Constitution amendment: Remove second item from goals
Currently second point in Goals section of our constitution states, "We would like to engage with more young and educated citizens and bring positive change with their involvement."
As suggested by @Kannan V M https://codema.in/d/SFfYwagX/associate-requests/183 I think we can remove it. This was there from the original draft but no one thought it as a problem till now.
Poll Created Sat 30 Nov 2019 6:28PM
Remove second Goal from constitution Closed Thu 5 Dec 2019 5:11PM
We need to reword it as @Akshay objected to removing it.
Remove "We would like to engage with more young and educated citizens and bring positive change with their involvement." from constitution as it is not inclusive.
Results
Results | Option | % of points | Voters | |
---|---|---|---|---|
|
Agree | 66.7% | 4 | |
Abstain | 16.7% | 1 | ||
Disagree | 16.7% | 1 | ||
Block | 0.0% | 0 | ||
Undecided | 0% | 159 |
6 of 165 people have participated (3%)
Pirate Praveen
Sat 30 Nov 2019 6:28PM
Something that needs cleanup
Pirate Bady
Sun 1 Dec 2019 3:24AM
I wonder why no one, including me of course, didn't think about it before. Thanks @Kannan V M for pointing it out.
Abraham Raji
Sun 1 Dec 2019 3:37PM
Another aspect of the problem is what we consider as being educated. We have people without even primary education in our country building aircrafts, capable of classifying various species of snake on sight, various artist and authors who have played important roles in forming the conscience of the society. Calling them uneducated is simply prosperous. Education is beyond a degree. We need try and redefine what the term educated means. But until that changes we may have to take this out.
Abraham Raji
Sun 1 Dec 2019 3:45PM
Another aspect of the problem is what we consider as being educated. We have people without even primary education in our country building aircrafts, capable of classifying various species of snake on sight, various artist and authors who have played important roles in forming the conscience of the society. Calling them uneducated is simply prosperous. Education is beyond a degree or cert. We need try and redefine what the term educated means. But until that changes we may have to take this out.
Akshay
Wed 4 Dec 2019 2:24PM
It is just a goal. Removing the sentence doesn't make us suddenly inclusive towards non-young, non-educated citizens. Neither does existence of that sentence make us not inclusive. Extending that goal with more goals is a better approach, IMO.
Abraham Raji Wed 4 Dec 2019 3:31PM
@Akshay Don't you think that the statement might imply that we're only interested in engaging with educated youth? Tbh I believe what we mean by that is too engage with people who think in a more open, inclusive and 'modern' (for the lack of a better word) way that would bring good changes in the society. I think it's better if we remove or change it in a way that is more inclusive as there are people in our country who can't afford formal education or have boycotted the education system because of thier own reasons. On top of that I don't think anyone here thinks of education as a necessity to work with us or that a person's educational status is indicative of his/her intelligence or experience. So the clause 'educated citizen' is unnecessary in my opinion and hence should be removed.
Pirate Praveen Thu 5 Dec 2019 8:53AM
We want people to participate in our decision making process, ie, the crucial difference we propose and what makes us different from other organizations. So we must accept the requirement to participate (internet access and English) as a limitation. Unless we make conscious efforts to fix this, just removing the line will not make us inclusive (this is what I understood from Akshay's objection).
Akshay Wed 4 Dec 2019 3:32PM
What we consider as educated is educated (by whatever life experience it takes) to understand how a democracy works.
The young ones in a society have more to lose or gain because they will be living longer in that society.
Pirate Praveen · Wed 4 Dec 2019 2:57PM
@Kannan V M @Akshay I think both of you need to find a common ground that both can agree.