I have always believed in evolving a consensus before taking any major decision.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
I look for the consensus because the consensus drives the policy into new places.
Consensus isn't just about agreement. It's about changing things around: You get a proposal, you work something out, people foresee problems, you do creative synthesis. At the end of it, you come up with something that everyone thinks is okay. Most people like it, and nobody hates it.
Ultimately a genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus.
I strongly believe in political activity that has to do with choices - and not consensus that sometimes covers problems and doesn't resolve them.
To me, consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values and policies. So it is something in which no one believes and to which no one objects.
There is no consensus, there is no homogeneity, there is no truth.
It is not always what we know or analyzed before we make a decision that makes it a great decision. It is what we do after we make the decision to implement and execute it that makes it a good decision.
I don't think consensus-building politics is what I'm meant to be doing.
Consensus building doesn't necessarily fit with my experience.
If we are all in agreement on the decision - then I propose we postpone further discussion of this matter until our next meeting to give ourselves time to develop disagreement and perhaps gain some understanding of what the decision is all about.