I am sorry my health does not encourage me to carry through on my
volunteering to run your needs through our community and report to
you. Large stumbling blocks are learning (and sorting
through reasonably but carefully) law with respect to
representation of every adults’ opinion.
Sub-thought: How about including a separate category
of kids say 14 to legal age in whatever defining agency
(law). As to who shall, may, and may not
vote—Dealing with this and the mess
‘law’ has made of it as
“jurisdiction” comes to be
considered. I thought on what else might be
devised.
More and more small groups are finding that consensus is the
most practical and successful way to deal with matters which must
be dealt with (see dictionary for meaning) Caution:
Care must be taken that necessary record-keeping and action-taking
be done rigorously, fully and publicly. Each group is
the ‘public’ here. As careful
thought about how such ‘decision’ trees
would naturally function. Aim: 1 person of each
beginning groups survives to join another surviving one
person. Thesis: In a community of our size and make-up,
some non-exclusive definitions must be devised (only one) (at the
outset) to be sure that every single individual within the entire
target population is in one and only one
‘beginning’ group and so on up to and
finally pinpointing ends of each groups’ determinations
and conclusions, to last groups decisions for government
formation. Quakers functioned like this from outset but
have not managed to avoid changing fundamentals out-of-bounds to
and ‘every persons’ aim—their
aims and population is exclusive, not inclusive.
Recap! (!!!) (Side remark)! As I reread this for clarification I
wish I could go into a social studies classroom and kick this
around with the kids (high school) (but a really good
teacher’s upper elementary class too) and I am just
physically not up to it now. I wish some of your
citizens with the yearning to get kids involved now might do
something to get them in so they will know there are people who
take them seriously—see and long for the enlargement
getting them in (and make it plain they do) would. (End side
remark)
One kind of management of political needs never used generally
is consensus. It could work. One strength
that might be missing in any other way is that 100% of population
would be involved through continuity of word-carrier at
‘next step’ times.
Another questionably positive or negative strength might be that
of the ‘type’ of group each group would
be. Thus every step would contain largest response from
a given “type” of person.
Bless you all in what you’re doing. It
needs doing.
[Entered from scanned document]
|