ir230@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (john wavrik) (02/10/91)
ANSI and AMERICAN EDUCATION
I am, perhaps, more conscious than most people that messages posted to
this newsgroup are sent to people around the world. In recent
postings, several people have used the term "democracy" in connection
with the proceedings of the ANSI team. I feel very embarrassed at the
impression this gives those in other countries of our system of
government. Please understand that the problem stems from a fault of
the American Education system.
The American Education system has deteriorated over the years. At one
time, all children received education (at about age 10) in history and
government. Apparently, over the past few years, subjects like
computer programming have pushed aside "history and government" -- and
we now produce students who can program a computer, but haven't the
slightest idea how their own country is governed.
Let me draw on my own 5th grade education (which occurred when UNIVAC
was the most powerful computer on earth -- so we were still taught
these things). Mrs. McGillicutty taught us that democracy meant,
literally, "rule by the people". She went to great lengths to point
out that "democracy" does not mean "mob rule" or even "majority rule".
The idea, going back to Greek times, is to form a system of government
in which all citizens have equal status. As implemented by the
founding fathers of America, the government is partitioned into
several bodies. Each body has separate primary responsibilities, but
each is involved in an elaborate system of checks and balances against
the others. An essential component of the government is a judicial
system -- a protection against unjust laws (among other things).
The original Senate, for example, consisted primarily of landowners --
who could afford the expense of attending meetings several times a
year. It was assumed that members of the Senate represented vested
interests -- and that, if left to their own devices, they would not
act in the best interest of all the people. The power of the Senate is
tamed by the House of Representatives -- greater in number, and
elected to represent the people. In most important respects, the two
bodies deliberate separately but must act jointly. Legislation passed
by these two bodies must be approved by the Administration (headed by
the President) which is also charged with carrying out the legisla-
tion. All laws must pass scrutiny by the Judiciary to make sure they
are consonant with both the letter and spirit of the Constitution and
the body of Law.
I am sorry if any of you have gotten the impression that there is a
resemblance between the way the ANSI team is trying to make a Standard
for Forth and the way the United States is governed.
P.S. I have been unable to find the quote about democracy which has
appeared twice in this newsgroup. I believe it is due to
Winston Churchill. While looking, however, I found another
quote by Sir Winston that says a lot (to me) about setting
language standards:
"If we open a quarrel between past and present, we shall
find that we have lost the future."
John J Wavrik
jjwavrik@ucsd.edu Dept of Math C-012
Univ of Calif - San Diego
La Jolla, CA 92093 wmb@MITCH.ENG.SUN.COM (Mitch Bradley) (02/11/91)
Okay, so Brad and I have used the word "democracy" incorrectly. As Steve
Martin would say, "excuuuuse me". I realize that this is yet another
example of my shallow education, having chosen to quote Steve Martin
instead of the redoubtable Mrs. McGillicutty.
However, in our quest for linguistic accuracy, let us not lose sight of
the intended point, which I believe was:
ANS Forth decisions are made by voting.
Call it what you will, that is what I meant. I hereby promise to refrain
from using the word "democracy" anymore.
Some observations:
No one person has absolute authority. There is no computer that is
programmed to objectively evaluate every committee decision according
to a preprogrammed set of rules. There are guidelines and stated
goals and principles, but their application and interpretation is
subject to the vote. Anyone can join the committee. It is true that
not everybody can afford the time commitment or the expense of maintaining
membership, but the committee has made every effort to minimize the
expense (X3J14 is probably one of the least expensive ANSI committees).
Short of having some "sugar daddy" to subsidize the effort, I don't see
how the barriers to joining could be much lower. No "loyalty oath" or
"pledge of allegiance to the principles" is required for members; show
up at two consecutive meetings, and you are a full-fledged voting member.
Most decisions involve some amount of compromise; nobody gets exactly what
he wants, and most people get something they can live with.
Furthermore, I believe that outside people *are* listened to, and quite
carefully. At the last meeting, I personally championed quite a few
issues that were raised by outside people. Several of those issues
passed; all were given serious consideration, and subjected to a vote.
Nobody will be forced to implement or to use ANS Forth. Personally,
I plan to both implement it and use it, because I think it is a big
step in the right direction.
Mitch