[pp.int.general] Political Party X

aloa5 piratenpartei at t-online.de
Thu Jul 3 08:24:37 CEST 2008

Ole Husgaard schrieb:
  > P.S: I really like all the opposition we see now. This is important. I
> only hope that new discussions are concrete (as opposed to theoretical)
> and make a starting point by quoting the text agreed on at the Uppsala
> conference and stating what could be better.

´morning :-)

Concrete for later texts:

There is no need at all for making such statements as
- we WILL go in a coalition
- we WILL say "yes" to (all) other party´s issues

I don´t know why you think that this has to be written in a declaration. 
  But for getting votes it´s (very) bad - and it´s not diplomatic. Even 
it´s the second time here (not only for) for me saying this (first was 
in pp-int-forum to Rick in 2006 I think in a discussion about his first 
written concept of an int. manifest).

I think it´s just not neccessary to talk about again, isn´t it? Not 
about a point wich easily can be left out and we will get no agreement 
anyway. :)

And - as a annotation from me (hope you are not angry about an 
undiplomatic annotation about your "private" sector):
I never understood that you wrote it at your election at the 
valmanifest. I am quite sure that this had cost you (really) a lot of 
votes. For my political understanding this is a "never ever". I don´t 
know how the political landscape is in Sweden. If in Germany a party 
make a promise for a *certain* coalition before an election this may 
work... *sometimes*... not ever and only depending on the system in 
Germany. And only because the party generates votes just for "this" 
certain combination (coalition).
Talking about coalitions are normal. Like "if we have the chance to - we 
will have a look if another party offers us support for our ideas". But 
it makes no political sense to say "we will have a coalition with each 
party wich supports our ideas". A disastrous signal you sent out to the 
voters this way. It is a (great, great) difference between having not 
more issues in a program... and do ("official") not *care* about all 
other issues.

And - to acomplish and round up my statements above:
perhaps you think over why you are against today´s patents. When you say 
- "hinder innovation" - why do you think that innovations are and less 
monopoly´s are "good"? I don´t think that you can answer this without 
using (more) social and economic words (as they are such). So - pirates 
care about this things as well I think. Not: "we don´t like patents 
because we don´t like patents". :) ;) (And if you also think this could 
be true - maybe you understand why the statements above are all-too-true)

Cooler this morning... fine, 21 and not 30 degrees :). I wish you a nice 
day. :D


More information about the pp.international.general mailing list