead (and
thus
many of Sarkar's categories often make little sense to the present,
his
vision was temporally broad and deep);

6) Committed to leadership creation and not just organisational
development,
thus avoiding the bureaucratic tendency (and thus, the focus on
creating
leaders that have deep humanistic qualities and not just on the
expansion of
the movement);

7) Trans-state oriented, not solely concerned with nation-states and
ego-power but acknowledging that there are four conventional types of
power - worker, warrior, intellectual, economic - with the challenge
to
develop processes that create a fifth that can balance these forces.

8) Morality based, not solely doing the expedient but a willingness
to, for
example, live in the same conditions as the poor, willing to sacrifice
their
own needs for those of others, and

9) Family/Monastic, having a place for both the family and the monk,
seeing
both as essentially transformative spiritual paths.

While certainly social movements have dimensions of the above, they do
not
possess all these factors (and realistically in terms of the day to
day,
neither do Sarkar's movements, these are process goals and hopes,
which
humans strive for). Moroever, many social movements are coopted by the
State
or by liberal campaigns of shallow inclusiveness. Prout, on the other
hand,
has been attacked through the jailings of its workers and its founder.
Through struggle, sometimes apparently violent, it is shown that it
cannot
be so easily coopted.

Who?

Now what type of individuals might be attracted to Sarkar's movements.
From
the West, one would expect those disenchanted with the
material/industrial/bourgois way of life. However, many from this
category
opt not for social/spiritual movements but prefer becoming involved in
chemical ways of life or are concerned only with spiritual pursuits -
new
age types, for example, focused on personal emotional healing or on
Alien
contact. Those potentially interested in Sarkar's movements would be
those
who were tired with the material way of life and not attracted to the
chemical way of life and had seen some suffering in the world, either
through travel or insight that there is social/structural injustice,
ie
inequity in the world system. Individuals from the West coming from
highly
educated and priviledged families (that could afford to travel, that
gave
the children a feeling of material security) would fit into the
category of
potential Prout and Ananda Marga membership. But these individuals
would be
rare as most would prefer single issue movements instead of the all-
encompassing (in terms of time and commitment required) nature of
Sarkar's
movements.

One might also expect as potential recruits individuals who had become
disenchanted with socialist or activist paths, who saw the follys of
the
communist option, or who in their activism or social service saw the
need
for internal transformation. In the West these would be individuals
who had
worked in the labor movement or in Peace Corps-type activities and
were
searching for a spiritual path that was committed to social justice.

In the East, however, these assumptions might not necessarily be
appropriate. With spirituality as more of a given - especially in
India - it
would be individuals who were drawn to the mix of activism and
spirituality
but outside of a strict religious framework. In India, these would be
transformed hindus who had coexisted with Muslims or Christians, had
traveled and seen the limitations of a particular tradition and thus
became
inspired by Sarkar's eclecticism (without giving into to liberalism).

Certainly, there is not a huge batch of individuals to draw from.
While the
Green party - with its emphasis on ecology, gender cooperation,
spirituality
and deep democracy - would draw from the same group, Sarkar's pool
would be
less inclined towards anarchy and in that sense more conservative than
Green
potentials. However, while the pool is small, one does not require
millions
for social transformation. Leadership creation, afterall, and not
bureaucracy is Sarkar's mission.

For Sarkar, part of the transformation of individuals is the creation
of a
new language. Returning to our early point on metaphors, underneath
these
processes has been Sarkar's effort of creating and using a new
language
(with some guiding categories such as samaj, prama, microvita,
samadhi,
sadhana) and new metaphors

Shiva dancing between life and death) to help be the vehicles of the
good
society he envisions. Much of the failure of current politics is that
neo-realistic thinking (whrein only states are real, only markets can
provide good and services and we are all autonomous individuals)
colonizes
our imagination. Sarkar desired to create a new language which could
both
deconstruct current orderings of knowledge but also provide new
avenues of
expresssion in which, for example, the spiritual was not antagonistic
to the
material; in which reality was seen as having layers; and, wherein the
idea
of humanity could be expressed in the context of other forms of life.

As a movement Ananda Marga (and to a lesser extent Prout) must also be
seen
in is cultural context. Its Indian, non-Western and spiritual
origination
cannot be avoided, indeed, it is its strength. It would be quite
impossible
for Ananda Marga to succeed if it did not have a historical context,
if it
could not at some level be civilizationally "remembered." Ananda Marga
must
show some similarities to other movements/religions/ways of life,
there must
be a gateway to entry, some recognizable social and spiritual
categories. At
the same time, Sarkar's ingenuity is that within his movments are
dynamics
which allow them to transcend their own cultural limitations. For
example,
Indian movement workers must cast off the caste system and many work
in
non-Indian nations thus learning about the other

workers/monks from other nations are similarly sent to a nation
different
than their own). Moreover marriages are encouraged between different
ethnicities, again challenging any purity of race or tradition
nations. It
is a universal society that Sarkar imagined not India or any
particular
nation writ large.

However, as might be expected humans are not universal. We are racist,
sexist and capitalist and certainly Sarkar's Prout and other movements
exhibit these categories as well. However, meditation and and
institutional
culture which looks aghast at such practices provides a dynamic where
over
the longer term - fifty years perhaps - these contradictions can
increasingly be worked out. To not expect these contraditions would be
quite
unusual since humans live in a social and political context. The
process of
struggle with these dynamics - our inner demons - is not outside of
Prout or
Ananda Marga, but part of its very essence. This struggle is both
meditational (an internal battle), organizational (who gets what
authority
and recognition) and social (how others are treated). While the goal
is the
path, at the same time only concern with internal organizational
dynamics
avoids individual responsibility and the need to show concrete
alternatives,
to do something for "the suffering humanity," to use Sarkar's
language.

Revolutions

Lastly, it is important to situate Prout in a historical sense.
Glossing
human history, we argue that even while there ar cyclical dimensions
to
history (the rise and fall of varna and of nation), there has been a
linear
movement towards more rights, towards laying bare power.

While this argument is somewhat universalizable, in this discussion we
focus
on the European social formation. It can be characterized as having
five
structures: The clergy (Sarkar's vipras), the aristocrats (Sarkar's
ksattriyas), the bourgoisie (Sarkar's vaeshyas) and the peasants
(Sarkar's
shudras). Underneath this structure are the underclass: women, gypsies
and
Nature.

While one could focus on the rise and fall of dynasties staying within
our
structural typology, we can see European history as a sucession of
revolutions. To name a few critical ones:

1) The revolt of the peasants against feudalism (the late middle ages,
the
14th century).

2) The revolt of aristocrats against clergy (church/state) - wherein
church
power was contested (modernity).

3) The revolt of aristocrats against the king, a constitutional
revolution
as in the English Glorious Revolution of the 17th century, a process
started
much earlier with the Magna Carta in the 13th century.

3) The revolt of bourgois against the aristocrats and clergy. This was
the
French revolution and created the Enligtenment.

4) More recently the revolt of the proleteriat against the bourgoisie.
This
was the Russian socialist revolution of 1917. In Nordic nations this
was
more of a gradual evolution of labor power, of the welfare state.

5) Elsewhere, there was the revolt of the peasants against the city.
This
was Mao Zedeng's formula (the argument that the two opposing camps are
the
city and the rural). Pol Pot took this view to its tragic consequence.

6) More recently (and of course, part of a long term trend) has been
the
revolt of women against men, against patriarchy in all its forms.

7) The revolt of nature against industrialism. This has been the Green
position calling for a limits of technocracy.

8) The revolt of the Third World against Europe, with calls for Third
World
solidarity. This decolonization process - The 18th American Revolution
being
a much earlier example of this - has eventually led to

9) The revolt of the indigenous against all foreign social formations,
calling for the creation of special status for them as guardians of
the
planet

10) Finally is the revolt against the nation-state worldview, wherein
social
movements are finding space to express themselves against the
interstate
system.

Our question then is how does Prout fit into this sucessive revolution
of
increased rights? Sarkar's Prout can be seen as expanding and
fulfilling
these revolutionary movements, not focused on any particular
revolution but
attempting to balance and move forward all of them.

1) Sarkar expands humanism to neo-humanism which struggles against the
Enlightenment's human centrism and argues for increased rights of
plants and
animals - towards global vegetarianism and for an global ecological
regime.
Like the humanists of the European 14th century, who helped bring
about a
renaissance, Sarkar hopes to bring about a new renaissance, but a
universal
one, that includes all living beings wherein identity is layered
situated in
self, other and cosmic consciousness.

2) Sarkar intends to expand the concept of the magna carta (against
the
power of the king) into a neo-magna carta and develop a world
government
with basic human rights; rights of language, right of religion and
right to
purchasing power.

3) Sarkar's economic system is committed to the idea of a maxi-mini
wage
structure wherein minimum rights are guaranteed and thus he can be
seen as
fundamentally anti-bourgois. Land, in particular, is seen as a common
resource, owned by God. While small scale ownership is allowed there
are
clear limitations on the accumulation of wealth in all its forms.

4) But while Prout is a type of progressive socialism, it also argues
against socialist egalitarianism as Sarkar believes that incentives
must be
given to those who can create new wealth, ideas and technologies.

5) Sarkar is more of a womanist than a strict Western feminist as he
believes there are bio-psychological differences between men and women
(that, however, can be transcended, and will most likely dramatically
decrease in generations ahead) and he sees the need for women's rights
as
contextual, as part of the broader struggle against imperialism,
nationalism
and capitalism and not just as a struggle against men per se. He
argues for
coordinated cooperation between the genders, with women having their
own
space in some areas and sharing space with men in other areas. Working
together is the common regime with neither gender having the upper
hand.

6) The overall goal of Sarkar is the realization of cosmic
consciousness and
thus he is against materialism as well as philosophical dualism. He
also
argues that humanity's dharma or path is essentially spiritual and
thus in
the long run dismisses the sovereignty of identity outside the cosmic.

Sarkar's Prout thus continues these historical social revolutions but
sees
the revolutions of varna (labor, warrior, intellectual and merchant)
as
cyclical based, each one revolts against the other when it exploits.
The
worse is the exploitation by the merchants, which leads to a massive
revolution wherein power then concentrates again.

The purpose of Prout is to create a new leadership which keeps society
moving and eliminates the particular nasty expressions of each varna.
At the
same time, Prout has a linear dimension with the future one of
increased
rights for women and nature (and thus for men as well as they will be
less
subjected to the trauma of extreme capitalism, male religion and
totalitarian communism), for safeguards for the following of one's
religion,
for the protection of one's language and for protection against the
misery
of poverty.

Sarkar's goal, however, is not to create a global civil society (which
often
excludes the spiritual) but a gaia of civilizations, a planetary
civilizations wherein each culture can express itself in the context
of a
world governance system. For him, the citizen must be a world citizen
whose
identity is universal, seeing and acting as part of the cosmos. Sarkar
expands the idea of the civil from its oppositional definition to
state to
include other dimensions of reality.

Within the Indian context, Sarkar as well advances various Indian
revolutions. He expands Buddha's ancient eightfold path to his own
sixteen
points; he acknowledges the role of the bhakti movements, making
devotion to
God the centre piece of his ideology; and, he attempts to honor both
Tantric
and Vedic paths by focusing equalling on Shiva and Krishna as guiding
myths.
He challenges caste seeing it as cruel and violent but uses varna in
his
macrohistory. He manages to accede neither to Nehru's industrial
revolution
nor Gandhi's localism, instead seeking a cooperative people's economy.
Finally, while acknowledging the role of ahimsa at the personal level,
he
does not accede to extreme Jain positions, rather he argues that force
in
realpolitik is an appropriate response once all forms of negotiation
have
been exhausted. Clearly in the Indian context he is an iconoclast.
With no
space for him, Sarkar has sought to engulf and transform the Indian
way of
life and thinking.

Finally it is important to note that the plan is the process. For
example,
Sarkar hopes to create a

1) Planetary civilization through the encouragement of marriage
accross
culture and civilization.

2) A new spiritual culture through his 16 points of spiritual
practices as
propagated by the Ananda Marga movement. These points include
meditation,
yoga, personal morality, service to humanity, plants and animals.

3) A new culture through, for example, transforming day to day
greetings to
the Indian namascar (I salute the divinity within you) from the more
secular, hi.

4) A non-statist and peaceful culture through the celebration of
holidays
such as children's day and other such festivals that are not tied to
the
birth of nations and victories of conquerers.

With all these processes in shape, what then of the future? While the
first
phase of globalism is certainly the globalisation of capital and the
globalisation of American culture, Sarkar is hopeful that it is the
spiritual and the moral that will be next wave. The efforts of the
various
social movements in creating a new global governance system, a
stronger
civil society is certainly part of this future.

Ultimately Sarkar reminds us that we are not because we shop (market
based
selves) or because we hate others (nationalism) but because we love
and care
for others, because we yearn for the divine. History is created by
structural and personal forces, but also by the attraction towards the
Great, the divine. It is this force that will create a new planetary
civilization. Sarkar lived such a vision and his movements are
undergoing
the arduous task of creating such a vision. Will they be successful?
Hard
work, collective action and transcendental grace will be needed as
well as
faith. As Sarkar once said: "Justice is delayed but never denied."

Sohail Inayatullah is senior research fellow at the Communication
Centre,
Queensland University of Technology, Box 2434, Brisbane, Q, 4001,
Australia

References

Anandamitra Avadhutika, The Spiritual Philosophy of Shrii Shrii
Anandamurti.
Denver, Ananda Marga Publications, 1981.

Gunaprakashananda Avadhuta, Togo: A Proutist Approach for Solving the
Problems of Lowered Living Standards, Unemployment and Rural Poverty.
Lome'
Togo, Prout Research Institute, 1991.

Tadbhavananda Avadhuta and Jayanta Kumar, The New Wave. Calcutta,
Proutist
Universal, 1985.

Ravi Batra, The Downfall of Capitalism and Communism. London,
MacMillan
Press, 1978. First Edition. Second edition, Dallas, Venus Books, 1990.

Auguste Comte, Positive Philosophy. trans. Harriet Martineau. London,
Trubner, 1875.

Teilhard de Chardin, The Future of Man. trans. Norman Denny. New York,
Harper and Row, 1964.

James Dator, "The Futures of Cultures and Cultures of the Future," in
Marsella et al eds.) Perspectives on Cross Cultural Psychology. New
York,
Academic Press, 1979.

Merryl Wyn Davies, Ashis Nandy and Zia Sardar, Barbaric Other: A
Manifesto
on Western Racism. London, Pluto Press, 1993.

Eric Drexler, Engines of Change. New York, Anchor Press, 1986.

Michael Dudley and Kioni Agard, Man, Gods and Nature. Honolulu, Ka
Kane O Ka
Malo Press, 1990.

Riane Eisler, Sacred Pleasure. San Francisco, HarperCollins, 1996.

Riane Eisler, The Chalice and the Blade. San Francisco, HarperCollins,
1988.

Paul Ekins, Wealth Beyond Measure. London, Gaia Books, 1992.

Duane Elgin with Coleen Drew, Global Consciousness Change: Indicators
of an
Emerging Paradigm. San Anselmo, California, Millennium Project, 1997.

Mircia Eliade, The Myth of the Eternal Return. New Jersey, Princeton
University Press, 1971.

Kathy Ferguson, The Man Question: Visions of Subjectivity. Berkeley,
University of California Press, 1993.

Andre Gunder Frank and Barry Gills, The World System: Five Hundred
years or
Five Thousand. London, Routledge, 1996.

Johan Galtung, "The Green Movement: A Socio-Historical Exploration" in
Essays in Peace Research, Vol. 1-6. Copenhagen, Christian Ejlers,
1988.

Johan Galtung and Sohail Inayatullah. Macrohistory and
Macrohistorians. New
York, Praeger, 1997.

Willis Harmon, Global Mind Change: The Promise of the Last Years of
the 20th
Century. Indianapolis, Knowledge Systems, 1988.

Sohail Inayatullah, Situating Sarkar: Historical, Comparative and
Poststructural Inquiries. Singapore, AM Publications and Denmark,
Prout
Publications, 1997.

Sohail Inayatullah and Jennifer Fitzgerald, Transcending Boundaries:
P.R.
Sarkar's Theories of Individual and Social Transformation. Singapore,
AM
Publications, 1997 and Denmark, Prout Publications, 1997.

Sohail Inayatullah, "Cycles of Power," in Edges (March 1990).

Sohail Inayatullah, "Ibn Khaldun: The Rise and Fall of Asabiya"
Periodica
Islamica

Vol. 6, No. 3, 1996); 7-15.

Sohail Inayatullah, "Framing Indian Political Philosophy," in Edward
Craig,
ed., Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy," London, Routledge, 1998.

Sohail Inayatullah, Understanding P.R. Sarkar. Doctoral dissertation,
Department of Political Science, University of Hawaii, 1990.

Leopold Kohr, The Overdeveloped Nations. New York, Schocken Books,
1978.

Irwin Laszlo, "Footnotes to a History of the Future." Futures (Vol.
20, No.
5, 1988).

Robert Lawlor, Voices of the First Day: Awakening in the Aboriginal
Dreamtime. Vermont, Inner Traditions, 1991.

Ashis Nandy, Tradition, Tyranny, and Utopias. Delhi, Oxford University
Press, 1987.

P.R. Sarkar, PROUT in a Nutshell, Vols. 1-25. Calcutta, Ananda Marga
Publications, 1988.

P.R. Sarkar, Proutist Economics: Discourses on Economic Liberation.
Calcutta, Ananda Marga, 1992.

P.R. Sarkar, The Liberation of Intellect - Neo-Humanism. Calcutta,
Ananda
Marga Publications, 1982.

Pitirim Sorokin, Social and Cultural Dynamics. Boston, Porter Sargent,
1957.

Immanuel Wallerstein, The Politics of the World Economy: The States,
the
Movements, and the Civilizations. London, Cambridge University Press,
1984.

Immanuel Wallerstein, "World System and Civilization," Development:
Seeds of
Change (1/2, 1986)

--

--
'The main characteristic of PROUT-based socioeconomic movements
is that they aim to guarantee the comprehensive, multifarious
liberation of humanity.' P R Sarkar

People's News Agency
is a free news, views, analysis and literature
service for the progressive minded.
Send email to: majordomo@igc.org subscribe pna-news

PROUT - PROgressive Utilisation Theory http://www.prout.org
http://www.globaltimes.net
New Renaissance: A Journal for Social and Spiritual Awakening:
http://www.ru.org