[grive]

'General consensus' does not exist.

Take the Covid vaccine: it is clearly shown to reduce the risks compared to getting Covid without it, and still there is no consensus about getting vaccinated, and there never will be. Getting to 100% vaccination rate will be a social trauma.

Another example, climate change: the science is clear and easy to understand. The root cause is known for more than hundred of years, and the effect has been clearly measured since the 1960s. The scale of the issue has been made clearer and clearer these last decades. And yet, even beyond people holding interest in the current status quo, there are still people resisting this consensus, attributing any attempt to make society change there a polarizing and partisan issue.

So no, people would not do it.

[oblio]

I guess I'm more optimistic than you.

There is general consensus on many things (for example murder is banned across the world). There is rarely consensus on the "hot topics" of the day.

General consensus in my eyes doesn't mean that you have absolutely everyone agree, just a super high majority that gives you legitimacy. For example any vote above a super majority (67%, but for big stuff like this I'd say 80%+ )in a referendum could work.

There will always be extremists and for things to move you can't count on 100%.

For example even today, you couldn't pass a law for seat belt usage with 100% support. Even though any sane person in the last 20+ years would say that's ridiculous.