 This section is not so much on law and government, as on personal empowerment. To this point, we have been gathering information on what our legal system is, on what our United States government is, and how they have developed into the systems that we have today. The emphasis is on what we have, for citizens in this nation are the effective owners. This is one of the things that make the United States unique and wonderful. We the people can at any time step into effective ownership for whatever we agree needs to happen. And this focuses on the question of who we the people are. Just who has to be agreed? We have the general notion that it is citizenry, and we have the contrary understanding that people are inherently variable. The owner is going to be identified before anyone is going to pay attention to what we the people say or do. We have to find identity as part of our empowerment. It is only when we are agreed that we the people actually have a voice. In one sense, we have official identity in who gets to establish and promote the potency of an elected officer. It is a question of a citizen's right to a voice of specific leaders. It is when those who have a representative are agreed. They have a potential voice in directing their representative to represent whatever they agree upon. This is not a fixed body of voters. At the signing of a constitution, we the people were male adult citizens. This has changed. The answer is actually not fixed by our constitution nor by our laws on voting. It is the people and it is who we agree to honor as citizens. That is the key to this concept. We are owners and we own our nation, our government and our legal system. We are the ones who decide when we are agreed. And those who are given a public authority will answer to our voice because we are the source of all political and legal authority in the United States. This is the right of the sovereign citizen. The right of the owner to exercise ownership whenever and wherever we the people feel it is a good reason to do so. And so we need a human role. When can we say that we as humans come to effective agreement? The answer is that wherever 80% of the people see themselves as part of a group that has come to agreement. The remaining 20% or less will go along. It is a practical rule, not a scientific fact. It is established by general experience and is an element of all human society. The first requirement is that the people recognize that they are part of the same group. The citizens who direct the nation are the ones who recognize themselves as citizens of the United States. They must be together, recognizing each other as sharing in this group identity. The citizens who live in Nebraska recognize themselves as citizens of Nebraska and recognize that they share this with other people living in Nebraska. We have group identities. We belong to a church congregation, to a church denomination and to a religious community. We belong to a city, town, county, state and national grouping. We belong to the group of people in a school or who have passed through a school. These are identities that we share with others. Wherever 80% or more of any group of self-recognizing members agree, the 20% or less who might challenge will go along. At 20% agreement we start to have social significance. That is where a group can have a voice within the larger grouping. If 80% of a classroom of students find agreement, it becomes the will of the class of students. Those in the 80% can speak to what the class decides and the rest will go along recognizing that it is a corporate agreement. And what if our social scientists run studies and determine that it is actually 75% or 85%? What do we do with that? And the key for our action is that social scientists are not a significant portion of human society. If 80% of us agree to accept the general 80-20 rule, then our agreement, which seems natural to human behavior, is effective. Whether the scientists agree with us or not is immaterial. And neither is there any real significance to challenging one another and seeking which of their understandings is most correct. We are the owner and it doesn't matter which is most accurate or has the best scientific evidence and support. All that matters when it comes to our agreement is our acceptance of it. As a specific rejection, the voice of the majority is not the voice of the people. It is popularity, but it doesn't speak for we the people as a group. Majority votes do not require effective agreement. The fact that more people agree on one understanding than other people is how we do get divided into competing camps. The rule applies. There is no less effective way to do anything than to divide into competing camps so that one side can only accomplish what the other cannot prevent. The term majority rule is quite accurate. It is setting a majority to rule over a minority and it yields division, dissension, abusive potentials, and disempowerment of the people who engage in it. Majority is legally effective for doing things where a decision is required, where we are not agreed. As in which candidate to fill an office. It is not any exception. It is not an exception. It is not an exception. It is not an exception. We are not agreed. As in which candidate to fill an office. It is not any expression of a decision by we the people. It is an answer to which potential selection is more popular. The answer is that we the people are the real owners. And wherever we as a group decide to be the owner, we as a people as agreed will have no significant competition, but will be the only voice of the people. In the lessons covered in this course, you have been presented with one understanding after another that can be the basis for agreement within we the people. There have intentionally been addressed the three universal human values of personal freedom, personal prosperity and support for the human family. Being human values, their areas where an understanding of potential improvement provides a basis for human agreement in accord with the 80-20 rule. In our discussion sessions, we have been developing our own sense of how to come to agreement. We have been practicing empowerment in the local group of a class of students. We have been learning the fundamentals of honoring one another as part of the same well-defined people who can accept one another as members of this class. You do not have to be a leader to be empowered. We only have to come to agreement where people are indeed agreed. Any failure to honor one another is a real member of the class would prevent that agreement. We are only empowered as we accept one another. Even those who never say a word have to be part of the class and their agreement is important as part of we the people. Here is the perspective that brings us together. You cannot be empowered without empowering each other. As long as you have this perspective, you will be able to see how those who promote division are the ones who lose power for everyone. The empowerment you observe both for yourself and other class members is the empowerment of coming together. And it doesn't matter one bit who it is that originates or develops the understanding that brings us to agreement. Only that we are agreed at the level where we can find the voice of the class. Empowerment is ongoing. You have just opened the door, not yet entering in. That comes from our knowledge of statistical sampling. This is a well-developed area within our business science. We are able to address any normal population statistically. What is true for a sample drawn from a larger group will indicate what is true for the larger group. The same sort of things that bring you to agreement will also generally draw others toward a like agreement. When you empower each other as a group, you tend to empower everyone else as well. Your teacher is given public authority in the classroom, but it makes no difference to what you agree upon as personal decisions. That is your empowerment and is likely to have potency even with those outside the classroom who share in your understanding of needs and wants. That is the nature of humanity. That is the power of agreement in even a sampling of people. Those same sort of things that draw you to agreement will influence your instructor. That is a given and your ability to come to agreement upon anything will have an influence upon your class instructor. You are just beginning to find the human power that comes from agreement in the class. Whatever draws you together as a class sample has like potential to draw all people together. You are a sample of we the people. Again, the science of performance is here to support your being effective as a corporate owner of this nation, of its government and its laws. We have developed a statistical approach to sampling that can serve you in assuming authority of ownership by assisting you in determining when and where there is 80% agreement. The tool is statistical analysis. You do not have to be a statistician to use the knowledge just to develop it. All you need is the understanding that it is human, not scientific facts. This is what we can agree upon. All the science ads is a level of documentation to what you already accept because you are human. What the sampling plan does adds to this understanding that a certain level of agreement in a random sample will effectively indicate the potential for 80% agreement in we the people. Gaining that level of agreement in the sample opens the door to potential for bringing the voice of we the people into existence. This is also human. If people can see and understand why you are agreed and they are agreed, then they can also come to agreement just like you have. Finding agreement in the sample is a message to everyone else who is part of we the people. When they receive this, then they too will have a decision to make knowing the potential for them to be empowered through being one with we the people. When we the people speak, there is no significant opposition. When we the people find our voice, those in authority find that they too are part of we the people who are agreed. This course in law and government was prepared for your empowerment. It is not part of the source of power. You are. You are the source of all power and authority. You are in the others in the class who find themselves together as representatives of we the people. You do not learn to be empowered. Your potency comes from discovering that citizens are already empowered. What you learn here is a few areas where the power and authority of we the people are most likely to be found. Whenever and wherever 80% of a group of people come to agreement, the whole group is agreed. You as a class are a sampling of humanity and you represent the larger humanity that is we the people. When the class finds agreement, it indicates potential for we the people to also find agreement. Your practiced agreement in class is how citizens are empowered to agree as we the people.