Trust. Thats the main factor here. We need to be able to trust our law inforsment, transparency would help but holding them to a higher moral standard is the real way. Also im getting very sick of people claiming inteligince while simultaneously mocking or insulting others. Basic psychology would tell you thats not how you change a persions views or mentality. If your more intelligent then others here pull them up with you dont kick them down

As an individual who has worked in law enforcement for years now in the US, I can say that things could be run much more effectively than we have been doing. There are plenty of individuals out there in the Law Enforcement community with good intentions, the right motivations, and the knowledge to perform their duties thoroughly. Unfortunately, there are those among us who fail to find one or more of those attributes. I believe that all people need supervision of sorts. The way in which they are supervised is the biggest point of discussion for many. Law enforcement in the US maintains a very public appearance to remind people that they are there and watching for illegal activities. Other forms of law enforcement fall to a more reactive style which responds to an incident once it occurs and stays behind the scenes otherwise. Power can corrupt no matter what the power is. This could be at the law enforcement level, the judicial level, or appellate level is that were to be included. Oversight is one way to try and dissuade corruption from entering into something as important as law enforcement and other aspects of government. I believe that there should be an oversight committee to review actions resulting in arrest, injury, or damage to property. Those found liable, whether law enforcement or other, should be held liable whether it's a matter of punishment, re-education, or merely a fine for the damages. If law enforcement is acting within the purview of their assignment then the liability should fall to those whose actions required law enforcement's response. Transparency within law enforcement is required in order to gain the trust of the public. Lack of transparency and miscommunication through media is what has caused the falling opinion of law enforcement in the United States. There are certain matters which cannot be divulged entirely due to the security of a certain assignment or investigation although a group of citizens could be appointed that are not part of the investigation that could oversee the progress made by law enforcement. Educate the public on the laws of Asgardia from the beginning. This would promote knowing what the limits are in order to ensure the safety of people and property within the Asgardian community. This would also prevent citizens from claiming to be uninformed or unfamiliar with the laws, a common occurrence in my everday encounters. Educate law enforcement in the spirit behind the law so that laws can be enforced effectively. This would include a study of the laws themselves, their interpretation so as to understand the spirit of the law and what it is meant to do. Law enforcement would need training in the laws, use of force (defensive tactics), negotiation, recognition of mental illness, first aid training, etc. I do not believe that law enforcement should be limited to only enforcing the law, they could also serve as another arm to protect citizens by providing medical assistance when needed. Currently in the US, law enforcement officers receive basic first aid certifications and the only other training they recieve is at their own expense or found to be optional through the department most of the time. Educate the judiciary in the interpretation and upholding of the law so that it may dissuade offenders from re-offending and others from offending in the first place. Whether you used a single judge to rule on a case or a panel of judges to limit bias and corruption is something to be debated. Lastly, create a branch within the Ministry of Justice and staff it with those who can review and determine if the correct decisions are being made (i.e. an Appellate wing). Wrong decisions or misinterpretations happen every day whether it's a legal matter or a discussion over a current event. The appellate level could serve as the last line to ensure that justice is carried out appropriately. As time goes on and technology advances, we may get to the point where AI can assist or replace humans in the capacity of law enforcement. There will always be a need for human oversight though to ensure that justice is fair. The single largest downfall I have seen in the US justice system is the amount of time spent by the courts to review, argue, decide, and sentence cases. It's not uncommon for a case to take upwards of a year before it sees the light of a courtroom. By no means do I support empowering law enforcement to act as the judge, jury, and executioner. However, we should ensure that justice is hastily carried out and done so in the name of truth and righteousness. Too often can offenders stretch out a case to where justice seems meaningless as the offense is nearly forgotten.

I think Otavio summarized the problems of a global historical narrative quite well, although I have a more cynical viewpoint on it. All history is fundamentally local. They are, after all, records of things that happened in a place by certain people. Attempting a global history requires abstraction and generally results in a more shallow coverage. These abstractions are often controversial and with good reason. For example, trying to fit history into a globalization perspective runs into the great controversy over whether globalization is a modern phenomenon, enabled by modern high-speed transport and communication, or whether globalization is as old as civilization. This is not a question that can really be answered, due to a lack of historical evidence. There are a lot of reasons to think developments in Europe had a significant and near-immediate effect on developments in East Asia and vice versa since at least the bronze age, but these were not directly recorded, perhaps because they are merely coincidences, perhaps because it happened through series of middlemen\merchants. Many simply pre-date the written record and have to be inferred from archaeological evidence. Global climate trends are also a possible culprit behind some of the apparent co-developments. Records on the volume and types of historical trade are especially lacking until the early modern period, when governments for the first time took an active permanent interest in trade policies. I think it useful to learn history through the perspectives of the people who lived it. This comes with cultural biases, but that's a good thing. People should learn not just what ancient foreigners did, but why they did it and how they thought about the issues. Just as we should learn how our contemporaries from different places and cultures think differently. It is more important to understand the diversity of human experience than it is to artificially unify that diversity into a convenient historical narrative. This also helps us to understand that our particular ancestors are, far enough back, essentially foreign to us.

@Jsraadt for Asgardia otherwise I wouldn't of said "i hope to partner with Asgardia when things have calmed down". I have had it explained to me how it could be seen as promoting, that was not my intent, my intent was to inform people that I am currently working on an idea very similar, which (as I have said from the start over a year ago) any one is free to help, as long as they realise this isn't about getting rich quick. I will try to explain myself more clearly in future so hopefully there are no miss understandings going forward. Best wishes,

Hi Isa, I think the class might be necessary. Please elaborate on the theoretical approach (see scope and policies post), the units of chunking (what is learned each day, a "scope and sequence"), end objectives for each unit/chunk, and how the learning of these chunks will be measured. Will your class use tests, or assessments? Will your class be criterion-based, or norm-based? What is the impact on and the impact from cognition, society, and virtue? Your rhetoric in the first post is noted, but you might consider creating a new post following the instruction for dialectics in the policy and scope subforum.