What is really
destructive of the integrity of the group is a situation where one
person or a handful of people are able to block the desires of the
overwhelming majority. When such a situation arises - and it does
frequently in consensus-model groups - it makes a mockery of the
assertion that "consensus... allows each person equal and complete
power in the group". On the contrary, in a situation where
100 people want to do something, and one person doesn't and refuses
consensus, consensus ultimately hands over all the power to one
person, and totally disempowers everyone else.
One Vote for Democracy
Circumstances changed partly because people's consciousness changed. People who one day were sitting at home, politically passive, were suddenly in the streets in their thousands and then hundreds of thousands. Something happened in their consciousness - they suddenly felt it was possible. A mental burden lifted, they felt able to go out into the streets and started to believe change was possible. And because so many other people felt the same way it suddenly became possible. And in the course of a few months those regimes just toppled.
Interview - The overthrow of the Stalinist regimes in Eastern Europe
Like a routed army, battered by the defeats it has suffered in recent years, much of the left seems to be in wholesale retreat, indiscriminately abandoning not only the useless dogmas of Leninism and social democracy, but the principles and analytical tools it will need to re-group in the future.
Thinking About Self-Determination
The inefficient socialistic health care system sends him off for treatment within ten minutes - not too shabby, most of us might say - but it takes a lot more than efficiency and high-quality appropriate care to please a National Post columnist.
National Post columnist traumatized by having to wait his turn