PROUT: March 2006 Archives

If a business is built with the help of loans from any source, then that enterprise is termed kátiká in Sanskrit. Suppose someone has no capital but wants to start a business by taking a loan, then that business is called kátiká vyávasá. You might have noticed that there are many countries which suffer from financial stringency, so they take loans from other countries. These loans are then used for ventures like constructing large dams on their rivers.

By society ordinarily we mean a collective body of men and women, but the innate spirit of the word 'society' is not this. Samája or society in the true sense of the term implies an action of moving together (Samánam' ejate). We come across groups of persons in buses, trams and trains moving together; but this occasional movement cannot be termed society either. Being inspired by a common ideology, when different individuals move towards the common goal and become active for its achievement, this can be called a society. The appropriate English equivalent for Samája should not therefore be society. Social advancement, which is a type of social action, means that the tie of mutual unity among the persons moving together has become strong.

Prout supports intervention in sovereign nation states by a duly created world body. It rejects intervention by particular nation-states, even broad based coalitions. This is largely as the self-interests of nation-states (geo-political control, resource and ideology control) go against the self-interests of the planet.

Ideologically, Prout rejects the UN as such a world body, as the UN is foundations are based on inequitable world order. Moreover, eligibility into the UN is based on acquiring national status, thus leaving out social movements, cooperatives, and individuals.

Ideologically Prout rejects identity politics particularly religious politics, including the hindu variety ( eg, BJP genocide in Gujrat), of the Islamic variety (terrorism globally and in Kashmir) of the Christian Vatican (the feudal politics of the Vatican) and of the Jewish variety (Zionism).

Since the inception of the Progressive Utilization Theory (PROUT) by P.R. Sarkar in the late 1950s, there have been numerous efforts to come to terms with the various implications and applications, and structures and meanings of this theory. The purpose of this essay is to comment on these commentaries and to surface in the context of PROUTist texts the problem of inquiry. How, for example, does one constitute the real, what categories of thought does one use, and furthermore in what ways is one's method of inquiry related to or constitutive of the object of inquiry as well as to the discourses (texts, practices, the social construction of what-is) that frame one's method. Thus, this is a discussion of various epistemological approaches.¹

Prout's approach is that the medium of instruction from primary to tertiary level should be in the local language. The sum total of human expression is culture, and language is the best medium to express human culture. While different groups should encourage every language, each unit should use the local language to inspire self-confidence and self-respect amongst the local people. Encouraging a positive cultural identity is an important ingredient in the development of the local area, and is an essential factor in generating a sense of affinity and unity amongst the people.

Every living being has its own inherent tendency to express and symbolise. In the evolutionary process of creation, where higher species have evolved, living beings try to express their feelings by gesture, posture or by some sound. In a general sense, this acoustic expression of ideas is called language.

While we are all aware why we do not have peace in south asia, there is a paucity of explorations on how to create a better future. The lack of peace defined as both individual peace (inner contentment), social-psychological peace (how we see the Other), structural peace (issues of justice, particularly territorial justice) and epistemological peace (toward a plurality of ways of knowing) are among the major factors contributing to poverty in south asia. Government expenditures in each nation, especially India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka go for military purposes and not for education or health. Every time a positive economic cycle begins, yet one more confrontation sends military expenditures higher. Few, except military leaders and a few corporations (mostly foreign), benefit from this escalation.