[pp.int.general] Our ideology

Mats Eriksson mats.eriksson at piratpartiet.se
Mon Aug 3 14:52:11 CEST 2009

I get the feeling that the ideology discussions here during the latest weeks or so are implying that a centralized state should axiomatically exist, and the issue is how this state should be steered - hence all discussions about left and right, socialism vs liberalism (that also takes the centralized state for granted) etc.

As a pirate, I am not sure if I want a state at all. But if I want a state, can this state be operating in a completely different fashion? For example, if the today's centralized state is operating like an engine, can a future state work like a (TCP/IP) network? A state type that cannot be central controlled, and does not stop to work just because a part of it does not work? (compare with today's "engine" type of state where all components needs to work in harmony). Also, a network of states that also tolerates the "ad hoc" creation of new states.

In short: I would like the discussions to be about how a distributed networking state can be designed, rather than how the existing centralized state(s) should be steered.

Thanks for your time
PP Member in rural Sweden

pp.international.general-request at lists.pirateweb.net wrote:

> Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 23:21:47 +0200
> From: "Reinier Bakels" <r.bakels at planet.nl>
> Subject: Re: [pp.int.general] Our ideology
> To: "Pirate Parties International -- General Talk"
> 	<pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net>
> Message-ID: <44FA3C7224EB4D79A00BC00B9E8C8B8F at RBB2009>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=response
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Chart
> The chart is a nice try, but - as the WikiPedia editors already decided - 
> may not stand criticism.
> Is "left wing" synonymous with strong personal freedom? In my perception, 
> old-fashioned socialism requires strong state intervention in order to 
> reduce income differences.
> Populism imho does not belong in this scale at all: populism is dishonest 
> politics based on (perhaps) popular but infeasible promises, and/or 
> addressing artificial problems ("islamisation").
> In my observation another important axis is conservatism versus progressive 
> politics. Dutch politics has  the advantage of many political parties, so al 
> examples can be found here:
> socialist, conservative: SP
> socialist, progressive: left greens ("groenlinks")
> liberal, conservative: VVD
> liberal, progressive: D66
> And then there are the Christian Democrats who don't fit in any scheme 
> except POWER.
> reinier

More information about the pp.international.general mailing list