|
|
Musings Report 2019-26 6-29-19 A Modern Utopia: A Brief Look at Progressive Utilization Theory (PROUT)
You are receiving this email because you are one of the 500+ subscribers/major contributors to www.oftwominds.com.
For those who are new to the Musings reports: they are basically a glimpse into my notebook, the unfiltered swamp where I organize future themes, sort through the dozens of stories and links submitted by readers, refine my own research and start connecting dots which appear later in the blog or in my books. As always, I hope the Musings spark new appraisals and insights. Thank you for supporting the site and for inviting me into your circle of correspondents.
Thank You, Contributors!
Thank you, Rick L. for renewing your generous support of my work, and David S. for your generous subscription.
Welcome to "Your Topics and Questions"
I've introduced a new feature for patrons and subscribers: every month, I'll respond to your questions and suggested topics. Please submit topics through patreon.com or by emailing me at chsm1th@comcast.net.
A Modern Utopia: A Brief Look at Progressive Utilization Theory (PROUT)
This month's topic is courtesy of Terry J., who solicited my response to Progressive Utilization Theory (PROUT), a socio-political-economic system proposed in 1959 by PR Sarkar, an Indian philosopher.
"PROUT is an economic theory that addresses the defects of both capitalism and Marxism and offers the promise of a new economic order in which the world’s resources will be distributed in an equitable and rational fashion."
There is much to like in PROUT, hence my characterization of it as a Modern Utopia, hearkening back to Thomas More's book Utopia, describing his conception of a just and equitable society.
As we all know, recorded history, from China's Emperors to America's Incas and Aztecs to the many empires of the Mediterranean / Mideast to the present day of centralized bureaucratic states dominated by elites, humanity has been under the thumb of greedy, self-serving elites.
Sarkar's system is holistic, rational, common-sense and fair: PROUT recognizes the Earth is finite and its natural wealth should be distributed so that everyone receives a basic sustenance, and there is a ceiling on how much any individual can take.
I think most of us would agree with its core goals and principles.
PROUT proposes worker ownership of co-ops and other forms of production, and more broadly, economic democracy, i.e. democratic control of essential economic enterprises.
Terry provided these links which outline the PROUT system's principles:
THE PROGRESSIVE UTILIZATION THEORY(PROUT): ALTERNATIVE ECONOMIC AND SPIRITUAL MODEL FOR THE WELFARE OF ALL
Prout proposes the maximum utilization and rational distribution of all natural and human resources, emphasizing the value of both individual and collective well-being.
It is a holistic model of economic, social and spiritual concepts that include guaranteeing minimum necessities to all, the right to jobs, a three-tiered economy, including small-scale private enterprises, cooperatives, and large-scale publicly owned key industries, food sovereignty, sustainable agriculture, and economic democracy.
1. Minimum Necessities (for everyone)
2. Physical Wealth (sustainable, fair distribution of natural resources)
3. Proper Utilization of Natural and Human Resources
4. Economic Democracy
5. An Ecological and Spiritual Perspective
6. What Spirituality is Not: Dogmatism
7. Evaluating Social Policies with Prout
A Brief Introduction to the Progressive Utilization Theory (PROUT)
We can understand PROUT by looking at six essential features of this new socio-economic system:
1. Spirituality
2. A "Floor and a Ceiling"
3. Economic Democracy
4. Economic Reorganisation (Decentralised Economy, Balanced Economy and Regional Economic Self Sufficiency)
5. Moral Leadership
6. Global Governance
Prout: A New Socio-Economic Paradigm? (video, 45 minutes)
First, I'd like to thank Terry for introducing me to the PROUT system, which shares many of the same goals and feature of my proposed CLIME system, (community-labor integrated money economy).
My views on PROUT are generalized, meaning I have the same perspective on all alternative socio-political-economic systems:
1. The hard part is creating a structure that outputs the desired goals as the only possible output. Its idealistic goals must be instantiated in practical, functional institutions.
2. This requires a structure that offers easy-to-grasp incentives, which boil down to income, social status and power. (We're still social apes, and respond to any available means of improving our social status in the group...)
3. It also requires a structure that enforces disincentives, i.e. punishment for those attempting to game the system to amass dominating wealth/power.
4. This structure must have institutionalized mechanisms for differences of opinion to be sorted transparently, and for the "messiness" of democracy and enterprise to play out.
This was my goal is designing CLIME: the system can only output the desired decentralized, localized economies; it offers clear and compelling incentives (income, access to capital, positive roles in the democratically run groups, etc.), and disincentives for those who try to gain power or cheat the system: banishment from CLIME.
One of my core convictions is: "If we don't change the way money is created and distributed, we've changed nothing."
Since money is central to the economy, society and politics, we have to decentralize and localize money if we want to change the system. This is why CLIME has its own labor-backed cryptocurrency, i.e. its own money, which is only distributed to those who have performed approved labor on behalf of their communities or their CLIME group.
The issuance of money generates the key incentives in CLIME, which are basically the same things PROUT seeks: participants will put up with the difficulties and complexities of democracy within the CLIME groups because that's the only way they can get paid.
The only way to limit centralized greed and power is to decentralize the creation and distribution of money and political power.
The hard part is designing political, social and financial structures that enable participants to get ahead and gain some wealth and power, but not at the expense of others. Rather, individuals' ambition and drive to accumulate social status, money and some political power are harnessed to serve the community in ecologically sustainable ways.
Humans being human, there will inevitably be differences of opinion about how to proceed. In CLIME, everything takes place in the structure of a community group which is opt-in and democratically operated. Anyone is free to leave a group and start their own, provided they follow the same rules.
A system can have spiritually informed goals and principles, but it must be designed for the rough and tumble of average unsaintly, self-absorbed, greedy humans.
In CLIME, the institutions are embedded in software, as software (if transparent / open source) is objective and unbiased. It treats everyone the same, which is the goal of any system that values fairness.
I see CLIME or a PROUT system as emerging as an alternative or competitor rather than a replacement for the status quo, and so it seems likely that any alternative system will co-exist. It will have to work with existing systems and be able to defend itself against attempts to suppress or limit its success.
In my view, CLIME meets these structural demands. But it can't be tested until the status quo no longer provides what people want, and people are open to some other way of making a living and expressing their ambitions / desires to get ahead.
Highlights of the Blog This Past Week
Following in Rome's Footsteps: Moral Decay, Rising Inequality 6/29/19
No, Autos Are Not "Cheaper Now" 6/28/19
Could a Cryptocurrency Become a Global Reserve Currency? 6/27/19
Local Government Is an Engine of Inflation 6/25/19
The Human Cost of "Recovery": We're Burning Out 6/24/19
From Left Field
She’s 103 and Just Ran the 100-Meter Dash. Her Life Advice? ‘Look for Magic Moments’ (via John F.)
Mary Meeker's annual Internet report -- a 330-page data dump monstrosity, but chockful of interesting tidbits for those with patience and fortitude....
Authenticity Under Fire: Researchers are calling into question authenticity as a scientifically viable concept -- maybe not scientifically viable, but psychologically and philosophically viable...
Demographics, Population Growth Considered
Highlights Of UN 2019 World Population Prospects
U.S. Unauthorized Immigrant Total Dips to Lowest Level in a Decade
Economic Growth Out Of Fuel
Douglas Rushkoff -- Fighting for Team Human (via GFB)
Why San Francisco Restaurants Are Suffocating: What I witnessed during my two years in the industry
The Pattern of the 21st Century is Predatory Collapse: The Hidden Thread Running Through a Troubled Age
The Global Economy’s Next Winners--What It Takes to Thrive in the Automation Age
Bodies in Seats: At Facebook’s worst-performing content moderation site in North America, one contractor has died, and others say they fear for their lives -- clearly, we need the modern Big Tech equivalent of Upton Sinclair's expose of capitalism-run-amok in the meatpacking industry, "The Jungle"...
"Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything." George Bernard Shaw
Thanks for reading--
charles |
|
|
|
|
|
