Tuesday, June 16, 2015

Councils and "blocking" (Guest Post)

Today's guest post is by Garrick Beck (cross-posted from another forum).

Three comments about councils and “blocking.”

First. The opportunity to have blocked South Dakota was at last year’s Vision Council where it was part of the family’s consensus of places we might gather. Yes indeed, that was a pretty dis-functional council…and so we ended up with three bioregions an amazing number of miles apart for scouts to have to look at.

Second. Yes, you can go to Spring Council and Block someone’s ability to go to a particular place. But that some one you can block is yourself. You nor anyone, has the right to tell someone else what they can or cannot do thru our council. Who gave you or anyone that right? Do you really want a council – like an open mic forum – to have the right to tell you where you can or cannot travel? No one gave you that right ever. No one gave our council that right ever, ever, never. Each of us is a free human being with all the rights that comes with.

Third. Vision Council at the Rainbow Gathering chooses by consensus the place(s) we will assemble next. True, the council has become a trail of compromise locations with many people ‘blocking’ unless their favorite area is included. But what exactly does the consensus mean??? It means THAT THE PEOPLE SITTING IN THAT CIRCLE AGREE THEY WILL GATHER IN ONE OF THOSE PLACES NEXT YEAR. And the rest of the gathering people, scouts included, honor that consensus by following it. But it does not mean that anywhere along the line – at thanksgiving council, or spring council, that someone can just raise their hand and block everyone, or anyone or someone – other than themselves – from doing anything.

Our council is NOT a legislative body. It does not have the power to tell anyone what they must or must not do. It is an Open Forum for ideas and inspiration. It does have the great power of persuasion, which frankly is a very great power. But it does not have the authority or the ability to order anyone to do anything, nor to order anyone not to do anything. Suggest? Yes. Encourage? Absolutely. Plead for or against a cause? Yes, be heard. Convince others? Try with all your best arguments. Persuade? Yes, please, the entire evolution of human culture is based on communication among people. Command? No. Order? No. Vote by majority? No. Legislate? No. Demand what someone other than yourself should or must do or not do??? No way. We are not that kind of council. We never were. And we should not become that.

So again, on the topic at hand: If someone wishes to go to Spring Council they can certainly express a “block” for themselves not to do something they don’t want to. They can urge other to follow their lead with all their heart. But they cannot “block” someone else from doing what that other person freely chooses. No one has ever given that power to our council, nor to an individual in our council. People often want our council to be a place of power, and in some ways it does have the power to convince, but it is not a ruling body and it does not have the authority to tell someone what they can or cannot do. Our council is a very rare thing in the modern world: It is an open public forum for voices to have a chance to be heard and to be listened to.

1 comment:

  1. with all due respect i'm not sure what you are saying..

    People block consensus all the time.. sometimes because there is more to consider... sometimes because the people are about to do something stupid.. and sometimes just to manipulate people and force their will on the process.

    The notion that people can't do this -- block consensus to manipulate people -- seems rather naive. Your argument missed the problem completely in an effort to make it sound like the process isn't broken when people become stubborn and selfish and refuse to let the people agree without compromises that allow manipulation or drag things out for days so many people will leave and be silenced by attrition..

    Let's recap. The high holy scouts and their friends got South Dakota to be considered by blocking the circle from consensus on the east. They would not allow the people to reach consensus without this inclusion. Then they set spring council in SD knowing that people would get there and pretty much be too far from the other places to make them seriously considered.

    Now we are on disputed treaty land, tribal lands by all right -- and you are saying we can't block this, even though the people blocking everyone else is basically what put us there. I love you, but that is just empty rhetoric, brother!

    You know as well as I do that people will "vote with their feet" and just go dig in if the counsel can't agree. So if spring counsel can't reach consensus people just do whatever they want anyway and the belief that Spring Counsel needs to meet and decide something is just an illusion.

    So why "come to have a voice" and spend all that gas to find out that "being in the circle on the land" is just an encounter group designed to sanctify what this particular influential subgroup of "scouts" already decided for everybody. ("scout" is a verb, by the way, not a group of people or official office)

    Sorry to say, many of us can no longer abide by these disrespectful practices and have voted with our feet to have real peace gatherings where people really respect each other and show up to do peace and seek harmony without these games and manipulations to control an anarchist festival in the woods.

    Good luck, hope to see you at a real PEACE gathering again soon!

    ReplyDelete

Please keep your comments to the point. Any comments advocating violence, sexism or racism will not be published. You don't have to agree with me, but you can't cuss me or anyone else out either. As of 6/11/15 I'm not sure how I will be publishing comments. Too many people just submitting the same comment over and over again and I'm overwhelmed by trying to sort this out. So feel free to comment, but understand I may not be approving all comments.