[pp.int.general] You have GOT to check this out
ray.jenson at gmail.com
Sat Jan 19 19:54:20 CET 2008
Jan Huwald wrote:
> They want a tax on advertisments wich is dedicated to culture funding. I love
> the idea (and actually thought proposing it would immediatly brandmark one as
> communist), because:
> a. Advertisments pollute information space by false information and destroying
> poeples (and therefore society's) attention
> b. Those polluting the information space should pay compensation for that
> c. Culture (including journalism) can clean up information space and also
> extend it
Just my own opinions:
Advertisements don't really "pollute" information space any more than
politics do. A tax merely shifts who has more power and who can command
more money out of the system. A tax would do nothing to change the
system other than this.
The question again (as you said, Jan), is one of whom the money goes to,
how much is going, and how it is paid. Simply paying a tax would worsen
the problem, rather than bettering it. The big companies would gladly
pay a tax to be able to propagandize at will, since they already control
the lobbies. A tax would offer them more freedom to propagandize, not
less. They have virtually unlimited amounts of money with which to
accomplish their aims. However, money is not really important where the
ability to remain free. The issue is not as much one of who gets paid.
The issue is still one of who retains power and control over the media.
Levying a tax makes absolutely no sense in a democratic system, where
increasing freedom is concerned. What you consider rhetoric is actually
a fairly solid selling point, and one that most people can understand.
Simplicity is the key to getting the message across. There are few
things as simple as truth.
In order to secure more rights for creators, there must be a reduction
in the law. This means we need to fight harder than before in order to
get officials into office who might actually be able to accomplish this.
Many of our positions in the Pirate Party are compatible with those of
the Green party, but where they would seek to increase laws and
controls, we are trying to decrease them. The message of the video is
clear, and I support that, but I do not really support the other
lobbying efforts behind it. I consider them misguided and divisive. They
are essentially trying to pick up our cause without truly understanding it.
Therefore, we must help educate them on the points they've promoted,
rather that furthering the division. We should try to help them become
more democratized, and understanding of the enemy they're picking up the
cause for. I would rather they not push for a further division (an "us
versus them" mentality), because the entire situation would only
polarize further. Such polarization pollutes society by creating a false
choice without compromise--and is the chief reason the Green party is
not taken seriously here in the United States.
Radicalization is as corrupting on one side as it is on the other.
Extremism is necessary in some cases, but the entire purpose of our
fight is to bring things back into balance. The more I study it, the
more I believe that this is where the real power of our chief cause will
be. We are picking up power and this is becoming worrisome for those
already in power. Therefore, they are going to fight just that much
harder to keep the control they have.
Copyright itself has a *stated* intent (at least, here in the USA) of
being for the benefit of artists and other innovators. By requiring
adherence to that stated intent, we are finding that there is no fight.
The interpretation of the law is clearly one of favoring the interests
of commerce instead of those of the individual rights. This is an
extremely conservative standpoint, and one which should likely not be
taken lightly. By going back to the "tradition" of protecting artists
(as the stated intent), we appeal to both liberals and conservatives,
without deviating from our purpose or damaging the public interest.
Anyway, this is all my own opinion, so don't take it as my preaching to
you that this is the only way it can be. It's based on my own
observations and experience, as well as a significant amount of study
over the past few months.
"It is the duty of every citizen according to his best capacities to
give validity to his convictions in political affairs."
"Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every
man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance
in the entire population."
--both quotes by Albert Einstein
More information about the pp.international.general