Consensus is a social mind. It is a mind in that it includes realities, attitudes, values and purposes. Through a process, these all become the same for a large group of persons. The sameness locks minds together.

Unlike an imposed, external force, consensus is self-created—at least at its core. Being self-created, it is in line with the purposes of the persons involved. And it includes the realities which people have in common and agree upon.

This is not to say that no one can be sucked up by consensus and forced to believe or represent something they don't entirely agree with. While the majority of persons in consensus agree, they create a force which others may not be able to oppose and may have to cooperate with due to intimidation or exploitation.

Consensus is developed as a source of security and power. It is the power of numbers with psychological origins. A large number of minds carries advantages over a large number of weapons or dollars, as minds are complex, adaptive and responsive—but also judgmental, vindictive and coercive. This means that opposing consensus is hazardous, while supporting consensus provides security.

The problem is, it is not just objective reality which shapes consensus. It seems that nothing is easier to corrupt than consensus. When looking inward, the consensus of one's own group is supposed to be unquestionable, spotless virtue; but when looking outward, the consensus of foreign groups is viewed as at least problematic, if not sinister and threatening. This divergence is exactly why consensus is so corruptible—it is shaped more by subjective forces than objective reality.

Often, power is sought after and viewed as good. But there is nothing constructive that can be done with power, beyond the temporary need to protect against harm in a world of corruption. In other words, power is, at best, a trade-off of corruptions, not something that contains inherent value.

Persons who seek power assume subconsciously that it is a source of virtue, and this attitude is bigotry. Bigotry is the subconscious assumption that power is virtue and powerlessness is corruption. Since consensus is a source of power, it must be viewed as totally virtuous by bigots, while it is inherently corrupt, in actuality.

The power and assumed virtue of consensus create the attitude of self-righteousness. Persons who represent consensus can supposedly do no wrong. It's stunning how self-righteous the Nazis were in fixing the world through genocide, mayhem, slavery, torture, cruelty and wars. Consensus was shaped in such a perverse way through the elimination of dissent.

For the same reason, consensus eliminates the concept of injustice from minds. When the persons who control power can do no wrong, there are no injustices. The destitute and destroyed elements of society supposedly create their own problems rather than someone else creating their problems through injustices.

Eliminating the concept of injustice from minds is a guarantee of perpetrating injustices. If there is no such thing as injustice, the destruction of life is reduced to mechanical motion. It allows destroyers to deal with humans as if they were objects.

It's important to consider the difference between humans and objects, because destroyers pretend that there is none (which is materialism). Unfortunately, religious persons tend to mention only the subjective relevance of human concerns—people have feelings, and God created them. There are a lot of objective consequences to human concerns which destroyers do not account for.

People attempt to prevent themselves from being harmed or destroyed. Therefore, if destroyers are going to deal with them as objects, they have to eliminate the consequences. They never do. There has never been a magical disappearance machine which eliminates enemies. There are survivors, maimed or whole, central or peripheral. They are going to forever attempt to eliminate the threat. This means that conflicts result.

Nonbelievers, such as atheists, assume morality is a subjective, arbitrary whim without relevance. Supposedly, God wants his subjects to do things which are not good for themselves, and someone calls it morality. If Christ's words are studied properly, it is highly noticeable that one of his main points about morality is that it has the purpose of eliminating conflicts.

Christ also taught that poverty is the path which creates morality. Not the least reason is because poverty is devoid of consensus. The need to solve problems replaces the arbitrary synthesis of consensus with the objective reality which solves problems. To solve problems, something outside the mind (objective reality) directs the result rather than subjective synthesis which is required for consensus.

Of course, persons in poverty are always victimized due to their vulnerabilities, and this shows impoverished persons that there is such a thing as injustice. Knowing what injustice is, they try to eliminate it, which is morality. Morality and justice are synonyms.