handdator

Visa fullständig version : international network coalition


theodor sarafis
2006-05-29, 09:52
My name is Theodor and i am from Greece.... I find your idea to organize a party about digital rights in the age of globalization great... I believe that the dominated form of social organization in this age is the network... (Manuell Castells, Bob Jessop)

And i have two questions about your party movement...

Has your party a traditional top-bottom organization form? Or is a new non-beraucratic one with a diffused networked form?

And the second question is: how do you believe global citizens sould fight against the transnational surveillance system? Can european citizens coordinate to a network coalition with the same aims?

kalleanka
2006-05-29, 13:12
theodor sarafis (2006-May-29) Can european citizens coordinate to a network coalition with the same aims?





I'm just a normal member but I'd like to answear to that last question. Let's just say that if all the european citizens somehow get together under one flag and fight for the same goals we are one very powerful force to be reckoned with, I'm sure that there are way above 2million people that officially would become members in this organisation.



The problem is just who is going to start it and how will we get everyone to cooperate?

vigfus
2006-05-30, 11:35
theodor sarafis (2006-May-29)Has your party a traditional top-bottom organization form? Or is a new non-beraucratic one with a diffused networked form?

We try to have open communications as far as that is possible. The organisation isn't fully set yet (as far as i know) but at the present time anyone can contact anyone. All of us have a profile on the forum and those who regularly visit the forum are easy to get hold of.



As far as control goes i think we have a pretty good grassroots-organisation. Anyone can post an idea on the forum and everyone can join in the discussion (even non-members can have forum accounts).

theodor sarafis
2006-05-30, 12:55
[quote]The problem is just who is going to start it and how will we get everyone to cooperate?



I think there are two axes of analysis for the formulation of a fight against transnational surveillance systems and the support of the digital rights of modern citizenship.



The first axe of analysis is about the bipolar scale inclusion/ exclusion of people to the network society (Manuell Castells) (or digital society if someone prefer better)



The numbers show that there are digital inequalities all around the world,

for example:

in Africa in 2004 there were only 2.60 Internet users and 1.74 computers per 100 inhabitants

in the Americas in 2004 there were 30.89 Internet users and 34 computers per 100 inhabitants

in Asia in the same categories there were 8.10 Internet users and 6.35 computers per 100 inhabitants

and last but not least in Europe there were 31.13 Internet users and 28.48 computers per 100 inhabitants

These numbers are indicative of the digital divide on the continental level.

But if we look at the national data in the Americas and in Europe, we will see that:

1)17 out of 44 countries in Europe fall under the European statistical mean concerning internet users and computers per inhabitant

2) 35 out of 42 countries in America fall under Americas’ statistical mean concerning internet users and computers per inhabitant. 16 countries had in 2004 less than 10 internet users and computers per 100 inhabitants.(http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/statistics/at_glance/Internet04.pdf)



We speak therefore of digital divide on an international level. There are some leader online countries on the digital access and a big majority of poor offline countries And the question is what about all these off line people? Can they participate in a coalition for digital rights or not?



The second axis of analysis is about a new type of digital illiteracy of online people. On the one hand, there are users who know about new technologies, computers, programming etc, they have an “information” orientation, they participate in online virtual communities and maybe they want to be part of a big coalition for digital rights. And on the other hand there are users who know nothing about all these mysterious things. This category of computer users focuses only on traditional means of communication, eg. e-mailing, reading news, etc.



These are the main axes... But we must think about differences in economical, cultural, educational and other sectors of social level...



So who are the hard core of an international network coalition at the social level?

theodor sarafis
2006-05-30, 13:08
I have no doubt about your open communications. The point is at what level these communications construct an open organization at the social level. Have you got a decentralized structure on decision making? and if yes, how you govern this structure....?

vigfus
2006-05-30, 13:25
theodor sarafis (2006-May-30)I have no doubt about your open communications. The point is at what level these communications construct an open organization at the social level. Have you got a decentralized structure on decision making? and if yes, how you govern this structure....?

I'm not sure what you mean by "an open organization at the social level".



There is indeed a decentralized structure on decisionmaking. At our online meetings we use the forum to have polls wich only members have access to (we have yet to have an big IRL members-meet, only small ones around the country), those polls are "real". We have lesser polls on different subjects, some are "real" and some are just to guide the board that run the party. We don't have a poll on every minute subject, we let the board decide those for themselves.



Am i missing the point of your question, perhaps?

SM5POR
2006-05-30, 15:34
Fredrik Färm (2006-May-29)Let's just say that if all the european citizens somehow get together under one flag and fight for the same goals we are one very powerful force to be reckoned with, I'm sure that there are way above 2million people that officially would become members in this organisation.

In order to have 2 million people move in one direction, you need to limit the scope of the organization to a very small set of issues, just as the Pirate Party has limited itself to privacy, copyright and the patent system in the upcoming election in Sweden. When you bring in issues such as inequalities between groups of people and government spending, everyone will have their own solution to the problems identified, even if they all relate to the digital age and networked communities. Instead of having 2 million people fight for the same goals, you risk having 2 million people fight about 2 million goals among themselves, effectively getting nowhere at all.



We have seen this happen again and again: A few people gather around a single issue and gain some attention, thereby launching a movement. As more people join the movement, they tend to bring other issues along, hoping to see them promoted under the same umbrella. If they are allowed to do so, a different group of potential members will avoid joining the movement, since they disagree with parts of the growing agenda. When your agenda grows faster than your membership roll, you may just as well give up.



If you want to attract supporters from all walks of life and the entire political spectrum, you need to be very strict about sticking to a single agenda. Don't exclude anyone from joining, but make very clear to everyone where your focus is. If you can gain 50 percent more members by dropping one of several issues, drop it (if that issue is important to you, you can build a separate movement around it). In this way, conservatives and radicals may be able to support the same movement, even if they are in mutual disagreement over pretty much every other issue you can think of.

theodor sarafis
2006-05-31, 12:32
First i want to apologize for my problem to communicate exactly all of my thoughts. I have too many questions about your Party and i don" t know Swedish so i cannot find answers to these questions from your site. The only way is from this forum. I am sure that you have examined and answered many of my questions to other parts of your online party.



So we have three major issues in our topic



1)the tactical and strategical aims of an international network coalition for digital rights

2)the network organization structure we need to succeed these aims and

3)the alliance politics of this network coalition.



Let me begin from the last one:

I think that there is a complex matrix of factors that determines the process of globalization. This process is not closed but is determined from social, cultural economical and other components. This process is neither bad nor good.... Globalization is something beyond bad and good. I insist in the globalization process because it is the outcome but also the cause of the development and dispersion of net technologies....

Globalization in my point of view is a big-networked process of information flows. And, as Held and McCrew point, these processes are social:



?Globalization can be conceived as a process (or set of processes) which embodies a transformation in the spatial organization of social relations and transactions, expressed in transcontinental or interregional flows and networks of activity, interaction and power? (http://www.polity.co.uk/global/globocp.htm)



The movement for digital rights is a part from these processes and we must think it as such.



I agree with Anders Andersson that ?you need to limit the scope of the organization to a very small set of issues?. This is politically correct at the tactical level but we must think about our alliances with other social layers, parties and movements that have similar aims. Digital rights are constituted by conflicts arising among industry leadership, state governments, creators and citizens at national, regional and transnational level. We cannot ignore this truth...



(For example there is a transnational alienation between cooperation and states to build a huge surveillance system upon the copyright. (http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611725/100438659610/?ic=100446326476 )



But what about strategic aims?

?The very basic digital human rights are the right to access to the electronic domain, the right to freedom of expression and association online, and the right to privacy.? (http://world-information.org/wio/readme/992006886 - Introductory text) These rights are connected with other fundamental human rights or not? The right to life or the right to elect and be elected, the right to control the governance etc etc. I think new information technology is a resultant of social actions of human beings who --in their attempt to enhance their interaction in all levels (personal, interpersonal, social, political, scientific and others)-- invented new ways of communication. (A brief look at internet history is indicative of this argument). From the other point of view these new technologies are connected with complex webs of power. They can be both a factor of emancipation or slavery. All known examples of this (the virtual city of Amsterdam, the network of Seattle, the global anti- globalization movements, the virtual communities general etc but also the ESCHELON, biometric and data mining technologies etc)

I think the major strategic conflict is between those who want an open democratic network society and those who want powerful devices of control and domination. So we should re-consider our strategic aims.

Finally, these aims could be fulfilled only through decentralized structures regarding decision-making. I am glad to hear that you have polls which only members have access to and lesser polls on different subjects, which guide your board. I think this is the first step to decentralizing and democratizing our societies...



PS: Maybe the only way to answer all of my questions is to come to Sweden to see and talk with you closely. :)

SM5POR
2006-05-31, 17:32
theodor sarafis (2006-May-31)I agree with Anders Andersson that ?you need to limit the scope of the organization to a very small set of issues?. This is politically correct at the tactical level but we must think about our alliances with other social layers, parties and movements that have similar aims. Digital rights are constituted by conflicts arising among industry leadership, state governments, creators and citizens at national, regional and transnational level. We cannot ignore this truth...

Not a single truth should be ignored, I hope, whether relevant or not... :cool: I think limiting ourselves to a small set of issues is not merely "politically correct"; it"s the key to building a successful movement in the first place. Certainly we can and should form alliances whenever that helps us promote our goals; that"s what I mean by not excluding anyone. Anybody sharing our goals is welcome to join us, but we cannot incorporate whatever other goals they have in mind into our agenda merely to cooperate.



To give an example from Swedish politics, the Greens (Miljöpartiet (http://www.mp.se/)) first gained a foothold in the Swedish parliament in the 1980"s on an environmentalist, bloc-neutral agenda. They were voted into parliament in 1988, lost all their seats in 1991, but voted in again in 1994, this time with a EU-skeptic touch as Sweden was about to join the union. They have been in parliament since, and have developed an intricate relationship with the governing Social Democratic party, meaning they can"t be seen as bloc-neutral any longer. At the same time they have widened their agenda, partly to accomodate the Social Democrats, and they now have opinions on a range of political issues well beyond their environmentalist base. In a way, they have become more concerned about their own position of power, than about the environment (they will certainly disagree with me here, but this is from my own perspective).



The Pirate Party is now trying to repeat the Greens" attempt 20 years ago to introduce another dimension into politics, hopefully without falling into the same trap of becoming too addicted to power to stick to their initial agenda. The party agenda is about privacy, copyright, and patents; nothing more. If the party wins more that 4 percent of the votes, thereby gaining seats in the parliament, there is a good chance they will hold the balance of power between the two blocs (Social Democrats/Left/Greens vs. Centre/Liberals/Christian Democrats/Moderate Conservatives) and effectively pick the next government.



This is a position the Pirate Party is explicitely aiming to exploit, by negotiating an alliance with the bloc giving them the best offer on the privacy, copyright and patent issues. In all other issues (health care, defense, whatever), the Pirate Party intends to vote with their allies in government, just as the Greens and the Left Party (former Communist) does today, except that the Pirate Party has no predetermined preference for the colour of the government (red or blue). The mandate period for the parliament is four years, but the government may be reconstituted during that time if there are significant shifts in the alliances formed in parliament.



So, the Pirate Party is not afraid of building alliances, but it also intends to reject any alliance that doesn"t help promoting its goals, which come first.



PS: Maybe the only way to answer all of my questions is to come to Sweden to see and talk with you closely. :)

You are of course welcome, but seriously I think you can more easily make contact with most of us via the Internet than by travelling around. Sweden is a large and sparsely populated country, with a mere 20 inhabitants per km², and one important task for the Pirate Party will be to distribute its 3 million voting ballots to some 6 million potential voters in 29 constituencies and nearly 6,000 voting districts (the ballots have been paid and are being printed right now, for delivery over the coming months; some have already arrived). And most of the approximately 120 parliamentary candidates fielded by the party have yet to meet each other in person! :D

2006-06-05, 17:57
The point is at what level these communications construct an open organization at the social level. Have you got a decentralized structure on decision making? and if yes, how you govern this structure....?



Our official structure is pretty top-down, to make it easy for journalists to understand who they are talking to. Our party has a party leader, the districts has local leaders. But this does not reflect the way we work.



We have "Just do it" as our motto. If a handful of party members think something is in the best interest of the party they should do it, and not wait for approval. If this leads to trouble then we try to deal with the trouble in the same way. Sort of a real life political wiki.

2006-06-05, 19:36
The last post was (and this post is) written by Mårten Fjällström, local leader for the Uppsala pirates (or so my titel says).



For some odd reason I can not get this forum when I am logged on. I am working on sorting out that quirk. Or rather letting the experts do it.

theodor sarafis
2006-06-09, 08:09
Greetings from Greece where we have a warm political summer... Students and university professors strike against a new education law for universities privatisation.... What about your political campaign?

hpk
2006-06-25, 20:41
I am HPK from french pirate piraty :

http://www.parti-pirate.info



Do the Greek and the italien one have its own website ?



We could run a ring together or/and construct a webpage where all our links appears



Where are you website ?



I am very interested to point to you...

2006-08-04, 20:00
They should start a Pirateparty here in Finland too. Or is there one? atleast I havn`t heard about it yet! In that case please show yourself to the Finnish Peolple!!!

Nicklas W Bjurman
2006-08-04, 20:15
For anyone looking for global collaboration the network PP-International (http://www.pp-international.net) has started.



As far as I know there is no finnish party as of yet. If you don't find one feel free to start one!

Okänd Pirat
2006-08-04, 22:28
There is a Finnish party called Tietoyhteiskuntapuolue, which was inspired by the Swedish pirate party, and founded at the beginning of this year. http://www.tietoyhteiskuntapuolue.fi/news.php (I have mentioned this party previously on the swedish forum sections here: http://forum.piratpartiet.se/FindPost31254.aspx).



Being the first other political party inspired by the Swedish pirate party, they did not adapt the pirate image, but went with a more neutral 'information society party' (freely translated), and included things like computer education in schools into their agenda, in addition to more typical pirate party questions.



Reading on their forums, they seem to be considering changing their name to include the word pirate, but bureaucracy would slow it down as they have already started the process of registering and signature collection using the old name, and they are a bit cautious about the radicality in the term Pirate, as many were in the Swedish party in the beginning too.



http://www.tietoyhteiskuntapuolue.fi/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?1010.0

(post in Finnish about renaming the party to Piraattipuolue (pirate party)).



Current status appears to be that the board of Tietoyhteiskuntapuolue decided that at least for the moment the name will not be changed.



Because they have not adopted the pirate name, and don't have any english presentation of themselves on their webpage, it's quite hard for international visitors to find them.



--

Okänd Pirat





Edit: added link to earlier post about TYP.

bore
2006-08-05, 17:41
Could we perhaps have a link to them from http://www2.piratpartiet.se/international/ ?

Nicklas W Bjurman
2006-08-05, 22:55
I don't know they ain't calling themselves a Pirate party and I have no idea what they stand for. any finnish to English online translator anywhere?

tg
2006-08-05, 23:57
Nicklas W Bjurman (2006-Aug-05)I don't know they ain't calling themselves a Pirate party and I have no idea what they stand for. any finnish to English online translator anywhere?

Their board is presently split on the issue of identifying as a Finnish Pirate Party, and they intend to make some kind of decision about it in their official autumn meeting. I don't think they can presently in any way be called or counted as a Pirate Party. They are, just like their name says, an information society oriented party having some single individual members symphatetic to the idea of the change into a real Pirate Party and standing behind pirate movement's political goals. There is not yet a pirate party worth the name in Finland.