Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
But people work hard for many reasons, including physical, mental and
spiritual reasons. People's economy of Prout is designed to meet physical
needs, but once physical needs are met people begin to discover that they
have psychic and spiritual needs as well.
Examples of the kinds of motivation that explain why people work so hard to
perform are diverse and difficult task to correlate. A Nobel scientist once
said that in order to do well in science, a person must have a burning in
their tummy. Without a burning urge, it is unlikely that a person would put
in the hard work and have the persistence to overcome all the emotional ups
and downs of scientific research.
The term 'psycho-economics' was invented by Sarkar and refers to one of the
four sub-disciplines of economics. (The other three are people's economy,
commercial economy and general economy.) Psycho-economy includes the study
of the management and utilisation of psychic and spiritual resources.
Perhaps you have not thought of a scientist's "burning in the tummy" as a
form of wealth. But consider the tremendously valuable knowledge and
technology that would be lost if a potential Nobel laureate had not been
born with a burning in his/her tummy.
Since psychic and spiritual motivations are so strong in human life, how can
we utilise them for the benefit of social and economic development? A
Proutist economy would endeavour to discover each person's healthy
motivations and utilise them for the benefit of society. One idea promoted
by Sarkar is that a person's incentive income could partly be in a form that
both satisfies the person's desire and at the same time stimulates their
capacity to perform more valuable work. For example, a scientist who is
strongly motivated for research, would like to accept new equipment and new
research facilities as part of their 'income'. An engineer would accept a
trip to some of the engineering marvel's of the world as form of 'income'.
The concept already exists in nascent form in modern corporations as "income
packaging" and "fringe benefits". Prout would greatly expand this approach.
We can focus on the Venezuelan middle class and their role in the social
struggles of their country. Perhaps a bold assertion that it is not possible
to place the middle class "on hold" (i.e. ignore the aspirations of the
middle class in Venezuela) while attempting to fight poverty. This can be
amplified and there is a justification of this assertion.
We can combine these concepts into a single diagram which displays the
different kinds of power exercised by the three classes.
Consider people power. In this scenario, the poor are always in the
majority, so typically people power expresses their concerns. People power
is sometimes incredibly important in social struggle. For example, the right
wing coup which briefly removed President Chavez in April 2002, was defeated
when hundreds of thousands of the poor in Caracas came down from the slums
and surrounded the presidential palace. People power also defeated President
Marcos of the Philippines in 1986. However the primacy of people power is
very rare. If it were the norm, the democracies of the world would be run in
this way, but we know this is not the case.
Financial power is the dominant force in the world today and of course that
is exercised by the wealthy elite. Hence in the diagram, this becomes the
dominant colour - colour of financial power. In Marxist analysis, social
struggle boils down to a struggle between people power and financial power.
People power overcomes financial power only on rare occasions leading to a
proletarian revolution. However Prout considers this analysis to be
inadequate because it ignores the importance of cultural power.
The middle class have a special relation to culture partly because of their
education. But also the poor are usually too concerned about where their
next meal is coming from to have the luxury of reflecting on culture. And
the majority of the rich are more concerned about their overseas bank
accounts and tax havens. Therefore the responsibility for preserving and
reproducing culture falls to the middle class.
According to Prout, many social struggles revolve around culture, hence the
importance of the middle class in social struggle. The dynamics of social
struggle usually progress to a point where a community becomes polarised
between those who want to embrace socio-cultural change and those who do not
want change. Venezuelan society is in just such a condition.
It is convenient to compare the two Venezuelan cultures, old and new, using
a few key words. You can certainly think of others.
- The Old Culture: Privilege & Exploitation
- The New Culture: Social Equality & Cooperation
The strategy being pursued by the Venezuelan government at the present time
is to increase the social and cultural awareness of the poor, for example
through the establishment of the Bolivarian Circles. These are study circles
and crucibles for community planning. This is a useful and a worthy
strategy. It would be pursued by any progressive government. In terms of our
diagram, the effect is to increase the scope of the red colour (representing
the poor) in the bottom 'cultural power' rectangle and thus push the white
dividing line towards the right. But it is an insufficient strategy because
it ignores the great danger posed by the disaffected middle class on the
right side of the dividing line. The problem is that a large portion of the
Venezuelan middle class apparently do not feel that the current changes in
Venezuela offer them a future. This is a difficult and complex discussion
because much of middle class thinking is dominated by the media and the
media is almost completely controlled by the elite who are totally committed
to a culture of privilege and exploitation.
The media like to create an impression that the Venezuelan middle class is
opposed to the government of President Chavez. But clearly this is false. A
large number of the middle class do support the cultural changes in
Venezuela and for this reason it was possible for PDVSA (the Venezuelan
state-owned petroleum company) to recover rapidly from the crippling
management strikes of early 2003. However it is clear there exists a
significant portion of the middle class opposed to the new Venezuelan
agenda.
The great challenge is how to convince more and more of this disaffected
group that change in Venezuela is to their long term advantage. The idea
offered here is that an additional component could and should be added to
the government's programs - an attempt to win more of the middle class by
direct participation in its programs. This strategy appears as an additional
arrow in the diagram, situated on the divide within the middle class.
The psychological purpose of additional programs to involve the middle class
is that the middle class must also feel the benefits of the changes in
Venezuela. Better if they feel part of the exciting developments. They can
be the greatest critics of capitalism and the strongest opponents of
exploitation. They should share in the benefits of increasing prosperity.
There is a battle for the collective mind - so must get the positive message
out! Counter propaganda in private media - produce grass roots media. Here
the middle class has great potential.