Baba
A few weaknesses in democracy
Note: In the next few weeks and months, many minor and major elections will be held in numerous democratic states and nations across the globe. As Ananda Margiis, we should be cent-per-cent clear about Prout's critique of democracy so we can best educate others and raise awareness about the inherent weaknesses and deficiencies, as well as the positive points, of the various types of democracies that exist today.
Namaskar,
The Propounder of Prout, Shrii Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar, guides us how majority decisions can lead to disunity and divisions within a family. Suppose there are 6 grown siblings who share a house together. Four are rice eaters and wish to keep rice as the staple food in the kitchen, while the two bread-eaters object. A vote is taken and by a 4 to 2 majority it is decided that rice shall be the accepted staple food in the house. This greatly annoys and disturbs the two bread-eaters, and they move out, thereby dividing the family. On sensitive issues, a democratic, majority decision sparks anger, alienation, and disunity. In these types of circumstances, the rational approach for these six siblings would be to consider the wishes of everyone and allot funds for both rice and bread. By this way, all can peacefully and practically co-exist.
https://anandamargauniversal.blogspot.com/
Democracy caused unrest in various places
In the past, there have been similar issues with (a) the Russian control of Chechnya, (b) the Pakistani control of Bangladesh before 1971, (c) the Chinese dominance of the Uighurs in western China, (d) the Singhalese rule of the Tamilians in Sri Lanka, (e) the Turkish governance of the Kurds in Turkey, and (f) the Egyptian rule of the Sinai peninsula etc. In all these regions, there are crackdowns and unrest as the majority government aims to impose its will and regulations on local populations. These places are areas of perpetual violence and opposition. So a majority vote by the ruling regime is not sufficient for creating peace in an area, rather it sparks resentment, disunity, and insurgency. The above are all cases where a majority decision alienated and infuriated a section of the population. In result, there was serious social discord, violent uprisings, and division.
Prout philosophy states, “There are occasions when majority decisions do not create unity in society because people are more or less divided on an issue. In such circumstances, the leaders should be very cautious when making their decisions, and take special care to safeguard the interests of everybody. In particular, they should select a course of action which does not harm the sentiments of any group. For example, suppose there are seven brothers in a joint family, and these brothers are divided on an issue. Four brothers may be on one side and three brothers on another. If the head of the family takes a decision based on the wishes of the majority, the family will be divided into two groups. Therefore, a decision should be taken which safeguards the interests of all the brothers.” (1)
Unity heightened by forgoing democracy
Here we examine how the system of majority rule in a democracy can - in some cases - lead to infighting and disunity. Up till now, amongst the various political systems, democracy has been the best of a bad lot. The ideal system will come in the future. Until that time, we must stick with democracy, despite its pitfalls and limitations.
https://anandamargauniversal.blogspot.com/
There are occasions where majority rule was not followed, and, in result, there was greater unity in society. When the black slaves were freed in the US, that was not a majority decision. If it had gone to a democratic vote or referendum, their freedom would not have been granted. In response, there would have been a revolt, and that would have led to more struggle and strife and tremendous bloodshed. Those in power understood well that a majority decision to keep blacks enslaved would be tantamount to pouring gasoline on a fire. Thus, a proclamation was made to set blacks free; this issue was never sent for a referendum. In result, the blacks were freed and society was far better off than if they voted and the majority decided not to free the black slaves. Thus, on sensitive issues, a democratic, majority decision can spark anger, alienation, and disunity.
Peace by deserting democracy
A similar event occurred granting women the right to vote. In various countries around the world, during the male franchise era, voters with their male-dominated world view could have taken a majority decision not to grant voting rights to women. Had they done so, there would have been terrible discord and tension in society. Due to social pressure and circumstance, those at the helm came to the conclusion that women must be given their franchise. They understood that this would promote greater peace and harmony in society.
https://anandamargauniversal.blogspot.com/
And this whole episode can happen vice-versa as well. We can also imagine that in the matrilineal order, it could happen that males are not allowed to vote. The female franchise era voters, with their female-dominated world view, could take a majority decision that restricts males from voting. And this might continue for some time. Then, due to social pressure, those leading females may decide that they have no option but to grant voting rights to males - otherwise there may be tremendous backlash. So even though those females are in power and represent the majority, they understand that in order to create a stable society males also must be given their franchise. We can easily imagine this being the case in a different era.
On sensitive issues a democratic, majority decision sparks anger, alienation, and disunity. The overall point which Shrii Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar has given is that the democratic approach does not bring social harmony if a majority decision is made on certain sensitive issues. On limited occasions, the rule by majority is fine. Yet there remain numerous instances on delicate topics where a majority decision only serves to alienate and anger many people ultimately causing division and disunity. We have to remember that care and caution are needed to build a unified society. Simply resorting to majority rule will not do. That is the Proutistic guideline.
Conclusion
On certain occasions, the democratic approach works well, but in many circumstances the result of majority rule is harmful. There are many delicate issues that should not be decided by the democratic process because such majority decisions harm the sentiments of the people, thereby leading to disunity and division.
https://anandamargauniversal.blogspot.com/
Namaskar,
In Him,
Sutreshvar
~ In-depth study ~
Democracy not good in this case
Ananda Marga philosophy states, “Suppose a certain couple have five children. All of them are happy and comfortable in the family. But if the children, on the plea of being in the majority, suddenly claim full authority and the right of the management of the family, is it feasible? Say they call a meeting and pass a resolution that all the glasses and crockery should be smashed. Can we call it a wise resolution? Let me give you another example. Students compared to teachers are always in the majority. Now if the students, on the plea of being in the majority, put up the demand that they themselves should set the examination and be the examiners, can that demand be granted? So you see, democracy is not a very good or simple system. But unless an alternative, better and more agreeable theory or system is evolved, we will have to accept democracy in preference to other systems, and make use of it for the time being.” (2)
Democracy can cause breakdown of family or society
A similar type of example can be raised regarding loud music. Suppose there are 6 people living together and 4 wish to play loud music at night while the remaining two prefer a quiet house. If a majority decision is made to allow loud music, then the remaining two will leave. One creative solution would be to ask people to wear headphones when listening to loud music. But if this is overlooked then this could be another case where a majority decision leads to the breakdown of a family or social unity. That is why on sensitive issues, other means need to be employed to protect the comfort and interests of all.
https://anandamargauniversal.blogspot.com/
How to clean democracy
The following is the Prout discourse titled: Compartmentalized Democracy.
“Now let us discuss some reforms to democracy. Democracy cannot succeed in countries where people are illiterate, immoral, or backward. Countries like England, the USA and France are suitable for democracy, but even these countries need to introduce some reforms. First, legislators in the states and at the centre should be elected on the recommendations of the people at large. At the time of electing representatives the people should pay heed to their education, moral standard and sacrifice for the society etc. If the representatives are elected keeping in view these factors, they will not be guided by party interests but by collective interests. In their minds the interests of the entire human race and society will dominate, and not any class interests. They will be able to enact laws keeping in mind the problems of all and sundry, thereby accelerating the speed of social reconstruction. Their impartial service will bring happiness to all.
“The voting rights should be vested in educated persons who have political consciousness and awareness of people’s problems. Age should not be a bar to voting right. If illiterate people are given voting rights there is the possibility of antisocial and incompetent representatives being elected.
“To provide a fearless and independent ambience to the administration, the secretariat should be kept free from pressures from the cabinet. The cabinet should confine itself to legislation, the passage and passing of the budget, the implementation of its plans and policies, defence etc. The power of ministers should remain confined to the parliament and they should not poke their nose into the workings of the secretariat. The chief secretary should not be under the president or the prime minister but should act independently as the executive head. All the secretaries should work under the chief secretary. Free from cabinet pressures, every department will serve the people well.
“In the present system the judiciary functions under a cabinet minister, and pressure from the minister may impair its independent functioning. To remove this defect and to ensure impartial justice, the judiciary should have the right to function independently. In no case should the chief justice be treated as inferior to the president or the prime minister. Only moralists and honest persons should be installed on the hallowed seat of justice. If people fail to keep this issue under their close scrutiny, injustice will take the place of justice.
“[[Finally, for the proper utilization of the nation’s revenue and to ensure that every paisa is spent on building up the nation, it is extremely important that the audit branch as well be independent. The auditor general should be independent of the president. Only the independence of the auditor general can ensure that this branch will be able to fearlessly check the accounts of every other branch. Thus it should be a separate administrative branch of government, and independent of the party holding a majority.
“All the four branches mentioned above should be given the scope to function independently. Thus there will be four compartments. No compartment will function under another.]]” (3)
References
1. Prout in a Nutshell - 16, Three Cardinal Socio-Political Principles
2. A Few Problems Solved - 2, Dialectical Materialism and Democracy
3. Prout in a Nutshell - 14, Compartmentalized Democracy
* * *
The below sections are entirely different topics, unrelated to the above material.
They stand on their own as points of interest.
* * *
== Section 2: Prabhat Samgiita ==
"Toma'y kato bha'loba'si, tumi jano na' tumi..." (Prabhat Samgiita #0221)
Purport:
Baba, You are the Knower of everything; You are omniscient. Even then You do not know how much I love You. Always, all the time, I am thinking of You. Indeed, I have so many thoughts to share with You-- so many feelings which are accumulated in my heart.
Baba, why are You keeping Yourself so busy and involved constantly in Your work, every second-- why like this. O' my Dearmost, when I have so much love for You, why are You not giving me energy and involving me in Your work.
Baba, You are the source of all energy; please provide me with shakti day and night-- all the 24 hrs-- so that I can go on working non-stop for You. With every iota of Your grace and mercy, I will move ahead in the work. I will do according to Your liking. I will be 100% involved to please You. Baba, please grace me by utilising me.
O' Baba, I love You so much. You are so beautiful - You are my everything...
== Section 3: Important Teaching ==
Evolution proves humans are herbivores
Ananda Marga philosophy states, "In those days there was little security in people's lives. On one side there were fierce animals and on the other a scarcity of food. Both of these were constants. Nowadays if there is a scarcity of food in one place people can bring food materials from someplace else but that was not possible then. If food appeared one day there was no certainty [nishcitatá] that it would appear the next. Due to these kinds of circumstances human beings used to have an appendix to their intestines for accumulated or excess food. As it was needed this food would stimulate salivation in the mouth and be fully eaten and digested. The proper eating and digesting of the surplus food in the appendix is called romanthana in Sanskrit and jábar kát́á in Bengali. In good English we call it “rumination” and in spoken English “chewing the cud”. Many herbivorous (vegetarian) animals still ruminate and a need still exists for it in their wild state. As the certainty of food supplies gradually increased, the need for a corporal appendix to the intestines lessened. Eventually there was not even the slightest need for it. Today a small vestige of it remains in the human body although it is no longer used in times of distress. Human beings have lost the capacity to ruminate." (1)
Note: Animals that are herbivores have a large pocket adjacent to their stomach where they stock and store extra food. And in the nighttime, or whenever they do not get sufficient food to eat, they regurgitate that stored food from the pocket and then chew it again. After chewing it it goes back down the digestive tract and into the stomach for complete digestion. Humans also used to do this in the past because they faced an uncertainty in their food supply. They never knew when they were going to eat next. So extra food was eaten and that extra amount would be deposited in the pocket - or appendix. And later, when they got hungry that food would be regurgitated and then eaten again and digested. This process of “chewing the cud” was only done by plant-eating animals - and humans. Nowadays, in general, humans do not face uncertainty with regards to their food. They eat regularly. So humans no longer have any need for an appendix. And when it is not in use then it loses its quality and strength also. But the fact that only herbivores were the ones ruminating shows that those initial humans were also vegetarians. They needed an extra pocket to store food, and now today for humans that pocket - or appendix - has become useless.
In conclusion:
(a) Only herbivores have an extra pocket (appendix) to stock food.
(b) Certain animals ruminate - as well as early humans.
(c) Those who ruminate are 100% vegetarian, i.e only vegetarians ruminate.
(d) This proves that humans are vegetarian.
This logic can be used in pracar work also to convince others to become vegetarian and give up eating meat.
In Him,
Bhaeravii
Reference
1. Varna Vijiana, Emanation (Discourse 20)
== Section: Important Teaching ==
Nowadays most never get this point
Note: Baba’s guideline appended below gives two very significant teachings:
(a) When you arrived on this earth you came empty-handed. Everything belongs to Parama Purusa because He has created this universe. To think, “Something is mine” is a misguided notion. Your house, your family, and whatever else you think to be yours, after 150 years you will not have those things / relations. What to say of 150 years, even after one minute you may not have them. So one is just a pseudo-owner; the real owner is Parama Purusa. But this mistaken sense of personal ownership is the effect of avidya maya. Because avidya maya does not allow human beings to gain this simple awareness that everything belongs to Parama Purusa. Only when the veil of avidya maya is removed a little do people then start talking about this idea. Otherwise, there would not be any need to even raise this matter. The day when avidya maya is fully eradicated one will become Parama Purusa.
(b) The second teaching is that as humans we have special power, i.e. one’s I-feeling. Because of this a person can do sadhana and become one with Parama Purusa. Other jiivas do not have such a clear I-feeling, and they cannot do A-grade sadhana. That is why we should use our potentiality by (1) not having the vanity of taking another’s property as our own, and (2) utilizing the psychic potentiality for spiritual practice.
For more understanding read Baba’s below teaching:
Ananda Marga ideology states, “On a deeper analysis, it is found that human beings have nothing to call their own. They may boast about their intellect, intelligence, power and influence but the real owner of these is Parama Puruśa. By His grace, alone can one utilize or enjoy objects. If Parama Puruśa so desires. He can snatch away all these possessions from humans, And the humans will be unable to do anything about it. After realizing the Supreme truth intelligent people should endeavour to realize Parama Puruśa with the power He has given them. This realization of the Supreme also depends on His grace. In order to merit Parama Puruśa’s grace, unit beings will also have to do something. Their duty is to contemplate or ideate on Him.” (1)
Reference
1. Ananda Philosophy in a Nutshell - 4, Bhakti and Krpá
== Section: News ==
Today the truth was unfolded. Ac Kinshukji has passport in the name of Rajat Datta. However he applied for new passport in the name of Ac Kinshuk Ranjan Sarkar. During Police Verification, Police came to know that Ac Kinshukji already had passport in the name of Rajat Datta. Police could not find any document (birth certificate, Education certificate, etc) which confirm that his name is Kinshuk Ranjan sarkar and has been adopted by Srii Shrii Anandamurtiiji.
In absence of documents, Police smelt "Forgery"and hence Police escorted him to another Police station where he was questioned by top Police officers. However, after displaying so many court case documents that he is now heading AMPS as Kinshuk Ranjan sarkar.........Police, at last, released Ac Kinshukji....
His Passport documents are still pending.......He is still waiting for Passport in the name of Ac Kinshuk Ranjan Sarkar...No one knows whether he will get it or not....However it has once again been confirmed that Baba adopted him socially, not legally......
Above news was confidential. But One WT of Kolkata group Ac Devkrishnananda Avt who never accepted Kinshukji as PP, disclosed / revealed above facts in whatsapp groups. In fact there is a team of WTs in Kolkata group who do not accept Kinshukji as PP / President.
- Reporter
== Section: Important Teaching ==
O’ Parama Purusa think about me too
Here following is an English summary or gist of the below Bangla teaching:
With one brain how can you compete with Parama Purusa. Better is to tell Him that, “O’ Parama Purusa, You have innumerable brains. Think for me too and solve my problems. With one brain how much can I do.” By this way, one should surrender unto Him. (English summary)Ananda Marga ideology states, “তুমি একটা brain নিয়ে, তাঁর সঙ্গে পারৰে কী করে ? তার চেয়ে সময় থাকতে ৰলে ফেলা ভাল, যে “তোমার অতগুলো brain রয়েছে, আমার চিন্তাও করো, আমি আর একটা brain-এ কী করতে পারি |” (1)
Reference
1. The Thousand-Headed Puruśa, V06-15-(E) MGD 17 December 1978 Calcutta
== Section 4: Links ==
Postings to Read
Self-test: faith in Ista
Kiirtana: ideal tool for pracara
Interwoven nature of society
Unique points on gurupujanam
Mango parable & meaning
Consoling grieving family
Diagnosing mental health
