12/26/97 - 1430

Let's Get The Socialism Out Of ISKCON

By Dharmapada Das (Dean De Lucia)

Socialism can be defined as a form of political governance in which the ruling body restricts pluralism and the right to come and go freely, even imposing itself on the personal business of an individual. One's private life is structured for him, at least to a great degree.

The results of socialism can be seen in the stagnant societies which have been formed by it: The former Soviet Union, communist China, and Cuba. Wholesale alienation of the governed, a lack of initiative, and economic as well as social constriction instead of expansion have been experienced.

Unfortunately, ISKCON has also organised itself along rather socialistic lines and typically suffered as a result. There are many examples of this; I would like to make indirect reference to a farm community with which I am familiar in order to illustrate this point. I am going to say that this community is not in North America, but I won't say exactly where it is so as not to cause consternation.

In this farm community, the right to own property is conditioned by management. Devotees are allowed to own the house they construct, and even pass it on to inheritors. They may also transfer title by sale, but they may not speculate with the property; they may only sell it for the same price that they bought it for, though they may recover for improvement costs. Contracts are offered such that the movement has the right to revoke ownership ( with re-embursement ) and force a person out if one's behavior is not in accordance with certain pre-defined stipulations. One of the stipulations, for example, has to do with regularly attending the programs. Of course, management is known for working with good faith, but this basically means that if a devotee hits a rough spot in his devotional career, he could be forced to leave. ( This actually happened once ) A devotee's ability to keep his own house during a rough spot in his devotional career, or what have you, should rest with him. Such a right should not rest with any ISKCON management or even with a majority of peers. Abuses due to " mob rule " in the name of democracy are not lacking in history. And what if he had a bad relationship with management? Conditional ownership of property is classic socialism. In this case, ownership of property is conditioned by the " government," i.e., local ISKCON management. The results are constrictive, not expansive. Devotees think twice about moving there, and some distrust has been created.

Other aspects of this community are overly structured, too. For example, one day I was waiting for a householder to come home. I was chanting japa underneath his car port, which was a pretty tranquil place. Keep in mind that this was a car port in an isolated farm community, not in a karmi residential area. Well, the resident Guru, sanyasi and community president drove in from town and saw me there. He sent a messenger saying that I should chant japa in the temple room and that he didn't want devotees lingering in the householder areas, or something like that. ( He wasn't asking ) While seemingly an innocuous incident, this incident exemplifies the great degree to which our communities are rigidly structured ( usually ). Restricting the right to come and go is another classic component of socialism. Imagine telling a karmi not to go over to his friend's house, or not to hang around his pal's car port because those are the rules! Do we see personal movement, such as the right to visit a devotee friend, conditioned or subject to approval in the Bhagavat or Chaitanya Charitamrita? Talk about suffocation!

A devotee's personal affairs, such as marriage, childbirth, his children's marriage, the right to work, where and how he can work, how much he can earn, ect., are all subject to scrutiny or worse in this community. This usually means that a devotee has to get permission to do these things. These affairs are not absolutely determined for him, but his freedom in these regards is severely restricted by the society. And that is what socialism does- it restricts one's personal rights and conditions one's ownership. It does not do so absolutely- that would be more akin to communism. I'm not comparing the movement's management style to absolute communism.

Well, the results in this community have been pretty much what one might expect from a socialistic social structure- discouragement, suffocation and a lack of enterprise. Actually, this same type of arrangement has generated similar results in other parts of ISKCON. Varnashram wasn't supposed to be like this.

As a result, many visitors and friends of the movement either stay on the margins or go away because they get the idea that the movement is a cult or something, and that devotees quit thinking for themselves. And actually, they are right to a large degree. Even though this movement is pure, and practically has a lock on the Vedic conclusion, there have been unhealthy doses of personality worship, discrimination against women and blind following. If we are going to attract the intelligent class of men, this type of thing has to be dealt with, because intelligent people don't swallow this kind of stuff- such people are capable and think for themselves.

That things may be regulated to the degree described above may come as much of a surprise for many devotees, but much of the respect and personal freedoms which have been won by devotees in North America and Europe are not so prevalent in other places. The movement in South America reminds me of ISKCON in the 70s. I think that if some guru expected his permission to be sought for a householder lady to marry her daughter in North America, he would be in for an abrupt surprise. Householder women usually take care of their own family business, which is the way it should be.

At any rate, it is interesting to note that most socialist movements are characterised by some kind of idealistic fervor in the beginning, after which natural apathy sets in. The Soviet Union and Cuba are good examples. In the 1920's, the Soviet Union experienced the highest rate of industrial growth in the world, propelled by the idealism of communism. And Cuban society was very hopeful and enthusiastic about the revolution for a good ten years. Now they are not.

ISKCON also had an idealistic period in which the enthusiasm of the members carried it, but now the natural effects of its management structure has taken its toll. Actually, alienation began to impact the movement before Shrila Prabhupada's departure. Even while he was physically on this earth, there was a great amount of turnover. Back then, it wasn't noticed too much. The movement was so dynamic that new recruits more than made up for the losses and the movement as a whole grew. But now it is noticed.

And of course, we can't expect the devotees to be so much on the absolute platform that they can just shrug off management and social structure, and continue with Krishna consciousness uninterrupted. We have to recognise that the devotees are not on the absolute platform yet and we must take their conditioning into consideration. I remember one of the original gurus lecturing and saying that the word burnout " doesn't exist in the dictionary." But business schools include worker alienation in their curriculum, and the treatment of workers with dignity has been a lynchpin of the successful Japanese management model. The Nectar of Devotion does make a comment to the effect that acting on an artificial platform is a cause of falldown.

One problem is that our leaders typically haven't had the right type of training for the job. Karmi organisations typically have human resource majors, psychologists and and political science majors in positions of managing people. I'm not saying that our movement depends on anything other than Krishna's mercy to succeed, but let's just say that we haven't typically had broad perspectives on a managerial level.

We have to make our leaders understand that the type of management style and, indeed, political organisation that has typically been employed in ISKCON is not very functional and that it is responsible for our movement's shrinkage. I am not referring to preaching in Eastern block countries, where backlash may not have had time to set in yet. And it doesn't matter if the socialism is benign or not; if that were the case, then it would just take more time for the alienation to set in. The problem is a social structure which decides personal issues for people ( devotees ), and not whether or not it is benign.

Of course, our leaders are not generally inclined to see their control compromised- no leader is. This situation kind of reminds me of the Soviet leaders before the transition to democracy. They felt that if they gave up their strict control of society, then Western-style bad elements would come to the surface, such as crime, prostitution and drug use. These things actually did increase. ( I think the devotees should promise not to take drugs or become prostitutes if our leaders change things! ). But it was a natural trade-off for a more productive and expansive society. In the same way, our leaders may have to witness some things which make them uncomfortable were the social organisation of ISKCON made more liberal; for example, maybe a householder scandal which they couldn't control very well. But it would be a small price to pay for a functional Krishna conscious society which conserves its members and doesn't alienate new people. And it's also true that devotees have to learn by their mistakes in order to grow, either materially or spiritually. Things shouldn't always be done or decided for them.

An ISKCON constitution with some type of Magna Carta or bill of rights could go a long way towards solving problems caused by an organisational structure with strong strokes of socialism. We need a structural, fundamental solution. At the same time, I do feel that the GBC has an obligation to absolutely defend and protect the philosophy, though a devotee's personal business should be none of theirs. All of this could be reconciled in a constitution.

By Dharmapada Das ( Dean De Lucia )
dean@uninet.com.br