If ISKCON were reformable there would be some merit in the disenfrachised becoming enthused about the possibility of fixing the BBT, re-establishing Gurukula, enacting DOM, etc. However, the 30+ year "actual" record shows that no amount of commentary, contention, conflict and speculative debate by the disenfranchised has brought about any measurable degree of reform. The same record shows that ISKCON has little capacity for internal reform. The conclusion can be drawn that reform has failed and ISKCON will continue to be what it has become under the guidance of the GBC.

When reform fails, what do the disenfranchised do? Should they continue to express their grievances to the world until the end of their lives, or, should they begin some kind of revolution to re-establish the "Neglected Teachings" in the form of a new organization? The famous "Unabomber" Theodore Kaczynski made some interesting points in his Industrial Society and Its Future, in Point 19 of his Manifesto.

He wrote:

Revolution is Easier than Reform
140. We hope we have convinced the reader that the system cannot be reformed in a such a way as to reconcile freedom with technology. The only way out is to dispense with the industrial-technological system altogether. This implies revolution, not necessarily an armed uprising, but certainly a radical and fundamental change in the nature of society.

141. People tend to assume that because a revolution involves a much greater change than reform does, it is more difficult to bring about than reform is. Actually, under certain circumstances revolution is much easier than reform. The reason is that a revolutionary movement can inspire an intensity of commitment that a reform movement cannot inspire. A reform movement merely offers to solve a particular social problem. A revolutionary movement offers to solve all problems at one stroke and create a whole new world; it provides the kind of ideal for which people will take great risks and make great sacrifices. For these reasons it would be much easier to overthrow the whole technological system than to put effective, permanent restraints on the development of application of any one segment of technology, such as genetic engineering, but under suitable conditions large numbers of people may devote themselves passionately to a revolution against the industrial-technological system. As we noted in paragraph 132, reformers seeking to limit certain aspects of technology would be working to avoid a negative outcome. But revolutionaries work to gain a powerful reward—fulfillment of their revolutionary vision—and therefore work harder and more persistently than reformers do.

142. Reform is always restrained by the fear of painful consequences if changes go too far. But once a revolutionary fever has taken hold of a society, people are willing to undergo unlimited hardships for the sake of their revolution. This was clearly shown in the French and Russian Revolutions. It may be that in such cases only a minority of the population is really committed to the revolution, but this minority is sufficiently large and active so that it becomes the dominant force in society. We will have more to say about revolution in paragraphs 180-205.

Srila Prabhupada also wrote a Manifesto outlining the foment of a spiritual revolution. In his 960 pages of "Varnashram Teachings" he elaborated on the creation of an alternative spiritual social system as the remedy for the current dysfunctional global system.

Perhaps it is time for the disenfranchised to take up the banner of cooperation in continuing the revolution begun in our lives by Srila Prabhupada? The first step would be to give up on ISKCON as un-reformable. The second step would be to establish a network of association to bring us back to the basic standards and set out the details of a Vaishnava Revolution. The third step would be to establish a network of Communities that could gradually expand under a common Constitution based on a Federation Model.

Anyone interested?

Prabhupada das Karapurnam