Re: consensus child care"??? / wasAnother Bush Crime against humanity and Gaia

While our own community (10 households)  mostly uses consensus, we 
allow fall-back to voting though this very rarely happens. Working 
towards consensus, and in particular listening and seriously 
considering minority opinons, and looking for compromise and ways to 
keep everyone happy  has been important to our senese of cohesion. 
BUT allowing for votes, has proved critical in the community's past 
to prevent obstructionism from one person (not always the same 
person).

 From the stories I've heard from other communities,  and my own 
experience in activist groups,  I would strongly recommend against 
adopting formal consensus (with blocking) for any project, and in 
particular for a housing situation. For example several people at one 
community (which I'd prefer not to name) told me how they had been 
unable to make any significant decision for years, because of 
particular people who would block most things, despite the 
overwhelming majority wanting to move on some issue.  Also they had 
the issue of a particular personal emnity between two members (I 
think former lovers, or something like that), where if one brought up 
an issue, then the other would block it. This person had had to 
resort to having other people present their suggestions to avoid them 
getting blocked out of spite.

These are real situations, and occur many many times in consensus 
based housing situations, essentially you can easily end up with the 
tyranny of one.

- Mitra

At 7:09 AM -1000 1/2/05, forest wrote:
>on 1/31/05 9:50 PM, Ron Peltier at [email protected] wrote:
>
>Dude (don't know your name)
>
>ron:
>Somehow I got on this list and have been skimming through the 
>avalanche of messages saving the interesting ones, particularly 
>those regarding consensus.  When I read yours it struck me very much 
>like something I would say so I just had to drop you a message.
>
>ron:
>About three years ago my wife and I purchased some property with 
>three other families on the Island where we live with the idea of 
>doing an alternative minded development, emphasizing open space, 
>modest structures, sustain ability, etc.  All lofty stuff.  In order 
>to get a group together for this purpose we tapped into the local 
>established and successful cohousing community.  Individuals from 
>that group supported us and a couple actually bought in to the 
>property.  We ended up dividing into building sites, retaining a 
>fair amount of open space for organic gardening, using our state's 
>condominium law to create building sites as units, establish rules, 
>etc.  It's still a work in progress but we have worked through some 
>difficult issues.  One of the most difficult had to do with decision 
>making and the idea of consensus.
>
>ron:
>The Cohousing folks, and one of our unit owners, have kind of a 
>religious attitude towards consensus..  I tend to come from a 
>different direction.  Pure consensus, as I understand it, allows for 
>group members to block decisions when they feel it important to do 
>so.  I do not like the idea of one person holding up decisions. 
> Seems to me it gives too much power to individuals.  The response I 
>get to this is that I just haven't seen the light and don't really 
>understand what consensus is: I just haven't seen the light yet; 
>haven't evolved spiritually enough to see clearly.  It's very 
>frustrating because I do feel like I understand what it's all about 
>and still have a problem with one person holding the veto power over 
>an entire group, in those "once in a life time situations".  The 
>problem is that some people can be prone to quite a few :once in a 
>lifetime situations" that require them to block decisions.  These 
>the same ones who find it difficult to explain their ideas in a 
>manner which is compelling to the rest of the group and who need 
>their hands held during every difficult decision process.
>
>forest:
>i too have been in similar situations with consensus decision 
>making, i have been the sole blocker, and also been blocked by only 
>one for ideas i wished to pass thru....consensus imh-bs is a serious 
>undertaking, and now after more and more experience i like to be 
>very careful who i get involved with in consensus to avoid someone 
>who may be there just to polarize and disagree......good to 
>carefully get to know everyone before agreeing to join in group 
>consensus in the first place......one critical factor for me is 12 
>or less  council members, so i can get to know everyone on a more 
>intimate friendship level.....i realize consensus is not for 
>everyone, and that some who are not ready for it, may be creating 
>problematic situations in the future and attempt to hold back or 
>inhibit the groups progress......but i also invite and respect that 
>one blocker sometimes in order to look deeper into the decision we 
>are making or considering...sometimes it can be invaluable to the 
>success of the group to have one individual holding things up....it 
>seems to me if the group already has a strong foundation of 
>consensus agreement on the main mission of the group that these 
>blocking situations can be minimized and/or dealt with if all are 
>patient and considerate of each other....i also realize that there 
>are other options that are compromises to what you call "pure 
>consensus", such as "consensus minus one" approach of carloline 
>estes, an intentional community consensus teacher or guide....we can 
>get into consensus slowly and try various styles, one size fits all 
>is not the case, so good to have various options...but from me 
>current position and experience, i am interested in 100% unanimous 
>consensus in groups of twelve or less....i realize it is quite 
>idealistic, but that is the type individual i am, and as i said 
>before, i think the world problems are adding up, and in order to 
>survive we need idealistic options more than ever in his-story...
>
>ron:
>Ironically, while making the transition from an LLC, which purchased 
>our property, to a Condominium, we were legally bound to make 
>decisions by consensus.  I used this to block adoption of the pure 
>form of consensus into our new bylaws.  Somewhat ironic, but hey, I 
>felt very strongly about it.  I had no problem blocking perpetual 
>consensus by using temporary consensus.  In all truth, I wasn't the 
>only one in our group who had a problem with pure consensus.  Just 
>the one who made it clear I wouldn't accept it a a permanent fixture 
>under any circumstance.  What this eventually led to was a modified 
>consensus process.  Our bylaws provide for a majority vote over ride 
>after a proscribed time period of hand holding and discussion.  It's 
>sort of a compromise but does eliminate the possibility of someone 
>creating a problem and then protecting themselves by blocking 
>decisions intended to address that problem.
>
>forest:
>i agree with your position in larger groups for sure when i do not 
>know everyone very personally...am curious how many are in your 
>group who are voting and discussing????....i do however feel there 
>are ways to deal with a blocker who is blocking for no apparent 
>reason other than to get attention or polarize....in those 
>situations i attempt to get more peer group support in heartfully, 
>diplomatically, and assertively confronting that individual with 
>his/her reasoning....and to attempt to think of options or 
>compromises that we might all agree on....this i find as challenging 
>and interesting in the spirit of really trying to have everyone feel 
>good once the decision is made....if we already have a strong 
>foundation of consensus that i am happy about, sometimes those 
>little consensus issues that get blocked  by one can be dropped or 
>put on the back burner for further discussion later after new ideas 
>and time have come into play.....
>
>ron:
>It's always interesting to me how the mind of the true believer 
>functions.  If you don't agree with them you then represent a lesser 
>form of what is true and righteous: you then reflect imperfection by 
>virtue of your refusal to accept their truth as your personal savior.
>
>forest:
>it seems to me that all people are ready for growth and change in 
>varying degrees, no two are exactly at the same level or degree of 
>readiness for what i might call spiritual evolution......therefore i 
>think it is good to have all the various forms of decision making, 
>from majority rule to pure consensus, so we can all be invovled in 
>the style that suits us at various times in our life.....i think 
>each individual should have the right to choose when and where and 
>how much they wish to pursue ideals in life....at some point those 
>ideals lead us to group cooperation....so, we should be careful who 
>we get involved with and what the agreements are before agreeing and 
>carefully consider the degree of consensus we are ready or willing 
>to participate in.....
>
>ron:
>  This is fucking bull shit, arrogant, and narrow minded.  Many of 
>these types of folks are wonderful people but I believe they have 
>chosen to shut down a part of their mind in order to take refuge 
>from the complexity of life.
>
>forest:
>that is your point of view from your postition and interaction with 
>them, perhaps because you did not consider the ramifications of the 
>level of consensus in the beginning they were interested in, and 
>were not/are not ready to commit to what you call "pure 
>consensus"....i would do the same if the group is more than twelve, 
>but if twelve or less i would be willing to take on the challenge of 
>pure consensus and have many times already....even when i was 
>blocked off and on, i found it interesting and educational in 
>huWoMan interactions and spirit.....to each his/her own, sounds like 
>you made some good choices in modifying your group dynamics....best 
>wishes on your group efforts....aloha,
>
>
>--
>forest
>[email protected]
>http://www.lavazone2.com/forest/


--
Mitra Ardron: home/office +61-2-6684-8096  mobile +61-414-648-722 
[email protected]
Natural Innovation: www.naturalinnovation.org
Personal site and Blog: www.mitra.biz/blog
Skype: mitra_earth

Life is a Mystery to be Lived, not a Problem to be Solved