Welcome to episode four of Prout Consciousness where we will take a look at Prout’s idea of self-reliant socio-economic units. So far in the series we have discussed decentralised economic democracy and cooperatives, which are practical models for implementing Prout. Now the question comes as to how realistic those models are and how they may be implemented—on what basis and following which kind of human processes? As is generally observed, our physical world is most varied. Prout notes that our psychic world of individual and collective notions is even more diverse, ever fluctuating and changing. In fact, if we say that the physical environment is manifold and wondrous, it seems that our psychic environment is even more complex and totally unpredictable. In terms of socio-economics, the conditions of one country is like no others; every country and people are uniquely potential with their particular circumstances and resources. And the same is true for their psyche and subtler vital characteristics. Therefore, in order to generate progress for all and eventually unite the world’s people in such efforts, Prout promotes the idea of properly integrated socioeconomic zones or samajas.
This word, samaj, is really old, dating back to ancient nomadic Aryan culture and its concept of communities of people moving together. In Sanskrit, samaj came to mean “a group of people who are moving together happily and peacefully”. The root sam is ubiquitous in Indo-European languages. In English we say “same”, and in a host of other languages sam will be found to indicate “together”, “like”, “such as”, and so on. In my own mother tongue, Norwegian, society is called samfunn, which means “collectively founded”.
Prout’s definition of samaj is collective movement from a point of initial morality to ultimate attainment of the eternally great and good. From the preceding episode on cooperatives, you would recognise the emphasis that Prout places on the moral. Morality is not Prout’s endgame, however, but the prerequisite of proper social movement. Without moral impetus, without moral institutions, without ethically informed legislative, judicial and executive, society collapses before it has realised its goal of providing for all-round progress of its members. To Prout, morality is the starting point of society where values of particular human significance and greater social coherence begin to form.
Now, is it even moral to suggest that all people should follow one and the same idea always? Will for instance a Prout coop demand sameness of mind of all its members, turning them all into uniform units of a homogenous heap of conformists, as it were? And, at the greater level, how can Prout determine the nature of socioeconomic zones for all people? Will some people really benefit from just adopting the ways and means of others to join them in a greater march? Can a single economic idea be adopted by all countries, for all times and for all people? No, far from it. Such unnatural unification is better called invasion, and it would be unnatural because all living creatures including humans are not alike, and neither is it practically possible or moral to suggest such an approach of unilateral standardisation to solving the socioeconomic problems of global humanity. Historically, all attempts to make all follow uniform economic dynamics have soon ended in suppression, oppression, repression and final utter destruction by brute force. This was the case in all communist countries as well as everywhere where colonial and neo-colonial powers of capitalism put their clumsy greedy feet.
In the introductory episode to this series it was discussed that consciousness is the cause of all of existence. Consciousness is what binds human beings together, their one common factor—feelings, sentiments, thoughts and ideas; they all express consciousness. It was also said that like everything else, various schools of social and political systems express consciousness. And we gave examples such as the individualism of capitalism and the collectivism of socialism; they both attach ideas about wealth distribution to those ideals of the individual and collective, respectively. Now it may be asked, if consciousness is the great common denominator of all of creation, why are social, political and economic views so divergent; why is there so much conflict, war and suffering, and why are humans at war with plants, animals and the entire environment? If we manage to find life on other planets, can we only expect that we will go to war with them, too? And why do people conflict so much with themselves, generating a plethora of mental crises and insanity? What makes our personal and collective consciousness clash so much and so seriously?
As is well known, most creatures on this planet of ours live lives dominated by primitive instincts and sensuality. Everywhere we find that hunger, breeding, sleep and fear are chief catalysts of the battle for survival. This is true for all plants and animals. Humans, though, appear to live their lives somewhere in between the animal and something higher, something more, something subtler. In human life, the primitive and civilized, profanity and poetry, the crude and the sublime keep colliding. Human conscience, ethics, intuition and sense of caring all absolutely clash with our lack of proper interaction and existential backwardness. Accordingly, every ethnic community and country are plagued with internal and external clashes and conflicts due to petty self-interest. Where is the unity which creates a common bond among human beings; where is the proof of ever-present universal consciousness?
The baddie here is of course extroversive mind. Burdened by evolutionary baggage, by the legacy of tons of animal primitivity, the human mind continues to run amuck in the outer and also in the inner world. At times, though, it seeks the clarity of the inner sanctum, quiet reflection, undisturbed contemplation, but because of the external world’s relentless calling we all remain mostly restless and unsatisfied. The human mind, its existential ambivalence, torn between the superficial and the profound, the relative and the absolute, this ceaseless existential struggle represents a critical stage of evolution, a sort of halfway state between instinctual drives and godly enlightenment. The elevated state may appear momentarily like a twinkling star on the remote night sky of our subconscious, while animality keeps holding us back much like the force of gravitation nails us to the planet. While animal nature makes us loose ourselves in the marginal and allow narrow-minded sentiments to cloud any greater vision of glorious co-existence, our divine nature offers glimpses of the eternal good and great, so that once in a while it may appear that we are simply floating effortlessly in existence, joyously absorbed in states of exaltation and prolonged contentment, on something akin to infinite love.
Now, what is hate? It is a misunderstanding based on and embedded in love. Hate is negative love and love is not negative hate. Love is the basic attraction that keeps the creation together however much the various individual entities choose to believe in hating one another. Hostility, enmity, is embedded in perceived crude limitations. For example: two kids in a playground get into an argument over some sand. At the height of their little war their separated views of reality dominate completely: “This is mine—no it is mine!” To onlookers, their childish fight seems quite unnecessary. The same is the case when adults and countries go to war; to others it is just madness and an expression of lack of proper understanding and stunted growth. The onlookers’ notion of proper understanding is an expression of that all-pervasive love that runs through the entire creation and beyond, due to which all living beings feel a deep attraction for others. When the mind runs after external and superficial realities that same love is not felt that keenly because the mind gets absorbed in narrow limitations, but when searching deep within all that the mind is able to find is reverence and longing for more and still more of that essential love of all.
This universal attraction, Shrii Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar, the propounder of Prout, thought to be the natural wont of living beings. Had there been no such balancing force among all creatures, the entire existence would have shattered into pieces, just like when an atom gives up its nuclear core causing it to split into fragments and release a tremendous amount of destructive energy leading to rapid chain reaction causing an atomic explosion, a purely externally directed imbalanced process moving away from the nucleus. Existential balance is maintained due to the nuclear attraction of universal love amongst all different objects and entities. From atoms and molecules to human beings with developed consciousness, all entities feel attraction for one another. Prout’s socio-economic endeavour is based on this principle: attraction is not negative repulsion, rather repulsion is negative attraction. The so-called differences we notice amongst human beings in the external world are nothing but the expressions of negative attraction. For differences to occur people must enter into some sort of relationship with each other. Without close proximity there cannot be any friction. A serious difference of opinion today may be changed into friendship tomorrow. This idea is at the base of Prout’s concept of socioeconomic units evolving on their own platform of strength and gradually entering into cooperation and eventual merger.
On the basis of whatever limited experience and understanding we have, our mind forms strong sentimental attachments. Family feelings, national sentiments, and even divisive sentiments such as racism, sexism and religious hatred may grow out of such sentimentality. Sentiments are usually the basis for lasting relationships between individuals and groups of people. According to Prout, to establish unity and welfare common points of affinity must be identified and evolved in the sphere of socio-economics as well as in our psychic and spiritual spheres.
The first logical step seems to be to remove social and economic disparities, which otherwise generate so much hatred and backwardness. As discussed in previous episodes, each and every person should be guaranteed the minimum necessities of life. Everyone must be provided with sufficient purchasing capacity through work. And, it is not enough to simply provide the minimum necessities of life. Simultaneously, the wealth of the country should also be increased. Sufficient wealth should be generated to meet the growing demands of the people, both because of population increase and their increasing qualitative demands, such as for further education, for particular amenities; in short, for increasingly better life for all.
Just like individuals argue, quarrel and fight due to external attachments, various socio-economic groups do the same. All wars in the world today are fought over external resources. Now, what would be the common factors leading to unity among those same socio-economic units? What external and internal factors may bring countries, regions, continents and the entire world together? Prout identifies the following potential factors for common socio-economic and further growth and development: 1) same economic problems; 2) uniform economic potentialities; 3) ethnic parity; 4) the sentimental legacy of the people; and 5) similar geographical features. Let us discuss these one by one.
“Same economic problems” refers to the common economic problems confronting people in a particular area. These may include lack of markets for locally produced goods, surplus or deficit labour problems, communication or transportation difficulties and lack of irrigation water. Ascertaining whether or not a similar set of economic problems exists in an extended area is the first thing, which should be clearly analysed when forming a socio-economic unit. The economic problems of the entire socio-economic unit, and their solutions, should be well understood.
Second, there should be uniform economic potentialities in the unit. Despite natural variations from place to place, overall the people throughout a unit should enjoy similar opportunities for economic prosperity. Disparity between the haves and the have-nots and the rich and the poor will have to be progressively reduced so that the collective wealth will increase and society will become bountiful. This was discussed to a great extent in the previous episodes.
Third, there should be ethnic parity. In the past many races and sub-races have been suppressed and exploited by powerful, dominant races. Those with evil designs, in order to divide society and establish their own pre-eminence, have propagated racism. Society must guard against such narrow and dangerous sentiments. This can be done only if every ethnic group has adequate scope for its expression and development. Shrii Sarkar commented, that the multi-coloured garland of humanity will be enriched to the extent diverse human groups blend together from a position of strength and independence out of a genuine love for each other, and are not forced together through fear or compulsion.
Fourth, sentimental legacy includes factors such as language, historical traditions, literature, common usages and cultural expressions. It is the common chord in the collective psychology of a particular group of people, which gives them their unique identity, and sense of affinity. It was already established that human beings are predominantly sentimental by nature. They establish some kind of relationship with the many objects of the world through their day-to-day activities. Shrii Sarkar suggested, that if the sentiment for a particular favourite object is adjusted with the collective sentiment then that sentiment can be utilized for establishing unity in human society. For instance, there is a great difference between having a keen sporting competition between to traditional rival parties ending in chill hostility or arranging for the entire event to be embedded in an atmosphere of sweet fraternity. The human sentiment for many objects may sometimes run counter to the collective sentiment and create great disunity, so those sentiments, which are conducive to human unity, should be encouraged, and the sentiments which divide human society should be rejected.
Finally, similar geographical features such as topography, river systems, rainfall and irrigation water should also be considered in the formation of a socio-economic unit.
In most cases, each socio-economic unit will correspond to one political unit, but in some cases more than one socio-economic unit may form one political unit. Each socioeconomic unit represents a collection of human beings who want to move together as a samaja; hence all the people in these samajas should feel that they form a family whose members all have an equal right to utilise their inheritance, their entire world. The entire program of decentralised economic democracy will have to be materialised by and in those socio-economic units.
We discussed sentimental legacy and that the world of diversity is not limited to the physical sphere only; personal and societal characteristics vary, too. Just as each human being has his or her own traits, similarly people living within a particular geographical, historical and cultural environment also inhere some traits which distinguish them. Such traits or specialities are inseparably embedded in the internal behaviour of an entire population, and go to shape their particular bent of mind, expression of external behaviour, attitude towards life and society, and on the whole their typical outlook.
If we look at the world’s ethnic makeup, this fact becomes evident – that in their approach to life, the various ethnic trends invariably differ from one another. As already indicated, variations seem to be less external and more internal. The gradual development of internal discipline springs directly from the mode of living and education, and this internal discipline is an expression of peoples characteristic collective vitality. In proutistic terms, when the vital expression of a group takes a particular course of manifestation, that course of manifestation is known as their characteristic form of vitality, their significant form of being.
Shrii Sarkar gave the example of India to illustrate this phenomenon. The people of India are basically subjective in their approach to life and the world. By nature from the very inception of childhood they ascribe Godhood to every action, thought and expression. The reason for it is very clear. In ancient India, at the age of five, a boy was sent to the residence of a Guru or enlightened teacher to learn till the age of twenty-five. The child used to learn mainly spiritual knowledge and some mundane knowledge from the teacher. After the completion of student life, the youth could return to take up family life. In family life, both spiritual knowledge and mundane knowledge were cultivated. After reaching 50 years of age, people used to leave that way of life and entered into forest life where they used to only cultivate spiritual knowledge. This is the actual historical reason why the Indian people developed their basically subjective approach towards life. This subjective approach to life became the vital characteristic of the people of India. Even notorious robbers take the name of some goddess or the other before they go to commit their crimes. Of course, some people has come to opine that the thinking of Indians has by now reached such degrees of godly subjectivity that it even does not include basic morality, which is more of a mundane social concept; India is spiritual and immoral, they say. Whatever may be the case, it seems that everywhere in the world where religion has taken deep roots, we see the same phenomenon: Even diehard sinners take the name of God when circumstances dictate it. Wherever the educational system has cultivated subtle and sublime understanding it instilled in the students a high standard of behaviour, reverence and modesty.
Now, a proven way of enmity against a person or a people is to deprive that person or that people of their freedom to cultivate their typical being, and to prevent them from channelising their potentiality accordingly. For example, Shrii Sarkar commented, the best way of enmity against a bird is to put it in a cage so that it will become a biped animal and no more a winged one. The long confinement in the cage, which is against the vital characteristics of a bird, will deprive it of the capacity to fly. Even, at that point if you leave the door of the cage open, the bird will just remain sitting there.
Capitalism is opposed to the vital characteristics of humanity in general. The fundamental trend of human beings is to expand their being, flow along with the trends of existence, serve others by mutual community, and achieve great things. Prout wants to maintain the integrity of the vital characteristics of each and every people everywhere, and is of the opinion that different people will assimilate the theory of progressive utilisation according to their vital characteristics. In Prout, there is wide scope for adjustment. Prout supports and enhances the vital characteristics of all and thereby reinforces and strengthen their march along the path of progress.
Said Shrii Sarkar, quote: “Every living being has its unique characteristics and expressions. At the same time, in todayʼs world large animals are on the verge of extinction. Environmental conditions do not support the existence of big animals any longer. Where will they find sufficient food, where can they freely roam? In the past many large creatures inhabited the earth, but as environmental conditions changed and human beings extended their domination over the planet, giant animals became extinct.
“Similarly, small states are struggling to survive. At this point, people naturally develop their interest for forming larger and larger units to ensure the welfare of all rather than struggling to maintain many small states. Consequently, narrow sentiments are gradually fading away and a universal outlook is arising in the minds of human beings. Current technological developments are conducive to the spread of such universal ideas. Moreover, science have exposed the blind faith and dogmas that have suffocated society. Gradually humanity is advancing towards an age of rationality and common interest. In conclusion, the present age is not the age of large animals and small states,” unquote.
In accordance with this trend, Prout advocates federations of self-sufficient socio-economic units throughout the world. They will work to enhance the all-round welfare of the people in their respective regions and unite humanity on a common ideological base. As units become strong and prosperous they will merge with other units based on common evolving vital characteristics. The formation of a world political body, discussed in episode seven, will assist this process of integration. Socio-economic units will thus facilitate the comprehensive, multifarious liberation of humanity.
While forming federated socio-economic units, the same aforesaid unifying factors as for units should be considered. Where there is economic parity, cultural mixing, communication facilities and administrative efficiency, it will be easy and natural for two or more adjoining units to cooperate, because they will have attained a high degree of socio-economic uniformity. In such cases they should merge to form a single larger unit. This will further the welfare of their respective citizens and enhance their socio-economic interests.
Thus, under Prout in some cases current political units, such as provinces, states and nations, may be divided into two or more socio-economic units. That is, there can be more than one socio-economic unit in a political unit. Smaller countries of ethnic and other homogeneity may prefer to stay as one. This approach will enable different socio-economic units to develop to a level which fulfils their potentiality.
If a particular state in a large, complex federal system cannot get economic justice, it may agitate for the separate allocation of funds within the federal budget. If, after launching such an agitation, it still fails to secure proper justice, it will have no alternative but to demand the formation of a separate state. Still, Prout does not favour the formation of many small states, each with its separate budget and administration. Numerous state divisions will only compound socio-economic problems, causing unnecessary duplication, and are costly and wasteful. Rather, small states should be expanded into larger socio-economic units according to the principles suggested earlier.
The natural process of forming federated units will gradually result in the formation of one socio-economic unit of smaller regions, greater regions entire continents and finally one world integrated socioeconomic unit. After reaching this stage of development, socio-economic groupifications will have attained a state of equipoise and equilibrium, and the sense of universal family will be pervasive.
While there may be diverse cultural expressions and socio-economic potentialities in different units, the points of difference should not be allowed to divide humanity. If common sentiments of human beings—family, society, expansion, flow, service and attainment—are given prominence and unity on the basis of these values are made the basis of collective development, diversity will enrich humanity rather than tear it asunder. If each socio-economic unit is inspired by a comprehensive ideology and a universal outlook, human society will move ahead with accelerating speed towards a sublime ideal.
A sound ideological base is a prerequisite for socio-economic groupifications. Such a foundation is provided by universal humanism, which has the potential to unite all humanity. Universal humanism may not be established on the hard crust of the earth overnight, but will come to fruition gradually, stage by stage. It will include each and every person in the world, as well as animals, plants and inanimate objects. Prout’s subjective approach includes all as that subject, the self of Prout, is universal and of cosmic proportions. If a single person remains outside the influence of universalism and becomes a victim of exploitation, then the foundation of universal humanism will be undermined. Hence, Prout has adopted a rational method to solve socio-economic problems which may be characterized as universal in spirit but regional in approach.
Will a world of universal socioeconomic federation be entirely exploitation-free? How can exploitation be avoided? Society may enjoy lasting protection from all types of exploitation only if a comprehensive ideology, an empirical spiritual base, spiritually oriented working people and their proper institutions are well established and integrated in social life.
Prout is not only socioeconomic theory. By nature it is a movement of all humanity and like any other movement it has a marching song. The refrain of Prout’s marching song for the eternal progress of all is “internal approach and adjustment with external objectivities”. True progress requires an internal, elevating approach, as well as an external approach which maintains balanced dynamics in social, economic and cultural life. Proutistic samaj-movements, the topic of this episode, are popular movements aiming at socioeconomic liberation by which people find solutions to the pressing problems of their lives concerning their food, clothes, education, medical treatment, housing, energy, communications, etc. Such popular movements are based mainly on positive sentiments in favour of all-round progress, and also on anti-exploitation sentiments.
In nearly all countries of the world economically privileged or advanced groups are mercilessly exploiting other economically backward groups, sucking their vitality, gagging their voice and closing all the doors of their future progress. To overcome this tyranny and exploitation, movements will have to be launched for those suppressed people so that they can stride boldly forward, fight against all exploitation and attain economic independence. Nobody can deny the need of such an approach, of such movements, because such an approach is truly humanistic. If such an approach is not adopted, it will be something unnatural and anti-human. In fact, to oppose such movements amounts to working as an agent to protect the interests of the exploitative and reactionary forces.
To solve this problem and other pressing socio-economic problems, popular movements based on anti-exploitation and universal sentiments should be launched throughout the world. Such movements should oppose all forms of economic, psychic, cultural and psycho-economic exploitation. In addition they should undertake appropriate practical programs to enhance the all-round welfare of people.
Initially it was mentioned how the unity forged by a crisis situation may soon disappear when the crisis is over. To establish lasting unity in human society, besides the above two sentiments, the spiritual sentiment is indispensable. Infinite consciousness is the source of all creation and thereby of our own consciousness. This is the reason every human being has a spiritual thirst, we always want more. When this thirst for limitlessness is directed towards the infinite, a person feels fulfilled. Knowingly or unknowingly, human beings are searching for that Supreme State. Yet, commented Shrii Sarkar, ignorant of the right path, they remain confused. One of lifeʼs great tragedies is that so many people do not find the object of their search. Their entire life is spent searching everywhere, but in vain and in the absence of fulfilment and unity clashes and conflicts rule. The method that brings about psycho-spiritual progress is called spiritual practice. When human beings bring the entire universe within the range of their minds through spiritual practice, the result will be one universe, one universal society. Unity in the inner world brings unity in the external as well. As long as the feeling of nationalism remains alive, mutual conflicts are inevitable. Human welfare depends on the degree of psychic expansion. When nationalism cannot embrace every human being, that nation cannot attain perfect well-being. When the welfare of some individuals remains outside the scope of the limited mind of the nationalists, their sorrows will never be felt. That is why a group of nationalists may attack another group of nationalists just to establish their national ego. Not only nationalism, no “ism”, not even internationalism, attains the highest degree of psychic expansion.
Every particle is a reflection of cosmic strength, of the whole of that universal consciousness. According to Prout, the socio-economic reflection of that universal cosmic strength is socio-economic self-reliance. Economic planning as per the principles of Prout’s decentralised economic democracy will aim to make each socio-economic unit self-sufficient. Information should be collected to facilitate the maximum utilisation of the local potentialities such as the geographical resources of the area, including the capacity of the rivers, lakes and canals, the location and amount of mineral, forest and aquatic resources; the agricultural and industrial resources, including the possibilities for pre- and post harvest industries; the demography, including the labour skills, health and psychology of the people; the agrarian potential, including the distribution of land for collective needs; and communication. Planning for economic self-sufficiency will have to proceed on the basis of implementing the principles of Prout by making proper use of this data and information.
The final point of the approach of the socio-economic movements of Prout is that particular demands pertaining to the local area should be implemented. The local situation should be carefully studied and programmes should be adopted as per the requirements of the particular locality. For the socio-economic groups in Germany, Ireland and Korea for example, the major focus should be on the unification of their divided nations. Germany, you may ask, didn’t they unify back in 1990? Well, as soon as the initial cheering died down so did the illusions of one Germany for all, it appears. As economics professor Gonçalo Pina writes in The Conversation September 2024, quote: “When asked about my opinion on German reunification, I usually respond that I think it is a good idea, and that we should do it. This is, of course, a joke, as Germany is now united with no official internal borders. However, 35 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the division between West and East Germany remains clearly visible … A quick glance at economic and social statistics tells us these divergences show no sign of disappearing in the near future,” unquote.
The disparities referred to by Pina and numerous other socioeconomic researchers is a universal phenomenon. Everywhere local people demand the construction of bridges and roads to facilitate communications and make raw materials more accessible as a first step in developing new industry. In places dependent on agriculture, all it may take are small scale irrigation projects to increase the availability of irrigation water that would increase the number of crops grown per year. Thus, this last point, particular local demands, includes all the local needs necessary to expedite the socio-economic development of the local area.
That is it on Prout’s concept of samaj, socioeconomic units and federations of people from all parts of the world who move happily and eagerly together towards still greater progress. The ideas of Prout samajas are still more developed than what has been detailed in this episode and I can only refer to further material by Shrii Sarkar and others available on the web page. For this episode it is time to say thank you and goodbye for now.