Achieving Agreement

Representatives from all factions of society should assemble in round-table discussions. They will have a heavy burden of responsibility—operating as “heads” of the human family. Without the sense that all of humanity is a single family, the representatives at the table will not succeed in arriving at just decisions.

Another necessary condition for the success of the discussions will be transparency. All deliberations must be broadcast live, including the quarrels, disputes, and the hard decision-making processes. Everything should unfold right before the eyes of the entire world. In a sense, it will be a new kind of reality show, but one whose consequences will affect each and every one of us, all the members of the human family. And just like a reality show, the viewers will have a say in the final decisions.

In our actual reality, the viewers, all of us, will also be seated at the table. People will have to decide on priorities. This will be a prolonged process that will require everyone’s participation and involvement. Clearly, it will not be a simple exercise, but because we are rebuilding our society from scratch, there will be no other way. Only when we include the entire human family in the decisions will we be able to consider ourselves a true family.

Studies indicate that when one is involved in the decision-making process, his or her involvement invokes a positive, caring attitude toward that process, whatever decision is reached. In other words, even when the final decision benefits other sectors of society before one’s own, people who were involved in making that decision are likely to support it, even if they did not initially approve of it [84]. Thus, the sense that citizens are being ignored by decision-makers, who are subject to the pressure of lobbyists, will be replaced with a feeling of social solidarity and trust.

In fact, the round-table modus operandi should be our mode of action in all our decisions. It should become part of the management paradigm of society and state. In the course of our lives, we will often have frequent discussions regarding our problems, weighing them, grading them, prioritizing them, and together deciding on how to solve them. The round table is a perfect means to teach us how to truly become a single family.

However, and this is important, seeing everyone—on the levels of city, state, or world—as a single family does not mean we should give up our views. On the contrary, all views and approaches have merit. The recognition that we are all a family dictates that we understand that others with different views also have a place in the family. But even more than that, we should regard differing views as a constant source of enrichment. They provide new perspectives, new approaches to solving problems, and new information that we could not have come to know were it not for views that are different from ours.

Raising the value of public benefit will help each of us relinquish our own views when necessary. Once we present our views, and then recognize that another’s view better serves the public interest, we will accept that other view. Just as in a family, the collective interest overrides all else.

Indeed, why can’t the world be like a family? Is this not the real meaning of social justice? Is there any other way to achieve and sustain it?

The beginning of this new worldview will likely not be a smooth ride. Differences and hurdles are to be expected. Nevertheless, as we see that process through to achieve genuine consensus, we will learn that an open discussion enables us to work out our differences and achieve broad agreement. Indeed, the round table is not merely a notion of open discussion among equal peers. It is also an educational process on national and international levels of unprecedented scope.

[84] Hal R. Arkes and Catherine Blumer, “The Psychology of Sunk Cost,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 35, 124-140 (1985), http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CCUQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcommonsenseatheism.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F09%2FArkes-Blumer-The-psychology-of-sunk-cost.pdf&ei=Uy4cT8v1KdDsOci89JkL&usg=AFQjCNFE8XVozdwg8RW_kdmY2LfgvVMDZQ&sig2=2NzX5HvZjbct06MbtqPqXw