Guest guest Posted June 28, 2001 Report Share Posted June 28, 2001 Dear Hare Krsna Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP. Thank you for this great text that explains why the devotees on this conference and elswhere are experiencing frustration in trying to find a way to survive through ox-power farming. Your servant, Chayadevi - "Noma T. Petroff" <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu> "Nirguna" <adri108 (AT) cal3 (DOT) vsnl.net.in>; "Noma T. Petroff" <npetroff (AT) bowdoin (DOT) edu>; "Cow (Protection and related issues)" <Cow (AT) pamho (DOT) net> Tuesday, June 26, 2001 11:33 AM Does the Indian Farmer need technology? > Nirguna prabhu, > > Thanks for your kind note. For the reference of others, I'm posting the > Tavleen > Singh article from India Today that you mentioned. She states that "What the > Indian farmer really needs is technology." > > She's well-meaning to look at Indian farmers and try to figure out how to help > them, but unfortunately she is ignorant and brainwashed. I should add that she > is no more ignorant and brainwashed than 98-100% of the members of the U.S. > Congress, who believe basically the same thing that she does. > > If she had actually studied the Populist Movement (1873-1896) in the U.S. and > its aftermath -- and also studied Marx, Gandhi and E.F. Schumacher, she would > understand that a means of protecting the small farmer does not exist within > the > framework of capitalism. > > The Populist Movement was the largest democratic effort in the history of the > United States -- but partly because it tried to find a solution within the > capitalist system it was a failure. Hundreds of thousands of farmers from all > ethnic groups and all across the country joined together to fight the cheating > banks, land owners and railway companies who were cheating and oppressing them. > One way they fought was to make cooperatives for buying supplies and selling > their products. Decades later, after their political demise with the defeat of > William Jennings Bryant, Henry Wallace, who had been raised in Populist Ka nsas, > actually brought many of the goals of the Populist movement into reality -- > when > Wallace became Secretary of Agriculture under President Franklin D. Roosevelt. > > But historians understand that although the policies which the Populists strove > for, did help farmers, they mainly helped the big farmers. The end picture is > that whereas in the late 1800's well over 50 percent of the population were > farmers -- but by the year 2000, only about 1 percent of the population were > farmers. Capitalist competition had wiped out most farmers. Even today, it is > becoming a huge sociological problem that the midwest is becoming largely > deserted. Towns are dying from underpopulation. > > The point is this: Capitalist agricultural techniques -- capital-intensive > technology and inputs -- and market-oriented production -- inevitably wipe out > small farmers. So what Tavleen Singh believes is the solution is in fact a > slow > way of killing farmers, and destroying their families as they are sent to the > cities to become low-paid factory workers or unemployed -- languishing in > living > conditions even worse than what they knew in the country. > > U.S. Congress members and this Indian columnist do not realize that the only > way > to actually help the small farmer is to abolish capitalism -- "thoroughly > overhaul society" -- and set up viable subsistence -- self-sufficient or > self-reliant -- farming villages. These villages will not offer the specter of > concentrated wealth that capitalism offers, because capitalism means > concentrating wealth among a few -- and properly protected subsistence farming > would mean a much more equitable distribution of wealth. > > As long as we desire to enjoy great luxury, it will not be possible to help > people like these farmers. But, people can give up that desire for luxury if > they actually do experience a higher taste by engaging in Krsna consciousness. > > Capitalism is a religion -- or rather a cult. We have all been brainwashed by > this cult, which hold out the promise of immense material enjoyment. > Capitalism > is a religion. People who are not sure whether or not God exists have an > unshakeable faith that if the free market is allowed to function, then "the > Invisible Hand" will provide the greatest good to the greatest number of > people. For a serious student of history, there is no evidence that this is > true, nevertheless, it is the unshakeable belief of most "modern" people. > Capitalism is the religion of materialism. And capitalist technology in > agriculture, such as the tractor, is an important item of faith in the > capitalist theology. > > Tavleen Singh needs to realize that capitalism is always a competition, with > the > stronger forces always defeating the weaker. So it is with capital-intensive > technology (as opposed to small-scale or appropriate technology) in > agriculture. Over the years, the strongest farmers (not necessarilty the best) > will gradually wipe out all the smaller ones. Capitalism is just like a > baseball or soccer tournament. In the beginning, you may have a hundred teams > competing, but by the end of the season, there will be only a few teams left to > compete. So it has been with the history of market-oriented capitalist > agriculture in the U.S. -- of all the hundreds of thousands of Populist > farmers, > only a tiny handful of their descendents can still farm the land a hundred > years > later. > > What Srila Prabhupada is proposing is something quite different. He proposes > to > "thoroughly overhaul society." "Thoroughly" -- meaning even the economic > system, even the system of government. And indeed, as Lenin accurately pointed > out, subsistence agriculture cannot survive for long, unprotected in a > capitalist environment. > > In one sense, the spiritual principle of cow protection is almost like a trick > of Srila Prabhupada's to force us to develop models of subsistence agricultural > villages. Because cows must be protected, it means we can't slaughter bulls. > But to practically protect bulls, they must be trained for agriculture. But to > use bulls for agriculture, produces a product which is too expensive to sell in > a capitalist market and use the funds to support a family. Using the bulls for > agriculture can only support a family, if the family consumes the produce > directly (as advocated by Srila Prabhupada in numerous conversations in "Srila > Prabhupada on Varnasrama and Farm Community Development"). But the family can > only consume its product directly when they are living in a protected > subsistence agricultural village -- properly trained and with no mortgage or > rent to pay on their land. But such a village can only be set up by an > enlightened Krsna conscious government. > > But, if such a village could be set up ("a small unit of ideal community" as > Prabhupada says) it would be a hundred times more potent for attracting people > to Krsna consciousness than anything we have today. > > But: ISKCON leaders are not interested in developing subsistence agricultural > villages based on cow protection and working the oxen. Narayana Maharaja and > his sahejiya followers are not interested in developing subsistence > agricultural > villages based on cow protection and working the oxen. And, also the rtviks, > who claim Srila Prabhupada as their only guru are also not at all interested in > fulfilling his ardent desire on this account. > > I'm sorry to say, but I believe most of these leaders, in all the various > competing camps, with possibly a few exceptions, are either ignorant or > cheaters > on this account. > > The purpose of sex is to have a child. That child can be raised in Krsna > consciousness and become a wonderful devotee. The devotional process of > raising > such a child will benefit not only the child -- but also his father and mother > and other family members -- because of the exceptional spiritual insight that > Krsna will give them in their day-to-day lives. > > But, the whole process is cut off if the couple attempts to circumvent having a > child by using birth control. There will be no child. The practical spiritual > benefit and spiritual realizations that could have accrued to that couple and > their relations are never realized. > > Similarly when our so-called spiritual leaders attempt to circumvent the > responsibilities implied by raising Dharma the bull and engaging him to work > for > a family farm, it means that all the spiritual realizations and preaching > potency which could have developed are cut off. They are never realized. > > Instead of figuring out how to develop the "small unit of ideal community" > which > would be needed to properly care for the bull -- they attempt to solve the > problem by creating concentration camps of cattle as in ISKCON Vrndavana or > ISKCON Mayapur (inspired by the capitalist model). The bull is never trained. > Or, they shun cow protection all together. The model of simple living and high > thinking in a Krsna conscious village is never developed. And, in the worst > cases, the swamis simply sit on a velvet cushion and fantasize about the > activities of Krsna and the gopis, while holding their hand out for donations > to > build "spiritual Disneylands.". Without the proper engagement of our father, > Dharma the Bull, real spiritual progress will never be realized. And the Krsna > consciousness movement will never become powerful enough to attract all the > people of the world. > > your servant, > > Hare Krsna dasi > > P.S. I'm sending Tavleeen Singh's article in a separate post. I believe that > Vandana Siva ("The Violence of the Green Revolution") Arundhati Roy ("The Cost > of Living") , and even E.F. Schumacher ("Small Is Beautiful") have far better > insight on the futility of capitalistic solutions for the problems of India's > farmers. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.