Source: http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg24278.html
The following are encapsulations of the important points ( as I see them
)
of P.R.Sarkar's - Law of Social Cycles. I have never read Sarkar directly.
I'm not sure that he is available in English. What I know, I know through
the
writings of Dr. Ravi Batra the economist.
Having come from the left, and having always kept a wary eye on the doings
of Capitalists and Militarists, I immediatly reached a state of sympathetic
resonance with Ravi Batra's description of Sarkar's explanation of historic
cycles. See what you think. ------Joshua2
THE FOUR SOCIAL CLASSES
Most social phenomena are related to human nature.Sarkar argues that even
though most people have common goals and ambitions, the methods of achieving
their objectives may differ from person to person, depending on inner
qualities of the individual. Most of us seek living comforts and social
prestige. But some try to attain them by developing intllectual skills, some
by physical skills, and some by accumulating wealth. Finally, some people
have little ambition in life, and they form a class by themselves Thus,
society is basically composed of four types of people, each endowed with a
different frame of mind.
People have common objectives, but their modus operandi differs. Some
persons, born with superior bodily strength, excel in physical skills
requiring stamina, courage and vigor. Such people are usually employed in
occupations involving physical risks. Sarkar calls them persons of warrior
mentality. In his view, soldiers, police, firefighters, athletes, skilled
blue collar workers, and the like belong to the class of warriors in the
sense that all these occupations require physical skills. Thus, anyone who
tries to solve his problems with the help of might and muscle can be said
to
have a warrior turn of mind.
There is another type of person who lacks the physical energy of the warrior
but is endowed with a relatively superior intellect. Being so endowed, h/s
tries to develop mental skills to do well in society. To Sarkar, everyone
who
tries to solve their problems with their brain rather than brawn is an
itellectual. His use of the term is much broader than generally conceived.
To
him, not just philosophers, writers, and scholars, but lawyers, physicians,
poets, engineers, scientists, white collar workers, and priests are
intellectuals because they all utilize their minds rather than muscle power
to attain their goals.
There is another type of person who, according to Sarkar, strives to
accumulate wealth to achieve what is generally regarded as the good life.
Such people are also bright, but their minds run mainly after money. They
are
smarter than the warrior type but not as intelligent as the intellectual.
Yet
they are usually more affluent than the other two. Such people are called
acquisitors, because virtually all their propensities are engaged in amassing
wealth. To them, money is all that matters in life. It alone is the key to
success and prosperity. Merchants, bankers, moneylenders, businessmen, and
landlords generally belong to the class of acquisitors. While other classes
seek wealth to enjoy material goods, the acquisitor generally covets money
for its own sake.
Finally there is the fourth type of person who is altogether different from
the other three. He is the unskilled worker or the physical laborer. He lacks
the vigor of the warrior, the brilliance of the intellectual, and the
accumulating instinct of the acquisitor. He is also lacking in the high
ambition of the other three. His level of education is relatively low, and
he
is usually deficient in marketable skills. Because of these handicaps the
unskilled worker is, and has always been exploited by the rest of society.
He
does the work deemed dirty by others, and is the poorest among all classes.
Farm workers and unskilled factory workers generally belong to the class of
physical laborers.
The laboring class is simply composed of people who perform physical labor
by choice, or because they are unable to acquire technical skills.They lack
the ambition, initiative, and drive to succeed in the world; seldom do they
shine in society.
These then, are the four classes which exist in every society and have
existed since ancient times. Sarkar differs sharply from those who define
classes on ecconomic grounds - on the basis of income and wealth. Sarkar does
not neglect the ecconomic aspect, but to him it is only one component among
many. Class devisions, in his view, persist because of inherent differences
in human nature.
Thus every civilization, which is what a mature society is, consists of
four classes, each comprising people reflecting the predominance of a certain
type of mind. Although individual behavior might display two, or even all,
of
the four mental attitudes, for the most part, and especially under duress,
only one of them predominates. There is a bit of acquisitive instinct in most
of us, but only a few make money the consuming obsession of their lives. We
are all after a comfortable living standard and social prestige, but some
of
us attain them by means of physical skills, some through intellectual
persuits, and some by ceaselessly chasing after money. In this order we are
warriors, intellectuals, and acquisitors. Largely left behind are the
laborers, imbued with little ambition or drive, wanting in basic education
and essential skills.
In every society, generally warriors maintain law and order, intellectuals
supply philosophy, law, and religion, acquisitors are adept at managing the
economy, and laborers do the unskilled jobs.
A society evolves over time in terms of four distinct eras. Sometimes
warriors, sometimes intellectuals, and sometimes acquisitors dominate the
social and political scene. Laborers never hold the reins ( this was Marx's
mistake- J2 ), but at times the ruling class becomes so self-centered and
currupt that a large majority of the people are reduced to poverty. The
general public, engaged mostly in making a living, has then little time left
for the finer aspects of life. Such a time may be called the age of laborers.
No single group however, can exercise social supremacy forever. What is
more interesting, as well as intriguing, is that the movement of society from
one epoch to another follows a definite pattern. Specifically, in the
development of every civilization, ancient or modern, Oriental or occidental,
the era of laborers is followed by the era warriors, the era of warriors by
the era of intellectuals, and the era of intellectuals by the era of
acquisitors culminating in a social revolution - this is Sarkar's law of
social cycles.
Just as human evolution is indisputable, so are social cycles an inevitable
natural phenomenon, where social supremacy shifts from one class to another,
from the collectivity of one type of mind to another. Thus, underneath the
seemingly haphazard change in society lies the invisible but unmistakable
imprint of nature. Social evolution goes hand in hand with human evolution.
THE ERA OF LABORERS
How do we recognize the era of laborers? The laboring society is one that
suffers from complete lack of guidance, leadership, and authority; one where
the so called leaders become so egocentric and greedy that the majority of
people, following in their footsteps , display a mentality ruled by
instinctive behavior, greed, and total self concern. The era of laborers,
then, is characterized by near anarchy, by a lack of social order. Family
ties are not binding, people scorn higher values and the finer things in
life, morals are extremely loose, crime is rampant, and materialism permeates
society to the core. All laborer societies in ancient times were primitive,
and remained primitive until some warriors emerged and wrested the leadership
into their own hands. However, later laborer eras were actually governed by
acquisitors and can be properly called acquisitor / laborer eras.
A laborer today is one with low initiative and drive relative to people
of
other classes. And for this reason the laboring class is exploited as much
today as in the past. Its toil is still indispensable to the survival of any
society, but ruling classes are taking advantage of it everywhere in the
world.
The distinctive feature of a laborer society today would be the open
disregard of governmental authority and law by its dominant members ( the
rich and their corporations-J2 ). Thus, government may exist in a
contemporary laborer society, but its rule would not be respected; violent
crime would become rampant, with people living in fear.Today, the weakening
of family bonds would be reflected in the lack of discipline of children and
their disrespect for parental authority, in frequent divorces and marital
violence, and the heartless removal of the elderly from the family. Women
had
a lowly status in the distant past; in a contemporary laborer society, such
inferior status would be manifested in a high incidence of prostitution,
pornography, and general exploitation of women by men.
In short, if these characteristics are prevalent in a society, it is
unmistakably languishing in the laborer era. A close scrutiny of history
reveals that all civilizations occasionally pass through such periods, when
for example, they are beset by internal fissures or external assaults.
ACTUALLY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE EXTINCT AND EXISTING CIVILIZATIONS IS
SIMPLY THAT THE FORMER WERE OVERWHELMED BY THE ILLS OF THE LABORER ERA,
WHEREAS THE LATTER OVERCAME THEM TO RESUME THEIR FORWARD MARCH OF EVOLUTION.
THE ERA OF WARRIORS
The era of warriors, in terms of political and social structure, is
diametrically opposite to the era of laborers. In the warrior age the army,
headed by a dictator--king, emperor, president-- controls the government as
well as society. Political authority is centralized in the form of an
absolute government, people are highly diciplined, family ties are morally
binding, women are well respected, and so on. Intellectuals and acquisitors
enjoy some respect in the warrior age, although they have little say in
governance. But laborers perform the physical labor for the warrior class,
and in the closing stage of this period, as in that of evey other era, they
are mercilessly exploited. However, at the dawn of the warrior age, the ruler
respects their contributions and treats them with care and compassion.
Laborers, though physically strong, lack the enterprising and adveturous
spirit of the warriors, who use their physical skills, to advance in life,
to
excel within thier circle.
A warrior believes in physical discipline, in firm authority over his
family, and when it comes to power, his family extends to the entire
population living in his domain. A warrior ruler believes in authoritarian
government, in absolute power. That is why the warrior eras have always been
characterized by political centralization, by the divine right of kings, and
by dictators.
In time the warrior rulers become highly authoritarian, and lose much of
their early benevolence. Their domains are expanded greatly; in the past,
many tribes were unified after lengthy warfare into vast empires headed by
the conqueror. In the holocausts the warriors unleashed, laborers were the
helpless participants. In most warrior societies, the bloody wars of conquest
portend the end of warrior domination and the birth of an era of
intellectuals, who, represented by the priesthood or court ministers, came
to
power in every civilization at the end of the warrior age.
THE ERA OF INTELLECTUALS
The despotic governments of the warrior age were fundamentally unstable,
for
nothing based on fire and sword can command obedience from the people for
long. For that reason, absolute rulers felt the need for justifications to
support their arbitrary rule. In this they were ably assisted by the
intellectuals, who devised cunning theories to justify the ruler's absolute
authority over his people. Thus were born such concepts as infallibility of
monarchs and the divine right of kings. That is why in the heyday of the
warrior age the intellectuals enjoyed a social status second only to
warriors. And when the authority of absolute rulers declined as a result of
endless wars, the leadership vacuum could be filled only by men of knowledge
who alone commanded enough respect and authority at the time. Everywhere we
find that intellectuals came to power in the aftermath of protracted warfare.
In the West, for instance, the Catholic Church rose to primacy after the fall
of the militaristic Roman Empire.
The intellectual is endowed with foresight and keenness of mind. In general
an intellectual is cautious and pragmatic; h/she relishes comfort but not
at
the cost of physical labor. Consequently, the intellectual attains power only
by defeating the warrior in a battle of wits. Intellectuals rule indirectly--
through their control over the warrior ruler who alone can summon the might
to keep order in society. Whenever and wherever the intellectuls perceived
that the time had come, they devised new dogmas rationalizing their hold over
the people.
After outwitting the warrior, the intellectuals then set out to inject
baseless fears and prejudices in other classes as well. Once the ruler was
won over, it was just a matter of time before the rest of society yielded
to
their self serving doctrines. Thus we find that in nearly every civilization
the people were once caught in the stranglehold of power exercised by
priests, court ministers, or other manipulators surrounding the ruler.
The structure of government in the era of intellectuals appears to change
little from that prevailing in the warrior age, except that now, because of
the weakness of the ruler, the real authority is exercised by someone behind
the scenes. Yet the intellectuals need the warriors to maintain their control
over the general public, and, therefore, the government is now somewhat
decentralized. The apparent ruler is no longer absolute, nor is the indirect
ruler.
THE ERA OF ACQUISITORS
Nothing irrational or illogical can endure forever. The web in which the
intellectuals caught the rest of society began to loosen as other classes
slowly saw through their manipulations. Some elements within the intellectual
class itself began to question the priests' intentions. Not only the
elaborate rituals but also the luxury and corruption of the priesthood came
under fire. Among the intellectuals themselves there also occured a good deal
of argument and doctrinal battles, and tose who were thus defeated started
accumulating wealth to compensate for their loss. Similarly, some warriors
also followed that same route. In this way, another mentality evolved in
human beings; another class, one obsessed with money-- the acquisitive mind.
As a result of all these developments, the power base slowly drifted toward
the wealthy class of acquisitors, and thus began the acquisitive age.
In all civilizations, the acquisitive class consisted of the rich,
belonging to such diverse groups as landlords, money lenders and merchants.
No longer was it enough to have a keen intellect to attain comforts and
political power. Instead, social prominence rested on one's wealth.
An acquisitor differs from an intellectual mainly in the way he uses his
intellect. The latter, while interested in comfortable living and material
acquisition, is inclined to intellectual persuits for their own sake; he
likes theorizing about the world. The acquisitor will have none of this; his
intellect is obsessed with amassing, not just enjoying wealth. It is this
mentality that reigns during the acquisitive era. Yet the intellectuals have
an important role to play. They now help the acquisitors stay in power by
doing what they do best-- devising dogmas that, in return for some
compensation, justify the supremacy of the ruling class. This they
accomplish, as always, in a way that lures the gullible-- by concealing thier
support for the acquisitors' primacy behind proclamations of individual
rights, liberty, and justice.In reality, however, such lofty principles are
openly violated. They are usually observed only when it serves the interests
of the affluent. Once the intellectuals give in, warriors and laborers also
perform services for the rich. Thus in an acquisitive age, ALL OTHER CLASSES
SUBMIT TO THE WEALTHY, who then CONTROL THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION -- land,
factories, capital. Feudalism, and capitalism are two pointed examples of
acquisitive eras in Western civilization.
Of all forms of government, the one loved by the acquisitor is that in
which the central authority is weakest. In the warrior era this is
impossible. In the intellectuals' era, the central power is not so strong,
but the rigid social codes that the intellectuals contrive to control people
keep a tight leash on would-be acquisitors. That is why one finds that the
acquisitive era, especially as it matured, was accompanied by a high degree
of decentralized political authority in every civilization. A centralized
system can, if it suits the purpose, force the rich to share their wealth
with the poor, and no one is more aware of this risk than the acquisitors.
Therefore, whenever the wealthy hold the reins, the system of government as
well as the administrative apparatus is decentralized over time ( new
federalism - J2 ).
One distressing feature of the epoch of the acquisitor is that the
acquisitive mentality eventually infects all sections of society. Attitudes
of the ruling class do not spread so much, do not become so pervasive, in
other eras; but in the age dominated by the wealthy, other groups ultimately
submit to the allure of money. Everything is commercialized as a result--
Music, art, Literature, sports.
Crime also begins to flourish. A general disregard for the rule of law
developed in all acquisitive periods, plaguing the public in every
civilization. Family ties eroded; noblemen kept harems; divorce and
prostitution increased.
Prostitution undergoes a remarkable groth in the acquisitive age. Those
who
have money to burn are able to corrupt poverty stricken women. And ONCE THE
RULING CLASS CASTS OFF MORAL SCRUPLES, other classes are quick to follow
suit. As a consequence, MORAL DEGENERATION COMES TO PERVADE THE ENTIRE
SOCIETY. Erosion of family ties, excessive stress on individualism, and a
general lack of social discipline spring inevitably from a decentralized
political structure.
AS TIME PASSES, INCREASING AMOUNTS OF WEALTH END UP IN THE HANDS OF THE
RICH, and the acquisitive era gradually drifts toward the lawlessness
of the laborer age. Eventually things become so wretched that angry warriors
and intellectuals rise in rebellion ( Indonesia, and soon to be Russia .--J2
)
and with the help of laborers bring an end to the age of acquisitors. Soon
afterward, the rebellious warriors take over and the civilization moves afresh
on the track of social cycles.
THE PROCESS OF SOCIAL CHANGE
Sarkar's law of social cycles states that power and influence shift from
one
class to another in accordance with a certain pattern. Questions come to mind
at this point. First, is the change from one era to another smooth and
peaceful, or is it violent and marked by bloodshed? Second, does the rise
and
fall of a class occur in perceptible stages within each era?
A close analysis of civilizations reveals that during any era the dominant
class remains on top for at least two-thirds of that period. for instance,
if
an intellectuals' era lasted for three hundred years, one would find that
during that period intellectuals ruled for at least two hundred years and
other groups for at most one hundred years.
Because of overlapping transitional periods, one may not be able to
recognize a particular epoch of any society. The fact that nothing moves in
a
straight line does present difficulties. But a serious student should be able
to see where a society stands at any moment in time. The following points
should be borne in mind in the study of history:
1) In any society spread over several regions, one should first identify
the most important region. For instance, in Western civilization, which is
spread among many nations, America today is the most influential country,.
Since the U.S. is now passing through the acquisitive / laborer age, which
is
marked by high crime, extreme materialism, generally loose morals, and
excessive individualism, we can say that the entire Western world is in this
age. It is possible that some regions of a society may differ from the most
important region. But that is not significant. What counts is the dominant
mentality in the dominant region of a society. For instance, Canada, another
member of Western civilization, is also in the acquisitive age , but it does
not suffer from high crime. ( This was written in 1986- as Canada moves
deeper and faster into the Acquisitive /Laborer era via NAFTA, the crime
aspect is comming to resemble the U.S. on a smaller scale.-- J2 ) However,
the character of Western society as a whole is determined not by the ruling
mentality in Canada, but by that in the United States.
2) There may be more than one important region in a society at any given
time. Then the class ruling in the majority of such regions determines the
character of that society.
3) Once dominant regions in a society have been identified , the next step
is to see which group is in power in those regions. Normally one should be
able to pinpoint the class controling the government either directly or
indirectly. That is, one should be able to see if warriors, intellectuals,
or
acquisitors command pollitical power. For instance, a centralized government
with absolute authority usually means that either warriors or intellectuals
are at the helm. If it is not clear which group dominates politics, one
should examine the ideology popular in the society. Does it favor a warrior
attitude of adventure and fearlessness, or an intellectual's otherworldliness
and preference for theory over action, or an acquisitor's materialism over
the intellectual or adventurous persuits of mind?
4) Another way to identify an era in society is to observe what the average
person admires most, which careers earn the greatest status, what the popular
culture glorifies. Does the common man seek a career in the army, or does
he
want to become a poet, priest, or statesman, or does he aspire to be a big
landlord, banker, merchant, or businessman? In any society the profession
of
the ruling class is the one most sought by the public. In a warrior age, the
average man generally dreams of becomming an army officer. In an era of
intellectuals, he aspires to become an infuential thinker, a theologian, or
a
high placed pollitical adviser. In an acquisitive age, he seeks to become
a
merchant, businessman, landlord, or financier. In a laborer age, people
usually become lazy, extremely materialistic, and greedy. They want to become
wealthy without working hard.
Whereas in all phases of civilization, society consists of four broad
classes, AT THE END OF THE ACQUISITIVE ERA ONLY TWO REMAIN:
ACQUISITORS AND LABORERS-- ( Two tiered economies. Haves & have nots.
- J2 )
warriors and intellectuals have been reduced to the laborering class by the
extreme concentration of wealth. For a long time in the acquisitive era, the
standard of living remains high and the other classes make their living by
providing services to the affluent. For a while, the entire social order works
to support the dominance of the rich. The concentration of wealth continues
apace, but since material resources available to society are limited, the
acquisitors grow richer and richer at the expence of the other classes.
As wealth becomes concentrated, the living standard of the other three
progressively declines, until there comes a time when society degenerates
into two groups-- THE HAVES AND THE HAVE-NOTS. So strong is the power of want
and hunger that the distinctive features of the warrior's and intellectual's
minds submit to the compulsions of survival. It is during such dark days that
the acquisitive / laborer age comes into being. The resultant crime, poverty,
and malaise eventually INVITE THE REVOLT OF THE MASSES, who are led by
the very warriors and intellectuals-- now deminished to laborer ways of
thinking who had once embraced the acquisitive system with open arms.
Sarkar calls this upheaval THE LABORER REVOLUTION, one that occurs in the
terminal phase of the acquisitive era, contributes to its end, and is brought
about by disgruntled warriors and intellectuals.
The laborer revolution reflects not the fact that it is engineered by the
laborer class, which is generally unable to lead, but the fact that it is
masterminded by those reduced to the laborer's level of poverty. Few warriors
and intellectuals then remain, for, forced to devote all their time to making
a living, they have little time for other persuits. The laborer revolution
sweeps aside the influence of wealth. In the ensuing society, which may arise
immediatly or after a brief period of adjustment, power reverts to the
warriors. [ Fascism? Dictatorship? Autocratic rule? -- J2]
Today, Western society is passing thruogh another acquisitive / laborer
age. That is why there is so much conflict between wealthy corporations and
labor unions, something reminiscent of the conflict between landlords and
peasants in the feudal era; that is why there is so much crime, drug and
alchohol addiction, materialism, and general malaise in society today.
This state of affairs cannot last long. SOCIAL CONFLICT WILL CONTINUE TO
GROW UNTIL THE ACQUISITIVE MENTALITY IS ELIMINATED AS THE DOMINANT FORCE.
( If done soon it can be done non-violently, and avoid the next phase which
I
believe will end in social disintegration requiring autocratic or dictatorial
controls to restore " law and order ". --J2 )
Society will then move into another warrior age.
Joshua 2