Eversince my introduction to Critical Mass (CM) during my years at Leeds University I try to follow the developments of the London CM either via the London mailinglist or just joining in on a Friday evening.
There are some thought provoking discussions at the moment with regards to how CM is “governed” (it isn’t) and “coping with pratts on bikes at cm”. Here are some snipplets of the conversation (obviously these opinions are highly subjective as i the editing - you can view the full conversation in the archive of the cm-london list):
Actions performed by the Mass as a whole are can be influenced. The Mass is a democracy. It does what the majority of people want or allow it to do.
The mass is anarchy in action. That’s why it is so edgy, everyone has a different view and everyone can and does do just what they like.
Anarchists are those who advocate the absence of the state, arguing that
common sense would allow for people to come together in agreement to form
a functional society allowing for the participants to freely develop their
own sense of morality, ethics or principled behaviour. (Anarchy on Wikipedia)
I don’t think everybody would approve, but, being a democracy could mean they don’t have to.
The last one is my favourite