Thursday, July 14, 2011

Responding to Aiguru.

Ok. While replying to Aiguru’s comment I ended up with another blog post more or less, so here it is. You can read the actual comment in the comments section of the blog post titled: Breaking into Politics: The Hydra.

What I meant by 'Injecting our way of doing things' actually doesn't change the political system ‘proper’ at all, at least, not unless we actually get a majority, then the people on the party websites could do pretty much what they want with politics in the territory under that parliament more or less. See, we'd be operating our way on the net, our house, and as far away from their way of operating as we can get away with in parliament, their house. (Whoooose house!?) Anonymous would use the net to decide how our ministers will act on our behalf before our representatives actually go into the parliament/senate, whatever, and do so. See what I mean? It might not be ideal early on for certain types of political structure where small parties struggle, but in nations with proportionate representation, smaller parties will have more influence. Anonymous represents a global front, and our approach should incorporate the whole spectrum.

I believe in the whole Op Payback/Anti-Sec approach, its performing a very important role in exposing the corruption and ineptitude inherent in the system. I may need to re-clarify that the Anon Party approach shouldn’t at all be about changing Anonymous or putting a stop to our current methods, I for one love them. But many people do not see that we're exposing corruption and ineptitude, they see it only as us threatening their cosy state of affairs. So we need as many ways as we can to reach people and have them all working alongside each other in concert.
The Anon Party should be just another facet of Anon working along with the rest, it absolutely shouldn’t be a replacement for the current methods used by Anonymous. Anti-Sec will grow and continue to get support from people attracted by that area. With any luck the Anon Party will get people who are attracted by their area. That is why I call this way of dealing with the wider picture 'the Hydra approach', it's lots of teeth coming from all angles and the Anon Party and the ‘hacker front’ of Anonymous are merely two sets of teeth. There are a lot of Anon supporters who feel that they're useless to Anonymous because they can't hack or reach where the activist action is in person and we must find all the ways we can to unleash their potential. So I agree, we need to grow and spread awareness and expand our member base, this is just another way we can do so.

What you say about millions having not yet expressed their opinions, well, when they are ready, they can join the party. It’ll be there for them as will the rest of Anonymous and they can then try and take things where they want. That's how Anon is, so, in my opinion, that's how the party should also be. See, most parties base what they’ll do on a structured manifesto and election promises, these things often get broken, and the party can’t be flexible when the situation changes without running into criticism, or when they do so they can get accused of being morally flexible when, well …they are. So the manifesto I advocate is we'll promise people the ability to take things where they want to take them and also offer a safe guard against the corruption that’s making things crap like they are now, all by utilizing this open source and transparent approach and then basically offering nothing else. I can’t really see how you could offer to represent the people anymore than by saying: ‘look, you tell our ministers and MP’s/senitors where to take things and they will follow your lead, if they deviate you can remove them from the party.’ For me that's an example of real democracy, as apposed to the: 'We vote once every few years then, you lot in power pretty much so what the hell you want' approach..

Though 'winning' via this method would be fantastic, it’s not necessarily entirely about winning elections. It's also about understanding their system, and feeling out how the corruption and everything else works. I mean, christ, we can then inform everybody about it in detail. If they change the laws or do whatever to stop us from operating in politics our way, we will forever be able to say: 'Look how corrupt they are, they even stopped us from playing ‘fair’.' So I disagree with what you say about not trying to understand these men in politics, I think it’s vital, they’re a part of the ‘system of control’ that common humanity needs to rise above. I understand how you feel that the part of Anon you’re familiar with may want nothing to do with this, but Anon is the whole internet, and many of us do want to test the water and see what happens. It’s not going to be as if we're pulling hackers from the front lines.

If they can't get rid of us, we'll be there, in there base, trolling their dudes, for a very long time, bringing the issues of the 21st century to the 19th century’s attention. I wouldn't expect immediate victory, thus immediate changes within the system, but I would expect growth as the number of people in the population that are actually with us in our 'era' also grows.

Thanks for the questions; I hope we can keep this all going.

No comments: