David has asked me to make a further clarification including my motive. So, let’s try again. In Part 1 I began with:

Roth Note: I will suggest that there is no perfect government system. We’ve discovered that the system the Founders bequeathed to us was not sustainable over time. That said, I’d like to propose some aspects of a system that I think could work. I’m going to offer it up in parts so that the reader can consider and comment on each. I’m especially interested in comments on problems the reader might see in each part.

Following each post I’ve added:

Roth Note: Now tell me what’s wrong with this.

The anger that seems to have been generated is pretty surprising as those offended apparently overlooked these simple instructions for participation; participation which is not required. I was looking for informed opinions, not off-handed emotional responses. Most comments have been well thought out, but not all.

Then I posted the first clarification in an attempt to get everyone back on track and that was met with open hostility.

Neither I nor David have written what I’m posting in this exercise. It is from an independent source that I will reveal in due time along with a concluding post.

It is a CRITICAL THINKING exercise that I see from the comments some readers failing miserably. Rather than jump in with a knee-jerk reaction based on your preconceived notions, why not try tabula rasa? Tabula rasa is Latin for blank slate. Put all one’s prejudices and preconceived notions on the shelf and instead of reading into the text what you believe it says, let the text speak for itself. Then let it linger in your mind as you consider it before responding.

I must say some of the push-back has been quite good, but others have just been examples of propagandized minds. We can do better.

Why the anger? The whole reason for this series is to plumb your minds for how we might be able to begin something new. Certainly each of the planks represents an area where we, as a people, and our government have demonstrably failed, regardless of motive. So I’m offering a look at a system that succeeded rather well in another era – another time and place with a different people, in order that we might explore if any aspects of that platform might be used or modified for our use in the future.

Some of the readers seem to think I’m recommending this platform be swallowed hook-line and sinker. I say again. It is an exercise in critical thinking. There’s no need to read more into it than that. Please accept it as such. Continue to comment in a reasoned and thoughtful way after reading and considering each post. Then please also be patient and wait for the concluding summary post. It will be worth it.