All people who use the African Revolutionary Language do not share the same goals. Too many people have not satisfied their personal wants and needs. They will use the talk of African Liberation in an attempt to achieve personal satisfaction. Many people can be reasoning with different motivations, and while doing so they can realize different ways to satisfy their various wants and desires.

We all do not have to agree on the same 'one way' forward to correct this situation. We can disagree, while still doing works from our own vantage points. People will realize ways to act based on their awareness, and they should proceed with that, while continually reasoning out better ways. If, through their ongoing research and reasoning, they realize a better way, the only moral thing to do is to move to the better way. The key is, they should always be in search of better ways and be reasoning on it.

I know several groups that are doing work from their own vantage point, and I do not feel I need to build a direct alliance with them. I sometimes do not agree with their approach, but I can also see from how they are viewing things (and the other issues they have to work out), they are doing the best they can do. The multiple approaches allow people to work on different levels so a whole variety of needs and desires are being addressed at the same time.

I am reiterating this point: If people have better information to work with and/or through reasonings can see the correctness in another approach to doing things, they should move to that. If they do not act on what they claim is better, or if they are dishonest in the reasoning in an attempt to hold on to their ways, then only from that point I will consider their actions destructive.

To directly answer some of your questions (which are among some of the hardest questions posted on this board):

"If we say that all things should be open to reasoning, then at what stage will it be best to make binding decisions on ways to proceed?"

* Only when one is convinced the process they are using is based on a sound principle (one has to be always open to other views to test the principle).

"How can we ensure that what is changed is changed ONLY for our benefit?"

* First, we have to be clear on the goal, and have some integrity to be able to see when additional truths line up and enhance the process. E.g. In building a jig saw puzzle we usually get a picture of what is to be built. Then we proceed to putting the pieces together. One has to get a picture on the objective of life so one can have that picture to work with. There are some experiences people can get to help with this.

"In other words, how do we go about getting the right mix between flexibility and inflexibility? Is this something that is achievable by a collective consciousness?"

* No. It is achieved by individuals attaining a high degree of consciousness and being guided by that. There are ways to experience the truth of these states and use them as a guide.

I will leave room for others to respond to this tough but important set of questions.