Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Formal Consensus

[Buzz Harris (buzz_harris]

Hi Brian.

Long time no see.  :-)  How did you get from
Massachusetts down to Florida?

Based on things that you have posted lately you seem
to be coming to the conclusion that some values of a
lot of people who are interested in cohousing conflict
with some of your values.

Specifically, many people of my acquaintance who are
interested in cohousing perceive an excessive focus on
individualism at the expense of community in American
culture.  This is not necessarily true of everyone,
but I think it applies to many.  I feel that way very
strongly, which is what leads me to seek a life in an
intentional community which really stresses
'community', including such things as consensus
decision-making, a commitment to live with and really
know my neighbors, share resources, etc.

Your view feels much more individualist & libertarian
to me.  There are 'themed' cohousing communities,
though it is my experience that there are fewer of
them.  Evangelical Christians, orthodox Jews,
communists, and others have created their own
cohousing groups.

Might I suggest that you consider starting a
libertarian or laissez-faire capitalist intentional
community?  There are a number of libertarians who are
interested in cohousing (for reasons that I cannot
figure out, but it seems to work for them).  If you do
not want to operate by consensus, then don't.  Work
out a system that works for you and that is consonant
with your values.  There are quite probably other
people in this country who would be interested in your
vision of living together, if you articulate it
clearly for them.  You'll never know if you do not
try.

Last, I do have a request.  I know that you do not
share some of the views that many of us here are
comfortable with.  I am not asking that you agree.  I
would ask, though, that you try to disagree a little
more tactfully, if you would be so kind.  No one likes
being called 'the BORG'...

I have felt your disillusionment through the words and
framing that you have chosen.  I hope that you can
find your way through that to a version of community
living that will work for you.  It may not be the
ideal of a lot of people on this list, but so what? 
I'd be willing to bet that people here would still
share their experiences with you if you begin to
create your own group.  Take from it what you like
and/or think will work and leave the rest.

Thanks,

Buzz
Common Hearth Cohousing
Eastern Massachusetts


--- Brian Bartholomew <bb [at] stat.ufl.edu> wrote:

> I think it is comparing apples to apples to evaluate
> all the systems
> of group decisionmaking being discussed with this
> question:
> 
>       What percentage of all residents have to consent,
> to impose a
>       cost on what percentage of all residents who do not
> consent?
> 
> I tally the results into categories as follows:
> 
>      1. The laissez-faire, completely unregulated,
> free market values
>       consent the most.  If you don't consent to buy that
> car, no
>       group of shoppers or owners can override your
> nonconsent.  One
>       person can make a nonconsent stick.  Only one
> person has
>       mentioned that her forming coho group had no voting
> fallback.
> 
>      2.       Two (unrelated?) people can make a
> nonconsent stick.
> 
>      3. The percentage to make a block stick depends
> on the
>       circumstances of that meeting.  Some a% of the
> residents
>       attend a meeting, where b% of the attendees agree
> that a
>       nonconsent is "invalid", "unprincipled", "contrary
> to our
>       values", etc.  The consent-overriders may not be a
> majority of
>       residents.  In this situation the nonconsenter must
> continually
>       marshal voting-style support for their position,
> and get
>       enough block-supporters to attend each and every
> meeting.
> 
>       I think this analysis of power mechanics reveals
> cohousing
>       consensus to be indistinguishable from the US
> Congress.
>       Congressmen also claim to be "representing" those
> people whose
>       consent they don't have, using shared values of
> Mom, apple
>       pie, and pork.  If cohousings give nonconsenters
> more of what
>       they want, it is because the participants do that
> by choice;
>       it is not required by most processes I've read
> about here.
> 
>      4.       At least one cohousing has CC&R's that say
> if quorum isn't met
>       at a capital expenditure meeting, they can keep
> calling
>       meetings, but with each meeting needing half the
> quorum of the
>       preceeding meeting.
> 
> At this point, I'm quite disillusioned about
> "consensus".
> 
>                                                       Brian
>
_________________________________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives
> and other info at: 
> http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/
> 
> 
> 


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Buzz Harris
Writer, activist & political researcher

Interested in Cohousing in Massachusetts?
http://www.common-hearth.org


My thoughts on corporate social responsibility? One should always encourage 
cannibals to diet.

http://civic-oracle.livejournal.com/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Don't pick lemons.
See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html