im curious on how ariel is going to question the family compared to manny questioning the un soldier. And if it will be similar because he taught her or if it will be different because of the places that are living. Union creek being more of a community and the swamp being, well a swamp.
I have been slowly reading my way through it a few posts at a time. I find it thought provoking. So far the internal thoughts of the main character between what he is doing, how his people are viewing what he is doing and the debate with himself over the actions he feels forced to take and the impact on himself, his family , and possibly how humanity is changing to adapt to the new normal. As someone with a homestead that can imagine himself placed in similar circumstances, much of it rings pretty plausible. Fortunately I'm a hard old fellow who does what has to be done if he gets stuck with the duty. The old Hue and Cry and banishment / shunning were old methods of managing groups in many cultures. I linked it but Hue (sometimes hew) and cry was the action of the community hollering when someone committed a crime and everyone in the community dropped what they were doing and ran to help. (also used for fires and such) Shunning was a lessor form of banishment where for a given amount of time no one in the village would acknowledge the existence of or trade with or have anything to do with an individual who had overstepped village morals and rules but not sufficiently for banishment. If they had family that would feed them they could live through this and hopefully regain a modicum of membership in the village, through the passage of time or some heroic act. Banishment was literal telling someone to leave and not come back, either for a time period or in worst cases forever. This is kind of what was done with that messikin kid that was trying to help rape the girl. They would have dug two graves had it been me, I'm not as nice as your main guy. Anyway some of my post apocalyptic world thoughts on how law might evolve coupled with a basic respect for human life, and the right to own and control the fruit of each individual's labor by that individual. I would also like to see more exploration of group leadership and the balance between hearing all the group, vs. the need for decisive leadership / command & control during emergencies. I have thought of the Indian concept of peace and war chiefs. When war the war chief leads and is followed almost as a general, but in peace he steps aside and the peaceful ones run the day to day activities, only keeping with concepts like provide for the common defense as a war chief item he weighs in on. For example the war chief would be consulted on training or equipment or things needed to keep the community safe, but where to put the new garden only if it placed community defense in jeopardy. This would allow for exploring the usurpation of power under needs rules, sort of how fed gov usurps power using the interstate commerce commerce clause and how far it is allowed to go in group dynamics could add some interesting conflicts. well those are just things it sparked in my thinking. They by their very nature are my ideas and JMTC< YMMV. It is a good story or I would not have had my thinking sparked by it nor wasted my time commenting on it. I am sure over time I will get caught up to current posts. Thanks for it Thad