[pp.int.general] philosophy vs. action

[Carlos Ayala Vargas]

Reinier Bakels wrote:
>> Disagree: take the human rights out of the equation, then -at least 
>> for PIRATA- no single trade-off can be possible.
> I start to loose my patience.
If having anyone losing patience because of PIRATA not willing to 
trade-off on human rights ... well, the best I can say about is, not my 
business.
> you completely misunderstood an essential aspect of human rights. They 
> are often contradictory. I explained you that most provisions of the 
> ECHR have a subsection 2 (or 3, occasionally) that gives specific 
> rules in case of conflicts.
You mean that, e.g., ECHR allows privacy, freedom of speech and etc 
being spoiled without a court warrant, in certain cases like "/*in the 
interests of national security,* *public safety* or the *economic 
well-being of the country*, for the *prevention of disorder* or crime, 
*for the protection of *health or *morals*/" -I'm truly amazed with the 
/morals/ thing, which by the way links to your previous "/the fact that 
such opinions are not seen as crimes or torts imho does not imply that 
one is socially allowed to say anything that is not against the law/" 
comment-? Yes, I am aware, and that's why I prefer Spanish 
Constitution's inner bill of rights rather than such wicked ECHR.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_8_ECHR

However, my preferences doesn't really matter: since a 2005's Spanish 
Constitutional Court decision, if any time Czech Republic and Ireland 
finally sign Treaty of Lisboa -thus, making such Treaty coming into 
force-, Spaniard's guarantees on rights and liberties would be going 
down the sewer, and only ECHR will really matter. Does it please you? 
Because it doesn't please PIRATA.
> That is the trade-off I refer to.
I know, and I reject it. Unless there is a court warrant, PIRATA rejects 
such /subsections/. And as long as SC's inner bill of rights remains 
into force, Spanish law also does.
> E.g. no one can deny that privacy is naturally limited for reasons of 
> personal safety.
False. Read Spanish Constitution, read Spanish constitutional case law, 
and later and only later, just try to make such statement. In Spain, at 
least now, at least until Ireland and Czech Republic sign the Treaty of 
Lisboa and unless in State of Emergency/Exception/etc:

- you need a court warrant to seize publications
- you need a court warrant to make home searches
- you need a court warrant to spy private communications
- summarizing: you need a court warrant to break citizens' fundamental 
rights and liberties

You don't like it? You don't find it logical? Honestly, I don't care: 
those are our rights, those are our freedoms, and you are not entitled 
to attack them not to deny logical abilities of those defending them 
-e.g., myself-.
>> Are you asking us to give them up?
> If you mean a brand new copyright, yes.
While I actually mean a brand new *author's rights* legal framework ... 
thanks you for the /advice/: no, thanks.
> It is like the social democratic ideology vs. communism.
I'm not a /social democrat/ nor a /communist/, so ideological nuances 
between those groups are not my business.

What is actually my business, what PIRATA members chose me for, is to 
defend the right of a fair trial when fundamental rights and liberties 
-like freedom of speech and privacy- are attacked, and as it's my duty, 
and I obey my fellow party members and not you, I'll keep demanding that 
the limits to fundamental rights and liberties can only be set by courts 
of justice and not by governments -among other reasons, for the 
separation of powers' sake-. Whether you agree or not.
> I meant something very different. I meant that politicians (usually) 
> should not try to be a better government than the government, but 
> *check what the government does*. Not just on a substantive level, but 
> definitely also on a procedural level.
That's what we are doing in PPI.
> Really? Usually even a small minority can prevent that a topic is not 
> discussed at all, and accepted without debate. Having a debate is the 
> first step towards winning a debate!
Having a debate is essential, I agree with you on that; however you said 
"/asking questions will also trigger other politicans/", and I repeat 
"/not in Spain/". And, as long as we in PIRATA are aware of that, the 
ones we want to trigger by asking questions are not the politicians 
-talking about actually unrealistic efforts ...-, but citizens who, by 
the way, are the ones entitled to vote, i.e., the ones who can give the 
pirate parties enough seats to have real strength to fulfill our goals.
> While there is sometimes a quorum to decide whether a topic is a mere 
> formality or deserves to be discussed, usually no majority is 
> required, and opposition parties will be happy to join the PP.
Almost all parties (more than 90 % of MPs) voted for a non-legislative 
proposal urging the government to give pro-copyright lobbies censoring 
powers on the Internet. Read my /lips/, Reinier: not in Spain -I wish it 
were, however it's not-.
> Well, if it is not perceived as "extremist" (another caveat for the PP!).
Spanish Government calls /extremist /whoever that disagrees with him:

- called /antipatriotic/ all who talked about economic crisis -now 
they've passed, about 2009 forecast, from -1'5 % deficit and +1 % GDP 
(in November) to -6 % deficit and -1'5 % GDP (in January)-
- called /antipatriotic/ all who talked against private copying levies 
-recently, a court ruled that entities are not obliged to pay levies, as 
levies exists because of private copying, and only people (not entities) 
are entitled to make private copying-
- etc

Do I look like if I care about whether the Spanish Government is going 
to call PIRATA /extremist/ or not? Wake up, Reinier: *they are going to 
call us /extremists/ anyway!

*At least, concede PIRATA that -as we live in Spain, while you don't- 
it's /slightly/ more probable that we are better aware of Spanish 
political reality than you are.


                                                                                          
Carlos Ayala
                                                                                          
( Aiarakoa )

                                                                       
Partido Pirata National Board's Chairman

P.S.: Talking about patience: patience is what is needed to bear your 
language -including such "/I start to loose my patience/" warnings- 
without any moderator saying a word; if they tolerate your language, 
then the only chance for me is to answer you -in an appropriate manner, 
of course-; if you don't like me disagreeing with you, bad luck, I have 
my own viewpoints whether you admit it or not.