[lbo-talk] Murray Bookchin on autonomy, consensus, democracy

[Voyou]

On Fri, 2011-10-21 at 22:27 -0400, SA wrote (quoting Graeber):
> > group. One might say that the function which in the US constitution is 
> > relegated to the courts, of striking down legislative decisions that 
> > violate constitutional principles, is here relegated with anyone with 
> > the courage to actually stand up against the combined will of the 
> > group (though of course there are also ways of challenging 
> > unprincipled blocks).

That reminds me, actually, of a caveat I should have mentioned in my
reply to Doug. Most of my own experience of consensus decision making
has been in Europe, and I think the US may well have a stronger
tradition of individualist anti-majoritarianism (I'm currently a TA for
an Intro American Politics class, and it's a struggle getting students
to articulate _why_ it's a good thing that Wyoming has as many Senate
seats as California - the assumption that "minority protection" in the
form of equal representation for smaller states is a good thing, is very
strong). So, even though I don't think Bookchin's theoretical arguments
against consensus are very strong, there may be reasons why consensus is
more likely to be interpreted in problematic ways in particular
contexts.

-- 

    "When placed in value-relation to the linen, the coat signifies more 

     than when out of that relation, just as many a man strutting about 

     in a gorgeous uniform counts for more than when in mufti." 

                                                            -- Marx, _Capital_
Voyou Desoeuvre                                         http://blog.voyou.org/