The idea of consensus was a seemingly straightforward topic, but so much detail and analysis is involved with the whole concept of consensus decision making, which greatly surprised me. The assigned articles really give a good feel for the concept, but they portray it in a very positive, almost biased way it seems.
A few preconditions exist which help consensus work more smoothly. The main thing is that everybody in the process in on the same level and will let their voice be heard. These are how the decisions are made. Instead of the standard, vote yes or no for one thing and majority rules, in consensus decision making, decisions are kind of sculpted from everybody's opinions and potential conflicts. The decisions are manipulated until it becomes something everyone can collectively agree on. A few other conditions for the process are cooperation, nonviolence, and patience among others.
This process has both strengths and weaknesses. Some of the main strengths are equality and true democracy. Everyone has a right to their opinion, and everyone's opinion collectively molds the final decision. In essence this is true democracy because the group is of the people, by the people, and for the people. The biggest and only inherent weakness is that this decision making can only be made in small communities. In no way could this ever be the process of a large country, because hearing the opinion of millions is just too impractical. This can only be used for small living and learning communities.
No comments:
Post a Comment