Re: [d@DCC] Canadian politech resources

From: Russell McOrmond <russell _-at-_ flora.ca>
To: Bill Traynor <Bill.Traynor (at) lutheranlife.ca>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 11:58:19 -0500 (EST)

On Tue, 14 Jan 2003, Bill Traynor wrote:

> Should Canadian efforts within the digital-rights movement, FLOSS
> movement, etc. be centralized within one organization?  Do we have
> enough resources to support several groups?  Would one group better
> serve the interests of all?

  One group cannot serve the interests of everyone.  In politics it is
most often the case that "the whole" is much smaller than the sum of the
parts.

(Ask me some time why I strongly believe in Electoral Reform
http://www.fairvotecanada.org , and believe that the best decisions that
have defined us as Canadians have been made in Minority governments, not
Majority governments)



  Here is the central problem:  Outside of some core issues, we don't
actually agree with each other.  A centralized group would only be able to
be involved with the 'lowest common denominator' of the membership, and
thus would specifically force the group to ignore critical issues.


  I learned this with my previous involvement in movements opposing
multilateral Investment policy.  I was involved as I simply didn't agree
with the general concept of Investment policy existing at all, not because
I was an opponent to Globalization in general, or that I had any political
beliefs in common with others that were opposing some specific agreements
(Such as the Multilateral Agreement on Investment, Chapter 11 of NAFTA,
etc).  Coalitions existed on this one issue, and I even remember reports
of one parade in the USA that had both Black Rights groups and Skin-heads
in the same parade opposing the MAI.


  As soon as you asked this group for solutions or alternatives, chaos
resulted since there was only agreement on what they disagreed on, not
anything further.


  To be useful, we need to have groups that can actually offer viable
solutions to government, not just complain.  In order to offer solutions
you need to have groups small enough that they can actually agree on
solutions, and be able to present them to governments and the general 
public.


  FLOSS is a demonstration of what can happen with decentralization, and
Microsoft/RIAA/MPAA/etc are examples of what can happen with
centralization.  Our political involvement should take the same form as
some of the successful movements we are trying to help.


BTW: To echo Matthew, having individual citizens writing letters to MP's
(Their own, and specific relevant ministers) would likely have a greater
effect than having a well-funded group.  It might be great to have both,
but if you can spare $30 or write a letter to your MP, then I'd suggest
you wrote a good letter (Cc to friends, media, etc).


  How many copies of TheOpenCD.org have you handed out to existing 
Microsoft Windows users?  Have you given your MP a copy of one of Lessig's 
books?  (etc...)

---
 Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/>
 Any 'hardware assist' for communications, whether it be eye-glasses, 
 VCR's, or personal computers, must be under the control of the citizen 
 and not a third party.   -- http://www.flora.ca/russell/

--
For (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and
links to other related sites please see http://www.digital-copyright.ca