>> >forms a political group, called the Hundred. You prefer to belong
>> to the 100 of your neighbourhood, but if it's full you have to join the
>> nearest 100 you can find.
>>
>> Interesting concept.  Might, in neighborhoods like ours, even make
>> neighbors have to speak to each other (most don't, around here).
>
>Here they call them Home Owner Associations -- and, while there are
>positives, I could type things that I won't....
>
In doing conveyancing, I've dealt with enough Strata Councils to put me off
mini-power groups for the rest of my life. On the other paw, I find a big
difference between groups that have no hope of any actual power over-playing
their hands to try to feel powerful, and groups where what they say and do
actually make a difference. Even the local city council has a different feel
to it from strata councils, and as you move up the ladder (having spent time
working behind the scenes with the feds and the senate) there's less of the
fakery. I suspect when what you're doing really does affect your country,
then you don't need to pose so much - or perhaps the really petty poseurs
who have no actual charisma or ideas get weeded out.
I've also spent part of my childhood on the Marae, which is the Maori small,
local, political unit, and although (of course) you get the petty and
ambitious in every group of humans, when people do have a genuine democratic
say their behaviour is very, very different from the kind of displays you
find in strata councils and home owner associations. It's the difference in
a disconnected, powerless population scrambling to force an attachment and
feeling of power that isn't there, from a population that's connected and in
charge on a basic level.

>
>> >The "non-confidence vote" The Speaker then has to
remain focused on
>> the
>> >local issues, or else he or she is suddenly no longer Speaker.
>>
>> Like Parliamentary governments; too bad we don't do that here
>> (though there
>> is a provision called "recall" where citizens can do exactly this
>> sort of  thing.  Nobody uses it anymore, though).
>
I think that has to do with the same feeling that it doesn't really matter
what you do, it doesn't make any difference

>You don't live in Larkspur, CO.
>They have a recall attempt every year.
>Don't agree with the way things are going? Start a  recall!!!
>(ergo, checks and balances must be introduced, especially to stop the
>frivolous recalls in their tracks.... imho)
>
Same feeling that you have no real control or say, only taken in a different
direction. The same problem causes opposite reactions - either apathy or a
kind of hysterical over-playing the hand to try to force some kind of
control

>Don't take me wrong, Laurie, your premise is compelling and certainly
>well thought out....
>
>[It's all great, and then you get people involved.]
>
If you look at systems in history that really work, what holds true is that
the controlling unit has to be under a hundred people or the feeling of
disconnection sets in, and the "leaders" have to be based in their
neighbourhoods or the "ivory tower" sets in

>OTOH, it was my folks and their buddies who were going to "go in on" an
>LST and a tropical island and build their own country in the late 50s/60s
>-- might have done; but then Doc Harnsberger's In Laws bought him a
>practice back East that he couldn't refuse and stay married; tygress
>
Some people did set up communes in that era. Most fell apart fairly rapidly.
The ones that survived (some are still around today - few, but some) were
carefully thought out ahead of time and took human behaviour into account.
There are certain factors that have to be built in to the very foundation of
the system. If you just blithely drop everyone on a spot and let it sort
itself out without a basic plan, the "milling puppies" action will pull it
apart

Laurie got to work with reality Phoenix

--- Rachel's Little NET2FIDO Gate v 0.9.9.8 Alpha