[pp.int.general] Pirate Manifesto Reloaded

aloa5 piratenpartei at t-online.de
Fri Jul 4 07:54:37 CEST 2008

Hello Anton,

there are more options. I think your options are polarising (and point 2 
is not written down in the declaration). ;)

Lets have a look about the different points here and if we can have a 
consens. :)

As far as I can see we have this two sides of a coin on wich is written 
"politic" on it:

* The scandinavian Pirates think that we have to built a coalition with 
a/the/any gouvernment party anyway to get might. The "costs" for this 
can be really high. They assume that the might they would have with 1, 2 
3 seats in EU or national parliaments would imply enough might for 
changing something.

* The spanish Pirates think the other way around that we never go into a 
coalition this way.

I will offer following points for finding a compromise or a working 

1.) Coalitions (as an option) have to be possible
2.) If the price for a coalition (compromises to be made) is reasonable 
will be a decision of the PP members in each country.
3.) We have do decide *after* an election

And - to come across the point 2 you (Anton) below mentioned - I would 
like to ask the skandinavian Pirates something.

The same argumentation can be used for every separate country to 
legitimate any coalition -- and promising (any) coalitions before an 

First question:
Would you accept such an approach from any other party in your own country?

Second Question:
Would you think that voters would accept such an approach?

Third question:
Do you think that an opposition in your country has nothing to say and 
absolute no influence (quote: "..accomplish nothing.. voters give up 
their hope...")?

Perhaps with above mentioned points for a compromise for wich I ask you 
all to answer if this would be acceptable we find a way. And with 
answering the my questions we can find out more about the thinking of 
one another - and perhaps can start talking about what we think that 
politic "works" for us (long run).

Best Regards
ALOA (aka Otmar... my nick is really an alter ego wich sometimes seem to 
  have a life on his own :) )

Anton Tamminen schrieb:
> Essentially, this boils down into two options, assuming we aren't able 
> to create a group of our own.
> 1. We don't co-operate with a group and are absolute about abstaining, 
> and instead have no realistic means of influencing the EP within the 
> near future. We will continue to be able to accomplish nothing until 
> either voters give up their hope on us or we create a group of our own, 
> somewhere in the distant future.
> 2. We co-operate with a group and apply necessary (to be defined) 
> flexibility to enable us to have a direct means of influencing the EP 
> within the near future. We spend much effort on finding the right group 
> and right amount of flexibility. We are prepared to explain this to 
> those who question our decision. If we, somewhere in the distant future, 
> manage to create a group of our own, we may do so.
> I know this is not an easy decision, especially for those of us who have 
> high and strong ideals. I do not reject option 2. if the "necessary" 
> part is well defined and agreeable.

More information about the pp.international.general mailing list