same on issuu



[image linked to mw defn]:

a general agreement about something : an idea or opinion that is shared by all the people in a group

one idea .. shared by all people..

i don’t know.

make that’s our hold up.. our roadblock ..

why consensus

perhaps we have the tech capabilities (io dance ness) to redefine decision making..

and if we do.. perhaps we shouldn’t perpetuate efficiency of a mode/medium/means we no longer need.

perhaps we be brave enough to disengage from what’s irrelevant. from all the manufactured consent ness. perhaps we reimagine our broken feedback loop.


Collaboration is how problems are solved.  It is the ability to reach consensus.
Jaime Casap @jcasap

Original Tweet:

is it..?
or is the ability we now have to find our people… with the short lag time we all crave..
perhaps we quit chasing the puck.. pleasing others.. assuming supposed to’s..

howard thurman quote come alive

let’s do that.

what if it’s less about moving our thinking around to match.. and more about moving us around to match..

be\cause public consensus always oppresses someone (s)

snowden private in public law



as the day

gershenfeld something else law

www ness


revolution of everyday life

revolution in reverse


a nother way

for (blank)’s sake



“We need friction instead of consensus and culture instead of economics” | Social City

It is precisely this dissensus that can hold a society together, because it presumes a great deal of trust in the other.


we should learn to deal with dissensus, instead of trying to ‘solve’ everything through consensus. We need to avoid consensus, because it is excluding. Those who don’t fit the consensus, are truly left out. Dissensus, however, respects different perspectives and always holds the possibility that we see or realise something that we hadn’t noticed before.


This also means that our ways of attributing meaning can continuously change. That way we can escape our current conservative model, which confuses a state of culture with a state of nature, as is happening both in politics and mainstream media. Here, the free market is perceived as a natural given, as well as the financialised society. There must be values that are worthier than a balanced budget. Current acts of terrorism, and least as much governmental responses to it, show that some things are more important than a balanced budget. Unfortunately this doesn’t count for the care of elderly or disabled, to name just one example. If we would look at this from a cultural perspective instead of an economic one, we would understand that the world could always be different. And that’s the point. If we would embrace commonism, we would create an enormous sense of possibility and cultural freedom.

Pascal Gielen


from Rebecca Solnit‘s hope in the dark

loc 1842

jim dodge claims anarchy as an essential element of bioregionalism, ‘ the conviction that we as a community, or a tight, small-scale federation of communities, can mind our own business, and can make decisions regarding our individual/communal lives and gladly accept responsibilities/consequences of those decision.’..  this brings us back to he activism of the past 20 yrs.. or more, since contemporary anarchist organizing draws upon the decentralized models of the anarchists of the spanish civil war for its affinity groups, the more or less autonomous associations of five to fifteen people that constitute the basic unit of direct action

anarch\ism.. and jo freeman ness.. and ginorm small ness.. and…… a means/mech to facil that that would essentially make consensus as we know it.. waggle dance ness.. irrelevant..

he ability we now have to find our people… with the short lag time we all crave..
perhaps we quit chasing the puck.. pleasing others.. assuming supposed to’s..

in other words, they were, or rather we are, anarchists, and this mode of organizing comes most directly out of the antinuclear movement of the 1980s, where direct democracy was established through affinity groups and spokescouncils using consensus decision-making processes (a spokescouncil is a meeting to which member affinity groups have each sent a spokesperson

yet.. again.. even deeper.. now have means to disengage from (or at least go ginorm small.. approach limit of zero/infinity).. consensus




from the trap doc

32 min – what this meant was.. politicians..bureaucrats who said were working for public good.. was a complete fantasy.. because to do that.. *dependent on creating shared goals in society based on self-sacrifice and altruism.. but in a world that was really driven by suspicous/self-seeking individuals.. such concepts could not exist..

and shouldn’t really..  again.. playing extremes here…  today we can go beyond.. *shared goals in society.. so we can’t not.. because public consensus always oppresses someone (s)

out of this came a theory called public choice.. and a group of economists who wished to destroy a politicians dream.. that they were working for the public good… their leader: james buchanan (

James McGill Buchanan, Jr. (/bjuːˈkænn/; October 3, 1919 – January 9, 2013) was an Americaneconomist known for his work on public choice theory (included in his most famous work The Calculus of Consent), for which he received the Nobel Memorial Prize in 1986. Buchanan’s work initiated research on how politicians’ and bureaucrats’ self-interest, utility maximization and other non-wealth maximizing considerations affect their decision making. He was a member of the Board of Advisors of The Independent Institute, a member (and for a time the President) of the Mont Pelerin Society, a Distinguished Senior Fellow of the Cato Institute, and professor at George Mason University.

consensus ness