Global capitalism is fundamentally unjust and exploitive. It is often difficult to judge whether different proposals and theories in government, social media, or corporate media are credible and deserving of our support. Prout’s focus is always on what is benevolent for humanity and the planet. For this reason, we suggest using the following eleven criteria as a tool to help evaluate the worthiness of real world proposals.
Does it:
Strengthen social unity?
Build economic equity?
Promote diversity and inclusion?
Support gender equity?
Uphold science and rationality?
Foster cooperation?
Accelerate progressive change?
Inspire benevolent action?
Forge ecological and spiritual connections?
Encourage neohumanistic love for all creation?
Improve the quality of life of future generations?
Prout Anchor Exercise
Read one of the following questions. Together discuss whether it meets any of the above ten Prout “Anchors.” Write down why or why not it seems credible and worthy of Proutist support. If, after completing your task, there is still time, consider another question.
1. During a pandemic, should religious groups be allowed to have larger meetings than non religious ones?
The U.S. Supreme Court in a split decision decided to grant requests from the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn and two Orthodox Jewish synagogues to block enforcement of a New York executive order restricting attendance at houses of worship. Both the diocese and the synagogues claimed that their right to the free exercise of religion guaranteed by the Constitution must not be limited by government health orders. Yet church meetings have been superspreading events of the Covid-19 virus. The Shincheonji Church of Jesus in Daegu, South Korea in February: 5,080 infections. A prayer meeting in Mulhouse, France, in February: 2,500 infections, at least 21 deaths. The Jewish Hasidic community in Brooklyn, NY: hundreds of deaths (NY Times). United House of Prayer in Charlotte, NC in October: 187 infections, 8 deaths. A rural Arkansas church in March: 35 infections, 3 deaths. A choir practice at Mount Vernon Presbyterian Church in Washington State, May 10: 32 infections, 2 deaths. Should government health authorities force religious groups to limit the number and distance between members who attend their services?
2. Should the government adopt the Green New Deal?
The Green New Deal is a proposal in the U.S. Congress of a coordinated national program to transition from carbon-based industrial processes to non-polluting, non-carbon based industries and renewable energy. Its goals are to significantly reduce the national carbon footprint, in an effort to stop
climate change caused by global warming, and to reduce economic inequality. The scientific, technological, and human input required are analogous in size and scope to the resources and finances devoted to World War II. A critical element is the government acting as “the employer of last resort” to guarantee a job with a “living wage” to all individuals displaced from their jobs in energy, transportation, mining, agriculture, and food distribution as society transitions to non-carbon based industries.
3. Should the government pay off student loans?
University fees in the USA are the highest in the world and climbing, while state and national government financial support is shrinking. 16.6 million Americans attend college each year, and close to 11 million or 65 percent borrow annually to help cover costs. These students have on average $30,000 of loans, though some owe much more. In June 2019, the total amount of money owed in student loan debt exceeded $1.6 trillion [Kerr, Emma, “See 10 Years of Average Total Student Loan Debt.” U.S News & World Report, Sept. 15, 2020]. Cancellation of all student loans would offer a fresh start to millions of young people, who have been burdened with loan payments for many years after graduating from college or university. It would also inspire many poorer people to pursue higher education who today cannot due to its prohibitive cost. Conservatives argue that paying off student loans would not benefit everyone, and that it would invariably benefit wealthier students with graduate degrees and a larger debt.
4. Should the government adopt Universal Basic Income?
Universal Basic Income (UBI) is a popular idea proposed and debated by many progressive groups and politicians around the world by which every citizen gets a guaranteed sum of money as income, regardless of whether they are employed or not. Iran and Macau have this, and pilot programs have been successful in Brazil, India, Namibia, Finland, Alaska, and the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians in North Carolina, USA. Proposals differ whether the amount should be sufficient to meet a person’s basic needs or less than that, and whether all citizens, even the wealthiest, should be included. A negative income tax is a a type of UBI in which earners above a certain level pay money to the state while earners below that receive money. UBI lifts everyone out of poverty, though it does not give everyone a job.
5. Does the U.S. Criminal Justice System need major reforms?
More than 2.3 million people are incarcerated in the United States, and another 4.7 million are on probation or parole, much more than any other country. The Criminal Justice System is designed to punish criminal offenders in the belief that punishment alters one’s actions, that the infliction of pain will deter future criminal behavior, and that if someone kills, they should be killed to deter others. None of these beliefs are supported by research. Reforms that are needed: End pretrial detention for most defendants awaiting trial and use alternatives to arrest and incarceration for low-level offenses. Shorten excessive prison sentences and improve release processes. Sentence fewer people to incarceration, abolish mandatory sentencing, and make sentences shorter. Redirect public funds to community organizations that provide social services. Stop probation and parole systems from fueling incarceration. Keep criminal justice, juvenile justice, and immigration processes separate. Promote restorative justice and give all communities equal voice in how our justice system works.
6. During a pandemic should we adopt herd immunity strategy?
Some governments like those in UK, Sweden, and India have relied on herd immunity as a strategy to beat the Covid-19 virus. This is a form of indirect protection from infectious disease when a
sufficient percentage of a population has become immune through previous infections, thereby reducing the likelihood of infection for individuals who lack immunity, which stops or slows the spread of disease. The greater the proportion of immune individuals in a community, the smaller the probability that non-immune individuals will come into contact with an infectious individual. This same effect can be achieved through aggressive vaccination efforts also. However, relying on people contracting the virus to gain immunity has put a tremendous amount of stress on medical systems, doctors, nurses, and families who care for sick patients. So far 127 million people in the world have been infected and 2.8 million have died. This strategy balances that with keeping the economy open.
7. Is climate change a hoax?
Climate change skeptics deny, dismiss, or cast doubt on the scientific consensus on climate change, including the extent to which it is caused by humans, its effects on nature and human society, or the potential of adaptation to global warming by human actions. The fossil fuels lobby, the Koch brothers, industry advocates, and conservative think tanks in the United States organize climate change denial campaigns to oppose the regulation of carbon emissions. These are supported by conservative media and skeptical bloggers to manufacture uncertainty about global warming and show scientific controversy.
8. Was the Covid-19 pandemic planned and created?
“Plandemic: The Hidden Agenda Behind Covid-19” is a 2020 video that went viral promoting the claim that vaccines are “a money-making enterprise that causes medical harm.” Judy Mikovits, a former research scientist, claims that the Covid-19 virus was created “between North Carolina laboratories, Fort Detrick, the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, and the Wuhan laboratory;” that U.S. hospitals receive $13,000 from Medicare if they “call it Covid-19” when a patient dies; that hydroxychloroquine is “effective against these families of viruses”; that flu vaccines increase the chance of contracting Covid-19; that flu vaccines themselves contain coronaviruses; that “wearing a mask literally activates your own virus.” Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. wrote the Foreword to her 2020 book. Though quite popular, all of these claims have been refuted by scientists, medical doctors and public health experts as misinformation.
9. Should the Tech Industry Create Billionaires?
Covid-19 pandemic has triggered an economic crisis of a magnitude not seen since the Great Depression. Millions of people have lost their jobs, homes, and livelihood. Yet many CEOs in the tech industry have added tens of billions of dollars to their net worth. For example, Jeff Bezos, Amazon CEO ($187 billion), Elon Musk, Tesla & SpaceX CEO ($149 billion), Bill Gates, co-founder of Microsoft ($120 billion), Mark Zuckerberg, co-founder & CEO of Facebook ($100 billion), Larry Ellison, founder of Oracle ($87 billion), Larry Page, co-founder of Google & CEO of Alphabet ($76 billion), Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google & president of Alphabet ($74 billion – Forbes “The World’s Real-Time Billionaires”). Online technologies provide useful services in a pandemic-stricken, lockdown-hit, and socially-distanced world. However, does this justify the astronomical accumulation of wealth by a handful of individuals in the tech industry? Is this sustainable?
This was initially inspired by Sohail Inayatullah’s book, Prout in Power (Proutist Bloc India Publications, New Delhi, 2017). The digital pdf version is available here.