Collaboration in Action: How Working Groups Shape Auroville’s Projects

Auroville, the internationally renowned experimental township in South India, thrives on collaboration and collective action. This article delves into the pivotal role of working groups in shaping Auroville’s projects, illuminating how shared visions and teamwork lay the foundation for a harmonious and sustainable future.

Continue reading

On Authority

Most of us in Auroville have a distrust of authority. Coming here was partly to escape the world of authority, politics etc. And so when confronted with a form of, or a projection of, authority, many rebelled against it, by default as it were: it was an emotional compulsive decision.

Authority in Auroville lies in the Charter, the Divine Life, and as a first layer of execution means Leadership: the 3 bodies of governance called The Foundation, and it consists of Governing Board, Residents Assembly and the International Advisory Council. They are represented by a secretary and bring direction, decisions to be made. It is also there to protect us from power group’s tendencies that are obstructing development and creativity. Enabling us to…get on with it. Especially building the City and the major projects.

We have always had authorities in Auroville. These took the form of bureaucracy and groups of interest of different kinds……and extensions thereof, for example: reaching into the AVI’s and networks for fundraising, land purchase etc. Also people feeling entitled to the patch of land they had developed and not allowing others to build.

There exist forms of aristocracy for example, groups of interest. Little islands of authorities: even like country clubs as it were. Or the Entry group process holding power over one’s livelihood and making their demands: often crippling people’s chances of settling here.

Are all these not also forms of authority? They are almost invisible, like hidden networks that won’t budge.
The seeking of power and keeping it has always been there. In many ways these formations would hinder activities, block the development of the City, show favouritism concerning fundraising etc. The whole notion of freedom and collective process was a bit of a farce, drowning in these groups of interest: stifling our chances of developing on a collective level. Even the Residents Assembly of late tried to be the only authority and stop people from doing their work. Making a decision and then using the RA to stop it again because it was not to the liking of a few.

We have a lack of authority also. Anybody could come along and kick you out of your own project. Our working groups have never really had power behind decisions being taken. We could not move much, especially collectively. Very frustrating for those giving their time and energy often for nothing.

Now, when there are many people always commenting on the master plan, even on Mother, such things like ‘oh, it’s the past’, what are we to do: have no authority, no protection at all? Just be overrun by people who in their arrogance believe they know better?

We wish to refocus those energies to the one and only authority: Auroville, the Divine Mother. And we need leadership to do this, to get anything done.

Maybe leadership helps us not to be a victim of Authority.

Leadership can be better than fixed rules and regulations. It is not here to fix everything once and for all. It is a management to help redirect the boat towards the collective vision.
Yes it is especially towards building the City and its major elements.The Mother gave a detailed design and concept, through Roger, a great man and loving person. Why can we not also show love to this, and align and work in simplicity and under leadership… . The authority is The Divine, Auroville itself. We need not rebel or go against it, nor submit to the idea we have of it. Rather, to learn and rise to a third perspective and towards a society governed by sages and intuitive intelligence. Individual and collective research, effort, life. Freedom of expression, generating creative energy.

The freedom we are longing for then can begin to develop. And the authority of the RA can grow more true. And love can grow amongst people creating this vision.

Aurocracy – A model for Auroville’s Governance

Evolution of Governance in Auroville

The evolution of governance in Auroville has witnessed the exploration and experimentation of various models over time. While Auroville’s governance structure has not followed a linear progression through these models, different elements and aspects of each model have been explored and adapted based on the community’s needs and values. Here’s a brief overview of how these governance models have been considered in Auroville’s evolution:

Phase of Meritocracy: 

In the initial five years of Auroville, Mother was physically present and perhaps made merit-based selection, as can be seen through her decisions regarding Roger, Dayadand, etc. She laid importance on goodwill, expertise, experience, and competence in leadership positions. Individuals with the necessary skills and qualifications were chosen for specific roles and went about delivering results depending on best of their abilities. Otherwise, in general, the residents’ took whatever role they liked. Unless, specified by Her, specifically. 

Phase of Socialism/Communism:

After Her passing to different realms, the residents were affected by the usual ailment, being human. Mistrust, misunderstanding, and mismanagement grew wild, and without the resort to Mother, Aurovilians revolted against the previous leaders. Perhaps, they were inspired by principles of equality, cooperation, and collective ownership. Elements of socialist and communist governance, such as communal living, shared resources, and a focus on community well-being, have influenced the initial phase of Auroville’s development. There were the so-called “Pour Tous meetings” (For All Meetings). Perhaps, this is when the Auroville residents “discovered” their collective ego.

Phase of Anarchy: 

In those days, the resources were short, and given the temperature, tempers were even shorter. The principles of equality soon got replaced by egoality. Everyone might have felt, ‘Apun ko lagta hai, apun hi Divine hai’ and slowly anarchy might have crept in, wrapped with the meaning of self-governance and as a resistance to hierarchical authority. The emphasis on personal freedom, random-responsibility, and decision-making through shouting fests and fistfights aligned with certain narrow principles of anarchy.

Phase of Democracy: 

After 1988, with the intervention of the parliament through an Act, it dawned that anarchy cannot continue for long, and as result democratic system of governance was sought. Where decisions were made through the participation of the people, and for a decade or so the residents found a new toy to toy with. The Resident’s Assembly, WC, FAMC, etc. were conceived and born during those wild days. 

Phase of Oligarchy: 

In the phase of democracy, as the name suggests, demography expanded. When the number of new members increased, the entrenched powerhouses were not ready to share the hard-won governance with the newer players. Perhaps, this is when the oligarchy (rule by a small group) emerged and created rules, regulations, guidelines, codes, mandates, policies, etc. to win and rule with a quorum of 5%. This meant a few could play musical chairs across multiple floors and multiple buildings in the newly built Town Hall then. Till 2021.

Phase of Technocracy: 

After the arrival of a seasoned bureaucrat, in June 2021, she has slowly brought in and explored the elements of technocracy, where decision-making is based on the ‘so-called’ expertise and knowledge of technical specialists. Now, Auroville’s technocratic considerations and appointments are carried out top down, through the ever-present Secretariat, and almost never-present Governing Board. The buy-in for this model in the community is extremely low, and thus the ecosystem required to implement the incredible out-of-the-world ideas of the technocrats of Auroville are non-existent. Thus, defeating the purpose for which they’re appointed in the first place. 

Phase of Participatory Democracy: 

In reaction to the rigid and opaque technocracy, some residents have resorted to participatory democracy, which emphasizes active involvement and participation of ‘all’ community members in decision-making processes. This has been a significant aspect of Auroville’s underground governance model which is closed and exclusive in essence. The engagement of residents in the nomination, feedback, and selection processes, as well as the emphasis on community input, boasting a participatory approach, is carried out within the closed coterie of trusted and loyal residents. 

Well, all the above need to be put in context that Auroville’s governance is an evolving experiment which is the expression of a higher consciousness working to manifest the truth of the future. By whatever means, our society innately seeks to create a harmonious and inclusive environment that fosters individual growth, collective well-being, and the realization of Auroville’s broader ideals.

 

Need for a new Governance model

The above-mentioned governance models have been tried at various times and none seem to be fitting Auroville’s requirements precisely. They all have pros and cons. Perhaps, what we need is not an imported model, but a conscious governance model that fits the specific needs of Auroville. In truth, none of the existing models will work for us, as we’re trying to tread unchartered waters here. We need to evolve our own governance model to suit our needs. 

The proposed governance model, referred to as Aurocracy – a participatory action model, incorporates elements of various yogic disciplines (Raja, Jnana, Bhakti, Karma Yoga) and emphasizes the importance of discipline, knowledge, devotion, and action. The governance model described in the given scenario combines elements of meritocracy and collective decision-making. It includes specific processes for WG member selection and functioning. Here’s an overview of the model:

Nomination:

  • Residents cannot directly nominate themselves or others for the WG membership.
  • Individuals interested in membership of a working group must first work in it for a minimum of one year as a team member, and the experience cannot be from more than five years in the past.
  • Nominees must commit full-commitment to the working group. No other part-time or full-time engagements for utmost attention to serve Auroville. (This will ensure efficiency and quicker decision-making)
  • Residents can nominate themselves or others with at least one year of working experience as a team member of that WG, before applying for the membership. (For eg. Before applying for ATDC, the nominee should have worked in ATDC’s office in some role. This would ensure a deeper understanding of the work.)
  • The Auroville Council scrutinizes the applicants and shortlists eligible candidates. (Only to ensure the above criterias are met)

Presentation and Feedback:

  • Shortlisted candidates are required to make a presentation on how they will contribute to advancing Auroville’s interests in that particular WG. (Let’s say there are 20 applicants to ATDC, they may have to come up with interesting and creative ideas to prove their mettle and capability)
  • Residents can attend the presentation in person or watch it online and provide qualitative feedback within a week.
  • Nominees may need to incorporate the feedback or provide valid reasons for disregarding it and make a final presentation. (The ones who fail to do this will be removed from the shortlisted list.)

Random Selection:

  • The final selection of working group members is made through a draw of straw method or another random selection process. (Continuing with the same example, irrespective of the impressiveness of the presentation, everyone stands a chance.)
  • Typically, 5 or 7 members are selected randomly. (Again, they may not be the best ones, but it doesn’t matter. We all are one here and there is no competition. As it was a random selection, there is no resentment or disappointment. Anyone could have been the winner. A great equalizer. If the ones with the best ideas get in, they’ve their role cut out and can go implement. And, even the ones whose ideas were not great, can simply invite the co-applicants to share the ideas and implement. In fact, might include them in the project them)

Facilitation and Role/Project Assignment:

  • Once the working group is selected, a facilitator can be involved to align all the new members and assign responsibilities. (This is necessary, as all the 7 members of ATDC might have various ideas and some even conflicting. In fact, the 7 members can even invite the 13 other co-applicants who didn’t make it and try to integrate their ideas too. The facilitation also will ensure that the WG has a definite comprehensive and cohesive roadmap in place before starting working together.)

Working Working Group

  • The working of the WG may mainly entail taking policy decisions, resource mobilisation, work assignment and facilitation, monitoring and evaluation, etc. (For eg. ATDC may pass resolutions to award the DDP project to right team or experts, instead of holding the work inhouse)
  • Working Group members are not allowed to take up any power/role/project themselves. (ATDC doing DDPs, Crown, WTHC, etc. has only resulted in delay and wastage. At the same time, the MM lake team independent of ATDC could quietly finish the test lake, almost without any noise.)
  • They work closely with the Resident’s Assembly Service (RAS) to identify and select interested residents who can fulfill specific roles or projects. (It is the job of the RAS to ensure the residents enlisted in the RoR are indeed serving Auroville. It is their job to nudge the residents to take up responsibilities and contribute to the progress of Auroville. It is RAS’ responsibility to ensure the new entrants to the RoR are properly oriented towards the purpose and propose multiple possibilities to serve Auroville, motivate and align the existing / continuing Aurovilians to contribute according to the best of their abilities. And, facilitate those who wish to leave Auroville.)

This governance model aims to foster participatory action, far beyond participatory planning, emphasizing the importance of discipline, knowledge, devotion, and action. It includes elements of merit-based selection, community feedback, and randomization to ensure a fair and inclusive process. The involvement of a facilitator and collaboration with the RAS supports coordination and the distribution of responsibilities within the working groups.

Aurocracy may also prove to be a possible solution to our current logjam. The folks in the Town Hall will never agree to a number based governance model, as one can easily predict the results. On the other hand, even if the TH WG agrees to work with Aurovilians of opposing views, the appointment process has to go through the Secretariat and wait for Office Orders from GB. This is not going to be easy to accept for the Kailash folks. The above-mentioned selection process may mean that those with ideas from both sides will present, and the random selection process will ensure that there is no foul play. Whatever is the eventual composition of the team, can be considered as the divine play and work with the given team. 

Remember Her words…

“At any rate, they should get together. Then I will see.”

“And yet we must find a way for all these solutions to work together.”

“We have to bear in mind that we are starting from the present state of humanity. So you must face all the difficulties; you must find the solution.”

“This fact is so obvious that a simple and ignorant peasant here is, in his heart, closer to the Divine than the intellectuals of Europe.

All those who want to become Aurovilians must know this and behave accordingly; otherwise they are unworthy of being Aurovilians.”

“We shall work for a better tomorrow.”

“Auroville is for those who want to do the Yoga of work.

To live in Auroville means to do the Yoga of work. So all Aurovilians must take up a work and do it as Yoga.”

“Enlarge your consciousness and aspire for the satisfaction of all.”

“Auroville must not lie. Everyone who aspires to be an Aurovilian must make the resolution never to tell a lie.”

“We must “be” in all sincerity.”

“But for so many years they have been here. It must be proved, it can’t be a feeling or an idea or something like that, there must be a concrete proof.

I have read this question to S.S., because we have spoken together at length, insofar as we feel that certain decisions must be made to try and improve the situation in Auroville.

They will protest at first, but we must remain firm: “This is how it is.”

We must find the people capable of doing this, with the required strength of character, and once we find them, they can be given the authority, and if the others don’t like it, they’ll have to leave!

But when a difficulty comes, you must take heart and face it courageously.

We must strive for Order, Harmony, Beauty and… collective aspiration—all the things which for the moment are not there.

We must rise above personal reactions, be exclusively attuned to the divine Will and be the docile instruments of the divine Will—we must be impersonal, without any personal reaction.

We must “be” in all sincerity.”

Benefits of the new Governance model

The new governance model – Aurocracy – proposed in the previous description has several potential advantages:

Slay the tyranny of numbers: 

By implementing a system where residents cannot directly nominate themselves or others to membership positions, the model aims to address the potential negative aspects of majority rule or the tyranny of numbers. This helps ensure that membership positions are not solely determined by popularity or voting power, but rather by a combination of experience, qualifications, and commitment.

Divine anarchy to play its role: 

“Men must become conscious of their psychic being and organise themselves spontaneously, without fixed rules and laws―that is the ideal.”

The nomination, presentation, selection, facilitation, and action can all become an occasion for us to become conscious of our inner psychic being and act spontaneously. 

Work experience and knowledge as the base for decision-making: 

Requiring individuals to have a minimum of one year of work experience in a working group before being eligible for membership positions ensures that decision-making is informed by practical knowledge and familiarity with the group’s dynamics. The model promotes a meritocratic approach. This can lead to more effective and informed decision-making processes. 

Wider population willing to work in working groups:

By making work experience a prerequisite for membership positions, the governance model incentivizes a broader segment of the population to actively engage and contribute within working groups. This can result in a more diverse pool of candidates and a greater sense of ownership and commitment among residents.

Reduced Influence of Popularity or Political Campaigning: 

The model’s selection process, including the involvement of the Auroville Council and random selection methods, can help minimize the influence of popularity or political campaigning. This reduces the risk of individuals being chosen based solely on charisma or campaigning skills, ensuring a fairer and more impartial selection process. The model reduces the influence of external factors, such as lobbying, special interest groups, or media influence, on the selection process. 

Community Input and Feedback: 

The model encourages community participation and feedback through residents’ attendance at presentations or providing feedback online. This fosters a sense of inclusivity and allows community members to have a say in the selection of members and provide valuable input for decision-making. It promotes a sense of collective ownership and involvement in the governance process.

Collaboration and Effective Teamwork: 

The involvement of a facilitator and the emphasis on collaboration within the working group can lead to improved teamwork and coordination. By aligning the new members and assigning responsibilities, the model promotes efficient and effective decision-making processes, leading to better outcomes.

Balanced Power Distribution: 

By not allowing working group members to take up power/role/project themselves, the model promotes a more distributed and balanced power structure. This prevents concentration of power and ensures that decision-making authority is shared among a broader group of individuals. It can mitigate the risk of dominance or favoritism and foster a sense of collective responsibility.

Efficiency, Adaptability and Focus: 

By committing full-time to the working group, members can dedicate their attention and efforts solely to the group’s objectives and responsibilities. This can enhance efficiency and effectiveness in achieving desired outcomes. The model’s emphasis on aligning new members and assigning responsibilities with the help of a facilitator allows for adaptability and flexibility within the working groups. This can accommodate changing circumstances, evolving priorities, and the diverse skills and interests of the residents, resulting in more agile and responsive governance.

Enhanced Accountability: 

As members are selected based on their demonstrated commitment and experience within a working group, they are more likely to be accountable to the group and its objectives. This accountability can contribute to a higher level of responsibility and dedication among members.

Long-Term Perspective: 

The requirement that the one-year experience be within the past five years ensures that members have recent engagement with the working group. This helps maintain a focus on current challenges and opportunities, promoting a forward-looking and adaptive approach to governance.

Reduced Polarization and Partisanship: 

The random selection method for choosing working group members can help reduce polarization and partisanship. It avoids potential divisions based on political affiliations or personal biases, contributing to a more harmonious and cooperative environment.

Continuity and Stability: 

Requiring a minimum of one year of experience within a working group before seeking a membership position promotes continuity and stability in governance. members have a deeper understanding of the group’s dynamics, challenges, and goals, which can lead to more consistent decision-making and long-term planning.

Development of Leadership Skills: 

By requiring individuals to work in a working group for a minimum of one year before seeking a membership position, the model allows aspiring members to develop essential skills, such as teamwork, communication, and problem-solving. This can contribute to the growth and development of future members within Auroville.

Collaboration and Networking: 

The involvement of the Resident’s Assembly Service (RAS) in the role/project assignment process encourages collaboration and networking within Auroville. It creates opportunities for residents to connect with each other, share resources, and contribute their skills and expertise to various projects or roles, fostering a sense of collective progress and growth.

In summary, the new governance model – Aurocracy – offers a holistic and conscious approach to governance, tailored to suit the specific needs and aspirations of Auroville. 

***

Our Masters on Governance

FROM SRI AUROBINDO

Ideal of Human Unity / Forms of Government

Or it might be something like the disguised oligarchy of an international council reposing its rule on the assent, expressed by election or otherwise, of what might be called a semi passive democracy as its first figure. For that is what the modern democracy at present is in fact; the sole democratic elements are public opinion, periodical elections and the power of the people to refuse reelection to those who have displeased it.

The Ideal of Human Unity / The Drive towards Legislative and Social Centralization & Uniformity

Certainly, democracy as it is now practised is not the last or penultimate stage; for it is often merely democratic in appearance and even at the best amounts to the rule of the majority and works by the vicious method of party government, defects the increasing perception of which enters largely into the present day dissatisfaction with parliamentary systems. Even a perfect democracy is not likely to be the last stage of social evolution, but it is still the necessary broad standing ground upon which the self consciousness of the social being can come to its own.

It does not follow that a true democracy must necessarily come into being at some time.

War and Self Determinism

Ancient liberty and democracy meant in Greece the self rule—variegated by periodical orgies of mutual throat cutting—of a smaller number of freemen of all ranks who lived by the labour of a great mass of slaves. In recent times liberty and democracy have been, and still are, a cant assertion which veils under a skilfully moderated plutocratic system the rule of an organised successful bourgeoisie over a proletariate at first submissive, afterwards increasingly dissatisfied and combined for recalcitrant self assertion.

Another illusion was that the growth of democracy would mean the growth of pacifism and the end of war…

Man refuses to learn from that history of whose lessons the wise prate to us; otherwise the story of old democracies ought to have been enough to prevent this particular illusion.

War and Self Determinism

The future does not belong to that hybrid thing, a middleclass democracy infected with the old theory of international relations, however modified by concessions to a new broader spirit of idealism.

The future destined to replace this present is evident enough in some of its main outward tendencies, in society away from plutocracy and middleclass democracy to some completeness of socialism and attempt at a broad and equal commonalty of social living, in the relations of the peoples away from aggressive nationalism and balances of power to some closer international comity.

The Idea of Human Unity / The Peril of the World State 

Democracy is by no means a sure preservative of liberty: on the contrary, we see today a democratic system of government march steadily towards an organised annihilation of individual liberty as could not have been dreamed of in the old aristocratic or monarchical system… it revives now only in periods of revolution and excitement often in the form of mob tyranny or a savage reactionary or revolutionary repression… 

Sri Aurobindo / Evening Talks, 1926 / Purani

I am at present speaking against democracy. That does not mean there is no truth behind it – and I know it, yet I speak against democracy because that mentality is against the Truth that is trying to come down.

FROM THE MOTHER

On Thoughts & Aphorisms 341 -343 (Karma)

Democracy was the protest of the human soul against the allied despotisms of autocrat, priest and noble; Socialism is the protest of the human soul against the despotism of a plutocratic democracy; Anarchism is likely to be the protest of the human soul against the tyranny of a bureaucratic Socialism. It is chimerical to enquire which is the better system; it would be difficult to decide which is the worse.

A turbulent and eager march from illusion to illusion and from failure to failure is the image of European progress.

Agenda 10 April 1968

If there is no representative of the supreme Consciousness (which can happen, of course), if there isn’t any, we could perhaps (this would be worth trying) replace him with the government by a small number—we would have to choose between four and eight, something like that: four, seven or eight—a small number having an INTUITIVE intelligence.

All the intermediaries have proved incompetent: theocracy, aristocracy, democracy, plutocracy—all that is a complete failure. 

Agenda, August 16, 1969

In an undated note, Mother once wrote:  Democracy was necessary and useful a hundred years ago, but now we must go beyond it if we want to take a step forward towards a new creation.

Agenda 27 July, 1968 (conversation)

Satprem: The Press is asking for a few texts to fill blanks in the forthcoming Bulletin.

The Mother: Take from Sri Aurobindo, not from me! Everything from Sri Aurobindo

Satprem proposes the following text:

Sri Aurobindo: Overmind is obliged to respect the freedom of the individual….

Oh, that’s a revelation! I didn’t know that.

Sri Aurobindo: …including his freedom to be perverse, stupid, recalcitrant and slow. Supermind is not merely a step higher than Overmind—it is beyond the line, that is a different consciousness and power beyond the mental limit.”

Do you imply that the Supermind will not be obliged to respect the freedom of the individual?

Sri Aurobindo: Of  course I do! It will respect only the Truth of the Divine and the truth of things.

The Mother / On Auroville’s Organization

We want an organization which is the expression of a higher consciousness working to manifest the truth of the future.

Mother’s Agenda, 1966

Scores of people have come for Auroville…. Instead of working, they spend their time talking… They’ve already begun discussing what the city’s political situation will be …And one of them wrote to me yesterday, saying he couldn’t take part in something that wasn’t purely ‘democratic’… So I answered him this: Auroville must be at the service of the Truth, beyond all social, political and religious convictions… but above all…it would be better to build the city first!

Mother’s Agenda, 7 Feb, 1970

The anarchic state is the self government of each individual, and it will be the perfect government only when each one becomes conscious of the inner Divine and will obey only Him and Him alone…

Someone from Auroville wrote to me that he had come here to obey only himself and he found there were rules and laws. And he said: I won’t do it! I am free, I refuse to do it… so I wrote to him.. 

“One is only free when one is conscious of the Divine…”

Charter of Auroville / The Mother

But to live in Auroville, one must be a willing servitor of the Divine Consciousness.

Aurocracy: An Auroville-specific governance model


Over the period, Auroville has developed a unique governance model, which can be called Aurocracy, which is based on the principles of collaboration, self-governance, and self-awareness. In this article, we will explore the Auroville specific governance model – Aurocracy. The Aurocracy governance model is based on the principles and purpose of Auroville as outlined in the Charter. It is a unique model of governance that seeks to promote harmony, unity, and progress among the residents of Auroville.

The term “Aurocracy” is derived from the Greek word “kratos,” which means “power” or “rule.” In Aurocracy, the power or rule is not vested in any individual or group, but in the Divine Consciousness that is said to guide and govern Auroville.

Aurocracy is a decentralized form of governance that is based on the principle of self-organisation. It is a system where decisions are made collectively and where the individual is empowered to take responsibility for his or her own actions. The aim of Aurocracy is to create a system where each person can live in harmony with others and with nature, while being able to contribute as a willing servitor to the well-being of the City as a whole.

The core documents of Auroville like the Auroville Charter, a Dream, and To be a True Aurovilian serves as the basis for the Aurocracy governance model. The Auroville Charter which was adopted in 1968 and outlines the vision and values of Auroville. It clearly states that Auroville is meant to be a place where people live in harmony, where the emphasis is on inner development and where there is no discrimination on the basis of race, nationality, religion or political beliefs.

The Aurocracy governance model is based on three key principles: collaboration, self-governance, and self-awareness.

  1. Collaboration is a fundamental principle of Aurocracy. It is the principle that underpins all decision-making processes in Auroville. In Aurocracy, decisions are made collectively, with the aim of finding the best possible solution for the City as a whole. Collaboration is seen as a way to ensure that everyone’s voice is heard and that decisions are made in a transparent and inclusive manner.
  2. Self-governance is another key principle of Aurocracy. It is the principle that empowers Aurovilians to take responsibility for their own actions and to contribute to the well-being of the City as a whole. Self-governance is based on the belief that Aurovilians are capable of making decisions for themselves and that they have a responsibility to contribute to the well-being of the City as a whole. Working groups are led by 4-8 individuals with intuitive intelligence. Each individual is expected to take responsibility for their own actions and decisions, and to work towards the common good of the City .
  3. Self-awareness is the third principle of Aurocracy. It is the principle that emphasizes the importance of inner development and personal growth. Auroville is seen as a place where individuals can come to explore their inner selves, to develop their own consciousness and to contribute to the growth of the City as a whole.

Aurocracy is a system where decision-making is decentralized and where power is distributed among the residents. The system is designed to encourage participation and collaboration among the Aurovilians. Decision-making in Aurocracy is based on the principle of consensus. In a consensus-based system, decisions are made after all City members have had the opportunity to express their opinions and concerns. Aurovilians are expected to take ownership of their lives and their work, and to contribute to the City in a way that aligns with the ideals of Auroville. This means that decision-making is decentralized, and there is a great deal of trust placed in individuals to make choices that are in the best interest of the City as a whole.

The Aurocracy governance model is based on a series of working groups, each with a specific mandate. These working groups are responsible for various aspects of City life, such as governance, education, environment, and economy. The working groups are made up of volunteers who have nominated themselves to the public service and vetted by the Foundation. From amongst the pool of self-nominated volunteers, a handful are selected by some randomised selection process. As each working group is responsible for making decisions related to their specific mandate and for implementing those decisions, the new volunteers naturally join the group and contribute to its purpose.

The Aurocracy governance model is also based on a series of committees, each with a specific mandate. The committees are responsible for overseeing the work of the working groups and for making decisions related to City -wide issues. The committees are also responsible for maintaining the Auroville Charter and for ensuring that the principles of Aurocracy are upheld. The committee members are nominated by the Governing Board of the Auroville Foundation and they ensure checks and balances on the working groups.

Another key feature of the Aurocracy model is its emphasis on collective decision-making. In Auroville, decisions are made through a process of consensus building, where all members of the City have an opportunity to participate and share their ideas. This ensures that all perspectives are considered, and decisions are made with the collective interest of the City in mind. According to the Aurocracy governance model, decision-making is based on the principle of consensus. This means that decisions are made through a process of dialogue and discussion until a consensus is reached. This process is designed to promote harmony and unity among the residents of Auroville.

Another important aspect of Aurocracy is the emphasis on transparency and accountability. Auroville operates on a system of open meetings, where all City members have the opportunity to voice their opinions and concerns. This helps to ensure that decision-making is participatory and engaging, and that everyone’s voices are heard. Additionally, Aurovilians are expected to be transparent in their actions and to hold themselves accountable for their behavior.

One of the challenges with this model is that it can take longer to make decisions since it requires input from all members. However, proponents of the Aurocracy model argue that the benefits of having a decision-making process that is inclusive and engaging far outweigh the potential downsides. While Aurocracy is often praised for its democratic and decentralized approach to governance, it is not without its challenges. For example, the emphasis on individual responsibility can sometimes lead to conflicts between City members who have different ideas about what it means to contribute to the City. Additionally, the lack of a formal hierarchy can sometimes make decision-making more time-consuming and difficult.

Despite these challenges, however, many Aurovilians feel that Aurocracy is a highly effective governance model that allows them to live in a City that aligns with their values and ideals. By placing a strong emphasis on individual responsibility, self-governance, transparency, and accountability, Aurocracy has created a unique and thriving City that continues to inspire people around the world.

In addition to consensus building, another important aspect of the Aurocracy model is its focus on self-governance. In Auroville, there are an external authority of the Government of India which ensures the manifestation of the idea of Auroville. However, the City fully relies on its own internal mechanisms to maintain order to manifest the ideal of Auroville.

One example of this emphasis on individual responsibility is the way in which Auroville handles conflicts. Rather than relying on a hierarchical system of authority figures to mediate disputes, Aurovilians are encouraged to work out their differences through open communication and dialogue. This approach not only empowers individuals to take control of their own lives, but it also fosters a culture of mutual respect and understanding within the City. While handling the issues of conflicts and disputes, the self-governance model is supported by a system of conscious justice that emphasizes mediation and reconciliation rather than punishment. When conflicts arise, members of the City are encouraged to come together and find a solution that is acceptable to all parties involved. Often, the surface conflicts are the result of deeper issues, and in Auroville, we attempt to got the root problem and heal rather than provide superficial band-aids.

The Aurocracy model represents a unique approach to governance that places a strong emphasis on collaboration, collective decision-making, and self-governance. While it is not without its challenges, many members of the Auroville City believe that this model has been instrumental in fostering a sense of unity, purpose, and shared responsibility among its residents. The Aurocracy model represents a compelling alternative to traditional forms of governance. Its emphasis on collaboration, inclusivity, and self-governance has helped to create a strong sense of City and shared responsibility within Auroville. While it may not be suitable for all communities, the Aurocracy model serves as a powerful example of what can be achieved through collective action and distributed decision-making.



Power and Marginalisation: Examining Governance Structures Addressing Systemic Inequalities in Auroville

While Auroville has always aimed to create an egalitarian and harmonious society, it is not immune to issues of power and marginalisation. As with any community, there are inherent power structures that exist within Auroville, and those who are on the margins of society may not always have an equal say in decision-making processes. This can lead to systemic inequalities that need to be addressed.

Continue reading

Creating a Transparent and Accountable Community: Steps Towards Achieving Zero Tolerance for Corruption in Auroville

Auroville is a community founded on principles of human unity, spiritual growth, and sustainable living. To uphold these principles, it is essential to maintain a zero-tolerance policy towards corruption. Corruption can undermine the integrity of the community and affect its ability to achieve its goals. In order to create a transparent and accountable community, there are several steps that can be taken towards achieving zero tolerance for corruption in Auroville.

Continue reading

Critique of Auroville’s Citizens’ Assembly

In my humble opinion, Auroville is not a democracy project, and it does not have ‘Citizens’. Somehow, I think, democracies are about dumbing it down, flattening it out. Look at our political leaders. Auroville is a dream of elevation, evolution, and embodiment. I do feel the need in Auroville for Extraordinary participation, Educated deliberations, & Equal opportunities. Perhaps, we already have enough groups and assemblies. Our job is to better the existing bodies, instead of boycotting and participating selectively.

Continue reading

Response to Outreach Media of Auroville

Dear all, 

I’m writing this on behalf of many concerned residents, in response to the email sent by Fabienne to all the Auroville entities and openly publishing it on the Auronet. 

She has asked 3 questions and here are responses for each one of them.

  1. On what grounds was this decision made?
    Is common sense good enough? Fabienne of Outreach Media went on a blitzkrieg after the MoM of GB was released on the 3rd Dec and action started on the 4th. She frantically reached out to media houses, national and international, planting skewed and sentimental stories, to evoke sensationalism while there was none. Outreach media was set up to manage the misinformation and avoiding detrimental narratives, however in this case, she herself indulged in such actions, which are deplorable given the delicate scenario within the community. The need of the hour was to find solutions within our community, rather than sending SOS messages outside, without giving a second thought to its long term effect, in terms of fundraising, image of India, etc. 
    Auroville Foundation’s Under Secretary Sri Srinivasmurty’s request to Fabienne 1. to restrain from publicity (Dec21), and, 2. move the assets (Jan22) after taking cognizance of the damage it is (or will) creating is timely and appreciable.
  2. Have the 3 bodies that together constitute the Auroville Foundation been consulted and agreed to this decision?
    Conflated sense of self-importance. For every small decision, like transfer of few assets, should all 3 bodies be consulted and wait for the agreement? The community have long drawn processes (which will put the worst kind of bureaucratic systems to shame) and ill-adapted for quick decision-making, calling for such seems to be an excellent instrument to delay. If we follow this argument, and decisions regarding transfer of assets are deemed so important, why were the mentioned 3 bodies not considered, consulted before giving those assets in the first place, and what about the appointment of an executive to this ‘important’ position? It’s purely a self-appointment, like the executives of Auroville Today, News&Notes, Auroville Radio, etc. Moreover, now Outreach Media is managed by One Executive – Fabienne. If the Auroville Foundation believes the damage caused by Fabienne is of extraordinary proportions with grave consequences for the outlook of India, on the international stage, by all means, it is in their purview to act, and they’ve done so, rightly, by asking her simply to move the assets. How come, outreach of Auroville is an unrestrained, unquestioned, unrelenting personal fiefdom of one individual? The 3 bodies ought to come together to decide on the whims and fancies of one person? Preposterous?
  3. Has the FAMC, as the mandated body responsible for managing assets of Auroville, been consulted and agreed to this decision?
    I personally think this point is valid. Funds and Assets Management Committee (FAMC), the relevant body under the Auroville Foundation, could have been kept in the loop. I am sure they would have collaborated, given the circumstances. After all, Sabine who worked in N&N was removed from executive-ship on some flimsy grounds, by the FAMC. So, there is precedent for FAMC to take action. 

Having mentioned the above, the main assets of Outreach Media are not some computers and cameras. It is the connections that Outreach Media has carefully cultivated over many years as an official voice of Auroville, and Fabienne as the face of it. The media, world over, is buying Fabienne’s story because the media thinks she is Auroville’s voice. When Fabienne sends distress calls to her email lists asking for the world to help against the so-called ‘high-handed’ external force named Government of India, the individuals who truly care about Auroville believe it and the media finds it lucrative. 
I find the second email by Fabienne, wherein she refuses to comply to the request, even more worrisome. She mentions she’s ‘charged’ with managing the Outreach Media on behalf of the Residents’ Assembly of Auroville. I think it is a false claim, or else, I am happy to read the note that corroborates her position. She then goes on to talk about the ‘Jurisdiction’, which by definition means ‘the official power to make legal decisions and judgements’. I don’t think 19(2)(b) – in haste she read it as 19(b) – mentions anything being under direct jurisdiction of RA. The section 19 of AVF Act enumerates the ‘Functions of the Residents’ Assembly’, it is not the ‘right’ ‘power’ or ‘legal means’ in any sense. The 19(2) says ‘In particular, and without prejudice to the foregoing powers, the Residents‟ Assembly may-‘ and (b) says ‘organise various activities relating to Auroville’ not sure where she got her facts from. Whereas, section 17 of AVF explicitly mentions ‘Powers and functions of the Governing Board’ and 17(d) mentions ‘to monitor and review the activities of Auroville and to secure proper management of the properties vested in the Foundation under section 6 and other properties relatable to Auroville’ based on which Auroville Foundation is duly and ‘lawfully’ acting, given the mismanagement of assets.
In the 3rd para of her second letter, she mentions ‘As such, the FAMC of the RA is the authority that is charged with the duty and power over all funds and assets of Auroville…’, and again it’s a misreading of the facts. The FAMC is mandated with some functions, it is not ‘the authority’ and it does not have ‘power’ over all funds and assets. In fact, FAMC performs under the Governing Board of Auroville Foundation and the Under Secretary is also part of the FAM Committee. In the final para, she suggests the Auroville Foundation to ‘apply to the FAMC seeking clearance or any other permission’. Her defiance gives a feeling, she believes the Auroville Foundation is under the ‘authority’ of FAMC. After going through her emails, having seen the glaring gaps in her understanding of Auroville Foundation Act and misreadings about ‘powers’ and ‘authority’, I wonder what other misinformations have we been spreading out in previous years. 
Given the confrontational attitude presented in Fabienne’s email to everyone, it’s clear she is taking the request from Auroville Foundation personally, rather than thinking of the collective good. I sincerely hope she lets the new volunteers, Joel and Sindhuja, work at par with her. I hope she uses her power positively and productively. To make things clear, the Auroville Foundation is not taking over the Outreach Media. They simply asked other willing volunteers from the community, who are not trigger-happy and are better restrained in the actions, to manage it. 
Thank you for your attention and time. I request each one of you to take the pains to be aware of the alternate thoughts and underlying motivations, and support actions which helps in the progress of Auroville, instead of PAUSING Auroville.

Who will Compensate Auroville for its losses?

For over a year now the Forest Group and the Youth Centre (YC) have opposed the clearing of the Crown (ROW) and the laying of an electrical cable alongside it. Arguments have been heard from their side justifying their claim that the Crown should not pass through the YC or the Bliss Forest. The TDC has replied to their arguments explaining why it is necessary to clear the circular Crown right-of-way (RoW) as provided for in the master plan. Almost 300 Aurovilians have written a letter of support to the TDC requesting them to continue their work. The Secretary of the Auroville Foundation has also directed the TDC to complete the task of clearing the master plan RoWs and to lay the HT cable along its designated path along the cleared Crown RoW. He has also directed that other master plan RoWs must be cleared. When the TDC sent a team to survey and mark the Crown, YC residents told them that they are not welcome there and that no survey should take place. One member of the Forest Group had remarked in a posting that proceeding with the work may lead to violence (“We seem to be heading for a violent clash. When the TDC orders the JCB to cut through the YC it will be hard to find peaceful space for dialogue and mutual understanding”).

The defiant blocking of the progress of the development work of building the Township goes against the fundamental structure of the Auroville Foundation Act, the provisions of which govern the functioning of the Auroville Foundation.

How is one to deal with such a situation? It was never expected that Aurovilians would act against Auroville. Hence this situation is new and needs some thinking on what to do.

For those who do not know the background of the TDC here is a brief history of the creation of the TDC.

The Auroville Master Plan provides for the establishment of a “Town Development Council” with an organisation structure as given in Appendix V of the Master Plan (page 108). The Auroville Master Plan also provides for a “Prescribed Authority” to be established by the Auroville Foundation for the implementation of the Master Plan.  In the Standing Order by which the TDC was established by the Governing Board in May 2011, the TDC was also designated as the “Prescribed Authority” for implementation of the Master Plan. The Standing Order by which the TDC was established was amended in June 2019 to take care of a technical detail.

The Governing Board has been given the mandate of ensuring development of Auroville in accordance with the Auroville Master Plan as per section 17(e) of the Auroville Foundation Act. With the establishment of the TDC, the Governing Board undertakes this responsibility through the TDC. Residents of Auroville are expected to take part in the planning and development of Auroville as also shown in the organisation diagram of the TDC on page 108 of the Master Plan document.

The TDC Standing Order makes a reference to l’avenir d’Auroville as follows: “Since the name “L’avenir d’Auroville” was given by the Mother for the Township Planning, developing and building the organisation; the Council shall retain it and may use the expression “Auroville Town Development Council – L’avenir d’Auroville” in its internal communications”.

Getting back to the situation of blocking the progress of the works of TDC, here are some thoughts:

The Mother has told us: “No big creation is possible without Discipline – individual discipline, group discipline, discipline towards the Divine” (16-09-1968).

Could it be that far too many people have entered Auroville who do not have any faith in Mother’s idea of Auroville and want to replace Her idea with their own? If that is so then what should be done? From various communications, postings and meetings it appears that increasingly residents of Auroville seem to think that they are the “clients” of the TDC and that the township is to be built as per their wishes rather than acting as volunteers who build the Mother’s town, where she is the “client” and we are the workers.

The blocking of the work of the town development infrastructure has caused financial losses to Auroville. An issue arises about who will compensate Auroville for these losses. There is an urgent need to hold the people causing these losses accountable and liable to compensate Auroville.

Another related issue arises from this and similar incidents: Many individuals, institutions and corporations have provided donations and grants to Auroville. The Government of India has also provided grants for the development of the Auroville Township. The project of the Auroville Township has been detailed in various brochures that describe Auroville as well as the master plan that sets out how the Auroville Township is to be developed. These brochures have been circulated amongst donors who have contributed for this purpose. Land has been purchased with this plan in mind. Equipment and materials have been purchased to develop the township, including its infrastructure, as per this plan. To use the land for purposes other than for which it was purchased creates a criminal liability towards those who have donated. The people who have encroached upon the land and put it to some other use need to be held accountable and liable under the law of the land.

A reading of the minutes of the meetings of the Governing Board confirms that the Governing Board on numerous occasions had called for accelerating the development of the Auroville township including the preparation of detailed development plans. In their meeting of 8th September 2019, the Governing Board noted that the true experiment of Auroville will only start when Auroville is a vibrant township with 50,000 residents. The Board further noted: “All programs and projects of the Auroville Foundation will henceforth be aligned with the larger program of building the Auroville township within a time frame and as per the Auroville Master Plan.”

However, these directives and guidelines have been flouted specially in relation to the structure and functioning of the Town Development Council, compliance with the Auroville Master Plan and consistent and continuous engagement with the Tamil Nadu Government for the creation of a statutory land use regulation mechanism.  

A masterly continuous argumentation over some issue or the other causing long delays and effectively annulling the directives of the Governing Board has been a strategy used to good effect. Some members of Auroville working groups are seen openly taking sides with those who oppose the Galaxy Concept and the Master Plan based on it, and with those who block the clearing of the Crown and other master plan RoWs and the installation of infrastructure services. In effect they use their position to support the blockage against the work of the TDC rather than assisting with the development of the Auroville Township.

This leads to the following reflections:

1.  What are the consequences for either individuals or a working group that causes financial loss to Auroville? Since no machinery exists within Auroville to claim compensation for losses caused to Auroville, do we use the ordinary legal machinery of the civil and criminal courts to claim this compensation? If we do not want to use the ordinary legal machinery then what are the other ways to deal with this ?There is a need to think about this before it is too late and things go out of our hand.

2. Auroville is being built with financial support in the form of donations and grants, which are given by people who have been touched by the vision of the Mother of her Township. Should there be any consequences for individuals or groups of individuals who covertly or overtly work against the township plans? Since there does not seem to be any mechanism in Auroville to deal with such actions, should Auroville act under ordinary law where such acts may be perceived and treated as cheating and misappropriation, which are criminal offences? Would Auroville need to resort to such measures when the need arises?