ARE WESTERN DEMOCRACIES
THE GUIDING LIGHT OF MORALITY?
Namaskar,
Each and every moment that transpires in the materialistic western
democracies like the US brings new ordinances and laws that depict the
growing distrust and suspicion in these societies.
"Background" checks have become routine; students pass through metal
detectors to enter their school; picture id's must be carried
everywhere; and, so many more things are done which reveal the
superficial unity of these western democracies.
THE "GLORY" OF WESTERN CAPITALISM
Even then it is the capitalist-run democracies of the west project the
image around the globe that it is they who have the patent on humanity:
As if everything that goes on in these lands is the defining standard of
society, i.e. the way it should be.
They think that they are the leaders in all respects including on points
of morality and human rights. Having grown up in one of these "leading
western democracies", it is clear that this type of idea has saturated
the soil of such countries.
For these reason and others, since WW II-- to the naive observer-- it
looks like capitalism is the winning ticket.
MATERIALISM IS A HOLLOW APPROACH
But we Ananda Margiis know that the materialistic approach of capitalism
is intrinsically flawed to the very bone. Not only can't capitalism keep
itself afloat financially, but it creates a distinct rift or distrust in
the human society. Because in the materialistic outlook of capitalism,
there is very little faith or regard for one's fellow human beings.
Baba says, "Materialism functions by imposing social pressure on people
to enjoy material objects; and accepts that as the only mode of
operation. Thus, in materialistic countries or societies, people look at
one another with suspicion and act according to the information given by
the intelligence agencies. In absence of spiritual ideas, firmness of
morality cannot be established. The apparent morality in a materialistic
society is nothing but an immoral alliance to protect self-interests."
(PNS-6, p.59)
By Baba's above teaching it is clear that the defective approach of
capitalism completely undermines human & moral values and leads people
down the dark alley of distrust, phobia, and suspicion. Steeped in their
own selfishness, people become completely alienated from one another.
ARROGANCE OF THE WEST
However since long common citizens in our so-called advanced countries
of the west have been thinking that they hold higher moral values than
people in our so-called third world nations. Here it is common for
people to look down upon those in the "developing nations". In their
arrogance, westerners feel they are more "cultured" and "civilised" than
our eastern counterparts. But the truth is that in our materialistic
western countries morality is only skin deep. And that is what Baba
exposes in so many of His teachings.
That is not to say that there are no redeeming qualities in the west,
but on whole it is quite clear that our western democracies are not the
beacon light of humanity, as they would like everyone to think.
NOT MORALITY: JUST FEAR OF GETTING CAUGHT
Sure enough, superficially it looks like capitalistic western society is
very advanced and orderly and that everyone is quite particular in their
behavior and dealing. This is the external show of capitalism. But upon
closer examination we can see that only due to fear of the authorities
do people follow the rules. They are just scared of getting caught--
there is no higher ideal in their mind.
And the proof is that when the police are not strictly watching them,
then even regular citizens start indulging in so many illegal and
immoral misdeeds. This is evidenced by various incidents such as the
terrible looting which happened in New Orleans and Houston during
Hurrican Katrina, where people were rampantly stealing and committing
sexual crimes like rape -- all because the police were not there to stop
them.
Thus only out of their selfish desire not to get caught do our western
citizens refrain from stealing. And when their selfish mind tells them
that the gains to be had from stealing outweigh the potential hazards or
chances of getting caught, then they move in that negative direction.
Thus, the social fabric which keeps society together is very low--
almost non-existent.
In contrast in our "third-world" countries we do not see such type of
outbreaks. The common people do not start stealing just because the
police are not watching. If that were the case then they would be
stealing night and day-- because the police are not able to monitor
everyone so strictly like in the west. But common people do not sink
themselves in immoral activities.
HIGHER STANDARD IN "THIRD WORLD" NATIONS
Hence although in the so-called third world countries the people's lives
are difficult materially, but with their own conscience they basically
follow the social rules. No authority figure or policeman is there
watching them-- forcing them to follow. It is not like that. So the
social order achieved in the less materialistic societies is based upon
the moral fiber of the people, not on the threat of being put in jail.
In contrast in our west, many citizens break the everyday rules whenever
they get the opportunity. That is, crimes often are committed simply
because people think they will not get caught. So when the authorities
are not directly watching or threatening them, then common citizens
indulge in looting or theft etc. And if those same people from these
so-called advanced countries were living in third-world countries where
there are less police authorities to watch them, then they would commit
exponentially more crimes.
THE PEOPLE ARE NOT INHERENTLY BAD;
THE PHILOSOPHY IS DEFECTIVE
Here the point is not that all the people in materialistic countries are
inherently bad and those in so-called developing nations are better.
Rather the key issue is that materialistic philosophies like capitalism
lead to the degradation of the human psyche.
Of course in the east the people are guided by various dogmas in the
religious sphere etc, but on the point of morality they are
comparatively better. Because to the degree people are not engrossed in
materialism, the better they will be on the point of morality.
And of course to become a true exemplar for the society one must follow
the path of spirituality.
ROOT CAUSE OF NEGATIVITY OF MATERIALISM
The question that strikes in the mind is why is it that materialism has
such a disastrous effect on the human mind, whereby people become so
cynical and suspicious of one another. And the answer is that
materialism dictates that mundane things are everything. There is
nothing beyond that. Yet the people see that there are only a finite
number of material objects in this world. So this causes two negative
tendencies: greed and fear.
Out of greed people feel that they should grab things quickly before
their neighbor gets those things. Secondly, their mind is always
coloured in the fear that there will be a shortage. Thus with these two
psychic diseases prevalent, then the whole society becomes imbalanced
and people walk around wary of one another-- worried about what the
other is going to grab.
MORE NEGATIVE DEVELOPMENTS IN THE MATERIALISTIC COUNTRIES
So inside and out, materialistic western countries are riddled with
doubt and suspicion. That is why when every baby is born in the west
their fingerprint is taken and now authorities are also demanding that a
sample of every baby's DNA be taken at the time of birth. All for the
purpose of law enforcement because there is no hope or faith that the
new members of society will grow up to be benevolent citizens. Rather
the basic assumption is not to trust anyone-- even new-borns. In that
way the materialistic nations are totally trustless, ravaged by the
thorns of selfishness and fear etc.
NO HARMONY IN THE SOCIAL LIFE
Here Baba reveals how despite the apparent gains of our western
materialistic society, there is no harmony in the social life.
Baba says, "The West is completely obsessed with physical
development...it has made so much material progress...But for all that,
it is not socially content." (PNS-18)
BABA'S BLESSING
AM IS THE PATHWAY FOR SOCIAL WELFARE
Only the pristine and sublime approach of our Marga can create peace and
welfare for the entire society and planetary world.
Baba says, "The socio-economic philosophy of Ananda Marga calls for the
elimination of capitalism. It clearly emphasizes the need to fulfill
minimum economic needs and create an ideal congenial social environment
in which there will be maximum utilization of collective wealth and the
rational distribution of resources to solve all economic problems. Every
human being will get ample opportunity to follow Pra'na
Dharma'....Ananda Marga wants to establish the Pra'na Dharma of the
entire universe, and the Ananda Marga philosophy has been conceived to
that end." (TK-2)
Namaskar,
Punya'tman
Note 1: JUST ONE SUPERFICIAL SHOW
Here Baba clearly explains how fake morality or materialistic morality
is totally fleeting-- not at all dependable.
Baba says, "The show of morality, may at any moment break down...The
morality of a moralist may disappear at any moment. It cannot be said
with any certainty that the moralist who has resisted the temptation of
a bribe of two rupees would also be able to resist the temptation of an
offer of two hundred thousand rupees." (GHC, 'Introduction')
Note 2: SPIRITUAL VALUES NEEDED
Baba says, "Without spiritual ideals true morality based on universal
love cannot be awakened." (PNS-16)
Note 3: BABA'S FINAL WARNING
Baba says, "Materialism can never be the base of human life in any
country because it is detrimental to the all-round development of human
beings." (PNS-7, p.56)
******************************************
Why Some Intellectuals Are Fools?
Baba says, "When the human mind is filled with positive tendencies, it
integrates everything which it receives as real and claims that it has
seen an object-an elephant or a camel. Now suppose that the mind is
obsessed with negative tendencies, what happens? In that case, though
the mind projects an elephant within, it cannot experience that
elephant. Even if the mind thinks of it, still it cannot see that
object. Because of this psychic defect or disorder, the mind suffers
from positive or negative hallucinations. In your mental thoughts as
well sometimes such positive or negative hallucinations can occur.
Obviously, whatever an intellectual thinks in his or her arena of
intellect is complete defective. There always remain scope for doubt in
intellectuality. So intellectuality is also baseless because the very
movement of the ectoplasm is baseless." (PNS-14, p.18-19)
******************************************
Namaskar
ReplyDeleteWe noticed this post & shows folly of 4SP. One more rebel group failing away.
-----Original Message-----
From: Dharmadeva
To: 'margiimail@googlegroups.com'
Subject: Why the confusion about seat reservation?
Namaskar
We know that Prout is for the happiness and all-round welfare of everyone. In various discourses Baba talks about how democracy can be improved, noting that there are many defects in democracy that human beings have already started to rectify. One defect that is singled out is that of seat reservation, particularly in parliamentary democracies.
Seat reservation
----------------
Baba states in 'Problems of the Day':
"Although the system of seat reservation* is against democratic principles, temporary arrangements for seat reservation, if desired, may be permitted for backward communities.** But generally it is found that among the representatives of backward communities, the number of competent persons is very few. Hence the right to contest reserved seats should not be limited to those belonging to a particular community. At the time of the primary election of the candidates for the reserved seat, however, only those belonging to the community for which the seat has been reserved will enjoy the right to vote. That is, two people will be nominated for the one seat in the primary election. Later, either of the two will be finally elected by the vote of the general public. If, in the primary election, only one candidate is nominated that is, there is no other contestant in that case his or her popularity must be tested before the general public. Only if a backward or minority community clearly demands seat reservation will it be adopted, otherwise not."
The translators also noted:
* Seat reservation is the practice whereby parliamentary seats (and also administrative posts) are reserved for particular sections of society, usually less-advanced communities or minorities. Trans.
** "Backward communities" refers to those communities which have not had access to social services and education. Generally only the members of such communities have the right to contest reserved seats. (Backward communities should receive preferential treatment from the government until poverty has been eliminated.) Trans.
In summary, to establish a proper system of reserved seats for backward communities:
1. Any competent representatives may contest a reserved seat
(ie this is not limited to persons belonging to the backward community);
2a. A primary election of candidates for a reserved seat must first be held; 2b. but, only persons in the backward community for a reserved seat can vote at the primary election
(note often primary elections are also referred to as nominations for a seat);
3a. Once the candidates become known from the results of the primary election, there will be a final election; 3b. and, all persons in the general public can vote at the final election.
In addition:
4. If, in the primary election, only one candidate is nominated, the final election by the general public will still be held to test the popularity of the candidate for a reserved seat;
5. Only if a backward community clearly demands seat reservation will it be adopted, otherwise not;
6. Backward community also means a minority community.
This means, in relation to a reserved seat:
- Any competent person can be a representative;
- Only the backward community votes in a primary election to nominate candidates;
- The general public votes in a final general election choosing from amongst the nominated candidates.
So, in respect of reserved seats:
- Potential representatives from the general body;
- Nomination / Primary election of candidates by the backward community/minority;
- Final election by the general body.
Even when one takes a brief view of Indian constitutional law history, you can immediately see that Baba is driving at the deficiencies in seat reservation policy and law in the case of India specifically and also on seat reservation generally. Looking at that constitutional law history of India we find a raft of Supreme Court cases and amendments to laws regarding seat reservation over the last 50 years, including in relation to the 'Creamy Layer' (ie those better off but who fall within backward communities). This history arises because of, and reflects, the initially deficient policy in relation to seat reservation in India (which was supposedly to last for only 10 years). Baba being aware of this, and its future contentious impact, then clarified what is the proper approach for a temporary scheme for seat reservation (see above). Had the legislatures followed this in India, there would undoubtedly have been better outcomes all round.
Some of us may occasionally come across a scheme called 4SP. This scheme tries to rely on and assert what it calls seat reservation by picking up on what Baba said above. However, it presents a fundamentally wrong view on seat reservation. Quoting from political tracts (usually called a FAQ) of the 4SP it states: "must have a reserved percentage of seats, and each groupification will elect its own representatives".
Assuming (on the surface) that 'groupification' refers to backward community or minority, we can see what is wrong in the statement. The context shows that the statement relates to a final election, and in that it is saying only the particular community elects representatives for the reserved seat. But this is wrong because in Prout's (temporary) system of seat reservation the whole electorate actually votes in a final election for the candidates contesting a reserved seat. The particular backward or minority community only has the exclusive right to vote in the primary election which is for nominating candidates who will contest the final general election. In that final election the whole electorate is entitled to vote, even for reserved seats.
Most of us would be aware of the difference between a primary election and final general election, as there is much media publicity these days on the 'primaries' being held in the USA for certain candidates to contest the final general election for the next President of the USA. The 4SP scheme, and presumably its proponents, simply disregard what Baba states about the necessity for both a primary election and a general election when it comes to reserved seats for backward and/or minority communities. Further, it muddles up who has the respective voting rights. Accordingly, this is not consistent with Prout discourses. It is clear that the entire electorate has the right to vote for a final representative for a reserved seat, not just the backward community which benefits from the reserved seat.
Incidentally Baba states about the UK and USA political systems that:
"If I am to express my views impartially, so far as the parliamentary form of government is concerned, Great Britain is in the position of champion. No country has surpassed them. So far as the presidential form of government is concerned, the USA is far ahead of the USSR."
Neither of these countries have seat reservation. Arguably, both countries have minorities of some sort, whose range includes indigenous communities, certain immigrant communities, less-advanced communities, and communities suffering a lack of access to social services and education.
We can see from the above discourse on Prout that ultimately it is the general public or the whole electorate who must have the final vote on who the sitting representatives will be in the governing legislature that adopts a system of seat reservation. Anything short of this is bound to be deficient and seriously impact of proper governance overall. Indeed, any suggestion that a backward and/or minority community (in 4SP tract language a groupification) will elect its own representatives in any system determining the outcome for a reserved percentage of seats, is incorrect.
For AMPS, the correct approach is simply stated in Caryacarya itself as:
"The purodha's of Ananda Marga will elect the members of the Central Committee (CC) from among themselves."
That is, every purodha (and therefore all the purodhas, each one of them - rightly qualified, of course) has a right of election in relation to every and all the members of the CC. Is it not straightforward? They can exercise their election rights as if they are considering who gets on the CC as a whole, not as if they are considering the CC as having groups, ie by who gets on the CC via a group voting process representing 3 groups in the CC. As shown from Baba's Prout discourse (above), this latter (4SP) approach is also deficient in terms of Prout.
4SP claims that groups of purodhas have the right to elect representatives of their group onto the CC. We can immediately see how artificial the 4SP concept is, and yet how natural the words of Caryacarya are. And how obviously awkward the 4SP is when compared to the words in Caryacarya. The 4SP brings in an unwanted 'gloss' or distortion to organisation and Caryacarya.
Job reservation
---------------
Regarding administrative postings, ie to the Central Executive Committee (CEC), Caryacarya states:
"The purodha' pramukha will be the ex-officio president of the Central Committee, and he will constitute the Central Executive Committee according to his choice."
Essentially, this gives the President a complete discretion, and the President is not fettered or confined by any formula or systemic constraints. In exercising the discretion, the President may develop some procedures and may change these as required, if anything like that is even required (as that is what choice and discretion is about), but that is entirely up to the President (and of course, the President can take advice from whoever considered necessary). In no way, is any formula approach to be set in concrete in this regard.
In terms of Prout, Baba states:
"In some countries of the world such as India, job reservation has been introduced to provide employment to backward classes and ensure their economic advancement. However, job reservation is not in tune with the ideology of PROUT. That is, when PROUT is established, nobody will feel the necessity of job reservation because everybody's progress is guaranteed in PROUT. In the Proutistic system people will not seek jobs -- jobs will seek people."
In the ideal of Prout implementation, there is not job reservation or, one part of which, we might call administrative post reservation.
Baba goes on to give some temporary measures to help move from disparity to parity, and states:
"In the present socio-economic environment, however, if the following preferential system is adopted as a temporary measure, then the suffering of the people may be alleviated. First, poor people coming from backward families should get first preference in the fields of services and education, irrespective of their birth affiliation. Second preference should go to the poor people coming from non-backward families. Third preference should go to the non-poor people coming from backward families. Last preference should go to the non-poor people coming from non-backward families. Here, "backward" means families who did not get any services or education in the past. Such families should continue to get these facilities until there is no poverty in the country -- that is, until the minimum requirements are guaranteed."
The priorities are:
1. Poor and backward;
2. Poor and non-backward;
3. Non-poor and backward;
4. Non-poor and non-backward.
It is obvious here that it is the economic condition that is important, NOT birth affiliation (or in 4SP tract language groupification). This is made clear when Baba states:
"Thus, the criteria for receiving preferential services and education should not be birth affiliation but a person's economic condition. A so-called low caste shoe repair man may be economically well-off, thus the advantage of job reservation is superfluous for him and misleading for society. There is no need of job reservation in these circumstances. On the other hand, there may be a Maethil Brahmin who comes from a so-called high caste family but is economically very poor. Job reservation is essential for him, and would increase the economic standard of the entire society."
It is the economic standard that is relevant to any temporary system of job reservation, and birth affiliation is not a factor. Similarly, a formula that tries to cement birth affiliation (or groupification in 4SP tract language) into administrative posts as an 'organisational feature' is incorrect when it comes to looking at the matter from a Prout perspective. In terms of Caryacarya, constituting the CEC is a matter at the choice/discretion of the President when it comes to administrative postings on the CEC.
Indeed, where it otherwise, the 'Creamy Layer' of backward communities or minorities could benefit unnecessarily, and this Baba indicates is misleading for society. It would appear that Baba is rightfully disregarding the 'Creamy Layer' in the above extract, as well. The danger of 4SP is that it promotes birth affiliation and also has the same potential problems that arise in relation to the 'Creamy Layer'- which is one of the matters that has caused a fair bit of confusion in Indian constitutional law history.
Baba recognised the potential conflict between backward and forward classes and gave clear direction in relation to both legislative and administrative positions. Baba states (in relation to both undeveloped and developed countries):
"Many undeveloped and developing countries are struggling to elevate their backward classes. For example, Bihar is at war over the question of backward and forward classes. If the above system is followed, it would certainly end all possibility of struggle among backward and forward classes in India and other countries of the world. At the same time, it would automatically provide people with the opportunity for social justice and economic self-sufficiency. Without giving any consideration to caste, creed, religion, race, language or sex, governments would be able to create a suitable environment for the all-round and quick development of all local people, providing them with food, clothing, housing, education and medical treatment. This would eliminate any feeling of inferiority from their minds, and all would have the opportunity of earning their livelihood on the basis of their capabilities."
Baba foresaw the problems that a deficient policy, or one not well based on first principles, gives rise to when it comes to backward communities. In all this, race and language, as well as birth affiliation, are not factors to consider as indicated above. Any scheme that has these attributes in the forefront is an incorrect approach in terms of Prout.
Weightage or preferential treatment
-----------------------------------
In another discourse, Baba states:
"4) Question: What is the difference between a minority and a strong minority? And what does the term "weightage" mean in politics?
Answer: A minority is less than 40% of the population. A strong minority is between 40% and 50% of the population. Weightage is the preferential allocation of parliamentary seats to a minority over and above what it is logically entitled to. For example, suppose in a country 38% of the population belong to one community and 62% of the population belong to another community. In a house of representatives of 100 members, the former community should have a representation of only 38 seats. If more than 38 seats are allocated to it to appease any sense of social insecurity it may have, these additional seats are considered as weightage. The weightage system does not occur in the case of strong minorities.
In the past, in the Bengal parliament, there were 250 seats. Representatives were elected to 200 seats and nominated to 50 seats. That is, 50 seats were reserved for minorities and outstanding people from different fields. At that time 45% of the population belonged to one community and 55% of the population belonged to another community. To appease the former community, 120 out of the 200 seats were reserved for it, leaving only 80 seats for the latter community. This was not the correct approach because the former community were not a minority, but a strong minority."
Accordingly, proportional representation to satisfy minorities should be in proper proportion (eg 38% population means 38 out of 100 seats). Weightage or preferential allocation of seats, though is essentially a disproportional representation. There should be no weightage for strong minorities. There should be proper proportionality generally.
Baba clarified also that division by an numbers game in representative institutions (ie legislature) based on communal consciousness is unnatural. Such mental divisions is uncalled for. As below:
"As an example of the communal approach of the Government of India, take the case of Bengal. At that time reservation in the Bengal assembly was for 250 seats. 250 seats were created as part of provincial autonomy. Of these 250 seats, 120 were for Muslims, 80 were for non-Muslims, 25 were for British merchants -- for the British businessmen of Calcutta to contest elections -- a few were for Zaminders, a few were for universities, and a few were for labour leaders. The total: 250. In Bengal at that time, 45% of the population was Muslim and 55% was non-Muslim. That is, the land of Bengal was not only physically divided but also mentally divided, as a result of which Bengal was divided on the basis of communal consciousness, which is unnatural. Communalism is unnatural. Again today, the foolish leaders, the political leaders, are encouraging this very sentiment. And I fear that if it is not controlled in the proper time -- it is the most opportune moment to control it -- if it is not controlled in the proper time, the country will face further disintegration."
So the preferred approach when it comes to representation in a legislature, or certain parts of a legislature, that adopts a system of proportional representation is to have the proportions that reflect the actual numbers in the electorate(s) - of course, relative changes in population will not always get the exact numbers, but these differences are numbers on the margins and so are not immediately critical.
Say in an electorate where there are 900 persons of community A, 300 persons of community B and 150 persons of community C, the proportions are 6:2:1. Say also, that the candidates eligible for election come to 10% in each community, ie 90 for A, 30 for B and 15 of C. Then say that the number of seats available on the representative body are 27. This means by proportional representation, community A gets 18, B gets 6 and C gets 3. These proportion represents the simple facts of that electorate, the clear empirical approach.
Now say someone advocates that the proportion should be 2:2:1. Obviously, this would result in a disproportion all round. The numbers would come out approximately as 10.8:10.8:5.4 (or 11:11:5 when rounded) and result in what is called a gerrymander in favour of community C. A gerrymander being a political advantage by way of redistribution. Obviously that is politically untenable.
Let us say the population varies a bit to A=1000, B=300, C=200 with eligible candidates now being A=100, B=30 and C=20. Say that same advocate proposes that the ratio still sits at 2:2:1. What a disfigurement this would be because the true ratio is 10:3:2 or 5 : 1.5 : 1. We can see that community C is well out of proportion (favourably) in terms of their preferential allocations compared to community A if the ratio where to be 2:2:1. That is 2:1 compared to 5:1 and so community C consider themselves to be far more favoured than community A - this creates superiority and inferiority complex. This is ill-advised politics and inconsistent with the guidance provided in the Prout discourses. Remarkably 4SP advocates something similar in disproportionality and openly admits that a community such as C would be significantly advantaged, ie the "short-term effect of the current percentages would be ... a significant increase in power".
The approach of 4SP creates disparity not parity, and Baba says elsewhere that inferiority and superiority complexes, and social conditions that create them, are contrary to establishing parity. Throughout history, such complexes have been at the root of denial of human rights. The are contrary to the principle of social equality.
Conclusion
----------
The 4SP approach is inconsistent with Prout discourses in relation to political representation - both elected and administrative. It is plainly inconsistent when it comes to organisational governance in AMPS to suggest that the 4SP system or formula be introduced. The framework for AMPS organisational governance is already clearly set out in Caryacarya Part 1. One can, from the start, resort to 2 basic sentences in this regard:
"The purodha's of Ananda Marga will elect the members of the Central Committee from among themselves.
The purodha' pramukha will be the ex-officio president of the Central Committee, and he will constitute the Central Executive Committee according to his choice."
These sentences apply to AMPS and when carefully examined can be considered consistent with the Prout literature. Not that one can necessarily cent per cent equate governance structures advocated in Prout for general public politics with governance structures in AMPS for organisational purposes, but conceptually one can say they would have some similarity. Importantly, the governance structures above-mentioned in relation to Prout relate to general social politics while the governance structure for AMPS relate to organisational governance, and the better approach when making comparisons is to rely on the Prout discourses to do with Sadvipra Boards, not necessarily only on Prout discourses to do with general social politics.
We can see that 4SP does not attain the consistency. Rather it creates divergences in terms of seat reservation, job reservation and proportionality. When it comes to considering the neo-humanist decision making matrix, it is not beneficial (conducive to human welfare), ie it is non-blissful. It may be auxiliary to an extent but to harness some points it raises requires proper cultivation, ie it needs work for proper alignment with Prout and organisational concepts of governance.
Of course, for proper organisational development, we already have the core tenets in our AM organisational system and structure and that is what we should all turn our minds to, rather than unnecessary schemes and glosses popping up and then disappearing, whether they be so-called 'administrations' (curiously 4SP gives so much credence to these false administrations, stemming from NGB and EC, by accepting them under the name of 'administration', but then denounces them - again it present a confusing and inconsistent approach), GAC, or 4SP.
Dharmadeva