Menu
CoCreating Community is a 508(c)(1)(A) non-profit, faith-based association, founded in 2023, a small group of apolitical, solutions-oriented, like-hearted folks with a shared vision. The initial seed idea was creating a space to gather, support one another, have fun, and share skills. The seed sprouted when we manifested a gathering place for weekly meetings, skill shares, potluck gatherings, and more.
In the process of creating the community hub, the seed idea blossomed into Dreaming a more beautiful world into existence. We pondered deeper, more expansive questions, like:
During the winter of 2023, we created a space and many people offered what lit them up! Collaborations among previous strangers were born. Individuals from diverse cultures, backgrounds, and beliefs thrived in the common ground of sharing their passions and learning from others’. Although we lost the space after only 5 short months, that time gave us a glimpse of what is possible and opened us up to expand our vision and efforts into northern Minnesota and Western Wisconsin!
Today, CoCreating Community is focused intentional living projects; health and wellness on all levels; bridge-building; and exploring alternative ways to meet community needs without debt, inequity, exclusion, and perhaps even without money. Only limiting beliefs stand in our way, and those are rapidly dissolving!
WHAT ELSE IS POSSIBLE?
CoCreating Community is a self-governing community model of intergenerational, collaborative, learning environments. We are committed to claiming agency over our own lives, expressing our truest selves, sharing our unique gifts for the benefit of the entire community, and developing systems and community structures that facilitate living in alignment with nature.
CoCreating Community understands that creating a new way of living and being requires talking responsibility for one’s own life, behavior, and decisions. Having been enculturated in a system that has taught us to yield responsibility to police officers, lawyers, and judges, learning new skills is crucial to successful self-governance. Several co-founders and community members have enrolled in trainings in Sociocracy, as well as courses of study in Common Law, Natural Law, and Equity (origins of law), in an effort to remedy our societal learned helplessness and empower ourselves to confidently create a more beautiful world. Our focus in using Sociocracy, a peer governance system based on consent, is best conveyed in the following text from the Sociocracy For All website.
How does sociocracy differ from consensus or voting? How does it differ from hierarchy?
The difference between consensus and consent is not clearcut because the practice of consensus varies. The simplistic difference is this: consensus requires agreement. Consent requires that no one disagrees. A circle member who objects will need to state their objections with reference to the circle’s aim. Understanding the core of the objection can then improve the proposal.
Another difference is that consensus-run organizations often require the group of all members to make decisions together. This is not the case in sociocracy, where decision-making is distributed and decentralized into smaller groups.
Voting (majority vote) and consent differ because in consent decision-making, the majority cannot outvote the minority. A group will strive to integrate each objection until all members consent. The idea behind that is that minority opinions matter and that majority vote tends to polarize instead of bringing people together.
Hierarchy or top-down decisions are typically autocratic decisions where the superior can overrule the subordinate. This is not the case in sociocracy. Each circle or role will have authority in a defined domain. Since domains are nested, there is a hierarchy of domains but no autocratic relationship between people or roles. The comgination of top-down and bottom-up linking between circles leads to circular hierarchy.
Limits of Sociocracy and Ideal Use Cases
Consent requires working through issues in a collaborative way. That means that sociocracy requires a commitment to listening, learning, and using its tools. For some, this might require some “un-learning” of practices from more hierarchical contexts.
