Trust is the Only Currency


I've just discovered PROUT, a group that supports basic rights and equality for humans and their coexistence within the natural environment.  Only one of their tenets gives me pause; their endorsement of one world government.  All their other ideals emphasize localization and decentralization, so maybe their 'world government' model is less ominous and controlling than the one in which we're familiar?  

Please read past the basic tenets to the article on Proutist Economics.  I'd like to know what you think.  ~ Noa

PROUT is an acronym for PROgressive Utilization Theory, a socio-economic philosophy that synthesizes the physical, mental and spiritual dimensions of human nature. The goal of PROUT is to provide guidance for the evolution of a truly progressive human society.

PROUT is an alternative to the outmoded capitalist and communist socio-economic paradigms. Neither of these approaches have adequately met the physical, mental and spiritual needs of humanity. PROUT seeks a harmonious balance between economic growth, social development, environmental sustainability, and between individual and collective interests. Combining the wisdom of spirituality with a universal outlook and the struggle for self-reliance, PROUTist thinkers and activists are creating a new civilizational discourse and planting the seeds for a new way of living.

A few basic tenets of PROUT are:

Spirituality and Progress
Human beings are on an evolutionary path toward realizing their higher consciousness. True progress is movement that leads to self-realization and spiritual qualities such as compassion and love for all beings. Material or intellectual gains do not necessarily constitute progress unless they contribute to deeper, spiritual well-being.

The progressive orientation of society is maintained by making continual adjustments in the use of physical resources and mental potentialities in accordance with spiritual and Neo-humanistic values. Human beings are encouraged to construct economic and social institutions to facilitate the attainment of our highest potentialities.

Economic Democracy
Political democracy and economic democracy are mutually inclusive. PROUT advocates economic democracy based on local economic planning, cooperatively managed businesses, local governmental control of natural resources and key industries, and socially agreed upon limits on the individual accumulation of wealth. By decentralizing the economy and making sure decision-making is in the hands of local people, we can ensure the adequate availability of food, shelter, clothing, health care and education for all.

A decentralized economy can better ensure that the ecological systems of the earth are not exploited beyond their capacity to renew themselves. Environmental stewardship is a requisite for people who are dependent upon these systems for their own survival and well-being.

Basic Necessities Guaranteed to All
The basic necessities of life must be a constitutional birth right of all members of society. People cannot attain their highest human potential if they lack food, shelter, clothing, health care and education. Meaningful employment with a living wage must be planned to ensure adequate purchasing capacity for all basic necessities. The standard of guaranteed minimum necessities should advance with increases in the economy's productive capacity.

For a benevolent society, it is essential that leaders are morally principled and dedicated to serving society as part of their personal progress. Authority should not be centered in the hands of individuals, but should be expressed through collective leadership. The viability of political democracy rests on an electorate possessing three factors:

1) education,
2) socio-economic consciousness,
3) ethical integrity.

Individuals should have complete freedom to acquire and express their ideas, creative potential and inner aspirations. Such intellectual and spiritual freedom will strengthen the collectivity. Restrictions should only be placed on actions clearly detrimental to the welfare of others. Constraints need to be placed on the accumulation of physical wealth, as excessive accumulation by a few results in the deprivation of many.

Cultural Diversity
In the spirit of universal fellowship, PROUT encourages the protection and cultivation of local culture, language, history and tradition. For social justice and a healthy social order, individual and cultural diversity must be accepted and encouraged.

Women's Rights
PROUT encourages the struggle against all forms of violence and exploitation used to suppress women. PROUT's goal is coordinated cooperation, with equal rights between men and women. PROUT seeks the economic, social and spiritual empowerment of women throughout the world.

Science and Technology
Scientific knowledge and technology are potential assets to humanity. Through their proper use, the physical hardships of life decreases and knowledge is gained about the secrets of life. Time is freed for cultural and spiritual pursuits. However, the development and utilization of scientific knowledge must come under the guidance of spiritual and Neo-humanist values and ethical leadership. Without this, technology is often abused by profiteers and the power-hungry, resulting in destruction and exploitation.

World Government
PROUT supports the creation of a world governance system having a global bill of rights, global constitution and common penal code in order to guarantee the fundamental rights of all individuals and nations, and to settle regional and international disputes. As the global economy becomes decentralized, it will be advantageous to also have a global political system.

** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** *** ** ** ** ** **

Trust is the Only Currency

Thursday, December 31, 2009

Proutist Economics

This chapter presents the basic economic principles required to move from a profit-based to a consumption-based economy. A consumption-based economy is premised on the belief that the opportunity to meet one’s basic needs should be guaranteed to all the members of a society.

Section One:
Production for Human Needs and Maximum Utilization

The capitalist socio-economic system is based on the motivation of the individual for financial profit. In the pursuit of profit, human beings are treated as capital input, equal to land and equipment. According to PROUT, such a system is the exact opposite of what a socio-economy should be. We hold that meeting the needs of human beings is the reason that economies exist.

Read the rest of the article here:

LightCommodore's picture

"We hold that meeting the needs of human beings is the reason that economies exist." That really says it all, doesn't it? Like you, Noa, the only thing I can't agree with is the worldwide government--if such a system went awry, there would be no escaping it anywhere on the globe. Other than that, the group sounds great!


A World United in Love governing through compassionate wisdom in accordance to True Democracy is the type of World Wide Government that all Higher Ethical Principaled Beings speak of.

I am for such a government--- All relationship is symbiotic.  Do you think your cells in your body work independently in a Xenophobic State of all that is?  All symbiotically cooperates with everything to maintain the whole world.  By looking at the Natural Economy and Goverence of Nature--- it is very clear.



Bob07's picture

It sounds very good, and I do believe that a one-world government of some kind will be necessary.  However, I also share some of the reservations already expressed about this.  EVERYTHING depends on who is in charge of this government and what the government's powers are.  Representative domocracy as we know it has failed.  Representatives are as a matter of course bought and paid for, leaving the people's needs to rot.   The hacker group, Anonymous, made up of thousands worldwide, apparently make decisions by a direct democratic process.  In this cyber age this may even be possible in governing the whole world, where humanity directly governs itself.  What we don't need is a new group experts, elites, or professional leaders deciding things for everyone else.  And whether a localize economy can even exist in a one-world government scenario needs some serious study and reflection.  Again, it depends on what the government's powers are, and whether it can decide to exceed whatever limits are placed upon those powers. 

The ideas behind PROUT are those of Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar, whose spiritual and social perspective seem impeccable  (see ).  On that Wikipedia page, I didn't see any reference to one-world government, however.  While I admit I haven't researched this at this point, I wonder if Sarkar himself proposed a global government.  Whether he did or not, we should be alert to the possibility that the existing elite can appropriate otherwise positive organizations and movements and bend them to their own purposes.  I'm not saying that this is the case here, but we know from past experience that they try to do that very thing.

So... it doesn't do to be naive.  Jesus counseled people to be as gentle as lambs but as wary as serpents.  Good advice.  It's about critical thinking.

Wendy's picture

All social engineering ideas seem like poppycock to me.

I have the same problems with these ideas that I have with the Zeitguist movement or any other. If someone is saying "this is how the world should be" then they are looking to control the world - they are looking to control others actions that don't need control. Yes, they are saying they want everyone to have freedom and for there to be diversity but then they are saying that everyone's basic needs should be met. Who decides what those basic needs are? If I have children, and decide that spending my money on organic food for them is more important than owning a house, will the "housing is a basic need" police come round?

Society changes for the better when we choose to reflect our own values in how we control our own lives - not in a desire to control the lives of others. If you want to make sure everyone's needs are met then do that for all those around you. It won't happen with political action - that is really stealing from the rich to give to the poor. Choose to give to the poor yourself - only that decision to act for yourself will truely change the world. Asking government to do what you would rather not do yourself is a cop out.


ChrisBowers's picture

Can and Do Dear Brother, can and do...

the real question is when will we finally achieve a collective sustained dynamic that spontaneously fades the petty offerings of the presumed elite.

they don't make themselves without some help from those wanting to be led...

makes me think of the metal "lead"....

well said Bob

Bob07's picture

Thank you, Wendy; you make some excellent points.  And to tell you the truth, although I do think that a global government of some kind (a direct democracy, having the function of guaranteeing people's freedom to live as they see fit) may be necessary, at least for a time, I am also a dyed-in-th-wool anarchist. 

For real anarchism (which is not anarchy) to work, we need a population that is aware, responsible, and committed to live and let live -- and being compassionate would really make it work.  But since we as a whole are not yet able or committed to live at that level of being, we do need something to protect whatever and whomever is at risk of being taken advantage of or harmed by people who don't give a damn about anything but their own advantage -- or who just aren't aware of the negative results of their actions. 

One could argue that if people would rise to the level of Sarkar's ideal, no government (at least as we know it) need exist at all.  And that would be the "ideal" of anarchism (although there aren't really any ideals in it).

Yes, Chris, that is the point...

So when you go to the grocery store--- you have made all that food and distributed it yourself.  So when you go to mail a letter--- you also deliver it?  So when you go to travel across millions of lightyears in a space ship you did this alone with no cooperation with others?  So when another violates your freewill--- you just shrug and say--- all well?

Governing Councils are part of organinzing every society--- including our own and the very Galactics that are assisting us including the Galactics that just airlocked the leadership of the Regressives.  Did they act without any organization to achieve this compassionate intervention?  Were they coming from a place of Anarchy?

I believe in A World Government that is part of a Community of many Worlds on this World and throughout the Cosmos.

FEAR is what I see in all the posts above.  The "BAD GUYS" are any one that is a leader or in government.  It reminds me a bunch of people huddling in their basement listening to talk radio while smoking pot and yelling into the wind at the "Government."  And then toking some more--- 

We, the People of Earth, are the government... each one of us has a role to play in the World Government. 


Bob07's picture

Elizabeth, it's your 4th paragraph I have trouble with...  If it hadn't been there I wouldn't be writing this response.

This is a forum where we freely exchange ideas.  There's no need to put down anyone for saying what they see or feel.  Your image of a bunch of people huddling in a basement toking on dope, reactively (without thinking) yelling into the wind... or whatever ... has nothing to do with us here.  We're people trying to think things out, and hopefully we can respect one another for that.   Each one can present his or her view.  That's the essence of democracy -- or half of it.

Back to the topic, people have very good reason to be wary of government.  Government as we have known it on this planet has been a horror; this has been our own direct experience.  (And we know absolutely nothing about the Galactic Federation organization or whatever else is out there, except by hearsay.  Maybe some day we'll have an experience of that.)  Our founding fathers were extremely wary of government; the Declaration of Indpendence and other documents of that time show this.  They were not fools; they were some of the most brilliant and wise people secular society has ever produced.  And it's been observed by several notable people from other countries (de Tocqueville and von Bismarck for two) that goverment seems to have almost a "duty" to lie -- especially to its own people.   That's been our collective experience, I believe.

Still, as I said in my posts above, a world government of some kind will be necessary -- especially to protect people's freedom and wellbeing.  You seem to have missed that.  It depends on who is in control and what the limits of that government are.  If the people really are in control, and directly, then fine.  Anarchism (not anarchy; that's not what I said; there is a difference) is a highly evolved social state where people are aware and responsible enough that government -- at least as we know it -- is not necessary.  (But cooperation IS necessary.)  That may not happen for a long time here, but I have to believe that it has happened somewhere in the cosmos.  But short of that, yes, we do need some sort of government.  Should we be very wary about what this is and make sure that it isn't just more of the same?  To say no would be extremely naive, in my opinion.

In your first paragraph you're talking about cooperation.  You seem to be implying that cooperation and government are the same thing.  They aren't.  All of the examples that you give, save one, have nothing to do with government and everything to do with cooperation among people (which is the life blood of Anarchism, by the way).  And even that one example, mail delivery, doesn't need to be done by the government.  In colonial days folks did it themselves.  A person would put a letter on a post in front of their house, and a passing traveler who was going where the letter was addressed would take it and deliver it.  "Post Office" comes from that original wooden post out by the road.  (I'm not recommending that we go back to putting posts in front of our houses.  Just want to make a point.) ... By the way, I have no problem with the government delivering my mail, although that doesn't have to be a government function.

Most of the things the government does for us we can do for ourselves, in cooperation.  In that I agree with Wendy.  And cooperation can be highly organized -- and needs to be when on a large scale.  Again, that's not necessarily government.  Government implies an authority over people.  If the people themselves are that authority, then fine; let there be government.  Otherwise, we'd best be careful.  Is that fear?  I call it being aware and using our heads.


The definition that I work from is this:  The core and essence of Government is cooperation between and with all Realms:  Human, Flora, Fauna, Mineral, Planetary, Cosmic, Galactic.  Each body of Government works within the framework of Truly Democratically elected councils which make up the body of the Government.   Each Council is in charge of leading the work of each area of society:

Transportation, Economy, Healthcare, Education, Food Distribution, Individual and Planetary Safety, Energy, Building, Weather and planetary movement response teams, welfare of vulnerable populations, pollution cleanup and management, air, water, earth, and inter deminsional safety standards, durable goods standards, conflict resolution between groups and individuals, truth, justice, reconcilation, Planetary Protection, ecology etc.

I have yet to see any 1 person create and maintain this level of being.

I apologize for my imflamatary statements.  I bless your hearts with love.


Noa's picture

Having a governing body that oversees what is "best for all" seems like a good idea... if everyone agrees upon what that is. That's the rub, isn't it?

As my father used to jest, "If everyone was like me, the world would be perfect!"

Wendy's picture

I think we might all be much more advanced than we realize. I continue to be amazed at how cooperative and kind people are when there is no authority present but a great human need - such as during a disaster. The childish and selfish mentality seems to crop up much more in highly authoratative and controlled situations. This is a chicken and egg question. Does our bad behavior stem from authoratative government or is that government the result of our bad behavior?

Fear works both ways - there are those who fear government and there are those who fear people might harm people without governmental protection. Certainly authority uses fear to keep people in line and as an excuse for it's domination. The current war on terror is a good example of that.

I like to trust that without government, even if there were a few "bad" guys out there, informal networks of neighbors would get together to protect any elderly or children who were being abused or to help families who were struggling. It would feel soooo much better to me to be a part of something like that, than to pay taxes for some unknown to handle  problems.

I personally really like the way churches and religious organizations handle things - leaving the needs of the group to be handled by volunteers and donations. I like unstructured situations - I think it's really neat when people can spontaneously pool together to create something or solve a problem. When structures and customs are firmly in place, everything feels tedious to me - like my creativity is being squashed. These social engineering ideas all seem to want to have too much structure and control over others.


garydgreer's picture

This is all wrong. Motivation will come through education and involvement. This whole 10:1 " he's more deserving" goes right back to the same old wrongness. Reward is not a valid means for maximum potential.

Education, understanding, cooperation and compassion promote maximum potential.

Integrity is the key to everything and that's where we have to start. With integrity you don't worry about someone slacking or dishonesty and the likes. We can not start from within the existing architecture that is already flawed. Our ideas have to flower within a new architecture and foundation first. This involves our thought processes, reasoning, intentions, character, motivation, integrity and setting up some "givens" or absolutes to be expected. The systems we set up have to incorporate this new behavior and release all the contingencies for the old behavior.

Knightspirit's picture

I agree with you Gary - the current system is designed to keep the new struxture form happening. And that keeps people thinking that they can do something with the old structure instead of building a new one from scratch. But the "fix" is complete abandonment of the old structure and a brand new one designed around the principles you mention.

First - though - we have to create people who have these pricnciples to begin with - and that is where we have been locked out so far! Kids are trained to be corporate drones for a paycheck - and that system has to end. So again - I agree - education has to be changed and new principles of conduct instituted.



The Gathering Spot is a PEERS empowerment website
"Dedicated to the greatest good of all who share our beautiful world"