[Oe List ...] Want to discuss consensus?
Herman Greene
hfgreene at mindspring.com
Wed Mar 3 08:37:01 CST 2010
Thanks for the compliment Carlos. Tim, your thoughts are well taken. While
one could say that what is going on now is "just politics" I agree with you
that if this is politics it is standing in the way of consideration of
important issues.
Is spirit of collaboration and dialogue different than consensus? Certainly
on any large scale there will not be agreement for example on what to do
about climate change (a/k/a planetary destabilization). There are
ideologies, cultural and cultural convictions, psychological factors (from
archetypes to simple fear), in the case of climate change the ideas that we
can manage nature and the power of free markets, wildly imperfect knowledge,
economic and other interests that necessarily make the process messy, though
I do think a different ethos and spirit of collaboration could change the
nature of the debate, but not the difficulty of it. I am astounded sometimes
when the hard fought battles of the past seem to appear as new issues and
have to be re-fought perhaps in every generation. I thought, for example,
that is was clear that the framers of the American Constitution wanted
separation of church and state. Now this is up for debate again, with some
arguing that is not what they meant.
Which leads back to what does "participatory government" mean? The Tea
Baggers certainly think they are participating. On the surface I think the
democratic system (of the republican nature where people elect
representatives) is the best system. It's not consensus by any means, but it
does allow for change, witness the election of Obama, and earlier of Reagan.
Yet no sooner does the public elect Obama then they become impatient because
the problems are not solved. Left goes after the administration for not
being Left, Right goes after the administration for not being Right. Some
would argue that the corporate and money interests sail happily along above
it all. If this is democracy it is messy. (On democracy I always think of
you when I see your cousin (?) Mary Landrieu at work.)
On the issue of small group consensus, I have experienced the tyranny of the
group where a leader of insight is drowned out by the common mind of the
past. The creative is submerged in the way it has been done. I've also seen
that those with charismatic power are the ones who can move the consensus
when things are stuck and they can have inordinate power that way.
I do know that political is more than three triangles on the social process
triangles. It is an issue of how can wisdom and creativity be given the best
chance to prevail in a complex, pluralistic world. The three triangles give
areas to consider but they are only placeholders. While I once was a
political science graduate student and studied political theory, it has been
a long time since I have really given deep thought to governance. I am
dealing tangentially with that now as I consider issues of "Earth
Jurisprudence" and am presently writing on the rights of nature (I think
nature has rights, but the more difficult issue is rights in relation to
what, and the value of wholes and parts). (I'm a very small and
inconspicuous voice but am writing an article on this.)
I won't try to wrap this up, just some thoughts. I will add one more thing,
in the book I earlier mentioned by David W Orr on Down to the Wire, I think
he rightly makes the point that ultimately only government has the power to
take the steps needed to turn the tide on ecological issues. The problems of
course are governments, governance and what the constituents are prepared to
ask their governments to do, and the need at some levels for global
governance.
Herman
_____
From: oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net [mailto:oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net] On Behalf
Of Carlos R. Zervigon
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 9:46 PM
To: 'Order Ecumenical Community'
Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] Want to discuss consensus?
Tim
For not being well thought out, WOW!
Carlos R. Zervigon, PMP
Zervigon International, Ltd.
817 Antonine St.
New Orleans, LA 70115 USA
504 894-9868 Mobile: 504 908-0762
carlos at zervigon.com
http://www.zervigon.com
From: oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net [mailto:oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net] On Behalf
Of Tim Casswell
Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 6:50 PM
To: Order Ecumenical Community
Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] Want to discuss consensus?
I think this is an interesting debate. It has produced a heartfelt if not
altogether thought through meditation of my own...
As we go towards a hung parliament in the UK we are facing a period where
consensus and collaboration will be precisely the process skills that are
needed. In almost every other country apart from the USA the democratic
process is multiparty coalition government. In our two party polarisation we
watch our politicians stuck into their party lines locking horns as if they
wete in court in a shockingly wasteful display of adversarial stupidity.
As we face the complexity of global financial, ecological, political, and
resource challenges it will be probably through conflict but just maybe
through collaboration that we work out our salvation.
I am weary of the "Reality" TV gameshow approach the personality politicians
adopt which effectively excludes us from the social process other than as
consumer - voters.
The situation before us now requires collaboration. I yearn for a politician
or a party that declares a stand for consensus.
A party that declares that the global financial, ecological, political, and
resource situation we face is so complex, so critical, it is a state of
catastrophe in which we all are faced with the choice of caring for one
another or competing, looting, and fighting with one another over broken
pieces and depleted resources.
The adventure we face today is so overwhelming it probably cannot be won or
even survived. However I know which way I want to die. In a community of
people listening, caring, dancing, chancing, cherishing, in a slow,
frustrating, exquisite, subtle, elusive, consensual community of human
relationships Community is still the most fascinating dance of all.
I think the tide is turning. We are tired of the adversarial alpha male good
shepherd rhetoric we once admired and flocked to in our herds. Now we know
it really is in our hands and we have a choice. Consensus, collaboration,
trust, listening, understanding, generosity, responsibility, and decisions
based on love, or conflict, suspicion, hostility, hoarding, and decisions
based on fear.
I long for a politician to declare "I stand for consensus. If you elect me
it is because you know I can do nothing for you just that you dare to share
a dream of a collaborative sharing world where rights are what we give
rather than fight for. Voting for me is a vote not for what you can get but
for what you can give and a declaration that we are choosing to take up the
challenge of this awesome moment ourselves"
Wasn't this the language of MLK and Ghandhi?
I see again the scene towards the end of that film where the field is full
of people who were once slaves declaring "I am Spartacus". Slaves no longer
to charisma, power, manipulative political forces. The complexity of the
catastrophe makes it simple. This is the time for each to dream and if you
let me be in your dream you can be in mine.
Let's dance with Zorba let's sing with don Quixote, let's shout our dreams
to the empty sky with Thelma and Louise, and work out our consensus with
diligence.
Consensus is not the abandonment of beliefs. It is the art of human being.
Tim Casswell
creativeconnection.co.uk
07956 851 852
On 2 Mar 2010, at 02:43, "Carlos R. Zervigon" <carloszervigon at gmail.com>
wrote:
If you are pure in your stance you finally are a group of one that can get
nothing done. Stand on your principles and be ineffective. Politics is a
healthy science that acknowledges that we live in community and must make
decision s as such. Effective and creative leadership helps form consensus
on a creative, inclusive, depth and futuristic context but does not bully
it's way through charismatic demagoguery. Margaret Thatcher was a guardian
of the illusionary past and did not contribute much to a future for the
planet. Herman Greene however has made his mark many dimensions above
Margaret.
Carlos R. Zervigon, PMP
Zervigon International, Ltd.
817 Antonine St.
New Orleans, LA 70115 USA
504 894-9868 Mobile: 504 908-0762
carlos at zervigon.com
http://www.zervigon.com
From: oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net [mailto:oe-bounces at wedgeblade.net] On Behalf
Of Herman Greene
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 11:00 AM
To: 'Order Ecumenical Community'
Subject: [Oe List ...] Want to discuss consensus?
I received this morning meditation today:
Lord, guard me in my convictions.
"To me consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs,
principles, values and policies in search of something in which no one
believes, but to which no one objects--the process of avoiding the very
issues that have to be solved merely because you cannot get agreement on the
way ahead. What great cause would have been fought and won under the banner
'I stand for consensus?'" <image001.gif>-- Margaret Thatcher in a 1981
speech as reported in The
<http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1103092727795&s=3496&e=001eUju4wGW3ExAKBDtBm2e
hjlXGb3YxBf-t0TT45xntPymCjCHoa9cvglQCnaVSN6AAkSTC-KjNqdp3cyKQ8pBNcolEOJ8IuyQ
FCTahsyOlp0=> Wall Street Journal
_____________________________________________
Herman F. Greene
2516 Winningham Drive
Chapel Hill, NC 27516
919-942-4358 (phone and fax)
hfgreene at mindspring.com
Skype: hgreene-nc
_______________________________________________
OE mailing list
OE at wedgeblade.net
http://wedgeblade.net/mailman/listinfo/oe_wedgeblade.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe_wedgeblade.net/attachments/20100303/6c003db1/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the OE
mailing list