How were rules probably established in a small Stone Age community?
The need for a ruling body |
|---|
If the group has attempted unit 1 they should have established the need for rules, so now we investigate the different ways rules/laws are established and agreed upon. The idea of this section is not that they are being tested on whether they know the answers but that they are introduced to the different methods and are given an example of each one.
Let the group think about how rules are established in various situations. Put up a list of some of the possibilities on a board or an O.H.P. and ask them to choose between them as answers to the following questions.
> By a referendum of all the people involved
> By a group of representatives elected to a ruling body.
> By a small group of powerful people
> By the most powerful individual
How were rules probably established in a small Stone Age community?
(By the most powerful/strongest individual.)
How were rules established in the Early Roman Empire?
(By the aristocracy in the senate (until it was abolished))
How are laws made in present day Britain?
(By elected representatives)
How are many laws made in Switzerland
(By referendum (actually of the male population!))
[Suggestion: Take along a newspaper with parliamentary pages and look for stories about any legislation currently going through parliament]
We now investigate the relative merits of the different methods of decision making. Ask them to vote and write the answers on the O.H.P. or board, or give them individual sheets with a list.
The methods above have their relative merits and drawbacks. See which you think
is best by doing this survey.
Rate each method on a scale of 1 to 10 for
a) Speed of decision making.
b) Making an informed decision (i.e. the people making the rules know well the subject they are making rules to cover.)
c) Making sure that the decisions made are best for
all the people affected and not just for a powerful elite.
d) Giving a stable society where rule is accepted and once made.
e) Being able to make difficult decisions that are necessary but not popular.
See which method they think would work the best!
[Suggestions: 1) There is a movement in Britain at the turn of the twentieth century that wants important decisions to be taken by referendum. Discuss if they think this a good idea.
2) During the Second World War normal parliamentary democracy was suspended in Britain for a Government of National Unity. Let them discuss to which of the items above it was necessary to give most weight in time of war]
We have looked at different ways in which rules and laws can be made. To some extent which method is used depends on the situation, but it is vital that it is agreed how rules are made.
How does your school make rules?
How does your company make rules?
How does your family make rules?
What would happen in each case if it were not agreed how they are made?
What would happen in a country if it were not agreed how laws are to be made?
In worst case civil war and anarchy (e.g. Somalia)
[Suggestion: You could mention and or discuss
a) The English Civil war when there was a strong disagreement between the King (Charles I) and parliament (Cromwell).
b) The American Civil War when the Confederate states were unwilling to agree how laws concerning them were to be made and the Union states wanted the ability to make stronger laws centrally]
Finally give them the chance to invent a ruling body either for their school or BB Company.
How would you like to see the rules and decision of your School or BB Company made?
Many schools have a schools council and companies have NCOs meetings. Do they think they should have power to make final decisions or be consultative bodies? Should those who have the ultimate responsibility have the ultimate say?
Back