The next image of the future which is increasingly gaining adherents is that of global collapse. This image is constituted in various discourses. The first is the economic. In this perspective, the world economic system's inability to deal with increasing levels of inequity (within nations and between nations), the international debt load, and rising speculation in the global stock markets will lead to a global collapse of epic proportions. Areas integrated into the world capitalist system will be particularly hard hit; those areas that are self-reliant will manage, though. This image is also constituted in the language of the return of the Vengeful God. Because Man has tampered with nature (through technological development--genetic engineering, space exploration, overindustrialization), nature is now striking back--we can't escape our collective karma. What will result is environmental catastrophes such as the Greenhouse effect, earthquakes, nuclear meltdowns, water shortages, and other wonderful things one can ponder while one falls asleep at night. Religious groups, in particular, are eagerly awaiting this event, or series of events. For many it is the Armageddon, the return of Christ, the Madhi, or Amita Buddha. It is the collapse of the hope and promise of the science and technology revolution, of the rationality of the enlightenment, and of liberal democracy. While some imagine this collapse as leading to the arrival of heaven on earth, most see this world as that of the rise of the worst of humans, a post-nuclear society ruled by the mighty.
The PROUT perspective, first of all, is not focused on the collapse (although Shrii Sarkar has predicted a depression this century), but on ways to avoid collapse, on ways to transform society so as to reduce human suffering. How can PROUT prevent the collapse is an appropriate question? This is quite different from the view that basically says: "I can't wait for the collapse, so all the greedy capitalists will get their due; or California should be punished for its sins." In fact, Shrii Sarkar sees these efforts as similar to blaming the victim ideologies historically perpetuated by fundamentalist priests and currently perpetuated by right wing developmentalists. For example, developmentalists often believe that the third world is poor because something it has done, that people in Bangladesh suffer because they don't have Protestant or Japanese values. These assertions forget colonialism and the larger world economy, and the concept of imposed karma. Here it is noteworthy that PROUTist thinking differs from traditional Hindusim, for Sarkar argues that while causality exists, it is not so simple to determine clear cut, single variable reasons for human suffering and pleasure. In additon, one's own suffering could be a result of imposition from outside, from structural imperialism, for example.
Moreover, as mentioned earlier, Sarkar's image is that humans have not exceeded their boundaries; in fact, the process of evolution entails humans becoming as gods, gradually taking on the powers of Cosmic Mind. This is not to say that science and technology have not been guilty of hubris; the problem however is in the development of a science that is valueless, that is divorced from various spiritual traditions and from nature. Of course, we can argue that it is the epistemology of science that has resulted in the above, but that is a different historical discourse itself.
Finally, while for collapse and self-sufficiency proponents, nature is absolute; from the PROUT perspective, nature is relative, it is problematic and ever changing; it is who we are, the Noumena, that is eternal. From the collapse perspective, the PROUT movement remains too committed to the present system and the various attempts to salvage and manage the crises; nothing really can be done, except preparing for the crash.
There are other visions of the future as well. There is that of the transformationalists, who, like Sarkar, too, see humankind on the verge of an incredible revolution, but for them this is technological such that changes in technology will fundamentally change who we are. Computers will lead to true democracy, advances in health will reduce suffering, and death will be beaten back-it will be the death of death. It is argued that in the next twenty years we will see more change then what we have seen in the last two thousand. We will soon be in space, living a life of leisure surrounded by robot slaves. The problem of scarcity will be solved; the real question will then be those of a philosophical nature. We are presently, it is argued, in the midst of the third wave. The first was the agricultural revolution, the second the industrial revolution and the present is the computer/information revolution. What will result will be a high-tech, individualized and highly decentralized society.
Moreover, the human of the future may be unrecognizable to us today; instead of a divine being as Sarkar might posit, he or she will be half-human and half robot-a cyborg. In any case, we will soon be able to do what we desire to do: play, love, and search for new challenges and understandings.
In contrast to the technological orientation of this image is the spiritual New Age movement which too sees this as a time of fundamental change--it is the age of Aquarius, a time of global peace and love, of meditation and the development of a world consciousness. "If we all just think of peace, everything will be all right, smile and the world will smile at you," it is commonly thought. The real changes are not technological but personal and psychic; through unity and through the expansion of our minds, the impossible will become possible; people will become rational and lay down their weapons, all for the greater good. "Even the arms merchants will decide that they would rather be working in a health cooperative, after all didn't a channeled message from the Masters of the MX Zone tell them to do so," it is believed. It is the beginning to the era of the "Eternal Hug." In general, the argument is that capitalism has solved most of humanity's problems, except that of meaning. Traditional religions, East and West, are too hierarchal and bureaucratic and thus the need for a new individual orientated spirituality; one that incorporates the best of the ancient (yoga, visualization) with the best of the new (biofeedback, bodywork, and therapy). The goal of the New Age movement is that of developing one's inner potential so "one can be all that one can be." From the New Age perspective, Sarkar is far too hierarchal, disciplined and political to be of any socially or personally interest. While Sarkar's PROUT movement shares in many ways the spirit of these two transformational visions of the future, Sarkar reminds us of the way that power and struggle is constituted in who we are. Even in the high-tech transformational world, there will emerge an elite. While we may not phrase this elite in terms of the non-productive parasites or 14th century social philosopher Ibn Khaldun's virile Bedouins turned lethargic by luxury, there will still be difference in the apprpropriation of value. Sarkar's vision is not a utopia, it does not predict the end of exploitation and struggle; rather it is a eutopia, a good place, where not only will there be good forces, but evil forces as well, thus requiring structures and safeguards to the amassing of power and wealth. Moreover, it is not technological revolutions that will lead to the death of death, but spiritual practices. And these spiritual practices must be based on rigor, discipline, and selfless service to the Other, not solely on good feelings and the search for spiritual pleasure.
The New Age movement from the PROUT perspective is overly concerned with the psychic model of human development and its adherents tend to be first world, middle class oriented, often concerned more with their own development, than with the suffering of humanity. It is naively apolitical. For Sarkar love is important--in fact it is the ground of any lasting social change--but so is the struggle involved in challenging the assumptions and ideas that govern present-day institutions. There exist real global problems that neither a new computer nor a hug from a friend can solve. Centuries of the misappropriation of wealth are not solved by wishes or creative visualization only. Sarkar's new era, sadvipra samaj then is about spiritual progress, but also about hard thinking, and hard work. Antonio Gramsci said it well. In his Prison Notebooks he wrote: "It is necessary to create sober, patient women and men who do not lose hope before the worst horrors and who are not excited by rubbish."33
Of course, Sarkar's vision of the future, his idea of the good society and his predictions can be critiqued forcefully from a variety of perspectives. Very briefly, as the purpose of this paper is the presentation--not systematic critique--of an unconventional view of the future. First of all, the maxi/mini limits on land and wealth run counter to the liberal-democratic ownership principles of capitalism. The spiritual basis of PROUT also contradicts the laissez faire ideology of self-interest leading to harmony for all. PROUT movements, thus, as they gain support, will be severly challenged by the world capitalist system. As the history of anti-systemic movements such as the International Socialist movement has shown, we should not discount the ability of the capitalist system, on the world and national level, to stifle and coopt anti-systemic movements. In addition, instead of transforming capitalism and communism, Sarkar's cultural/ethnic movements may lead to various forms of ethnocide and race wars. He also appears to discount the possibility of nuclear holocausts. All in all, his vision appears overly idealistic.
PROUT's concept of leadership is also problematic. Sarkar's spiritual leadership, although obviously necessary to transform capitalism and to ensure the humanistic applications of technology, does the raise the possibility of an authoriatarian religious leadership developing over time. Finally, neither his view of history, nor his predictions of the future, at present, have any "empirical" basis. For example, how can we reliably deduce which regions are in which era of the social cycle? In addition, will all regions be in one global Martial era, or will some have their own internal cycles.
Of course, for all these critiques Sarkar does have responses. Again, very briefly, for him the world capitalist system will transform due to its own contradictions. The cultural movements will primarily emphasize spiritual unity and universality and secondly attempt to polarize the ruling class and the exploited classes. The development of a populist spiritual leadership will be balanced by increased educational development among the public and by strengthened judicial institutions. Finally for Sarkar, his theory of history and his forecasts are intentionally interpretive and intuitional. Although empirical validation is important to him, transforming the world is more so.
Although Sarkar is idealistic, he does emphasize the precarious struggle ahead for humanity. He warns us of the possibility of a world destroyed by pollution and ravaged by human greed and evil. Yet his vision remains optimistic. But we should not be surprised as Sarkar has written: "I am an incorrigible optimist, for optimism is the essence of life."34 Sarkar's vision is a global vision, and although he develops a partially deterministic theory of history, it is women and men who still must courageously act, who must bring about preferred visions, who must with their intellect develop new scientific possibilities and societal futures, and thus develop the new Human in the new World. As Sarkar states in his classic mythic language:35
NOTE:
Read other articles by Sohail Inayatullah at metafuture.org
Posted by proutist-universal on February 16, 2006 11:17 AM
