3 ms·

I find Falkvinge's libertarianism[1, 2] much more compatible with the idea of a pirate party than direct democracy; democracy can outvote individual freedom and

by vedranm 10y ago

I find Falkvinge's libertarianism[1, 2] much more compatible with the idea of a pirate party than direct democracy; democracy can outvote individual freedom and create a majority rule over an individual[3]. Other pirate parties are a good example of how the core principles can get outvoted and diluted with off-topic issues. In 2015 Pirate Party of Iceland overthrew the blasphemy laws[41, which is a great success. I honestly hope they do not take the way of the modern left and introduce the concept of "hate speech" which limits free speech to only ideas the ruling group likes. It has happened over and over. Still, I see this victory as a positive move. I hope the party will succeed in passing a meaningful copyright and patent reform. [1] https://falkvinge.net/ https://falkvinge.net/ [2] https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/ https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/ [3] https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education-libertarian https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/educatio... [4] https://www.rt.com/news/271645-iceland-pirates-blasphemy-law/ https://www.rt.com/news/271645-iceland-pirates-blasphemy-law...

avar 10y ago
The party's main policy for this election isn't to try to enact direct democracy. It's something they have as part of their core policy[1]. You can read about what they want to accomplish in the shorter term here[2]. They'd like to sensibly work towards more self-determination and greater direct participation in the government, not try to establish direct voting on every issue and abolish parliament. I think you're mistaken about more direct democracy being some easy part to tyranny. Right now if the majority in Iceland wanted to say, completely restrict freedom of speech, this would just be the main issue in the next election. Some tyrannical party would get voted into power and they'd make it the law. No direct democracy needed. Of course there's something to be said about the moderating influence of the time delay required for that, but there's other ways to achieve that. I think you're missing what a moderating influence it can be for a society to feel like they're directly involved in decision making, and how that could be an even bigger moderating influence than directly removing power from the population. [1] http://piratar.is/en/core-policy/ http://piratar.is/en/core-policy/ [2] http://piratar.is/en/election-manifesto-2016/ http://piratar.is/en/election-manifesto-2016/

by vedranm 10y ago

avar 10y ago

The party's main policy for this election isn't to try to enact direct democracy. It's something they have as part of their core policy[1]. You can read about what they want to accomplish in the shorter term here[2]. They'd like to sensibly work towards more self-determination and greater direct participation in the government, not try to establish direct voting on every issue and abolish parliament. I think you're mistaken about more direct democracy being some easy part to tyranny. Right now if the majority in Iceland wanted to say, completely restrict freedom of speech, this would just be the main issue in the next election. Some tyrannical party would get voted into power and they'd make it the law. No direct democracy needed. Of course there's something to be said about the moderating influence of the time delay required for that, but there's other ways to achieve that. I think you're missing what a moderating influence it can be for a society to feel like they're directly involved in decision making, and how that could be an even bigger moderating influence than directly removing power from the population. [1] http://piratar.is/en/core-policy/ http://piratar.is/en/core-policy/ [2] http://piratar.is/en/election-manifesto-2016/ http://piratar.is/en/election-manifesto-2016/