The Problem with PROUT

PROUT stands for Progressive Utilization Theory which is from Indian guru PR Sarkar, founder of Ananda Marga.

Its principles are:

1. No individual can accumulate any physical wealth without the clear approval of the collective body.
2. There should be maximum utilization and rational distribution of all mundane, supramundane and spiritual potentialities of the universe.
3. There should be maximum utilization of physical, metaphysical and spiritual potentialities of unit and collective bodies of human society.
4. There should be a proper adjustment amongst these physical, metaphysical, mundane, supramundane and spiritual utilizations.
5. The method of utilization should vary in accordance with changes in time, space and person, and the utilization should be of progressive nature.

Its most striking feature is the guarantee of minimum requirements as a realization of those principles, without explaining how it would be done.

PROUT influenced Hugo Chavez and consequently, Venezuela . However, we do not know whether its policies were implemented by Venezuela as to contribute directly the its rapid economic decline.

If PROUT had any influence in Venezuela’s inflation problem, it could be from the misunderstanding of how to guarantee minimum requirements:

It may be questioned whether it is wise for any government to guarantee the minimum requirements. If the state is to supply cereals, pulses..to all people then naturally the state has to institute some process of control which people may not like. Hence PROUT’s view is that people should be guaranteed the provision of sufficient purchasing power to meet these requirements. In that case the state need not adopt control measures. The other disadvantage of guaranteeing the supply of minimum requirements is that if consumable goods are supplied to everyone, people will become lethargic.. I have not said anywhere that society should give plenty of money to everyone; I have only said that the purchasing power.. should be increased.

PR Sarkar

Chavez’ socialist rule had made Venezuelans lethargic.

They now want the government to guarantee even cheap refrigerators which are not part of the minimum requirements, and now Maduro must satisfy lethargic people by driving the economy down with more controls.

Instead of controls, Chavez & Maduro should have invited more investment:

If production is increased through investment in developmental programmes instead, the purchasing capacity of the people can be increased.. In pure economic terms developmental programmes are those programmes which directly increase national wealth

PR Sarkar

Unfortunately, PR Sarkar never elaborated on the technical aspects of how to increase purchasing power and so it has remained abstract.

He correctly points out that investment is needed, something that capitalists are very much experts on.

• This is in contrast to the tendency of shallow humans to give welfare for free as a means of social upliftment

If PR Sarkar elaborated on its technical aspects, then PROUT would have instead advocated ’national wealth investment’ alongside minimum requirements.

Currently, China has such public investments in welfare through its state run infrastructure and services with work via state capitalism.

• Sarkar calls these state run organizatios as “key industries”

So the natural system of economy was already discovered by Chinese socialism, which also pushes for cooperatives and single-party control where the Communist Party is the sadvipra party.

This makes Prout much less relevant as an economic solution when we compare the povery in Venezuela and the wealth in China, both of which are socialist.