How do you handle dissent in a group?

A Tribe Steem up bi-weekly question.

While maintaining my own groups I've always considered it best to designate a conflict free zone where anything can be discussed without fear of violence.
Open discussion, by those involved, is the direct route to resolving the issue, if it can be resolved.
If members of the group wish to disengage that is their perogative.
If they wish to politic others out, that is also their perogative.
I've seen the backlash against the catty get pretty toxic in it's own right.
We separated the combatants and they agreed to a detente, but it wasn't long before the catty one was frozen out due to her continuous push on the group against the other.

The question becomes, who is more valuable to the group?
The person who becomes toxic when confronted with dissent, or someone that agrees to avoid conflict with the aggressors?

I don't typically hang out with large groups because there is always somebody there trying to sacrifice my well being on the alter of their own.
It is much simpler to be a hermit.

So, I was somewhat surprised to be picked up by tsu, and fully expect my membership to be sacrificed at some point.
Those trying to get ahead under the old rules will see to it.
Hopefully, it doesn't come to that any time soon.

Is tsu ready to leave behind hierarchy, rule by force, and the rules of those who have imposed on us for millenia?
If not, it's just more of the same.

I can see Kenny is certainly set on finding new ways.
Time will tell us about how well he does managing the tribe making his own rules as he goes.
We can all learn a lesson, or two.

The reason I was so surprised by the group's invitation is that I am insurrectionary.
I think in the proper circumstances violence is a required duty.
We get exactly as much tyranny as we tolerate.
Until the bullies get punched in the nose, why would they let up? They are winning.

Chanting children, the elderly, and the orderly walking on the sidewalk to their free speech cage will simply continue being managed as a cost of being in business.
Its the Bhagat Singhs, the Alex Berkmans, the Leon Czolgoszs, and the Errico Malatestas that make the changes happen.

Some of us come to points in our lives that it becomes better spent in ways others have reason to only contemplate.
Most of us would never think of robbing a bank, but for some of us it is second nature.
It's called diversity of tactics because nobody wants violence, however, some of us are very interested in not being ignored anymore.

We want our vote to count, too!
Freedom doesn't come from the ballot, it comes from folks taking their freedom where they can.

If you aren't one of us, if you are not called to a higher power, then kindly look away, and don't see anything, it is very important that no beings become harmed in our theatre of the spectacle.

But, I don't expect you were exposed to those concepts in grad/e skool.
Those that controlled your 'education', your 'fakeducation', if you will, had no interests in letting you become aware.
They are better served by a population that isn't so bright.
One that doesn't question 'authority'.

I spent my time in the crapitalust's machine, I've greased a few cogs.
I've been to work very early, I've worked seven days a week.
I've worked for every level of govt, and a few private businesses.
If that is what it takes to succeed, then mark me down as born to lose.

Instead of denigrating myself for it, I'll celebrate it.
I revel in the rejection.
For it is from among those born to lose that we are most likely to find our next great agent of change.
Who will be the postmodern Budha?

Those for whom the current system is working just fine are unlikely to seek change.
Comfortable slaves don't rise up, they become crackers.
They should be given donuts for being honorary cop of the year.

Who will be the household names of the information age?
Who will reign as the King of the Age of Aquarius?
We should be looking forward to that much more than who is gonna be president.
Who is to be our next man of the people?

Elect FBA Rey del Mundo!

As a part of my becoming an anarchist, I realized that rule by force comes off the table.
Anybody using violence to control another is just mirroring the world around them.
Folks don't do better because they don't know better.
In fact, they are often intentionally taught the opposite.
Warrior culture, anybody?

Unless the group is good at maintaining a peaceful space, what good is it?
Is eliminating dissenters equal to eliminating dissent?
I don't think so, but maybe.
It surely makes finding consensus easier.
It ends the conflict, in the here and now.
I'm not sure how we get butter brickle from all the vanilla, but I am confident the rebels will find a way.

So, TSU, how do you propose we handle dissent?

Tribe Steem Up is an experiment founded by @kennyskitchen.