Dear brothers and sisters,
In response to the above circular we have received following response from the following.
With brotherly regards,
S S Goenka
----- Original Message -----
From:
AnonymousTo:
sgoenka@gogoindia.comSent: 18 February, 2008 2:32 AM
Subject: [ANANDA MARGA - SSG CIRCULAR] New comment on GLOBAL MEET OF ALL MARGIIS TO FURTHER THE AGENDA O....
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "
GLOBAL MEET OF ALL MARGIIS TO FURTHER THE AGENDA O...": 4SP flushed away - finished before it could get started due to defective outlook & misinterpretation of Baba's works.Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 22:24:32 -0400From: Donald_G To:
am-global@earthlink.netSubject: The Glass Menagerie== THE GLASS MENAGERIE: RACIST QUOTAS ==Namaskar,Currently one faction, albeit a flailing faction, is filling the sky with their silly menagerie and dreaming that dividing the Marga along racist lines will lead to the formation of a united AM and one human society. They think their racist quota system is the ticket to heaven-- the be-all and end-all.Believe it or not, still 1 or 2 folks-- along with their leader-- are foolishly clinging onto this hopeless, if not dangerous, agenda: The racist quota system. All so that one aged factional leader can get some power. For this reason he dreamed up his quota concoction.However, the broad-minded teachings of Ananda Marga are something totally different. Baba guides us that we are to employ the universal outlook of neo-humanism to form that unified humanity, not a dogmatic quota.In that case what is the need to pull the mundane, racist, and outdated quota system from the general society into our Marga. This will only create tension and ill-feeling.BABA'S SYNTHETIC APPROACH IS THE BESTIn our Marga, Baba has brought the feeling of unity between one Ananda Margii and another by instilling high ideals and sentient practices. In AM we have one Ista, one ideology, one code of dharma, and one system of sadhana. These are all part and parcel of Baba's synthetic approach.And the outcome of this is that everyone in AM is an Ananda Margii.We do not distinguish between whether one is Korean or Venezuelan or Haitian or Russian. None of these superficial differences do we recognise-- none at all. Rather anyone who follows the golden precepts of AM is an Ananda Margii. This is the practical outcome and sweet result which we have all experienced first-hand.By this way all Ananda Margiis share so much in common: From our belief system to our way of eating, from our bath mantra to our Kiirtan, from our 16 Points to our Yama & Niyama. By following all Baba's divine teachings, then naturally a deep sense of unity is formed between all Ananda Margiis and no one differentiates between one margii and another on the basis of superficial differences like race or birth. Because we are all one-- due to the great teachings of Ananda Marga.And that is why before 1990 there was no such thing as a quota system in AM.ONLY THE NIA GROUP OPENLY SUPPORTS THE QUOTABut now one groupist NIA chieftain is trying to drag that crude quota system into our Marga. Of course B, H, and EC have their crude agendas and racial tendencies but none of these factions will openly proclaim that they actively support a racist quota agenda. This much smartness they have. What they do behind the curtain is another matter. So it is only NIA that is so foolish to publicly condone the racist quota policy. That is why no margiis are attracted to the NIA platform. Before investigating this fully let us see why and how the quota system is used among the masses.THE TOOL OF THE COMMON SOCIETY: QUOTA SYSTEMDevoid of any higher ideal and without any sentient life practices, the general society had to grab onto something to make their band-aid type of "unity". And what did they grab onto?-- The Quota System.By that way when employing people in an office or when accepting people into a university the leaders cry out:"Give me 3 whites, 2 Asians, 4 Blacks, 1 Native American, 2 Hispanics, 4 Arabs, and 3 South Pacific Islanders" etc, etcSuch a quota system is the crude way of bringing people together in the mundane society.This is done because the common public does not have any higher ideal. Just they employ their crude quota system where everyone maintains theirown separate identities-- thus causing all kinds of problems and difficulties like strained social relations, cultural tension, and hatred between one race and another. This we see day in and day out in the general society where race riots, racially motivated killings, and bigoted name-calling are everyday events.So the quota system is not something high or rational; rather it is just one mundane mechanism for mixing people together and creating a false show of oneness. All done because they do not have any higher ideal in mind.BABA'S WARNING AGAINST SEPARATIST POLICIESLIKE THE QUOTA SYSTEMFrom start to finish Baba is totally against the quota system. Because it completely undermines the fabric of society and inhibits our abilities to from one human society.Baba says, "We cannot build a strong society if we discriminate against a section of humanity by drawing imaginary lines of distinction." (HS-1, 'Social Justice')So Baba does not at all condone the dividing or naming of people in AM based on superficial differences like skin color etc. Thus when NIA has created their own racist dictionary and is dividing the Marga society along racial lines like H, B, NIA, NBIA, NIM, NITA, etc, then which rational margii can appreciate such things.And here again in straightforward and clear-cut language Baba condemns the idea of separating people on the basis of language etc.Baba says, "Clubs that are set up on linguistic consideration may not be supported wholly on moral grounds." (HS-1, '87 Edn, p.39)Thus Baba has zero tolerance for dividing humanity by making crude distinctions on the basis of language, skin color, or origin of birth etc. None of these things are acceptable in our Marga.NEGATIVE WAYS OF THE NIAYet that is exactly what the NIA chieftain is doing. He has one grand dream of dragging the crude quota system into our Marga and using that to label and divide our AM society. This is his crude tactic. Because in black and white language the NIA law-makers proclaim:"Give me 3 NBIA'S, 5 NIA'S, 3 H's, 6 NITA's, 4 B's, and 2 NIM's..."This is how the NIA chief wants to make the next batch of Purodhas: By labeling and differentiating using their racist quota formula. In that case how is the NIA agenda different from the ways of the crude general society which has no higher ideal.Once again here is a sampling of how things work in the crude, general society:"Give me 3 whites, 2 Asians, 4 Blacks, 1 Native American, 2 Hispanics, 4 Arabs, and 3 South Pacific Islanders" etc, etcSo NIA's grand master plan is nothing but a re-hash of the low-minded strategies already in vogue in the general society. As if in AM we have nothing better to do than to copy racist strategies. This is the NIA leader's crude machination-- his dream of the quota system NIA: NO DIFFERENT FROM DEFECTIVE WAYS OF THE PASTWhen reviewing the defective philosophies of old, Baba points out their demerits and failings.Baba says, "Some of these philosophies pertaining to the physical realm sounded very fine indeed, but they were not in perfect tune with the hard realities of the objective world. Those philosophies were quite satisfactory in the dreamland of theory, but they had no connection whatsoever with the practicalities of the earth." (NH-LOI: Disc 1)Thus the NIA's quota system falls into this same defective category. Because already we know that the quota system is not working well in the general society. It cannot stand up to the hard crust of the earth. Rather this quota system is the cause of extreme racial hatred in so many avenues in the general society. Even then the NIA chief paints the glories of his quota system and insists on using it to promote his own NIA agenda.And here again when talking of the crude philosophies of old Baba points out how such tinsel types of agendas went against the spirit of humanity.Baba says, "Sometimes the superficial display of these theories has dazzled the eyes of the onlooker, but actually they contained no dynamism...In the end they have only flung humanity into the quagmire of dogmatism, the breeding ground of innumerable mosquitoes. They did not contribute to the welfare of any human being." (NH-LOI: Disc 1)Likewise the quota system advocated by the NIA heads falls into this same dark abyss of dogma and confusion. On the outside the leader tries his best to make it sound alluring and he tries to make it sparkle but the truth remains that the 4-Step plan is just one harmful and racist approach drowned in the defects of the quota system.BABA'S NEO-HUMANISTIC PRINCIPLEBy following the same sadhana and the same Ista and seeing one and all as brother and sister, all Ananda Margiis are naturally drawn together.Baba says, "People must develop closer and closer links with each other. One heart must gain a warm and deep understanding of another heart." (HS-1)Thus Baba's approach to forming unity is completely unique and universal where there are no superficial distinctions on the basis of race etc. There are no false groupings based on crude quotas. Rather everyone is linked together as one.BABA'S BLESSINGBy Baba's grace the oneness of all will be established in our AM society and then throughout the entire globe and planetary world.Baba says, "The newly awakened humanity of today is anxious to herald the advent of one universal society under the vast blue sky. The noble and righteous persons of all countries, bound by fraternal ties, are eager to assert in one voice, with one mind, and in the same tune that human society is one and indivisible." (AFPS-2)Namaskar,DivyajyotiNote 1: DEFECTS OF THE QUOTA SYSTEM ON UNIVERSITY CAMPUSESPerhaps nowhere else in the general society is the quota system used as much as it is used on university campuses, especially in the US. See here the recent US Supreme Court decision of June 23, 2003 which upholds the quota system:"The Supreme Court (5-4) upholds the University of Michigan Law School's policy, ruling that race can be one of many factors considered by colleges when selecting their students." (
www.infoplease.com/spot/affirmativetimeline...)And see the effect that such quota policies have. It goes not engender feelings of unity--rather the opposite:"A new study shows large numbers of female and minority faculty experience a particularly challenging and sometimes hostile campus climate, even as universities across the United States..." (12/18/2003)And that negative environment does not just exist for faculty but for students as well."Racism that Blacks and other minority students experience are racist comments, graffiti with racial slurs and different treatment in the classroom." ("Racism on U.S. college campuses')So all along the way, we can see that by labeling and separating people into racial camps does not lead to a wholesome sense of unity-- rather it creates racial tension and backlash. At the same time in the general society they may have no other recourse than to adopt the quota system. Because in the present era they are entirely lacking any type of neo-humanistic outlook. But in AM we have our higher ideal; then what is the need to copy the crude quota system from the debased general society.Note 2: GIFT OF NIA: THE RACIST DICTIONARYOut of the desire to create a crude quota system and make himself a Purodha, the NIA chieftain made-up his own racist dictionary that harshly divides our Marga society. Whose ears can tolerate such terminology.NIA= Non-Indian Avadhuta/tika; NITA= Non-Indian Tattvika / Acarya; NIM= Non-Indian Margii; IO= Indian Office; NI= Non-Indians; NBIO=Non-Bengali Indian Office;...And here are more communal terms which the NIA founder created:IA= Indian avadhutas/ikas; NIB= Non-Indian brahmacariis; BI= Bengali Indian; NBI= Non-Bengali Indian; B= Bengali; NB= Non-Bengali; BMPS=Bengali Marga Pracaraka Samgha; HMPS= Hindi Marga Pracaraka Samgha, etc.NBIA= Non-Bengali Indian AvadhutaPlus NB-NBIA, NB-NBMPS, NB-NBI/EC, NB-NBI, etc, etc, and on and on he goes...All the above divisions came into the gray matter of the NIA founder. With his own brain he created all this racist terminology. This can only be due to a lack of sadhana and a lack of neo-humanistic feeling--otherwise what can be the cause of such racist tendencies.Note 3: THREE-STEP PLAN BECAME FOUR STEP PLANWho can forget the history that when the NIA chieftain first formulated his racist strategy it was called the "Three-Step Plan". But when he realised that the "Three-Step Plan" was totally broken and defective then he invented the "Four-Step Plan". This is their crazy planning and way of working. They invented their own selfish theories and crooked policies based on their lust to become Purodhas. And then change their theories based on their own whim and side by side they hope that no one will notice.Better these NIA heads should clean their minds with the force of sadhana and follow the path of neo-humanism. If they can do that then that will really be great. Then they will become the real seers of society. Until that time however, so long as they remain wedded to their racist polices and divisive Four-Step quota theories, the NIA factional head will go down in history as just one more dogmatic theorist, like so many before him. Because with sparkling eyes the new humanity will easily recognise what is what and who is who.Note 4: CREATING UNITY IN OUR MARGAHere Baba has given the key how to create lasting unity in our Marga.Baba says, "The entire society of A'nanda Ma'rga is founded on a common ideal, the goal of becoming one with Brahma...the unity in a society founded on the ideal of Brahma will be everlasting." (PNS-3) ********************************************Right Type of InspirationBaba says, "Inspiration comes from inside. [Sometimes] we need inspiration from outside; but that inspiration is not lasting. It is momentary. But in order to inspire yourself you have got to know yourself; by knowing yourself you are inspired always. Inspiration from inside will stand for all time; it will inspire you for all time. That alone is going to help you. And by inspiring yourself you are inspiring others. So be an example. Be a true aspirant by becoming yourself what you are; [and by becoming what you are,] you show others what they have to be. So in order to know everything you know one thing. That one thing is dharma. That one thing is the supreme truth, and that truth is hiding in your heart. You have got to know that truth inside yourself. That is why sa'dhana' has to be performed." (AV-31, p.100)Note: Everyone desires inspiration; this is a universal quality of human beings. And as Baba is describing above when a sadhaka receives praise from someone for something they did, then that praise does not produce a long-lasting effect. Such external inspiration cannot fuel someone for a long time. Rather it will dry up quickly. In contrast when a strong vibration comes in sadhana and one is filled with inspiration from within, then that inspiration is permanent. It goes on and on. Certainly each and every sadhaka has experienced this. That is why it is commonly thought that external praise has little or no value in comparison to the internal inspiration derived from our spiritual practices.********************************************posted by Paresh at 7:52 PM on Jan 4, 2008 Posted by Anonymous to
ANANDA MARGA - SSG CIRCULAR at February 18, 2008 2:32 AM
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Beard" <
dcbeard@yahoo.com>
To: "SGoenka" <
sgoenka@gogoindia.com>
Sent: 18 February, 2008 9:12 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Divide and rule policy
> Namaskar:> > It is my thought that Unity among us is more important than> whoever the 'Leader du Jour' may be > > "Leaders" who are promoting petty fiefdoms instead of Unity> are not really leaders. > > How can they be? > A Leader is someone that represents the rest of the WT's> and House'hold'ers> > These are wanting what? Unity! & Dharma'Raj> If the so called leaders are not providing then they are> impediments to our collective progress .. they may be good> people, they may not but True Leadership requires something> more it requires Completely dis'interest'ed service to> Humanity>
----- Original Message -----
From:
DharmadevaTo:
ananda_marga_srs@yahoogroups.comSent: 17 February, 2008 4:18 PM
Subject: [ananda_marga_srs] Why the confusion about seat reservation?
Why the confusion about seat reservation?NamaskarWe know that Prout is for the happiness and all-round welfare of everyone. In various discourses Baba talks about how democracy can be improved, noting that there are many defects in democracy that human beings have already started to rectify. One defect that is singled out is that of seat reservation, particularly in parliamentary democracies.Seat reservation----------------Baba states in 'Problems of the Day':"Although the system of seat reservation* is against democratic principles, temporary arrangements for seat reservation, if desired, may be permitted for backward communities.** But generally it is found that among the representatives of backward communities, the number of competent persons is very few. Hence the right to contest reserved seats should not be limited to those belonging to a particular community. At the time of the primary election of the candidates for the reserved seat, however, only those belonging to the community for which the seat has been reserved will enjoy the right to vote. That is, two people will be nominated for the one seat in the primary election. Later, either of the two will be finally elected by the vote of the general public. If, in the primary election, only one candidate is nominated that is, there is no other contestant in that case his or her popularity must be tested before the general public. Only if a backward or minority community clearly demands seat reservation will it be adopted, otherwise not." The translators also noted:* Seat reservation is the practice whereby parliamentary seats (and also administrative posts) are reserved for particular sections of society, usually less-advanced communities or minorities. Trans.** "Backward communities" refers to those communities which have not had access to social services and education. Generally only the members of such communities have the right to contest reserved seats. (Backward communities should receive preferential treatment from the government until poverty has been eliminated.) Trans. In summary, to establish a proper system of reserved seats for backward communities:1. Any competent representatives may contest a reserved seat (ie this is not limited to persons belonging to the backward community);2a. A primary election of candidates for a reserved seat must first be held; 2b. but, only persons in the backward community for a reserved seat can vote at the primary election (note often primary elections are also referred to as nominations for a seat);3a. Once the candidates become known from the results of the primary election, there will be a final election; 3b. and, all persons in the general public can vote at the final election.In addition:4. If, in the primary election, only one candidate is nominated, the final election by the general public will still be held to test the popularity of the candidate for a reserved seat;5. Only if a backward community clearly demands seat reservation will it be adopted, otherwise not;6. Backward community also means a minority community. This means, in relation to a reserved seat:- Any competent person can be a representative;- Only the backward community votes in a primary election to nominate candidates;- The general public votes in a final general election choosing from amongst the nominated candidates.So, in respect of reserved seats:- Potential representatives from the general body;- Nomination / Primary election of candidates by the backward community/minority;- Final election by the general body.Even when one takes a brief view of Indian constitutional law history, you can immediately see that Baba is driving at the deficiencies in seat reservation policy and law in the case of India specifically and also on seat reservation generally. Looking at that constitutional law history of India we find a raft of Supreme Court cases and amendments to laws regarding seat reservation over the last 50 years, including in relation to the 'Creamy Layer' (ie those better off but who fall within backward communities). This history arises because of, and reflects, the initially deficient policy in relation to seat reservation in India (which was supposedly to last for only 10 years). Baba being aware of this, and its future contentious impact, then clarified what is the proper approach for a temporary scheme for seat reservation (see above). Had the legislatures followed this in India, there would undoubtedly have been better outcomes all round.Some of us may occasionally come across a scheme called 4SP. This scheme tries to rely on and assert what it calls seat reservation by picking up on what Baba said above. However, it presents a fundamentally wrong view on seat reservation. Quoting from political tracts (usually called a FAQ) of the 4SP it states: "must have a reserved percentage of seats, and each groupification will elect its own representatives". Assuming (on the surface) that 'groupification' refers to backward community or minority, we can see what is wrong in the statement. The context shows that the statement relates to a final election, and in that it is saying only the particular community elects representatives for the reserved seat. But this is wrong because in Prout's (temporary) system of seat reservation the whole electorate actually votes in a final election for the candidates contesting a reserved seat. The particular backward or minority community only has the exclusive right to vote in the primary election which is for nominating candidates who will contest the final general election. In that final election the whole electorate is entitled to vote, even for reserved seats.Most of us would be aware of the difference between a primary election and final general election, as there is much media publicity these days on the 'primaries' being held in the USA for certain candidates to contest the final general election for the next President of the USA. The 4SP scheme, and presumably its proponents, simply disregard what Baba states about the necessity for both a primary election and a general election when it comes to reserved seats for backward and/or minority communities. Further, it muddles up who has the respective voting rights. Accordingly, this is not consistent with Prout discourses. It is clear that the entire electorate has the right to vote for a final representative for a reserved seat, not just the backward community which benefits from the reserved seat.Incidentally Baba states about the UK and USA political systems that:"If I am to express my views impartially, so far as the parliamentary form of government is concerned, Great Britain is in the position of champion. No country has surpassed them. So far as the presidential form of government is concerned, the USA is far ahead of the USSR."Neither of these countries have seat reservation. Arguably, both countries have minorities of some sort, whose range includes indigenous communities, certain immigrant communities, less-advanced communities, and communities suffering a lack of access to social services and education. We can see from the above discourse on Prout that ultimately it is the general public or the whole electorate who must have the final vote on who the sitting representatives will be in the governing legislature that adopts a system of seat reservation. Anything short of this is bound to be deficient and seriously impact of proper governance overall. Indeed, any suggestion that a backward and/or minority community (in 4SP tract language a groupification) will elect its own representatives in any system determining the outcome for a reserved percentage of seats, is incorrect.For AMPS, the correct approach is simply stated in Caryacarya itself as:"The purodha's of Ananda Marga will elect the members of the Central Committee (CC) from among themselves."That is, every purodha (and therefore all the purodhas, each one of them - rightly qualified, of course) has a right of election in relation to every and all the members of the CC. Is it not straightforward? They can exercise their election rights as if they are considering who gets on the CC as a whole, not as if they are considering the CC as having groups, ie by who gets on the CC via a group voting process representing 3 groups in the CC. As shown from Baba's Prout discourse (above), this latter (4SP) approach is also deficient in terms of Prout.4SP claims that groups of purodhas have the right to elect representatives of their group onto the CC. We can immediately see how artificial the 4SP concept is, and yet how natural the words of Caryacarya are. And how obviously awkward the 4SP is when compared to the words in Caryacarya. The 4SP brings in an unwanted 'gloss' or distortion to organisation and Caryacarya. Job reservation---------------Regarding administrative postings, ie to the Central Executive Committee (CEC), Caryacarya states:"The purodha' pramukha will be the ex-officio president of the Central Committee, and he will constitute the Central Executive Committee according to his choice."Essentially, this gives the President a complete discretion, and the President is not fettered or confined by any formula or systemic constraints. In exercising the discretion, the President may develop some procedures and may change these as required, if anything like that is even required (as that is what choice and discretion is about), but that is entirely up to the President (and of course, the President can take advice from whoever considered necessary). In no way, is any formula approach to be set in concrete in this regard. In terms of Prout, Baba states:"In some countries of the world such as India, job reservation has been introduced to provide employment to backward classes and ensure their economic advancement. However, job reservation is not in tune with the ideology of PROUT. That is, when PROUT is established, nobody will feel the necessity of job reservation because everybody's progress is guaranteed in PROUT. In the Proutistic system people will not seek jobs -- jobs will seek people."In the ideal of Prout implementation, there is not job reservation or, one part of which, we might call administrative post reservation.Baba goes on to give some temporary measures to help move from disparity to parity, and states:"In the present socio-economic environment, however, if the following preferential system is adopted as a temporary measure, then the suffering of the people may be alleviated. First, poor people coming from backward families should get first preference in the fields of services and education, irrespective of their birth affiliation. Second preference should go to the poor people coming from non-backward families. Third preference should go to the non-poor people coming from backward families. Last preference should go to the non-poor people coming from non-backward families. Here, "backward" means families who did not get any services or education in the past. Such families should continue to get these facilities until there is no poverty in the country -- that is, until the minimum requirements are guaranteed."The priorities are:1. Poor and backward;2. Poor and non-backward;3. Non-poor and backward;4. Non-poor and non-backward.It is obvious here that it is the economic condition that is important, NOT birth affiliation (or in 4SP tract language groupification). This is made clear when Baba states:"Thus, the criteria for receiving preferential services and education should not be birth affiliation but a person's economic condition. A so-called low caste shoe repair man may be economically well-off, thus the advantage of job reservation is superfluous for him and misleading for society. There is no need of job reservation in these circumstances. On the other hand, there may be a Maethil Brahmin who comes from a so-called high caste family but is economically very poor. Job reservation is essential for him, and would increase the economic standard of the entire society."It is the economic standard that is relevant to any temporary system of job reservation, and birth affiliation is not a factor. Similarly, a formula that tries to cement birth affiliation (or groupification in 4SP tract language) into administrative posts as an 'organisational feature' is incorrect when it comes to looking at the matter from a Prout perspective. In terms of Caryacarya, constituting the CEC is a matter at the choice/discretion of the President when it comes to administrative postings on the CEC. Indeed, where it otherwise, the 'Creamy Layer' of backward communities or minorities could benefit unnecessarily, and this Baba indicates is misleading for society. It would appear that Baba is rightfully disregarding the 'Creamy Layer' in the above extract, as well. The danger of 4SP is that it promotes birth affiliation and also has the same potential problems that arise in relation to the 'Creamy Layer'- which is one of the matters that has caused a fair bit of confusion in Indian constitutional law history.Baba recognised the potential conflict between backward and forward classes and gave clear direction in relation to both legislative and administrative positions. Baba states (in relation to both undeveloped and developed countries):"Many undeveloped and developing countries are struggling to elevate their backward classes. For example, Bihar is at war over the question of backward and forward classes. If the above system is followed, it would certainly end all possibility of struggle among backward and forward classes in India and other countries of the world. At the same time, it would automatically provide people with the opportunity for social justice and economic self-sufficiency. Without giving any consideration to caste, creed, religion, race, language or sex, governments would be able to create a suitable environment for the all-round and quick development of all local people, providing them with food, clothing, housing, education and medical treatment. This would eliminate any feeling of inferiority from their minds, and all would have the opportunity of earning their livelihood on the basis of their capabilities."Baba foresaw the problems that a deficient policy, or one not well based on first principles, gives rise to when it comes to backward communities. In all this, race and language, as well as birth affiliation, are not factors to consider as indicated above. Any scheme that has these attributes in the forefront is an incorrect approach in terms of Prout.Weightage or preferential treatment-----------------------------------In another discourse, Baba states:"4) Question: What is the difference between a minority and a strong minority? And what does the term "weightage" mean in politics?Answer: A minority is less than 40% of the population. A strong minority is between 40% and 50% of the population. Weightage is the preferential allocation of parliamentary seats to a minority over and above what it is logically entitled to. For example, suppose in a country 38% of the population belong to one community and 62% of the population belong to another community. In a house of representatives of 100 members, the former community should have a representation of only 38 seats. If more than 38 seats are allocated to it to appease any sense of social insecurity it may have, these additional seats are considered as weightage. The weightage system does not occur in the case of strong minorities.In the past, in the Bengal parliament, there were 250 seats. Representatives were elected to 200 seats and nominated to 50 seats. That is, 50 seats were reserved for minorities and outstanding people from different fields. At that time 45% of the population belonged to one community and 55% of the population belonged to another community. To appease the former community, 120 out of the 200 seats were reserved for it, leaving only 80 seats for the latter community. This was not the correct approach because the former community were not a minority, but a strong minority."Accordingly, proportional representation to satisfy minorities should be in proper proportion (eg 38% population means 38 out of 100 seats). Weightage or preferential allocation of seats, though is essentially a disproportional representation. There should be no weightage for strong minorities. There should be proper proportionality generally.Baba clarified also that division by an numbers game in representative institutions (ie legislature) based on communal consciousness is unnatural. Such mental divisions is uncalled for.
As below:"As an example of the communal approach of the Government of India, take the case of Bengal. At that time reservation in the Bengal assembly was for 250 seats. 250 seats were created as part of provincial autonomy. Of these 250 seats, 120 were for Muslims, 80 were for non-Muslims, 25 were for British merchants -- for the British businessmen of Calcutta to contest elections -- a few were for Zaminders, a few were for universities, and a few were for labour leaders. The total: 250. In Bengal at that time, 45% of the population was Muslim and 55% was non-Muslim. That is, the land of Bengal was not only physically divided but also mentally divided, as a result of which Bengal was divided on the basis of communal consciousness, which is unnatural. Communalism is unnatural. Again today, the foolish leaders, the political leaders, are encouraging this very sentiment. And I fear that if it is not controlled in the proper time -- it is the most opportune moment to control it -- if it is not controlled in the proper time, the country will face further disintegration."So the preferred approach when it comes to representation in a legislature, or certain parts of a legislature, that adopts a system of proportional representation is to have the proportions that reflect the actual numbers in the electorate(s) - of course, relative changes in population will not always get the exact numbers, but these differences are numbers on the margins and so are not immediately critical. Say in an electorate where there are 900 persons of community A, 300 persons of community B and 150 persons of community C, the proportions are 6:2:1. Say also, that the candidates eligible for election come to 10% in each community, ie 90 for A, 30 for B and 15 of C. Then say that the number of seats available on the representative body are 27. This means by proportional representation, community A gets 18, B gets 6 and C gets 3. These proportion represents the simple facts of that electorate, the clear empirical approach.Now say someone advocates that the proportion should be 2:2:1. Obviously, this would result in a disproportion all round. The numbers would come out approximately as 10.8:10.8:5.4 (or 11:11:5 when rounded) and result in what is called a gerrymander in favour of community C. A gerrymander being a political advantage by way of redistribution. Obviously that is politically untenable.Let us say the population varies a bit to A=1000, B=300, C=200 with eligible candidates now being A=100, B=30 and C=20. Say that same advocate proposes that the ratio still sits at 2:2:1. What a disfigurement this would be because the true ratio is 10:3:2 or 5 : 1.5 : 1. We can see that community C is well out of proportion (favourably) in terms of their preferential allocations compared to community A if the ratio where to be 2:2:1. That is 2:1 compared to 5:1 and so community C consider themselves to be far more favoured than community A - this creates superiority and inferiority complex. This is ill-advised politics and inconsistent with the guidance provided in the Prout discourses. Remarkably 4SP advocates something similar in disproportionality and openly admits that a community such as C would be significantly advantaged, ie the "short-term effect of the current percentages would be ... a significant increase in power".The approach of 4SP creates disparity not parity, and Baba says elsewhere that inferiority and superiority complexes, and social conditions that create them, are contrary to establishing parity. Throughout history, such complexes have been at the root of denial of human rights. The are contrary to the principle of social equality.Conclusion----------The 4SP approach is inconsistent with Prout discourses in relation to political representation - both elected and administrative. It is plainly inconsistent when it comes to organisational governance in AMPS to suggest that the 4SP system or formula be introduced. The framework for AMPS organisational governance is already clearly set out in Caryacarya Part 1. One can, from the start, resort to 2 basic sentences in this regard:"The purodha's of Ananda Marga will elect the members of the Central Committee from among themselves. The purodha' pramukha will be the ex-officio president of the Central Committee, and he will constitute the Central Executive Committee according to his choice."These sentences apply to AMPS and when carefully examined can be considered consistent with the Prout literature. Not that one can necessarily cent per cent equate governance structures advocated in Prout for general public politics with governance structures in AMPS for organisational purposes, but conceptually one can say they would have some similarity. Importantly, the governance structures above-mentioned in relation to Prout relate to general social politics while the governance structure for AMPS relate to organisational governance, and the better approach when making comparisons is to rely on the Prout discourses to do with Sadvipra Boards, not necessarily only on Prout discourses to do with general social politics.We can see that 4SP does not attain the consistency. Rather it creates divergences in terms of seat reservation, job reservation and proportionality. When it comes to considering the neo-humanist decision making matrix, it is not beneficial (conducive to human welfare), ie it is non-blissful. It may be auxiliary to an extent but to harness some points it raises requires proper cultivation, ie it needs work for proper alignment with Prout and organisational concepts of governance. Of course, for proper organisational development, we already have the core tenets in our AM organisational system and structure and that is what we should all turn our minds to, rather than unnecessary schemes and glosses popping up and then disappearing, whether they be so-called 'administrations' (curiously 4SP gives so much credence to these false administrations, stemming from NGB and EC, by accepting them under the name of 'administration', but then denounces them - again it present a confusing and inconsistent approach), GAC, or 4SP.Dharmadeva
