[From American Mensa Committee Annual Report of Officers, Mensa Bulletin #226, May, 1979; Rubin's final report as a member of AMC.]
 
[The first part of the report summarizes the history of American Mensa's several administrations.]
 
Good governors want and need an interested and fair-minded constituency, not an uncritical cheering section or a squad of snipers.  Good governors are both self-confident and cooperative, neither a committee of yes-men (-persons) nor a collection of self-seekers.  Mensa has not had perfect government, for that does not exist anywhere, but it has had good government for many years.  The best I can leave you with now are some verbal generalities about how to preserve and improve Mensa's government.  
 

In selecting governors or leaders, try to avoid those who feel they must maintain tight control, have difficulty in dealing with ambiguity or uncertainty, and prefer a regime of secrecy.

I have been told that my commitment to decentralization is a peculiar personal ideological whim.  That is a half-truth.  Of course, there is a strong ideological basis for decentralization.  In a society that uses the round table as its fundamental metaphor strongly hierarchical government is a dangerous inconsistency that threatens the qualitative character of Mensa  But centralized government is, as a practical matter, also weak and fragile.  Centralization limits the behavioral repertoire of the organization to the capacities and biases of the few at the top of the pyramid; it deprives the society of a valuable redundancy that complements one's weaknesses with another's strengths and makes the whole stronger.  On the scale between order and anarchy, do not sell anarchy short as a useful agent for improvement and growth.

Eschew the models of the corporation or the military which are so attractive because of their familiarity and superficial or theoretical effectiveness.  Mensa should be governed in accord with its own unique qualities.  It has no bottom-line profit objective to meet nor any war to win.  Mensa is as multi-goaled as its membership is numerous and should be inventing new modes of government, not copying old ones uncritically.  Indeed, the modern corporation, even with its conventional profit orientation, is finding increasing difficulty in justifying control through a hierarchy.

In selecting governors or leaders, try to avoid those who feel they must maintain tight control, have difficulty in dealing with ambiguity or uncertainty, and prefer a regime of secrecy.  There are, of course, occasions for control and for secrecy, but they are fewer than many suppose, and there should be an institutional and personal bias against control and secrecy that requires them to be explicitly justified rather than embraced by preference.

Do not lean too heavily on the law for guidance.  A certain amount of law is, of course, necessary to provide an objective structure of government and to convey certain expectations and norms, but if pressed too far the law will quickly lead you into verbal quibbling and away from the  problem you are trying to solve.  The law can also breed a special class of lawyers who will take government away from the members.  What counts far more than the law is the quality of those who apply it.  Good law will not save you from bad people, but good people can ameliorate bad law.

Instead of viewing the organs and officers of Mensa's government as arranged in a hierarchy or authority, regard them as functional elements that must cooperate to make the whole society run smoothly.  A certain amount of overlap of function provides a strengthening redundancy; too much overlap creates destructive rivalries and tensions.  Even if you choose to be an observer of rather than a participator in Mensa's government, cultivate a discrimination between a natural and useful divergence of view and assertion of one's own interests on the one hand and an ego-driven reaching for control over others' interests.  Not every difference can be composed, but a good faith discussion based on allocation of functions is likely to have a constructive outcome.

As important as good government and efficient administration are, as natural as it may be for those who govern to identify the government structure with Mensa, the society is not its government.  The essence of Mensa is the quality of the relationships it engenders among it members, and government is merely a means, not an end. . . .  Although the words of [these] suggestions may seem abstract and theoretical, Mensa has actually been governed under the policies described and has flourished.  Reality when put into words becomes idealized and elusive, but unless experience is verbalized and communicated we are liable to drift back into old paths and be compelled to relearn old lessons.