Sarkar’s Vision for Implementing a World Government
"Sarkar saw strong societal currents aiding the movement towards the adoption of a world government.
As he said:
Nationalism is fast getting out of date. Not only has national sentiment given humanity rude shocks in the world wars of the present century, but social and cultural blending of the present age also shows the domination of cosmopolitanism in world affairs.
He did not believe that these developments alone would lead to the creation of a world government, but rather the spirit behind them would provide momentum for the effort. In fact, he felt many people would actively resist this movement for fear of losing their own political or economic power:
Many people say that different national interests are the only hurdle in the formation of a world body. In my opinion this is not the only obstruction, rather this is just a minor difficulty. The real cause lies in the fear of local leaders losing their leadership. On the establishment of world federation the powerful influence which they enjoy today in different countries, societies and in the national lives, will no longer exist.
To overcome this resistance, Sarkar advocated stressing elements which emphasize our common humanity. He specifically felt we need to foster a common philosophy of life, common constitutional structures and penal codes, and the assurance of the minimum essentials of life for all peoples.
Sarkar’s notion of a common philosophy of life is based on his spiritual outlook, which sees humanity and all creation derived from one Cosmic Ideal which in turn is our ultimate destiny. He sees human development as an evolution in physical, mental and spiritual terms towards that Cosmic Ideal. While other aspects of life can give rise to social cohesion, Sarkar believed that only this absolute, unchanging spiritual source can bind society together on a permanent basis.
He felt this common philosophy was essential because, for him, human unity is purely ideational, a unity which occurs in the psychic or mental realm. Without this base, efforts to unify human organizational structures would be fruitless, and susceptible to destruction whenever divisive tendencies arise.
With a common philosophy as a base, creation of a common constitutional structure can serve to solidify the unity. While Sarkar generally discussed this constitutional structure in conjunction with the development of a world government, elements of his constitutional vision could themselves be used to promote unity as part of the preparation leading to the creation of a world government. For example, he would include provisions guaranteeing access to minimal essentials for life such as food, clothing, shelter, medical care, education and the like. This could be used as part of a campaign to bolster appreciation of a common philosophy of life by stressing our common basic needs. In some ways this is analogous to the role played by the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights both as a document embodying particular rights and as an educational tool to be used to build greater consensus for universal adoption of those rights.
It is a natural outgrowth of a common constitutional structure that humanity be governed by a common penal code. Sarkar wanted a single code to govern all people but his code would be based on universal tenets which he called cardinal human principles. These principles are those which serve to elevate humanity and individuals towards their spiritual goal.
He believed present day penal codes vary greatly because they are based on local notions of virtue and vice, which in turn are influenced by particular religious doctrines. In a sense he believed we should look for the universal truths held in common by our great religious and spiritual traditions and make them a basis for a unifying code of conduct. At the same time, we should ignore local variations which only serve to create disunity.
Furthermore, Sarkar felt the penal code should strive for a corrective as opposed to retributional end. Even those who make mistakes and violate the common code must be looked on as members of the universal society and efforts should be made to rectify them. This outlook also led Sarkar to oppose capital punishment except in very rare cases.
In addition to common philosophies and laws, Sarkar believed our common human needs can serve as a cohesive force. Although he recognized that no two people are exactly equal in their capabilities or needs, he nonetheless believed all people have basic common requirements for life such as food, shelter, medicine and the like. While people have historically fought over material possessions, Sarkar felt that all people have a fundamental right to these necessities and that emphasizing this right could foster closer ties among people.
Once momentum has been built for these unifying sentiments, the stage will be set for a phase wise implementation of world government. In the first phase, Sarkar saw the establishment of a universal body to frame laws. While in theory this universal body could derive from today’s United Nations, its present national government constituents will be among the least likely to support its expansion.
In any event, in the long run Sarkar’s universal body would pass laws which would be executed by local or national governments. Sarkar believed the universal source and nature of these laws would make it more difficult for local governments to discriminate against minorities.
Structurally, Sarkar saw a bicameral legislature:
There will be two houses – a Lower House and an Upper House. In the Lower House representatives will be sent according to the population of the country. In the Upper House representatives will be sent country wise.
This bicameral structure provides for checks and balances within the legislative body itself:
First bills are to be placed before the Lower House and before their final acceptance they will be duly discussed in the Upper House. Small countries which cannot send a single representative to the Lower House will have the opportunity to discuss the merits and demerits of the proposed act with other countries in the Upper House.
Sarkar also saw some executive powers for the initial stage of world government, limited principally to settling disputes and maintaining peace through a world militia. Over time these executive powers would be expanded until the world government would carry out a full range of legislative, executive and judicial functions.
While Sarkar saw natural evolution towards world government, he also counseled well-meaning people to accelerate the process. Rather than focus on political action, he urged people to cooperate in rendering social service to humanity. He felt that the political arena was rife with corruption and that people could easily get co-opted by it. Through the medium of service he felt progressive people could build on the present momentum towards world government:
Modern people should realize that in the near future they will have to adopt universalism. So the well-wishers of society will have to mobilize all their might and intellect in organizing a world federation, giving up all considerations of forming the communal or national organizations. They will have to concentrate wholly and solely upon constructive activities in a simple and straight forward manner rather than indulging in deceitful and diplomatic utterances.
The question is whether the establishment of a world government or universal fraternity is practicable without staging any fight. To this I will reply in the affirmative. The extreme welfare of the human race can be achieved by mobilizing the living spirit of those people who are desirous of establishing world federation, not by political rivalry but only by means of service and constructive work. One has to remain engaged in the task of social welfare with all sincerity, without having any other motive in one’s inner self. Those rendering due cooperation to the people undertaking the austerity of social service will be considered desirous of establishing world federation. Where the governments will not associate themselves with this task, people will become agitated and the violent mass will establish world government through a revolution. Therefore there is no necessity for people engaged in service of the masses to enter into the dirt of politics.
It is through this expression of benevolence and service that Sarkar believed a world government could be forged. Today’s political environment is far too divisive and self-interested to create consensus among diverse peoples for a global governance.
Sarkar joins a long and distinguished line of concerned individuals calling for the establishment of a world government to overcome the problems associated with today’s nationalistic framework. While many of Sarkar’s ideas are shared by other world government thinkers, he offered a number of new considerations, based on the need for developing a common philosophy, a common penal code, and guaranteeing economic security for all people. Finally, Sarkar’s emphasis on constructive service as a means to achieve world government presents a positive new approach for obtaining this worthy goal."
 Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar, Idea and Ideology. Calcutta, Ananda Marga Publications, 1978, 92.
 Tim Anderson and Gary Coyle, eds., Universal Humanism: Selected Social Writings of P. R. Sarkar. Sydney, Proutist Universal Publications, 1982, 113-114.
 Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar, Idea and Ideology, 91.
 Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar, ‘Discourses on Prout’, in Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar, Prout in a Nutshell: Part 4. Calcutta, Ananda Marga Publications, 1987, 17.
 Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar, ‘How to Unite Humanity’, in Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar, Prout in a Nutshell: Part 21. Calcutta, Ananda Marga Publications, 1991, 20.
 Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar, ‘Talks on Prout’, in Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar, Prout in a Nutshell: Part 15. Calcutta, Ananda Marga Publications, 1988, 19.
 Sarkar provides an in-depth discussion of these principles which he called yama and niyama in his book, A Guide to Human Conduct. Calcutta, Ananda Marga Publications, 1974.
 Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar, ‘Neo-Humanism of Sadvipras’, in Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar, Neo-Humanism in a Nutshell: Part 1. Calcutta, Ananda Marga Publications, 1987, 2.
 Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar, ‘Talks on Prout’, 20.
 Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar, ‘Discourses on Prout’, 4.
 Ibid, 5.
 Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar, ‘Talks on Prout’, 20.
 Prabhat Rainjan Sarkar, Problem of the Day. Calcutta, Ananda Marga Publications, 1968, 42-43.
 Tim Anderson and Gary Coyle, Universal Humanism, 113.