Communistic Farms

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

"Exactly what was it about Iskcon farms that you found communistic?"

 

That's an easy one.

 

-- Our farms ran on the principle that all income was automatically the

property of ISKCON.

 

-- There was no personal property and independent grhastas (sorry--fringies)

were allowed no meaningful role in the community.

 

-- Devotees were often manipulated into engaging in numerous illegal and/or

corrupting activities, without regard for their personal safety.

 

-- So-called ksyatrias exploited those they were duty-bound to protect.

 

-- The devotees who produced the income were often forced to live in extreme

poverty, while leaders could draw whatever funds they wanted.

 

-- Erstwhile brahmans supported these activities through preaching (or by

their silence).

 

-- Those who spoke out were severely punished or castigated.

 

These are generalized statements, but I believe at least several are

applicable to virtually every ISKCON farm community during the 70s, 80s or

early 90s. If you were in New Vrindaban during some of those years, then you

know everyone of these things was true in that case.

 

Your servant,

Sri Rama das

 

[srirama (AT) reachme (DOT) net], or

[srirama (AT) bbt (DOT) se]

 

 

 

 

WWW: Trisanku (Dasa) (New Vrindavan WV - USA)

 

On 2 Sep 1999, Srirama das wrote:

 

> Hare Krishna,

 

> Again, communes require exceedingly dedicated individuals who agree on all

> basic community goals. However, to the best of my knowledge, there are no

> examples of *vedic* communes. Still some may still want to try this model,

> which has been historically unsuccessful in ISKCON.

 

Exactly what was it about Iskcon farms that you found communistic? I mean we

had ksatrias (leaders). We definitely had the lowly shudra. (that was me).

We

had the vaisyas I suppose (fringies). And brahmins, who knows, I think they

worked for someone. I guess that describes the Soviet style, command

economy.

But aren't Kibbutzes a little more egalitarian, and democratic or

consensual?

 

In the varnashrama praadigm, I think the ksatrias and vaisyas can take care

of themselves. We need to empower the Bramins to be true anarchists, and the

Sudras to be communists, and protect themselves from exploitation. There is

always the danger of ksatrias getting power-crazed, and so I think some

democratic safeguards should be built in. But, then, I've never lived in a

culture where the brahmins were truly alive. I was reading Nistula's

description of the Brahminical community living aroud his farm. And it

sounded

so nice, even though it was but a remanant of it's former glory. That's not

something that can establish itself overnight, and certainly not by some

dictator's decree!