On consensus and freedom to have none...

 

Having recently heard a quote of Margaret Thatcher "Consensus is just the lack of leadership" I could not but recall the utter disgust I experienced every time I have spoken with a C level executives. Because of my "red" origins, they all sooner or later commented on communism and lack of freedom of speech and expression there, as opposed to exuberant free market and the liberties it conferred on lucky Americans. The presumed victory in the Cold War over the Russkies invariably sets these people in a self-congratulatory mood. When reminded that the biggest Communist country in the world is still alive and well; or, moreover, that it manufactures a substantial part of all the consumer goods in America - these folks uncomfortably twitch, probably not unlike Nixon who had to swallow his pride and offer friendship to his Chinese counterparts.

What disgusted me was not the noxious regurgitated propaganda, but the degree with which each and every one of them expressed their intolerance towards employees who disagreed with their views or leadership; the vehemence and resolve with which they assured me that there was no place for people like that in their enterprise, that this was a free country, and therefore these people were free to pursue their free will elsewhere, just not here.

Is freedom then ultimately a liberation from the need to build consensus? Is freedom just an opportunity to wander off into the West and live as one thinks one wants? Is freedom mostly lack of desire to live with others? Is freedom an ability to choose what one wants and whom one wants? Is freedom simply an option to avoid dealing with the Others, a permission to eradicate dissent by shooting any trespasser, even an imaginary one? Is it the same alpha-maleness, that unreigned desire to mark the territory with spit, blood and urine and fight any other perceived or real contender that one observes in some species?