>I understand and agree with your reasoning as it pertains to whether or not
>it would be a good idea for the SM to create a rule mandating some kind of
>intervention to help troubled students. However, I don't see any reason why
>they could not do so if the majority so desired.
Are you saying you agree it's not a good idea, but a SM could do it anyway?
Okay, I suppose so. Ever heard of the tyranny of the majority? As it is a
democracy, a Sudbury school could do anything by majority vote, even make
themselves something other than a Sudbury school. I believe that, in the
scenario we're discussing, intervening in an official capacity falls
outside the Sudbury model.
There is no rule, no bylaw, that could not be democratically altered, even
if it diminishes the quality of the democracy. Ultimately, the only
protection for individual rights, the only guarantor of respect at Sudbury
schools is the culture of the school -- the desire of individual members to
preserve "the atmosphere of freedom, respect, fairness, trust and order
which is the essence of the school's existence" (to quote from our
firstname.lastname@example.org with the following phrase in the BODY (not the
subject) of the message:
unsubscribe discuss-sudbury-model [the-subscribed-email]
If you are interested in the subject, but the volume of mail sent is too much,
you may wish to consider unsubscribing from this list and subscribing to
This mailing list is archived at http://www.sudval.org/~sdg/archives
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon Nov 05 2001 - 20:24:29 EST