Add new comment

Consensus is just another way of democracy, but instead of being a despotic majority rule, it's a totality (or totality minus one) rule. My experience of consensus-based decision making in mainstream contexts had much, much less people arguing or having dissenting opinions, so consensus becomes a rule of single-thinking. Which is even more authoritarian than majority rule... more precisely it's totalitarian.

Acracy or agonism are the only suitable process I see for a viable anarchy between several people. This means a lot of infighting and negotiations, but that's what makes it rich, unpredictable and ever-evolving.