[New-imc] network membership application for TN IMC

[PseudoPunk]

Arc wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 10:37:01AM -0500, Ryan Smith wrote:
> 
>>g. Adopt a decision-making policy that is in alignment
>>with consensus principles which include open,
>>transparent and egalitarian processes,
>>Regarding consensus, we have adopted the principles of
>>the peace coalition.  In all efforts we strive for
>>consensus as the modus operandi of the TN IMC.  When
>>consensus is not possible we will make decisions by
>>3/4 majority vote.
> 
> 
> 3/4 majority fallback vote is not consensus.
> 
> The principals of consensus, which are important because they create a
> positive atmosphere of social change and equal participation, rely on
> the individual's ability to speak his or her own truth.  The power of
> blocking, even if it is never used, must be present to ensure that no
> voice is ignored.
> 
> Any form of majority voting, wether it be 50%+, 2/3rd's, 3/4'rd, or even
> "consensus minus one", is not consensus. It promotes a social atmosphere
> where participants play political games within the group,

honestly,

that's it arc,
the only one playing disruptive political games in here is you.

Bart



 forming
> alliances and, over time, either creating divisions within the group or
> one group becomming dominant and removing everyone else from the group.
> Even with consensus minus one, when one individual cannot block on their
> own they'll "team up" with another member and mutually support
> eachothers blocks.  Not only are such divisions self-destructive but it
> creates a tense social structure where new members feel the need to join
> one of the divisions, also called a block or clique, or leave the group.
> 
> Having majority voting to consensus is just for appearences sake.  Very
> few people will ever block in consensus if they know the group will then
> vote anyways.
> 
> Consensus is about everyone "winning", about everyone being able to work
> with the decidions being made by the group.  It's not easy, it's a
> process of social change within the individual members as much as the
> group itself, and the group may find itself "held back" by new members
> who insist on blocking everything they dont agree with, using the power
> to block as a way to attempt to control others in the group.  This can
> often be kept in check by requiring voting members to contribute to the
> IMC and through creating a social atmosphere where this is unacceptable.
> 
> Any form of majority voting, wether it be 2/3rds, 3/4rds, or consensus
> minus one, is a "win - loose" situation.  It creates an atmosphere where
> members feel the need to have power over others, to play silly political
> games and where they feel defensive against other members of the group.
> While the group may be more productive, decidions made faster, it
> results in the social fabric of the group breaking down and eventually
> the group becomming the opposite of the world we strive to create.
> 
> We've seen what it leads to, the exact same things I described above
> continue to this day in NYC - where the IMC is divided into three
> distinct fractions, where members of one group were kicked out of the
> IMC (for being Anarchists) despite several people blocking it, where the
> video crew has found it nessesary to move into a seperate space for
> social-political reasons.. while the IMC as a whole is quite productive,
> at what social cost does this productivity come at?

-- 
<Sander> 99% van jnm'ers denken er ook zo over
<christoph> stalinistische scores

http://wvl.indymedia.org  |     bart at indymedia.org
http://thepits.be         |     bart at thepits.be
http://pseudopunk.be      |     icq: 48682266

gebruik vrije software -- Debian GNU/Linux -- http://debian.org

gpg --keyserver keys.indymedia.org --recv-keys be196251