[lbo-talk] Re: consensus-direct-representative democracy etc

Shane Taylor s-t-t at juno.com
Thu May 29 15:25:36 PDT 2003


Gar Lipow wrote:
> Nope - the consensus fetish can be found in all parts of
> the left (though concentrated more heavily among
> anarchists, I have encountered it in Marxists and
> liberals and social democrats). And there are plenty of
> anarhists and PE people who don't insist on either
> consensus or face to face participation.

The devotion to consensus is also common, in my experience, among the direct action crowd. Who are the PE people who don't require the consensus process or face-to-face participation? Anything of their's available online?


> Looking at all how both capitalist "democracies" and "Marxist
> Democracies" have worked out, I think something of the sort
> would be the best compromise between the endless meetings
> of true particpatory democracy that seem allow one type of
> minority to take control and and elitism of conventional
> representative democracy trhat allows a different kind of
> minority to take control.

I take your points, but with one digression. How do you compromise between face-to-face, consensus-based position and electing representatives (whether one-party, two-party, multi-party, etc.)? Endless meetings and one-party states are not two poles between which we'll find the answer, but two pitfalls to be rejected. That is, I don't see any merits to draw from the consensus process, as opposed to voting in some fashion. Granted, that's hardly an answer to what should be done, but it is an elimination of what, in my opinion, should be shunned.

Many consensus-based groups strive for consensus, then vote. But consensus is preferred, and there is an inherent prejudice against resorting to votes. The minority obstruction that I've encountered is when one or two people have a "principled objection" and do not agree to stand aside. Because of how this usually plays out, I think consensus is self-destructive, especial if it's more than a dozen people without clear unanimity of belief. It enshrines a single-mindedness of purpose as the highest virtue.

It often involves a bait & switch. Consensus is billed as the greatest realization of democracy, but when deliberation dispels an assumed consensus, deliberation is quickly vilified. Through this, consensus engenders a unity as false as One Nation Under God or United We Stand.

That is the internal contradiction of the consensus process: hyper-individualism and false unity.

-- Shane

________________________________________________________________ The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list