[pp.int.general] Stances on non-core issues: PIRATA approach

[Carlos Ayala]

De: Andreas Popp <Andreas.Popp at gmx.de>
Enviado: miércoles, 12 de noviembre, 2008 12:20:35
> I agree so far for keeping our profile a pirate party but I do agree with the point that having an
> opinion on the important political things is unavoidable.

It's not the same to channel an opinion and to have an opinion. In the first case, you act like a megaphone for others' opinions -be it other parties, or directly citizens-; in the second case are you actually the one who have those opinions. I think no issues outside core issues policy means to fully avoid having opinions in non-core issues -as Rick usually points out, to avoid internal divide and to avoid losing the focus on our core issues-, however, it allows to channel other's opinions; let's see what I'm talking about:


> I do have some experience fighting for votes on the street and the German people are a much
> harder audience than the Swedish. They say "Yes, civil rights and free knowledge are fine. But
> how is your opinion on social stuff / environment / military... " so at least here in Germany, we
> can't get arround these topics.

Here, in Spain, we do have answers for citizens who we find through the streets and with we talk about PIRATA -e.g., while collecting signatures-. An usual conversation to collect signatures is in the like of this one:

PIRATA collector> hello, I'm collecting signatures for a party which is willing to concur to the EU Election next year; signing does not compromise your vote, it only allows us to propose our candidates; would you mind if I ask you for giving us your signature?
potential signatory> huh? but ... what is that PIRATA thing about? which are its proposals?
PIRATA collector> well, we are for free non-commercial filesharing; against private copying levies; for the promotion of Information Society and technologies, where Spain is at the bottom of EU (this is brief explanation for Patents and for Information Society issues);defending rights and liberties like privacy, pressumption of innocence, freedom of speech ...
PIRATA collector> ... and for non-core issues, participative democracy; people would make proposals supported by signatures; and if there are enough signatures supporting that proposal, we add it to our platform and we defend it wherever we have MPs; the idea is to defend a basic set of principles and, outside them, purely acting as citizens' representatives, doing their will

(actually, it's more like liquid democracy, as in our approach signatories for those proposals would may act individually, or through civic groups that would act as proxies)

I can say, from my experience, that I collect signatures from more than a half of interviewed potential signatories (namely, and considering that strict forms have to be filled, 15-25 signatures per hour), and most of them cheer our approach to non-core issues; this doesn't mean them would be voting us next year -there is a phenomenon that is called in Spain captive vote, which consists in usual A-party voters saying "sure, A is crappy ... but the others are even more crappy!", thus those voters keep voting A in spite of truly not liking it-, however they do like ILCs -PIRATA initatives (made by citizens)- when they're explained to them.

Our approach requires citizens to work hard to achieve their goals. 1'3 million signatures have been collected in Spain, through the article 87.3 of Spanish Constitution, to fight against abuses on animals; more than 2 million signatures collected against private copying levies; 1'5 million signatures for a change in Spanish criminal law; those and other examples show that signatures can be collected and civic groups can mobilize to defend their goals, like it happens in other countries. The more proposals achieving enough support & consenssus, the more times we would adopt an ILC; the less proposals achieving it, the less times abandoning our a priori abstention. As Felix commented in a recent mail, it's not expected to happen way to often, but we would may accept a few ILCs per year when it starts to work.

When making term agreements with other parties, as I've seen regarding non-core issues sometimes in this list -a pirate party P would support a non-pirate party B in non-core issues, without questioning, in exchange for B's support in core issues-, actually it's also channeling others' opinions ... the difference is that those opinions are not citizens', but parties'. For PIRATA, dealing is allowed for specific issues -not unconditional and without questioning-, and after previous consultation -to the users of the Social Grid we would create to welcome ILCs-.

So, there is a way for observing the no issues outside non-core issues while, at the same time, not forgetting those non-core issues: for PIRATA, the way will be to avoid having stances in non-core issues, and instead simply receiving those stances from citizens -requiring consenssus (if equal number of citizens support & reject a proposal, then that proposal is not read for us, further dialogue between arguing parts is required) and quorum (a threshold amount of signatures supporting a proposal is required)- and defending them in the parliaments as ... representatives.

Isn't it what we want to be? MPs, i.e., representatives for our electors? Regards,


                                                                  Carlos Ayala
                                                                  ( Aiarakoa )

                                           Partido Pirata National Board's Chairman



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20081112/eca19153/attachment-0001.htm