The inevitable consequence of vaeshya exploitation is shúdra revolution. When the vaeshyas, maddened with excessive greed, lose their common sense completely and forsake their humanity totally, then for shúdra revolution the opportune time has come. However, it cannot be said that shúdra revolution will automatically occur just because an opportune time has come. Proper conditions relating to place and person will bear much of the responsibility.

Revolution takes place when, from the economic perspective, only two classes remain in society: the exploiting vaeshyas and the exploited shúdras. But if there are no vipras and kśatriyas from a mental standpoint – in other words if there are no people who, though shúdras from an economic standpoint, are vipras or kśatriyas from a mental standpoint – shúdra revolution will not be possible. It is not the work of people who have a shúdra mentality to bring about revolution. They avoid struggle; they are playthings of the vaeshyas.

At the high point of the Vaeshya Age, the vaeshyas easily manipulate the shúdra-minded shúdras. If the kśatriya- and vipra-minded shúdras lack spirit, they will also be bought by the vaeshyas’ money. Thus shúdra revolution ultimately depends on shúdras who have sufficient spirit and are mentally vipras or kśatriyas.

Obstacles to Revolution

Those who want to bring about proletariat revolution with the help of manual labourers only will not succeed unless they take into consideration the mentality of the people involved. Shúdra-minded people do not understand their own problems; they do not even have the courage to dream about solving them. No matter how well labour leaders explain the problems to them or how fiery their lectures on the need for struggle be, it will not have any influence over their minds. They will spend their time eating, drinking, and getting violently drunk. They cannot think about who in their families is eating properly or getting an education or not. If their bosses increase their wages, they will merely spend more on their addiction; their standard of living will not be raised. That is why I say that such people do not and cannot bring about a shúdra revolution. It is not only undesirable but also foolish for those who want to bring about revolution to depend on such people; their static nature will thwart its movement, their cowardice will prematurely extinguish the fire of revolution.

Besides this type of mentality, national and religious traditions also often thwart revolution. It is extremely difficult for kśatriya- and vipra-minded shúdras to go against such traditions, let alone shúdra-minded shúdras. People become averse to revolution due to the following ideas: “Whatever is fated will happen; does fighting accomplish anything?”; “Our days are somehow passing by, so why should we trouble ourselves?”; or incorrect interpretations of the niśkáma karmaváda [doctrine of desireless action] of the Giitá or other scriptures.

In fact, a subtle analysis will reveal that the policy of establishing a welfare state on a democratic base is also an obstacle to revolution; as are the ideals of Gandhism and the high-sounding theory of democratic socialism.

The Bhúdán movement is also a reactionary movement in this way. Although I have high regard for the founders of Gandhism and the Bhúdán movement – as men they are second to none – their philosophies are extremely harmful for poor people.

Some of the philosophical interpretations of janmántaraváda [the doctrine of transmigration of souls, or reincarnation] also oppose revolution; that is, they argue, “You are starving in this life because you committed many sins in your last life, so what is the point of launching a movement? Destiny cannot be changed.”

That is why I have said that kśatriya- and vipra-minded shúdras will bring about the people’s revolution. For this, these shúdras will have to be thoroughly prepared, suffer a lot and make great sacrifices. They will have to fight against opposing groups and doctrines.

The Pioneers of Revolution

It is very easy to talk big about revolution. Audiences may be awestruck and applaud, but to actually bring about a revolution is not at all easy.

Those kśatriya- or vipra-minded shúdras who are the pioneers of revolution will have to learn to be disciplined, take proper revolutionary training, build their character, be moralists; in a word, they will have to become what I call sadvipras. A sadvipra will not launch a movement against honest people, even if he or she does not like them. But a sadvipra will definitely take action against dishonest people, even if he or she likes them. In such matters it will not do to indulge any kind of mental weakness.

Such strict, ideological sadvipras will be the messengers of the revolution. They will carry the message of revolution to every home in the world, to every vein and capillary of human existence. The banner of victorious revolution will be carried by them alone.

Moralists and spiritualists can be found among all types of people, regardless of whether they are rich or poor. Everyone knows that the idea that rich means honest is completely false. But most sadvipras will come from the middle class. By “middle class” I mean the vipra- and kśatriya-minded shúdras.

One may ask whether rich people who are moral and spiritual can be sadvipras or not. In reply I will say yes, they can be. But in order to be sadvipras they will have to come down to the level of the middle class, because they cannot live in indolent luxury on capital acquired by sinful means. In order to follow the principles of Prout,⁽¹⁾ they will have to fight against sin and injustice, and in order to conduct such a fight properly, they will not be able to keep their wealth – they will have to become middle-class.

The meaning of the word sadvipra is “a person who is a moralist and a spiritualist and who fights against immorality”. Earning money in a sinful way or accumulating great wealth is against the fundamental principles of Prout. It will be quite impossible for people who are not following the fundamental principles of Prout to bring about shúdra revolution.

One may also ask whether poor people can be sadvipras. In reply I will say that yes, they can be. But only poor people who have the minds of kśatriyas or vipras can bring about a revolution, and such poor people I call the middle class. That is how I explain the term madhyavitta samája [“middle class”].

I do not agree with those who are of the opinion that people who do not work physically but intellectually are middle-class. I do not agree either with those who believe that those whose income is neither high nor low are middle-class. If we were to accept this second interpretation of “middle-class”, I would have to point out that the income of many shúdra-minded shúdras who perform manual labour in society is higher than that of many kśatriya- or vipra-minded shúdras.

If anybody objects to the use of the term “middle class”, or if anybody says that “middle class” refers to those who have an average amount of wealth and that therefore the pioneers of the revolution – the kśatriya- or vipra-minded shúdras – may or may not be middle-class, I am prepared to use the term vikśubdha [disgruntled], instead of “middle-class”, to describe the revolutionary shúdras. The vikśubdha shúdras are a constant source of uneasiness for the tyrannical vaeshyas. The capitalists are not afraid of labour unrest, but they are afraid of the labour leaders, the vikśubdha shúdras.

The capitalists like democracy as a system of government because in the democratic system they can easily purchase the shúdra-minded shúdras who constitute the majority. It is easy to sail through the elections by delivering high-sounding speeches. No difficulties arise if election promises are not kept later on, because the shúdra-minded shúdras quickly forget them.

It can be unequivocally stated that if only educated people instead of all adults were given the right to vote in any country, the governmental structure of most democratic countries would change. And if sadvipras alone had the right to vote, there would be no difference between the real world and the heaven people imagine.

In a capitalistic social system or in a democratic structure the situation of middle-class people (the vikśubdha shúdras) is generally miserable. This is because they are the greatest critics of capitalism and the strongest opponents of exploitation. An increase in the number of vikśubdha shúdras in a society is an early omen of a possible shúdra revolution. It is therefore the duty of those who want to create a world free of exploitation to help to increase the number of vikśubdha shúdras. It will be harmful for the revolution if these people die or are transformed into shúdra-minded shúdras. All the sadvipras in the world should be vigilant to make sure that the number of vikśubdha shúdras does not decrease due to unemployment, birth control, or other bad practices or policies.

Democratic Change

Revolution means a great change. In order to bring about such a change it is not inevitable that there will be killing and bloodshed. If the kśatriya-minded vikśubdha shúdras are in the majority, or are most influential, however, the revolution will indeed come about through bloody clashes. Iit cannot be unequivocally stated that a revolution can never be brought about through intellectual clash, without bloodshed – it is possible, if there are a large number of influential vipra-minded shúdras among the vikśubdha shúdras. But we cannot have much hope that this will be the case; so it has to be said that the liberation of the people generally involves bloodshed.

Some people claim that they will be able to bring about socialism or communism or the liberation of the people through democratic methods. Generally speaking, a welfare state is based on the same principles. They often say that England, France and some other democratic countries are progressing towards socialism. But I would ask, what is the use of tortoise-like progress such as this? Many countries which do not follow a democratic system have brought about the welfare of their population with greater speed than has Great Britain within a democratic structure, over a period of hundreds of years. In this situation speed is the most important factor.

Countries that exploited their colonies used to make efforts to promote the welfare of their population within the democratic structure, but if they had wanted to contribute to social welfare and had stayed outside the democratic framework, preferring instead the path of shúdra revolution, they would have progressed faster, and without exploiting any colonies. In fact, in a democratic structure the people’s progress is very slow. It cannot be called revolution; rather it is evolution, that is, gradual change.

If undeveloped countries avoid the path of revolution and choose the path of slow change, or deliberately ignore the defects in democratic socialism or in the concept of a welfare state, the welfare of their people will never be anything but castles in the air. In order to secure votes in a democratic structure, the assistance of thieves, thugs and other antisocial elements is required. These antisocial elements certainly do not support candidates selflessly. They expect that when their candidate becomes a minister he or she will then turn a blind eye to the antisocial behaviour of their supporters.

One of the most important basic features of socialism is cooperative bodies. Cooperative bodies cannot survive unless the state administration is run by honest citizens. Similarly, a socialistic state cannot survive unless the cooperative organizations are run by honest citizens. Hence if the public does not have a very high moral, spiritual and educational standard (an average standard or above average standard will not suffice), we cannot expect to find worthy people as representatives, as ministers, or as directors of cooperative bodies. Dishonest directors of cooperative institutions will steal money; dishonest ministers will indirectly support such activities; and weak-minded ministers will deliberately avoid looking into those activities out of fear of losing their ministerships, or in hopes of securing votes in the future. If such abuses continue, it will never be possible to build up cooperative institutions, corruption will never be flushed out of the courts and secretariats, and socialism will never be established.

It is extremely difficult, although not totally impossible, to attain the high moral standard necessary to establish socialism within a democratic structure. Thus while democratic socialism is theoretically not bad, we cannot hope that it will ever be possible in the real world.

Post-Revolution

Whether they have kśatriya intellects or vipras intellects, the vikśubdha shúdras who take over the leadership of the shúdra revolution are kśatriyas in terms of their courage, personal force and capacity to take risks. After the shúdra revolution the leadership of society passes to the vikśubdha shúdras, at which point their kśatriya qualities become still more strongly expressed. In the post-revolutionary period they cannot be called vikśubdha shúdras; by that time they have become the kśatriyas of the second rotation of the social cycle.

The moral, spiritual fighters who keep an eye on the kśatriyas to ensure they do not descend into an exploitative role in the future, are called sadvipras. If the kśatriyas descend into exploitation, the sadvipras will fight them and establish the Vipra Age in the second rotation of the social cycle. If the vipras descend into exploitation, they will also fight against the vipras and initiate the Vaeshya Age of the second rotation. And if the vaeshyas descend or wish to descend into an exploitative role, the sadvipras will inspire the vikśubdha shúdras and bring about a second shúdra revolution.

The social cycle will rotate continuously. Nobody can stop its rotation. If the post-revolutionary Kśatriya Age is called thesis, the steps taken by the sadvipras against the kśatriyas who descend into exploitation are called antithesis. The post-revolutionary Vipra Age which evolves out of this conflict is called synthesis. If, in a later period, the vipras wish to descend into exploitation, the steps that the sadvipras take against them are called antithesis. Therefore the post-kśatriya Vipra Age cannot be called synthesis at that time. It can be called the thesis of the next stage.

Nobody can stop the rotation of the social cycle, not even the sadvipras. They stay in the nucleus of the social cycle, wakefully and vigilantly observing the process of rotation. One after another, one age follows the next: Vipra after Kśatriya, Vaeshya after Vipra. The sadvipras cannot stop this process.

After the establishment of the post-revolutionary Kśatriya Age, the sadvipras will have to keep a vigilant eye on the kśatriyas so that they, as the representatives of kśatriya society, only rule and do not descend into an exploitative role. When they show signs of beginning to exploit, the sadvipras will immediately create an antithesis to end the Kśatriya Age. They will do the same thing in the Vipra and Vaeshya Ages. In other words, they will not allow society to follow the process of natural evolution. They will bring about social revolution whenever necessary.

So the sadvipras will have no rest. A time will never come in the life of a sadvipra when he or she will be able to sit back in an armchair and say, “Ah, I have nothing to do today. Today I will have a nice rest.”

Sadvipra Society

So far in the first rotation of human history on this earth, no sadvipra society has been formed. In most countries the last stage of the first rotation is in progress. In a few countries the post-shúdra-revolution Kśatriya Age has been established, and here and there the first indications of the Vipra Age are beginning to emerge. As there is no sadvipra society, the social cycle is rotating in a natural way.

In every age the dominant social class first governs, then starts to exploit, after which evolution or revolution takes place. Due to the lack of sadvipras to lend their help, the foundations of human society fail to become strong.

Today I earnestly request all rational, spiritual, moral, fighting people to build a sadvipra society without any further delay. Sadvipras will have to work for all countries, for the all-round liberation of all human beings. The downtrodden people of this persecuted world look to the eastern horizon, eagerly awaiting their advent. Let the blackness of the new-moon night be lifted from the path of the downtrodden. Let the new human beings of a new day wake up to a new sunrise in a new world. With these good wishes I conclude my discourse.

Footnotes

(1) Progressive Utilization Theory. See Idea and Ideology, 1959. The Five Fundamental Principles of Prout:

(1) No individual should be allowed to accumulate any physical wealth without the clear permission or approval of the collective body.
(2) There should be maximum utilization and rational distribution of all mundane, supramundane and spiritual potentialities of the universe.
(3) There should be maximum utilization of physical, metaphysical and spiritual potentialities of unit and collective bodies of human society.
(4) There should be a proper adjustment amongst these physical, metaphysical, mundane, supramundane and spiritual utilizations.
(5) The method of utilization should vary in accordance with changes in time, space and person, and the utilization should be of progressive nature.

–Trans.