Five Fundamental Principles of PROUT: Difference between revisions

# There should be no accumulation of wealth without the permission of society.

# There should be maximum utilization and rational distribution of the crude, subtle, and causal resources.

# There should be maximum utilization of the physical, mental, and spiritual potentialities of the individual and collective beings.

# There should be a well-balanced adjustment among the crude, subtle, and causal utilizations.

# Utilizations vary in accordance with time, space, and form; the utilizations should be progressive.

The fundamental principles of PROUT have been likened to the construction of a social pyramid with five layers.<ref>[[Abhidevananda|Avadhuta, Acarya Abhidevananda]] (1984) ''[http://onlyhisname.com/Books/PSA/ PROUT Social Analysis]''</ref> Theory flows from top downward. Practice flows from bottom upward. As the theory of PROUT is based on practice, the first fundamental principle of PROUT appears at the bottom of the pyramid and not the top.

Law maintains social integrity. Without it, society, to the extent that it survives, is reduced to tyranny.<ref>''Where law ends, tyranny begins.'' [[:wikipedia:William Pitt, 1st Earl of Chatham|William Pitt]], Earl of Chatham (1770). "In reply to Lord Mansfield, in relation to the case of John Wilkes". [http://www.classicpersuasion.org/cbo/chatham/chat09.htm The Speeches of Lord Chatham].</ref> Without law, not just our social existence but also our social identity is in jeopardy.<ref>''We live in and by the law. It makes us what we are: citizens and employees and doctors and spouses and people who own things.'' Ronald Dworkin (1986). Preface to ''Law's Empire''. Harvard university Press. ISBN 978-0674518360.</ref> And fundamental to law is the notion of [[#Property rights|property rights]]. This applies regardless of whether a society is capitalist<ref>''One of the most fundamental requirements of a capitalist economic system—and one of the most misunderstood concepts—is a strong system of property rights. For decades social critics in the United States and throughout the Western world have complained that "property" rights too often take precedence over "human" rights, with the result that people are treated unequally and have unequal opportunities. Inequality exists in any society. But the purported conflict between property rights and human rights is a mirage. Property rights are human rights.'' [[:wikipedia:Armen Alchian|Armen Alchian]] (1993). "[http://www.econlib.org/library/enc/PropertyRights.html Property Rights]" in ''The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics", Liberty Fund.</ref> or communist.<ref>''The establishment of property rights is important not only because it affects the distributions of wealth and income, and control, but also because it affects economic behavior. Often it makes a difference whether there is an owner. New hotels in China, regardless of whether they are government-owned or privately owned, are all beautiful when they open. However, five years later, the government-owned ones typically look more than ten years old. And the privately owned ones often still look new.'' [[:wikipedia:Lawrence Lau|Lawrence Lau]] (2006). [http://policydialogue.org/files/events/Lau_Property_Rights.pdf Role of property rights]</ref>

In PROUT, the [[#fp1|first fundamental principle]] is the primary guideline in respect to law and the practical foundation on which the other four principles are constructed. However, the manner in which the first fundamental principle is implemented – the nuances in respect to [[#Social justice|social justice]] – are determined by the theoretical impact of the higher four principles.

The [[#fp2|second fundamental principle]] of PROUT reduces economics to its two rudimental elements: production and distribution. To optimize production, PROUT prescribes maximum utilization of all resources, animate and inanimate. To optimize distribution, PROUT prescribes a rational approach (in contrast to [[:wikipedia:Adam Smith|Adam Smith's]] ''[[:wikipedia:Invisible hand|invisible hand]]''<ref>Adam Smith (1759), Section IV.1.10 of ''The Theory of Moral Sentiments''and Adam Smith (1776), Section IV.2.9 of ''An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations'' [http://www.econlib.org/cgi-bin/searchbooks.pl?searchtype=BookSearch&pgct=1&sortby=R&searchfield=F&grp=AllSmith&id=&query=invisible+hand&x=3&y=9&andor=and Library of Economics and Liberty].</ref> and [[:wikipedia:Karl Marx|Karl Marx's]] ''[[:wikipedia:To each according to his contribution|according to contribution]]'' or ''[[:wikipedia:From each according to his ability, to each according to his need|according to need]]''<ref>[[:wikipedia:Karl Marx|Marx, Karl]] (1875). [http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch01.htm "Part I"]. ''Critique of the Gotha Program''. Retrieved 2008-07-15.</ref>). To  implement such an economy, PROUT analyzes economics in respect to four dimensions: ''[[#People's economy|people's economy]]'', ''[[#Psycho-economy|psycho-economy]]'', ''[[#Commercial economy|commercial economy]]'', and ''[[#General economy|general economy]]''. Regarding these four dimensions of economics, Sarkar states:

People's economy covers all aspects related to the production and distribution of the [[#Minimum requirements|minimum requirements]] (not just the [[#Minimum requirements of life|minimum requirements of life]] but rather the [[#Minimum requirements according era|minimum requirements according to era]]. According to PROUT, the first requirement of any economy is to guarantee these minimum requirements to all and to ensure that the standard of minimum requirements goes on increasing. In addition, people's economy comprises the following areas:<ref name="ReferenceA"/>

* [[#Economic democracy|Economic decentralization]]

* Encouragement of [[#Cooperatives|cooperative]] spirit (dynamism)

Under PROUT, efficiency in respect to production and distribution is enhanced by judicious allocation of [[#Amenities|amenities]]. Another way in which efficiency would be enhanced is by restricting hiring in respect to [[:wikipedia:Floating population|floating populations]].<ref>''The problem of a floating population and immigrant labor will not occur in the cooperative system, as cooperative members will have to be local people. Floating laborers should have no right to be cooperative members – migratory birds have no place in cooperatives – as they can disturb a whole economy. Howrah district, for example, produces sufficient crops in a season to feed the local people for seventeen months, but due to immigrant labor the produce is consumed in six and a half months. The elimination of the floating population will also protect the social life of the cooperative from the possibility of adverse social influences.'' Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan (1982). "Farmers Cooperatives" published in ''PROUT in a Nutshell Volume 4 Part 20''. [[Ananda Marga Publications]].</ref>

The banking system is a crucial element of commercial economy. Without banks, the mobility of money would be hindered. However, banks and similar institutions have a tendency to be greedy. Hence, they may make unsafe or unwise loans. When that occurs, depositors are at risk of losing their savings.{{#tag:ref|Some recent examples of this problem are the [[:wikipedia:Savings and loan crisis|savings and loan crisis]] in the 1980s and 1990s, the [[:wikipedia:Subprime mortgage crisis|subprime mortgage crisis]] in the 2000s, and, most recently, the [[:wikipedia:Libor scandal|Libor scandal]] of 2012.|group="nb"}} PROUT insists that the banking system be carefully regulated. The establishment of local banking [[#Cooperatives|cooperatives]] can also help to reduce risks.<ref>Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan (date unknown). "Questions and Answers on Economics – Excerpt C" published in ''Proutist Economics''. [[Ananda Marga Publications]]. ISBN 81–7252–003–4.</ref>  

The overall position of PROUT in respect to general economy is consistent with the objectives of  [[#Economic democracy|economic decentralization]] and regional [[#Self-sufficiency|self-sufficiency]].

* {{anchor|se}}''Small-scale enterprises'' may be run as a private business. Typically, privately run businesses would provide non-essential commodities or luxury items, that is, [[#Amenities|amenities]]. Small-scale enterprises would include [[:wikipedia:Putting-out system|cottage industries]]. Though such businesses may be privately run, PROUT would require that they maintain an adjustment with the [[#mlc|cooperative sector]] to ensure a [[#Balanced economy|balanced economy]].<ref name="Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan 1982"/>

PROUT would organize nations and ultimately the entire world on the basis of [[#Self-sufficiency|self-sufficient]] economic zones, based purely on socioeconomic and geographical considerations rather than political considerations (as is currently common).<ref>Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan (1961). "Talks on PROUT" published in ''PROUT in a Nutshell Volume 3 Part 15''. [[Ananda Marga Publications]].</ref> Within each socioeconomic zone, there would also be decentralized planning down to the ''block'' level, the block being the lowest level on which economic planning is feasible. In other words, economic planning would function on many levels – block, district, state, national, and global levels – but the block-level planning would be the primary level of planning. As block-level planning is essential for economic decentralization, it should be adopted in all blocks, and it should be constitutionally mandated.<ref>Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan (1981). "Inter-Block and Intra-Block Planning" published in ''A Few Problems Solved Part 8''. [[Ananda Marga Publications]].</ref>

In keeping with its organic view of [[#Society|society]], PROUT notes that [[:wikipedia:Civilization|civilizations]] come and go, [[#Social vitality|live and die]]. For example, the ancient Egyptian civilization that constructed pyramids is gone. Though the country is the same, the society is different.<ref>''From ancient times many groups of people came into existence. Some of them somehow managed to drag on, some became extinct and some continued to exist in a metamorphosed form. About one thousand five hundred years ago, Arabs were very developed in science. But they were defeated by the Islamic wave... The same is the case with Egypt. It was fully developed in the spheres of art, architecture and science. It is the Egyptians who made the pyramids which needed subtle geometrical knowledge. Moreover, they were also very advanced in the sphere of civilization. Despite this, they could not prevent their defeat. Today’s Egypt is the Egyptian form of Arab civilization.'' Sarkar, Prabhat Ranjan (1966). "The Future of Civilization" published in ''A Few Problems Solved Part 6''. [[Ananda Marga Publications]].</ref>

With all [[:wikipedia:Decision making|decision making]], multiple options are available. The [[#fp4|fourth fundamental principle]] of PROUT calls for a ''well-balanced adjustment among the utilizations''. Sarkar amplifies the concept of a well-balanced adjustment by affirming the need to maintain correspondence and concord among all the factors: crude, subtle, and causal as well as physical, mental, and spiritual. For example, society is obliged to furnish the [[#Minimum requirements of life|minimum requirements of life]] to everyone. But if society were to carry out that obligation by building a house for every citizen and delivering food at each doorstep, then people would soon become lazy. So a more balanced approach would be for society to make provision so that everyone, in exchange for their labor according to capacity, will earn the money required to at least purchase their necessities. For similar reasons, to raise the [[#Minimum requirements according to era|minimum standard of living]], the best approach would be to enhance everyone's [[:wikipedia:Purchasing power|purchasing power]].<ref name="AM Sen">Anandamurti, Shrii Shrii (1962). Sutra 5:15 of ''[[Ananda Sutram]]''. [[Ananda Marga Publications]]. ISBN 81–7252–027–1.</ref> In later years, Sarkar formalized and extended this decision-making paradigm (sometimes referred to as the '''law of parallelism''') by introducing the theory of [[#Prama|pramá]].

Spiritual power is the rarest and subtlest ability. So, from those with all three capacities (physical, mental, and spiritual) developed, society should take greater spiritual service, less intellectual service, and still less physical service. According to Sarkar, such persons can render the greatest service to society. Those with only physical and mental power ([[#ksatriyas|warriors]], [[#vipras|intellectuals]], and [[#vaeshyas|capitalists]]) render less service. Those with only physical power ([[#shudras|unskilled laborers]]), though not unimportant, can only work under the direction of those endowed with spiritual or mental power. Hence, social control should not be vested in those that are only brawny nor even those that are also brave, brainy, or worldly wise. Rather social control should only be vested in those who possess all of those features plus the spiritual quality to work selflessly for the welfare of all – in a word, [[#Sadvipras|sadvipras]].<ref name="AM Sen"/>

The [[#fp5|fifth fundamental principle]] of PROUT observes that change is a constant in this universe. Three factors of relativity (time, space, and form) are constantly changing in relation to themselves and in relation to the other two factors.<ref>Anandamurti, Shrii Shrii (1955). "The Base and the Relative Truth (Ádhára and Ápekśika Satya)" published in ''Subháśita Saḿgraha Part 1''. [[Ananda Marga Publications]].</ref> So, according to PROUT, change is inevitable. What PROUT prescribes is not change but rather [[#Progressive|progress]].