[pp.int.general] Pirate Manifesto Reloaded

Fri Jul 4 11:20:38 CEST 2008

----- Mensaje original ----
De: Anton Tamminen <anton.tamminen at piraattipuolue.fi>
Enviado: jueves, 3 de julio, 2008 21:06:00
> ...in 2014, for which the Pirate Party could no longer register

Why?

> as successful lobbyism from IP interest groups had among other things resulted in a ban of political activity by
> "organisations that can be considered immediate threats to the international enforcement of the ACTA or whose
> agenda is in unlawful conflict with the treaties administered by the WIPO".

Truly? Don't think so: in Spain there is an organic law to ban parties supporting terrorist/mafia/illegal organizations ... and we remain a legal party. While fake evidence would may be cooked to try to illegalize us, that scenario -of a law encouraged by lobbies and against ACTA/WIPO treaties- you present is unrealistic.

> The lemmings then spent the rest of their lives watching pre-2010 american sitcoms because there was no reason for 
> the Content Producer's Alliance to produce anything novel.

Or watching post-2010 Creative Commons/copyleft contents, as there are hundreds of millions of creators all across EU, and thousands of millions worldwide.

> What I meant was that it is by no means guaranteed that we can afford to wait 'til the year 2024 to get adequate
> representation in the EP. The world might be beyond rescue then. At least by democratic, legal means, that is.

What I 90 % guarantee you is that, according to Spanish United Left example, by merging with a traditional group you're closer to secure not having MPs in 2014 than by staying at non-inscrits.

> > ... it allows us to negotiate issue by issue, as long as we have the consent of citizens through Social Grid and
> > consultation to citizens, following certain rules. You may like it, you may dislike it, but you won't never be able to
> > state -if you want that statement to be true- that we can't cooperate. Regards,
> Thankyou for clearing this up - I simply relied on the statement "Our statutes say we will abstain in non-core issues"
> which is in obvious conflict with your statutes that add "by default".

Then it was my fault for contributing to the misunderstood: indeed, our abstention is by default.

> > Option 2 is a fake version of Uppsala Declaration...
> It is not a verbatim copy, no.

Of course it's not a verbatim copy, nor a real briefing of Uppsala Declaration, as it encourages to unconditionally support the group where such declaration state we would hypothetically join on non-core issues.

> > There is a third option -there may be even more-: PIRATA's
> Which might be realized, given that we..:
> 1. Somehow manage to find a means to compensate for the loss of influence in being excluded from parliamentary
> committees

As long as

- we are MPs and participate & vote in parliamentary sessions, having the key in some votings as long as there is no parliamentary group holding absolute majority
- because of being MPs we still can deal with other parliamentary groups
- committees agreements can easily be revoked by the parliamentary sessions

there is no significant thing to compensate.

> 2. Somehow manage to receive considerable monetary support as we receive no funding for staff as we are not group
> members

Now pay attention to this unquestionable truth:

1 ) we have nowadays no funds from EU
2 ) you talk about an scenario where we would lose money because of not joining any parliamentary group
3 ) but that requires us to have MPs
4 ) our MPs would be achieved without EU funds -look back to 1 )-
5 ) so, EU funds are not a requirement to nail MPs

Thus, while having more funds sound good, we don't need them to reach Strasbourg; on the other hand, if the price to pay in exchange of such funds is our self-destruction, is a quite high and unaffordable price to pay.

> 3. Witness a miracle in gaining enough support to form our own group in 2009 or hope shit has not happened before
> 2014, or 2019, or 2024...

What miracle? It's obvious that we won't get our own group in 2009 -if it's a requirement to get MPs from 6 different countries, I think there aren't six pirate parties with the chance of getting euroMPs ... actually we're fighting hard to have the chance at least in one of them-.

Aloa5 has repeatedly -and I must add, accurately- about political personality. Political personality uses to be rewarded by citizens; on the other hand, surrendering to a traditional group, as aloa5 points, is the opposite of showing that personality.

> 4. Manage to get groups and independents to think we are a relevant ally

Actually one of political issues is the art of dealing: we MUST spend five years interacting with ALL parliamentary groups -otherwise, surrendering to one of 7 parliamentary groups means to violently slap both the other 6 groups and the non-inscrits-, and with non-inscrit MPs, trying to reach agreements for our core issues. Tiring? Requiring our best efforts? Of course, however, what are we meant to be in Strasbourg for? Work, work, work and daily work, and tirelessly work for the citizens who would have supported us.

> I have no problem accepting PIRATA's option, given there is a realistic strategy behind it. It is within the boundaries of
> possible, but to think it is realistic requires, at least currently for my part, much faith

First, the four points you've associated to our strategy are, as I've just shown, wrong or misplaced. Second, what's not a realistic strategy is to surrender to a traditional group in exchange of nothing, and thinking that eligible voters wouldn't punish us -furthermore, you defend they would reward us! for supporting in non-core issues a traditional group in exchange of that group not granting us support in core issues!-.

The thing is that actually is Uppsala Declaration which requires a huge amount of faith -a faith which falls to the ground when faces the facts-. Regards,

                                                                                       Carlos Ayala
                                                                                       ( Aiarakoa )

                                                                 Partido Pirata National Board's Chairman

P.S.: I agree on what we stated last night, about focusing on the Manifesto thing instead continuing this argue -as I think each one's stances are pretty clear-. 5 pirate parties out of 12 have already filled in this wiki page their sections -Piraatti Puolue, PPUS, PIRATA, Piraten Partij and the Danish pirate party-.

P.P.S.: Piratpartiet, Parti Pirate, Partia Piratow, Piraten Partai, Deutsches Piraten Partei, Piraten Partei Oesterreichs and Australian Pirate Party have to yet. Common, the quicker we do it, the quicker we'll be able to start developing the Pirate Manifesto's First Draft :)

      ______________________________________________ 
Enviado desde Correo Yahoo! La bandeja de entrada más inteligente.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20080704/220818f3/attachment.htm 