Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: All Residents (homeowners) are HOA Directors

[Doug Huston (ldrnmsw]

This line of thinking has always intrigued me as well. I struggle  
with how to clearly articulate the feelings I experience when I hear  
the idea espoused in some form that the community is composed of the  
individuals/there is no community apart from the individuals who  
compose it. Of course it is true on an essential level, but I like  
these deeper explorations.

First, I see a parallel in our larger society. There is a view that  
our democracy works because disparate people and organizations and  
interests vie for their own needs and interests, and out of those  
entities competing to serve their own interests is born some solution  
that is "good enough." I think that where this approach has gotten us  
is tragic. Sometimes a minority or majority position wins; far too  
frequently because influence is gained through nepotism, money,  
intimidation, past favors come due, etc. The parallel with this in  
cohousing is that members simply express their desire or opinion -  
and then a solution is cobbled together. Positions/opinions are  
lobbied for through methods which may or may not be ethical or  
considerate of the sentiments of others - but is perhaps effective  
nonetheless. And "in the best interest of the community" can be  
invoked as a guise to "win" a conflict, rather than to serve the  
community's interest.

I would prefer members in cohousing (and society) to view themselves  
in a role in which they are stewards of something different, and dare  
I say more important than themselves. More important than them,  
because they are potentially creating something that outlasts them,  
as well being beneficial to more than just themselves. This different  
role, or stance, then becomes the important difference by which  
members potentially make decisions that benefit needs transcendent of  
their own needs. I have witnessed that there are many opportunities  
in cohousing to go after what one wants without much consideration  
for others. It seems that cohousing is inherently vague with the  
common goal aspect that Sharon rightfully states as important. It  
seems to me that cohousing is broad and vague. That's the good news  
and the bad news. Good because different communities create different  
traditions and physical surroundings and ways of relating, etc. Each  
community can have a different flavor/culture that is reflective of  
individuals who helped create it. Cohousing can incorporate a wider  
breadth of people because the door through which people enter is not  
narrow. The down side of that is that what defines one as in the  
group, or not in the group, is somewhat unclear beyond the simple  
fact that one lives in a home in cohousing. So what is in the best  
interest of the community is pretty tough to nail down. In cohousing,  
and in big societies that tolerate differences and encourage citizen  
input.

I appreciate these thoughtful discussions on the list serve.

idealistically yours,
Doug Huston (Bear Grass Village Cohousing - Ashland, Oregon)

On Oct 5, 2007, at 5:09 AM, Sharon Villines wrote:

> On Oct 5, 2007, at 4:18 AM, Joani Blank wrote:
>
> > How about "[Owners/members/residents] must act in the best interest
> > of the community even if at the expense of their own [indivdual]
> > interests."  It's not always easy, but it's the right thing to do,
> > dontcha' think, even when everyone is not on the Board.
>
> Whenever anyone posts this thought I have to object-- even though I
> know Joanie means this in the best possible spirit of community  
> living.
>
> Creating an opposition between one's own interests and those of the
> community is a false argument. The community is composed of
> individuals, all of whom have interests, who have chosen to form a
> group that is dedicated to a particular goal. There is no community
> apart from the individuals who compose it. If those individuals' best
> interests, in relation to the goal, are not served, there is no
> community interest being served.
>
> The unit of action is the individual and the community is a group of
> individuals who have a common purpose or aim or goal. Unless you have
> these two  measures -- the individual interests and the common goal
> -- the cult can take over.
>
> Serving the "best interests of the community" is too often just
> majority rule in another guise. "I don't want this but everyone else
> does so I'll go along 'in the best interests of the community'." The
> question is what are the goals of the group and is a decision in
> accord with those goals. If a majority makes a decision that is not
> in accord with that goal, is it a good decision? Does the goal just
> change because a majority wants it to change? It might, but only
> individuals can decide that. The "community" can't.
>
> Sharon
> ----
> Sharon Villines
> Coauthor with John Buck of We the People
> Consenting to a Deeper Democracy
> A Guide to Sociocratic Principles and Methods
> ISBN: 9780979282706
> http://www.sociocracy.info
> _________________________________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
> http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/