Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Consensus vs. Majority Voting

[don i arkin (shardon5]

Sharon V.: 
> A majority vote says I don't care what "you" think, "we" don't have to
pay
> attention to you. When a group reaches this point the disagreeing
> membersare disenfranchised and will live on the margins of the group
with
> their discontent or leave. 

 Chris Scheuer:
I think that is an oversimplification of the voting experience, which may
be more true of our quite limited national voting experience, but is not
neccessarily true in a smaller community. Having a rich democratic
experience, where you are afforded more opportunities to vote on
personally
important issues (as well as ones less important) means that you "win"
some
and "lose" some and in the process I believe  you come to understand the
nature of compromise and hopefully the proces becomes smoother over time.
I
would think that rarely does the same group "lose" every vote.....It may
be perferable to reach consensus, but if in the process of striving for
that, members become burnt out and stop attending or participating as
actively aren't they "disenfranchised"? 
**********
 I am also a member of Becky Schaller's community, where the paralysis
and discouragement caused by bogged down consensus process over the
playground wall, etc. does in fact lead directly to disengagement by
community members, which seems to me to call for major remedies.  So, I
appreciate Rob Sandelin's veteran advice about the two tries at consensus
followed by 3/4 majority voting if necessary.  And I found Chris
Scheuer's follow-up message re: voting persuasive as well.  
        I too think that Sharon V.'s nasty description of majority
voting's meaning and message is way too simplistic and unwarranted.  It
all depends on the *attitudes* of the people involved.  I have seen
plenty of the "I don't care what you think, and I don't have to pay
attention to you" stuff in efforts to reach consensus as well.  
Obviously, success at true consensus requires lots of time, committment,
study, and training, not to mention some self-analysis and personality
adjustment.  Unfortunately, many of us who want to live in cohousing
simply don't have all of the above requirements, and no amount of
cajoling will bring it to pass.  Sharon obviously has read a lot, and I
appreciate her insights into Sociocracy and other ways to help us operate
at least with a *consensus attitude,* the goal we all agree on.  
        But, if we are to survive and flourish as cohousing communities
with truly diverse populations, (some of whom place a much higher value
on the social interaction aspect of cohousing than they do on the high
minded but challenging consensus process,) then we absolutely must
address the energy drain and disengagement that does result from
over-tedious and paralyzing group process.  Sharon says that the answer
is easy, just "use better process."  But, reality begs to differ.  I do
think we need to guard against a tendency to be doctrinaire about
cohousing process, while at the same time trying to raise our
consciousness to a more evolved level of human interaction.  

        Another Sharon, from Sonora Cohousing in Tucson.
_______________________________________________
Cohousing-L mailing list
Cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org  Unsubscribe  and other info:
http://www.communityforum.net/mailman/listinfo/cohousing-l