Welcome on board as an Associate.

I, Abraham Raji, have read, understood and agree to the constitution of the Indian Pirates and would like to join the movement as an Associate Member.

direct democracy with constitution based decision making" and with a future roadmap.

We have the freedom to cooperate with each other.

Started a proposal at https://codema.in/d/Xt8vy7aG/constitution-amendment-refine-first-point-in-goals

I assume you meant under 'goals'

I would like to change direct democracy stated in the constitution to "direct democracy with consensus-based decision making" and with a future roadmap.

Usually yes.

non-cooperation is usually with an authority, right? Basic idea is we should come together voluntarily, its an invitation to join.

IMO adding freedom to cooperate makes it politically right. say, in a context of non-cooperation, the recommendation to cooperate with each other will be a conflicting thought.

It is not 'must' but only 'should' which already implies it is not mandatory, right?

Section 4: We should cooperate with each other.

I would like this to be changed to We should have the freedom to cooperate with each other.

Implying that I have the freedom to not cooperate if I choose not to.

Proposed it https://codema.in/d/F1Viy6Ll/constitution-amendment-remove-second-item-from-goals

I prefer to redact that line from constitution as it is not a goal.

Propose a change in wording. I guess it was there from the original draft, no one objected to it till now.

I have disagreement in the second goal mentioned in the constitution, which says "engaging with young and educated citizen". It should be an inclusive statement.

Welcome on board!

I Tanzeem MB have read and understood the Constitution of Indian Pirates. I agree with the Constitution and would like to be Associate Member. I am inclined towards swatantra software/ hardware and promote the free software movement. I've started a matrix room SHRUG- swatantra Hardware Respecting users group for promotion of RYF devices. Presently a group member has started doing building blocks for Enterprise level. applications. Other major activiteis: Organized Install fest at Thitruvananthapuram in 2017, organized software freedom day in 2018 at CDIT.

@utkarshgupta welcome!

Read the constitution and the manifesto and loved it.
I totally agree with them, too.
Willing to join in the same.

Yeah, I agree to the points in the constitution. Would like to join.

This is great that new members are joining^{^}

thank you :)

@smithai @gauravsitlani @mrlion welcome on board!

hi I have read constitution of Indian Pirates , and I do agree on those points an want to join :slight_smile:

Hi everyone my name is Gaurav Sitlani.
I have read the pirate constitution and the manifesto.
I totally abide by it and extend my gratitude towards it.
I will help and support in best way possible to spread and campaign for it.

hey folks, i have been not in direct touch with the pirate movement in India until recently. But have keenly watched its stewardship as publicly as one could do.

So far, i think the constitution framed for india pirate movement, have seen a critical evolution leveraged on direct democracy.

i would like to be an associate, with the current state of dynamics in the community, i believe democratic and cooperative principles are seriously evaluated constantly, without derailing to technocratic/oligarchic/plutocratic hell holes.

i am interested in studying geography, socio-economic-political, transport, food, communication networks. it would be really progressive if could able to help frame a mechanism and policy i learned in alternative economic models and other similar stuff, in promulgating the directive principles & goals stated through the articles and sections in the constitution. :thumbsup:

I Akash Bhagwandas Prajapati accept and agree the constitution of the pirate party and would like to join the pirate party .

Welcome on board fellow Pirate!

I, Muhammed Shamil K, have read and understood the constitution of Indian Pirates and agree to it. I would like to join IP as an associate.

I, Ryan, have read, understood and agree to the constitution of Pirate Movement and would like to join the movement as an Associate.

I, Wingston , have read, understood and agree to the constitution of the Pirate Movement and would like to join the movement. But i do think you can figure out a better way to do this initiation than by a thread like this. i had to scroll for a while before it let me comment.

Oh! No! Thank You for pionting it out.

@abhijtihb welcome on board as an associate.

Btw, is the typo in your username intentional?

I am Abhijith B. I am from Palakkad, Kerala, India. I am currently working as a developer in Digital Freedom Foundation(dff.org.in) at Goregaon in Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. I am of the view that decentralization, democracy, collaboration, freedom and privacy are essential. I read the constitution and found that it agrees with my view. I agree with it and would like to join as an associate member.

@manoharelavarthi welcome on board as an associate.

@michaeljohnsinclai can you start a separate thread for this proposal?

I agree with the constitution of the Pirate Movement and would like to join.

@anandj1 welcome on board!

I, Anand J, have read, understood and agree to the constitution of Pirate Movement and would like to be associated with the movement.

@mahirbinfarooque welcome on board! Participate in sub groups and discussions, spread pirate ideas in your circle and bring more people here.

I Mahir Bin Farooque, have read, understood and agree to the constitution of Pirate Movement and would like to join.

@anisha , @riyazusman , @karthikeyanak , @vishnu , @jayaura welcome onboard. Take our ideas to people, and bring more people here. Join 'Associates' sub group and any other sub group that you find interesting.

I've read through the constitution, it aligns with my vision of transparency and I accept the constitution. I wish to join as an associate.

I read the constitution and accept it. Wish to be an associate member.

Great constitution!!! Would like to become associate member of the party.

Accepting the constitution and applying for membership.

Hi @anisha could you introduce yourself here too https://codema.in/d/4Cpz3YGn/so-where-are-you-from-a-brief-intro-about-yourself-and-other-pirate-members

I would like to apply for associate membership. I fully read constitution and agrees with it.

@ambadyanands @akhileshjamdar @pradeep and @shanthakumar are now Associates.

Welcome! You can apply for permanent membership after the mandatory 6 month waiting period which will serve as a mutual probation to ensure that the individual’s objectives are in alignment with the larger group.

Hi @shanthakumar could you introduce yourself here too.. https://codema.in/d/4Cpz3YGn/comment/993582

I, Shanthakumar, have read, understood and found that the constitution of Pirate Movement complies with my philosophical views and would like to join the movement as a Member.

A late announcement, @fayadfami and @arjun were accepted as permanent members.

@ambadyanands @pradeepmohandas @akhileshjamdar welcome!

@akhileshjamdar could you introduce yourself here too - https://codema.in/d/4Cpz3YGn/comment/993582

I've been observing for a while, but I guess I should start contributing.

I hereby accept the constitutiion of the Indian Pirates. (http://pirates.org.in/constitution/piratesin-constitution-3.0draft3.pdf)

Hi @pradeepmohandas
Could you introduce yourself here for the rest of us? -
https://codema.in/d/4Cpz3YGn/comment/993582

It has been more than a year spent as an associate member of the party and I do not think I have contributed nor think that I will be able to contribute to the party. Hence, I humbly request to resign from the primary membership of the party.

I, Pradeep Mohandas, accept the constitution of the Indian Pirates and would like to be taken in as an Associate Member.

You don't need approval for initial application - but it will be to be an associate. No more initial members - those were only when forming the group - to get started, since no one had completed 6 months to be permanent.

Vidyut

Artistic handmade soaps by me ( https://vidyut.info )

Social Media: Twitter ( https://twitter.com/Vidyut ) Facebook ( https://facebook.com/theVidyut ) Google+ ( https://google.com/+AamJanata ) Diaspora ( https://poddery.com/i/62f15bc003f0 )

Blogs: Intellectual Anarchy ( https://aamjanata.com ) || Nisarga ( https://nisarga.info ) || tech ( https://vidyut.net ) || Homeschooling ( https://homeschoolingindia.in ) || Fek Le ( https://fekle.in )

I, Ambady Anand S, hereby state that I accept Indian Pirates' Constitution.

You can read my intro here.

I would like to apply for Permanent membership.

As an associate member I've tried to build a perspective based on ideas outlined in constitution. I've taken part in discussions, co-authored an article on behalf of Indian Pirates and jointly maintain the Indian Pirates public Diaspora pod.

So, @vik has been accepted as a permanent member. Handling @arjun's request now.

@shrinivasant welcome to Indian Pirates. As the name suggests, Initial Members were created to kickstart (bootstrap) Indian Pirates. This type of membership were accepted only for first 6 months. You can be an associate member now and a permanent member later when you are active here. Join the associate members subgroup.

Hey me @5hanth and @karthikeyanak are planning to meet up this Saturday and do the Lpg survey.. Would you like to come? How can we contact you

Got to know about indian pirates activities from @vik
Like to join as initial member.
Agreeing for the terms.

@vik @arjun great to see your interest, will process your request one by one (limitation of loomio, one proposal at a time per thread) https://codema.in/d/bmptNclA/membership-approval

@vidyut we have amended the constitution to allow any nationality to a permanent member. https://codema.in/d/BNVip2MO/constitution-amendment-allow-voting-rights-to-any-nationality

I'd like to become a permanent member too. Co-authored this https://medium.com/@piratesin/freebasics-a-free-ride-with-consequences-d7788a9480e1#.vemdkv93g
And am actively involved in promotion of IP ideas as well.

I would like to become a permanent member. I am actively involved with diasp.in and promotion of IP ideas generally.

@praveenarimbrathod Have we specified membership as limited to Indian citizens only? I can start a proposal, if so, but not sure citizenship is mandatory anywhere in our documents currently.

I don't think we are doing enough for the government to bother with us for a long long time yet and if we form a party, we'll have to form it from scratch, as people have joined here with "without" the intention to form party specified.

@vidyut @michaeljohnsinclai membership is not required for participating in discussions here. So we can already get ideas and observations. But we can still create and "Observing Members" or something similar if it helps recognize their participation level.

It is the observing member status, they can not vote but can take part in discusions supporting Pirate ideas.

@vidyut you can start a vote on "Voting Members" sub group about allowing non-Indians to be members.

I see organizational collaboration as a better option for working with pirates from other countries. Since borders are a limitation for any real activity on the ground it will create different classes of memberships. Also it will be an easy excuse for government to malign us.

This group as such don't aim to transform to a political party, but if enough members of this collective feels we are are ready to form a political party, they can form a party that is separate from this collective.

@praveenarimbrathod just a thought. On another thread, we are discussing collaborations based on acceptance of the constitution. Why not, instead (or, as well), open membership to pirates from other countries? As long as the focus of Indian Pirates is on issues relevant to India, of course. We will learn much more about operating and moving forward AS PIRATES, than vague collaborations we don't have agendas for. There seems to be a need people feel for "fresh blood" so to say, which I think is a manifestation of need for fresh perspective. I imagine people with understanding of what pirate parties are will be able to make far more constructive participation that helps us anchor ourselves in our primary task, than extending our focus outward, outside the scope of our identity.

If we aren't using this group to be a political party, I don't see a need for limiting membership by nationality (Indian political parties cannot have members of any other nationality). As long as the subjects remain relevant to India. I have no problem if @michaeljohnsinclai seeks membership.

Maybe this should be put to the vote. What say, @praveenarimbrathod? Not sure if the constitution mentions nationality. If consensus is against it, then we should perhaps explicitly state Indian nationality only.

@michaeljohnsinclai you can continue participating here with your ideas and views, but it'd be better for us to keep the membership to only Indians or we will be accused of foreign conspiracy and it will adversely affect our reach.

Do i have to live in India to become an Indian Piarate ? I am not of Indian Origin But I am starting to like this activity here?

I would like to be a permanent member. I was an initial member and took part in maintaining websites of diaspora yatra, pirates.org.in and diasp.in.

1. Is this discussion supposed to be happening in the "Membership Requests" thread?

2. Have you guys seen thevenusproject.com? Leave politics. Heck, chuck the idea of money, altogether. You can live a very peaceful life. Watch Paradise or Oblivion on Youtube.

Also - can we move this discussion to another thread or change it's title? "Membership request" is a bit confusing..

Besides, as a Pirate party, I see no need to subscribe to existing and dysfunctional isms that restrict our scope. We can adopt views that make sense to us.

Someone thirsting for libertarianism should check out Sanjeev Sabhlok's sabhlokcity.com ( http://sabhlokcity.com ) - I think it is the most sustained libertarian effort in India. No point reinventing the wheel.

Vidyut

Social Media: Twitter ( https://twitter.com/Vidyut ) Facebook ( https://facebook.com/theVidyut ) Google+ ( https://google.com/+AamJanata ) Diaspora ( https://poddery.com/i/62f15bc003f0 )

Blogs: Intellectual Anarchy ( https://aamjanata.com ) || personal ( https://vidyut.info ) || Nisarga ( https://nisarga.info ) || tech ( https://vidyut.net ) || Homeschooling ( https://homeschoolingindia.in ) || Fek Le ( https://fekle.in )

I think there is some distance in producing a taxation system that more accurately reflects a persons political preference. Most are happy with the overall concept of paying into a central fund to provide some basic services for all - but refinement of that system is required - a lot of money goes to waste and there is significant corruption - in most countries.

I still don't buy the lazy man arguments given so far though. I don't think a person can isolate themselves this way and still live in a modern society that works for most people.

Let's think about the food argument. If I produce food with my own labour and keep it for myself, because I made it - that's pretty much fine.

Then my neighbour, who doesn't have the same ability to produce food as me begins to starve. His parents never educated him with any agricultural skills so he doesn't know what to do. Then his first child dies of starvation.

When his second child dies of starvation, this guy is pretty angry at me and burns my house down. Destroying me, my family and all of the food I had. His actions are illegal - but I would understand them.

I could use a similar argument in terms of foreign aid. Here the UK foreign aid budget is currently about £1 billion per annum. It's purpose is to help other countries. You may say those countries should sort themselves out and not rely on handouts - but this is about reduction of potential harm for all. If our neighbours are safer because we help them out, we make our own environment safer.

I don't call this socialism, more self preservation.

I did not realize that this had become such a big thing with pitched camps etc :p

In line.

// balu, Currently a huge amount of our taxes is spend on defense. You have a problem if more money is spent on building houses? //

I simply disagree to spending my money (which is result of my effort, unless you can prove otherwise) in something I don't agree with. Whether it be war or houses. You need to get consensus before doing that and I keep the right to say no to it if I want to. Yes, I am ok with losing the services that I would've received had I said yes. Is there such a provision?

First of all, don't put words on my mouth. I perfectly know what I told and I never denied that there was slavery or feudalism or colonialism or untouchability. History is of course one of the tools we can look up on how to make a just tool. But, generalisation of events to "history" is something I don't agree to. I acknowledge history but I don't find it complete or cent percent authentic. History has been tweaked, mutated and re-engineered and hence can not be taken as a benchmark to identify all wrongs reverse them. Who decides which version of history is correct? (Or are you under the beleif that there is only one history. If so, sorry for you)

Few points
1. You say my wealth was made from forceful acquisitions by previous generations. Ok, prove it with some substantiable evidence. Else, stop this generalisation. Yes. That is how world runs (as of now). If you want to build a new world, first stand on the current world and play by its rules. Then modify the rules.

1. If you can not prove the above, then yes - don't touch the result of my effort (not inheritence, not privilege but EFFORT) without my permission. You can't simply assume something to be true.

Assumption and hope are two different things. We can build up a constitution based on hopes and modify it as and when required. Hope that everyone play nice and help out the neighbour when we ask them. Afterall, we all hope a world where all plays nice and strive to accomplish that.
But, if we start assuming things and consider those assumptions authentic, it is foolish. We are answerable to those assumptions. We need to justify those assumptions.

About forking, no. I am not forking Indian Pirates and starting another group. I had agreed to the constitution when I joined and I still agree to it. But I demand clarity on it. If the constitution is forming up a way that I can't accept to, then I will re-think.

Till then constitution is just unclear and vague for me, not wrong. And I am not disagreeing to something that ain't wrong. I think I have made that clear now. I agree to the constitution; I demand clarity.

PS : On a friendly note, stop putting the concept of forking whenever there is talk of dissent. IMO, forking is the last resort; not the first choice. Trying to reach consensus comes before forking and discussions lead to consensus. You simply can't put forking on the table in the middle of a discussion.

balu, Currently a huge amount of our taxes is spend on defense. You have a problem if more money is spent on building houses?

Balu, are you denying there was feudalism, untouchability, colonialism, slavery and all of history as we know is fairy tales? History is one of the most important tools we have to decide how to make a just world. There is no meaning to argue further if you refuse to acknowledge history. if "don't touch my inheritances and privilleges, its my right, collect good karma for privilleges in next life" is your policy, sorry, that is not what we are building this collective for. Since you and Jemshid agree on those ideas, you could make another group with those principles. We can continue working together on common issues where we agree.

History is and can not be taken as an authentic guideline to decide how we act in the present. Yes, what you say is absolutely right and wealth was once acquired by force. But, for that to be taken as authentic, it should be substantiable and officially documented, since in the current socio-economic circumstances documented equals official equals authentic (How that is an absurd argument is actually another thread. :) ).

Well, leave that aside and let's focus on that amendment.
I won't choose the phrase "political settlement". It adds a gangsta tone to it, which may validate the "by force" argument Jemshid questioned.

How about this one? This is a basic idea from the top of my head and may have many loopholes.

Fulfilling of these rights may be implemented by redirecting the money from other sources like taxes or profit from our institutions. However, these redirections will be completely transparent and criticizable. They are subject to a consensus agreement and will not be forcefully levied.

@Others: suggestions please.

If you look back at history, wealth were taken by force and the wealth you inherit has a component of that. It is indeed desired by those who got the privilleges to not mention history.

How about we add lines like this to constitution.

We should strive for political settlement with our neighbours and redirect money spend on decence to achieve these rights for everyone.

Balu, your hardwork has a component of historic oppression/privillege, you cannot ignore that. Some people justify it as luck/fate etc so how you see that is important in this discussion.

Balu, Jemshid, suggest the amendments you consider acceptable. It is never claimed to be perfect anyway.

@akshay
Can we make an attempt to define rights?
Can I define rights as those things for it's implementation, use of physical force is acceptable?

//Do I think everyone has a right to life? Yes. Does it mean I’ll take someone’s life and transplant his heart to someone who needs a heart? No//

I find that you have two kidneys and my neighbor is in need of a kidney. Do I have a right to take your kidney by force and transplant it on my neighbor?

@vidyut
//1. We probably need a new philosophy for changing times. //

Do we ever say that we need a new science for changing times?!

//Many things and values have changed and our ideas of governance have not engaged with them to a large extent.//
When we speak of change, I came across this article today.

18 spectacularly wrong apocalyptic predictions made around the time of the first Earth Day in 1970, expect more this year

http://www.aei.org/publication/18-spectacularly-wrong-apocalyptic-predictions-made-around-the-time-of-the-first-earth-day-in-1970-expect-more-this-year-2/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+aei-ideas%2Fcarpe-diem+%28AEIdeas+%C2%BB+Carpe+Diem%29

//2. Libertarian sides are sucky sources for views on socialism, just like socialist websites are sucky sources for views on Libertarianism.//

Many of us believe that socialism is a holy cow (Is this usage politically correct in the current Indian political scene?) which should never be criticized. The intention while quoting Ayn Rand is not to ascertain a fact, but to make people think about fundamentals and empirical results of socialism.

Ah, I couldn't say this on the "Voting Members" subgroup as I am not a member there. Let me state it here.

I am not simply disagreeing with the constitution. I am challenging its vagueness. I am demanding a clarity on what we have stated in constitution. If you think constitution is not the place to elaborate but one which should be concise, fine. Make another social document and make it clear there. Whatever we do, this vagueness should not be left unattended. No constitution will be precise in their first draft - it needs criticisms and updations. You define only fundamental rights in the constitution?? I am fine with that ; but that is not an excuse for those definitions be kept vague.

Jemshid's question actually explored this vagueness. We said "everyone has right". How is it implemented is a simple question that we may face. We must have an answer to that. Though not a perfect one. "We will do as and when times require" is not an answer. At least not one suited for a movement with such brilliant ideologies.

Exaggerating the essence of Jemshid's question to "life and heart transplantation" analogy is nothing but stupid. This can not be stated over and over. We are talking about physical stuff like "food", "house" etc and how my possession of them will be affected for the sake of equality.

// Do I think everyone has a right to life? Yes. Does it mean I’ll take someone’s life and transplant his heart to someone who needs a heart? No. //

Excellent. Please share what all comes under your definition of "life" and how you intend to ensure equality in all those sectors? I don't need a complete answer, but I definitely need an answer, at least an idea to stand upon.

I know we can't predefine and document every aspect and scenario where equality may be violated and how we intend to solve this. But, we should start somewhere and expand it as we move on. This may be also seen as premature optimization. But to me, premature optimization is far better than a temporary solution dominating the existence of a final solution just for the sake of practicality.

Until now, no one has cleared Jemshid's doubts and concerns. All we have done is ask questions back and scale up or down the issue from its core essence. He is right, something is not right in the constitution regarding those sections and should me made correct and clear.
Or if there is a consensus that it is already perfect and needs no modification, then yes, I will disagree to that constitution. Until then, I am challenging it.

a right to realize equal life chances regardless of identity.

Every one has a right to food, housing, education, healthcare and privacy

These are like fundamental rights. No constitution would mention how to achieve those I think. How to grant fundamental rights to all citizens is a question that a democracy has to think about every day, on a case by case basis.

@balasankarchelamat I do not understand why you object to the constitution based on @jemshidkk 's idea of how we are going to get everyone those fundamental rights.

Do I think everyone has a right to life? Yes. Does it mean I'll take someone's life and transplant his heart to someone who needs a heart? No.

1. We probably need a new philosophy for changing times. Many things and values have changed and our ideas of governance have not engaged with them to a large extent.

2. Libertarian sides are sucky sources for views on socialism, just like socialist websites are sucky sources for views on Libertarianism.

Vidyut

Social Media: Twitter ( https://twitter.com/Vidyut ) Facebook ( https://facebook.com/theVidyut ) Google+ ( https://google..com/+AamJanata ) Diaspora ( https://poddery.com/i/62f15bc003f0 )

Blogs: Intellectual Anarchy ( https://aamjanata.com ) || personal ( https://vidyut.info ) || Nisarga ( https://nisarga.info ) || tech ( https://vidyut.net ) || Homeschooling ( https://homeschoolingindia.in ) || Fek Le ( https://fekle.in )

I demand we clarify what we mean when we say "everyone has a right". Does it mean we forcefully take them from those who already have it and start from scratch by providing equal opportunity?? Do we threaten them" If you don't agree to every single point in our constitution you won't enjoy any of the services we provide". Not that we will do anything like that, but it should be made clear.

I don't intend to reply to the concepts of luck or fate or karma about which I didn't mention anything. My concept is simple - ensure equal opportunity, nott equal right. Opportunity to study, opportunity to put that education into use, opportunity to live. Equality should be ensured from the root level itself. Not after I worked my ass off to generate income.

I agreed to the constitution. Now when I think about it in another angle I am having these doubts. Jemshid raised similar ones and I found them valid. AFAIK our core ideas are not immune to updations or modifications.

/Basically, you’re saying socialism sucks./

Yes. Socialism sucks.

A few quotes from http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/socialism.html for convenience

"Socialism may be established by force, as in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics—or by vote, as in Nazi (National Socialist) Germany."

"Instead of prosperity, socialism has brought economic paralysis and/or collapse to every country that tried it. The degree of socialization has been the degree of disaster."

"Socialism is merely democratic absolute monarchy—that is, a system of absolutism without a fixed head, open to seizure of power by all corners, by any ruthless climber, opportunist, adventurer, demagogue or thug."

"There is no difference between communism and socialism, except in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism proposes to enslave men by force, socialism—by vote. It is merely the difference between murder and suicide."

Also constitution is common minimum program for the collective. We offer our discussion platform for those who disagree so either could change. But accepting the constitution is required for membership. We want to make changes in society not just discuss philosophical aspects of life. You don't need to be an official member to participate. But basic agreement on core ideas is necessary to work as a collective. We can still make alliances of different collectives on common themes.

Balu, do you believe luck, fate or karma from previous incarnation should be the basis for one's status and opportunities in life?

Not completely. Some portions of it suck. Like forceful wealth acquisition, just coz the other guy need it too. Pirate Movement is not another face of pure socialism. It adopts from socialism (and many other good -isms).

I vote for "equal opportunity" rather than "equal right". But, providing equal opportunity is somewhat utopian and needs a well-defined-well-planned-well-executed-long-term-course-of-action and we may need a temporary solution to start with. But, finally, that is my (AFAIK, our) aim and so it should be made clear in the constitution.

Basically, you're saying socialism sucks.

//Nobody is taking your money and giving it to someone else.
What is redistributed is opportunity. They take your money and distribute it as opportunity to those who are deprived of it.//

Err.. Aren't those two contradicting each other?? Do I pay money or opportunity?? If it is opportunity, do I lose my job inorder to give the other guy an opportunity?? If it is money, where is my compensation for you taking my money for something I don't agree to?

//Laziness is not the eligibility to get help from the Government. Opportunity deprivation is.//

And is it solved by "exploiting" my opportunity?

// After a limit, if you’re earning more money, you’re not going to be able to use it. And therefore there is no actual point in you making that money. And so, in the big picture, it is better for that money to be redistributed. //

Are we playing digital Robin Hood?? I decide whether the money created by my effort is useful or useless. Not the government.. Government don't own me. If I see the taxes they levy as valid, I pay them. Else, I don't. And I am ready to give up the services which I would've received if I had paid those taxes. But for that, I need clarity. Clarity on how the tax I pay is spent. Whether it is spent on an idea that I agree to.

• Nobody is taking your money and giving it to someone else.
• What is redistributed is opportunity. They take your money and distribute it as opportunity to those who are deprived of it.
• Laziness is not the eligibility to get help from the Government. Opportunity deprivation is.
• After a limit, if you're earning more money, you're not going to be able to use it. And therefore there is no actual point in you making that money. And so, in the big picture, it is better for that money to be redistributed.

Blunt levying of taxes, just for the sake of "equality" is what I am opposing. Taxation should be properly transparent and categorized. The income tax I pay is being used to "provide equality of food" is not something I agree with. It was levied for the services I get w.r.t the sector from where I earn that income. So, it should be channelled to that sector itself. This should happen for every sector, thereby making each of them self-sufficient.
Making every goddamn sector self sufficient is the ultimate goal of a government, not providing till the end of eternity.
You want to provide food to the poor? Take it out of the tax you levy from the food production sector. Make a cycle.

Jemshid's question remains - If I find out the tax I am paying is used for ideas that I disagree with, do I have the option to stay out of paying "that" tax (and thereby excluding myself from enjoying the services which that idea provides) and still enjoy the other services, for which I pay tax for??

Taxation is the foundation of the constitution. There's no Government that lives without taxes. You can't disagree with that part.

BTW, what happened to the discussion that @jemshidkk started and @praveen @vik and @akshay followed?? I was enjoying it and it abruptly stopped.

Actually, I am in support of Jemshid's side (even though I wish to see Praveen's idea in execution one day - however utopian it may seem. Afterall we are all working towards to get a future where it will be implemented right?). Other person's right to have food should not mean the food (or part of it) I have is taken from me and given to him. I earned my food (I am not talking about using my Dad's money to buy food - I put effort to make my food) and it is primarly and ultimately my right. If the other guy wants food, he should not be given the food which was taken from me. But, he should be made able to produce his own food (or something - product or service - which he can exchange to get food). You don't get a man a fish, you teach him how to catch one.
If he/she is unable to do that due to his conditions or societiy's inequal mindset or something like that, change the damn society. Change the damn system. The society, being harsh to him/her in accomplishing his needs is no reason to infringe in the product of my work.

Yes, the society does not play fair and equal. But, when you force me to share the product of my work with someone who don't have product (whatever the reason may be), it ain't democracy. It is just majoritarianism.

Yes. I used the knowledge of the previous generations to cultivate food. Due to that I am ready to share my food - but not for free. I want reward for my efforts - I tilled the land, I sowed the seeds, I watered it - I did everything (or I paid to get it done. Anyway it was essentially my wealth that was spent). You want a piece of it? Then pay me for my effort dumbass. Period.

Also, I don't agree to @akshay 's arguments. Just because I dissent from the provisions of constitution doesn't mean I am out of the structure. I simply disagree to follow the portions that I feel improper. That just means I can't exercise that provisions either. But, I have equal rights to exercise the provisions of constitution that I abide to. It ain't the "whole or nothing business".

A gun doesn't mean a physical gun. Just the threatening of "Either you agree to the constitution in whole, or you may dissent and live alone" is also a gun, a figurative one.

I would like to apply for permanent membership. I was an initial member, both here at Indian Pirates and its previous installation - Pirate Party of India. I have been a part in the discussions which shaped our constitution. Also, I have helped in the initial organizing of Diaspora Yatra, along with Anish and Sugeesh. I have also helped share the essence of Diaspora by taking classes about Diaspora in educational institutions like CUSAT.

@akshay, @praveenarimbrathod : thank you for accepting me into the pack of pirates. Happy to be here. :-)

@shine welcome as an associate member. As @akshay mentioned initial members are used only for bootatraping. You can be a permanent member after 6 months if you get support from 2 voting members. Stating acceptance to constitution is the only requirement to be an associate member.

@shine Initial Membership was used for bootstrapping and now that we've some permanent members it is no longer required. I am considering your request as a request for associate membership and putting it to vote here. If 2 voting members agree you'll become an associate member.

I, shine, have read, understood and agree to the constitution of Pirate Movement and would like to join the movement as an Initial Member

@praveenarimbrathod you're now a permanent member. I've added you to the voting members subgroup.

Long live the revolution! ;)

I would like to be a permanent member. I was an initial member (including two previous experiments of Pirate Movement and Pirate Party) and promoted pirate ideas though campaigns like pirate cycling and diaspora yatra. This brought mainstream attention, reach among the public and brought in many new members.

@arkarjun you're now the first permanent member.
I've created the voting members subgroup with initial members and you. New permanent members should be added to this group too.

You may create a permanent members subgroup too, I guess.

Now we have 50% women Initial Members who can make decisions on behalf of Indian Pirates. We should continue our efforts to involve more women. Now we cannot accept any more Initial Members. Anyone can become an Associate Member and after 6 months of promoting our ideas through campaigns, events and other creative means, can become permanent members.

@nandajavarma , you're an initial member now. Welcome! You can now vote other members in.

I ark Arjun would like to be a permanent member of India Pirates.
Why I think I am eligible?
I was been an initial member since the start of the pirate movement. I have designed previous logo of "pirate movement India" and been part of many activities of indian pirates including the recent diaspora yatra. The logo, cartoon, flayer, stickers was designed by me, also organised and spoke many events in 2 districts.

@soorajkenoth , @suneesh , @balasankarchelamat , @arkarjun , @shirish , @rajudvindane (and myself), our initial membership has expired. Initial members who joined after us will approve permanent membership requests now. We can apply for permanent membership now.

@jacksonisaac you are an initial member now! welcome!

Where as puting a gun on your head and commanding you to help your neighbor is wrong.

There's no gun! It's a democracy.
A democracy is a government of the people, by the people, for the people. It's built by people who agree that their group has become so large (like India), that they need to have people dedicated to be looking after the internal affairs (representatives), rather than being directly involved (like in ancient Greece).

In such a democracy, there's no gun. But then there are democratic processes, which you've agreed with, which're used to enforce the decision of the collective upon you.

And as far as I see, democracy allows the maximum freedom to dissenters. In the sense, if someone doesn't want to live by the rules of the government, they're free to live their life alone, without any interaction with people who agree to the democratic process.

When you earn money, you're agreeing to the democratic process. Because money is introduced by the Government. Now that you've agreed to the democratic process, it's only rational that you're expected to follow democratic decisions.

--

Now, not all decisions are democratic. That is why Indian Pirates exist. We make sure democracy is followed in its right spirit. In another sense, we redefine what democracy means to people.

It must be a necessary consequence of our FOSS backgrounds that we believe it is better for everyone if people cooperate without expecting rewards.
I don’t think people are doing things without expecting rewards. Money is not the only reward.

Read this as proportional rewards. People are cooperating expecting the safety of a democray and some reward, but not necessarily proportional. So when you work hard you can earn a lot of money, but you'll have to pay a lot of tax, and also you'll be guaranteed the security of your money. There are tradeoffs. It's something you have to live with.

I didn't read Virtue of Selfishness. But does it suggest a way of life which wouldn't involve a government? How do you live without a government? And when there's a government, what kind of government should it be, if it's not democratic? @jemshidkk I assume you aren't a caveman because you are accessing Internet. But unless you dug your own well, even the water you're drinking has been brought to you by cooperation.

You're free to dissent and live alone. But I don't find a way how you can, or why you should.

@akshay
//you are saying taxing the people who put “more effort” in order to help people who put “less effort” is wrong.//
There is nothing wrong in somebody helping poor by his choice. Where as puting a gun on your head and commanding you to help your neighbor is wrong.
When I find that the tax I pay is being used to support ideas which I do not agree with, do I have freedom to stay away from paying tax?

//It must be a necessary consequence of our FOSS backgrounds that we believe it is better for everyone if people cooperate without expecting rewards.//
I don't think people are doing things without expecting rewards. Money is not the only reward.

//You’re right, in today’s world where there’s no consensus for cooperation, where people are competing with each other, working harder and being selfish is the natural way of doing things.//
Cooperation has to be a thing of choice, not a command.
And I would say we should never denounce hard work or work. We live our life consuming the output of work.
Now coming to the selfishness part, I would say, we should be selfish and selfishness (concern with one's own interests) is the way to go.

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

//And we have a feeling that it’d be.//
Is it a feeling or a rational conclusion?

//I guess there are two ways of looking at life on Earth.
1. Ubuntu - an altruistic philsophy.
2. Everything opposite to number 1. A competitive world where every tit must have a tat. A selfish philosophy.//

Here is a better selfish philosophy
"I swear by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." John Galt.

@vik
// //When I produce something, it is mine and it is my right to decide what I should do with it. //
I guess this is where you and I would fundamentally disagree :) //

Precisely

//There should be dissenting voices and you are correct to make your feelings about the constitution clear//

My intention is not to put feelings here.

@praveen
//your logic is built up on certain assumptions like everyone has an equal opportunity, which is not a reality. //

I am not saying that everyone has equal opportunity. Infact as long I can not have an objective measure of opportunity, I can not attempt a comparison.

//Your free markets need rational actors, which is not the case either. //

Are you a rational actor?

@praveenarimbrathod
//when you say you produced it yourself, you forgot the knowledge that was produced by generations, even the language you used to learn is not yours, the hard work of people who were exploited as slaves, untouchables, using guns or swords. //

Who own the knowledge produced by generations?
@vik
It is not just guns that produced slaves. Being a slave is an attitude too. When we loose confidence to produce things we need, we beg a master (state) to feed us. When I assume that I am not capable of producing things, rather I should wait for my luck to get employed by a master, a slave is born.

An employement is not a courtesy of the employer. It is a trade with mutual respect. The employee sells his skils and time and the employer pays for it.

//You logic is totally without a historic context as if you are creating things from vacuum with your personal magic.//

It is not history, it's philosophy that governs my logic.

//Some people worship God, some worship markets. //

If you find it is not reason and logic but worship is governing my arguments, what is the point in having a discussion here?
I am looking for conversation based on logic and reason.

// I also wants competition and hard work to be rewarded, but not when a large number of people are systematically oppressed. //

When you limit / arrest competitiveness and and hardwork by others, you are oppressing otheres and their well being and freedom and that is what precisely a dictatoship does. The solution to systematic oppression is not another way of systematic oppression.

@jemshidkk when you say you produced it yourself, you forgot the knowledge that was produced by generations, even the language you used to learn is not yours, the hard work of people who were exploited as slaves, untouchables, using guns or swords. You logic is totally without a historic context as if you are creating things from vacuum with your personal magic. Some people worship God, some worship markets. I also wants competition and hard work to be rewarded, but not when a large number of people are systematically oppressed.

@jemshidkk your logic is built up on certain assumptions like everyone has an equal opportunity, which is not a reality. Your free markets need rational actors, which is not the case either. Anyway we can still work together on issues of mutual interest. This discussion group is open to all and dissent is valuable to us.

//When I produce something, it is mine and it is my right to decide what I should do with it. //

I guess this is where you and I would fundamentally disagree :)

//Nobody has right to take it away from me with a gun.//

Now this, we can agree on.

//I am OK with participating in the discussion without being a member of Indian Pirates. If you people are also OK about, I will be lisetning to your discussions and contributing to it once in a while.//

Absolutely. There should be dissenting voices and you are correct to make your feelings about the constitution clear, others may agree with you.

@praveenarimbrathod
//do you think UK, Norway, Canada are fascist?//

I can not comment much about this question. I don't know about their constitution and justice system.
But I know something. When I produce something, it is mine and it is my right to decide what I should do with it. Nobody has right to take it away from me with a gun. When gun (physical force) becomes the arbitrator, there is no scope for further dialogue.
When I produce something and I don't want to reveal it to the world, and If the government is curious about it, isn't it a violation of privacy?

//We are proposing policies and seeking support from people. It is called politics. Or do you think we should not propose any policies at all?//
My point is that even when we get a majority, we should not use physical force to dictate the life and decisions of any woman/man on earth. If anybody is violating rights of somebody else with a gun, gun is the way to go.

//Anyone can get voting rights if they can convinse at least two existing voting members about their commitments to these values.//
//You have to publicly state your acceptance of the constitution//
//If you disagree with any of the points in the constitution, we can discuss it here as well.//

I do not accept the constitution in the current form. I started this discussion stating my dissent to Article 1, Section 3. And sofar to my understanding, I am taking this discussion forward based on logic and reason.
I am OK with participating in the discussion without being a member of Indian Pirates. If you people are also OK about, I will be lisetning to your discussions and contributing to it once in a while.

@jemshidkk I disagree that the brick that you produce with your effort belongs to you. You we're given the knowledge to make that brick by someone else. You excavated the raw materials from somewhere too.

Secondly, when I am talking about finite employment, I think I am correct. Consider western free markets such as the UK. Here we used to follow the model of full employment and job creation by the state - so everybody could have a job.

Then throughout the Thatcher years we we're pushed along the road of the free market - which in the end reduced jobs, increased unemployment and we have had a mismatch between people and jobs ever since. This is the so called 'free society' where anyone can start a business and make themselves a millionaire - it's all depicted there in the American dream - unfortunately turns out it's actually a nightmare.

I understand very clearly who pays for healthcare and other state provision. I do! I pay huge sums of tax each year because I earn sufficient amounts of money.

I also understand that by earning that money and keeping it in my pocket - I deprive someone else of the possibility of having that money, because money is also finite. I understand that by having my job or business, I also deprive another person of occupying that spot, because I am already sitting in it.

The lazy man story seems to me an extension of the divide and rule approach of imperialists - and it works so, so well. We can easily feel so much more important that that "lazy person who doesn't work hard enough" without understanding anything about that persons life / ability / opportunity.

So very convenient.

@jemshidkk , if I understand you right, you are saying taxing the people who put "more effort" in order to help people who put "less effort" is wrong.

I guess there are two ways of looking at life on Earth.
1. Ubuntu - an altruistic philsophy.
2. Everything opposite to number 1. A competitive world where every tit must have a tat. A selfish philosophy.

It must be a necessary consequence of our FOSS backgrounds that we believe it is better for everyone if people cooperate without expecting rewards.

You're right, in today's world where there's no consensus for cooperation, where people are competing with each other, working harder and being selfish is the natural way of doing things.

But the philsophy of Indian Pirates (or what I wish is its philosophy) is to create a new world order in which cooperation is the default way of doing things, and selfishness is exception.

Now there's no proof this works. Maybe in such a world order everyone will become lazy and it may collapse. But if it turns out that it doesn't collapse, that people get motivated to work for each other when they don't have the pressure of working for survival, that as a whole human civilization will be able to achieve more progress in such a kind of world, then it would be great. And we have a feeling that it'd be.

@vik
//Your talking about basic facilities and linking the right to those basic facilities with the effort you have made. Using your analogy above, do you have the right to use the bricks that your more ‘lazy’ neighbour could have used had he got there first? Maybe he wasn’t as lucky to be educated in the same way as you?//

A brick is not a natural resource. It needs to be produced by somebody. When I produce it, it is mine and it is my right to decide what I should do with it.
If you are talking about limited natural resources, it belongs to the whole world. Every human being on the earth has a share of ownership on it.
Coming to the the brick again, a brick is wealth and wealth is not a limited thing on earth, but is being produced with effort. There is nothing I have to do with the brick my neigbor got. If I need a brick I will make a brick. Or may be better in modern times, I will make some wheat and trade it with my neighbor for bricks.

//For me, the measure of a civilisation is how well do we care for each other? How do we lift up the poorest and most vulnerable in our society.//

If this is the measure of civilization for you and you desire to be civilized, then you should work towards it. But when you insist your measure of civilization on somebody else with a gun, it is a totally different thing. It is fascism or dictatorship.

//I feel lucky to live in a country where we have:
A National Health Service - where I get free access to Doctors and Hospital treatment

If I lose my job I get Unemployment Benefit so I can meet my basic needs. I get Housing Benefit so that I can pay my rent.

If I am sick, I get statutory sick pay.

If a become disabled I get disability benefits.//

Did you ever think Who pays for health care?
If you are lazy to produce wheat for you to eat, who is toiling to produce wheat for you?
Doesn't it look like you desire for a master - slave society where government is the master and you are a salve.

//Politicians often use the language of ‘lazy’ to gain support from those who do not want to pay tax in order to look after other members in society, but they never really have an answer to the fact that employment is finite and the number of opportunities are less than the number of people. //

Your argument is based on the premise that employemnt is finite. Which is grossly wrong.
Yes employment is finite in a socialist / communist regime, where every business is owned by government and you are not free to start your own business or work.
In a free society, the question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me.

//Regardless of how industrious a person is, there is a huge amount of luck involved in getting enough money to get by.//

“I don’t subscribe to luck or chance, Miss Steele. The harder I work the more luck I seem to have." !!
-Christian Grey, Fifty Shades of Grey !

Buy the way if you need a better reply for your last sentence, I can explain further.

@jemshidkk do you think UK, Norway, Canada are fascist?

We are proposing policies and seeking support from people. It is called politics. Or do you think we should not propose any policies at all?

Without mass support these policies are not going to be implemented and these are not holy statements that won't be changed at all. We are open to discussions and we'll make changes if we are convinsed. These principles will continue to be revised and refined as we engage with wider audience. We are also glad to have this debate here. At this point the items listed are considered basic. It may change in future. We make changes to these documents based on consensus of the voting members. Anyone can get voting rights if they can convinse at least two existing voting members about their commitments to these values. All decisions are made in open discussions that anyone can see. Indeed we might have short comings like anything new. We are using the power of internet to connect people and build a non hierarchical collective. Every member could participate in the policy making process. Indeed that leaves out people who don't have internet, we need to find a way to address that.

@jemshidkk Your talking about basic facilities and linking the right to those basic facilities with the effort you have made. Using your analogy above, do you have the right to use the bricks that your more 'lazy' neighbour could have used had he got there first? Maybe he wasn't as lucky to be educated in the same way as you?

For me, the measure of a civilisation is how well do we care for each other? How do we lift up the poorest and most vulnerable in our society.

I feel lucky to live in a country where we have:
A National Health Service - where I get free access to Doctors and Hospital treatment

If I lose my job I get Unemployment Benefit so I can meet my basic needs. I get Housing Benefit so that I can pay my rent.

If I am sick, I get statutory sick pay.

If a become disabled I get disability benefits.

Politicians often use the language of 'lazy' to gain support from those who do not want to pay tax in order to look after other members in society, but they never really have an answer to the fact that employment is finite and the number of opportunities are less than the number of people. Regardless of how industrious a person is, there is a huge amount of luck involved in getting enough money to get by.

When a group of people together (collective) decide to sacrifices / spend their money / resources for somebody or for some purpose, there is nothing wrong in it. But when the group insist with gun (physical force) on others who doesn't agree with their idea to do the same thing, we call it fascism. Hitler was elected democratically.

//we, as a collective believe// : Does it sound like religion or communism? What would be the difference between belief and conviction? Can there be a belief based on reason and logic?

//basic facilities// : Who will decide my facilities and your basic facilities?

//If we can convinse enough people this is the right thing to do, we will use democratic means to achieve them// :
If we can convince enough people about this belief, let the convinced people do it according to their belief.
The second part of the sentence, "we will use democratic means to achieve it" is scary. An idea which has a majority by counting number of people supporting it, being imposed on somebody else by physical force is not democracy. It is mobocracy, fascism or dictatorship.

"Many countries in Europe already do this.":
Have no respect for the authority of others, for there are always contrary authorities to be found.! - Bertrand Russel!!

PS: @praveen , I like this conversation and I think it is valuable.

@jemshidkk we, as a collective believe people getting basic facilities should not be on the basis of their dad's merit. If we can convinse enough people this is the right thing to do, we will use democratic means to achieve them. Many countries in Europe already do this.

"do you believe luck should be at the center of deciding if people have basic facilities?"
Who will decide my basic facilities, my neighbors basic facilities and your basic facilities.

"Do people get a choice if their parents are rich or poor?"
No

"Do you think a rich kid getting lots of money from his father is his merit and hard work?"
It is not kid's merit, it is his fathers merit.

@jemshidkk do you believe luck should be at the center of deciding if people have basic facilities? Do people get a choice if their parents are rich or poor? Do you think rich and poor gets equal opportunities? Do you think a rich kid getting lots of money from his father is his merit and hard work?

I, Nandaja Varma, have read and understood the constitution of Pirate party. I agree to it and would like to be an initial member.

Article 1: Basic Principles
Section 3: Every one has a right to food, housing, education, healthcare and privacy

The food we eat these days in general, the house we live and health care are not natural resources. We need to put an effort and cultivate our food or construct our house.

When I build a house for me, do my lazy neighbor has a right on my house?

If I am not willing open my house to the lazy neighbor, the government is going to use physical force to take the output of my effort and distribute it to the lazy neighbor. (Taxation). Which is a violation of Article 1, Section 6.

I find something not right here.

Thank you.

I, Jackson Isaac, have read and I agree to the constitution of the Pirate Movement.
I believe everyone should have the freedom of knowledge and expression.
I would like to join this Pirate Ship and spread word about freedom to knowledge with all of you.

@vidyut you are an initial member now! Welcome!

@jemshidkk you have to state your acceptance of the constitution here to be considered as an initial member.

@truptirajeshkini you are an initial member now. Welcome! She is our first women initial member.

I agree to the constitution.

Membership request.

I liked the attitude in this phrase "We should no longer accept what we supposedly cannot change. Instead, we need to change what we cannot accept". I am completely opposed to restrictions and love to share knowledge. The term "Pirate" is apt for this movement. I would like to be part of this movement as an initial member and will change the world in my way.

@fayadfami I have updated the description here.

@praveenarimbrathod Thanks for adding. I assumed both to be the same. Couldn't find about Initial member in constitution, so got confused. Maybe its good to have a short description for both at the top of this thread.

Edit: Found it under constitution. Sorry for the confusion. Still it would be good to have the same at the top. Just a humble thought.

@vik you are an initial member now! Welcome!

@fayadfami you need two initial members to vouch for you. Once you actively involve in campaigns you will find people to vouch for you. Right now you can be an associate member.

I, Fayad Fami accept the constitution mentioned under http://www.pirates.org.in/constitution/ and would like to take part in the Pirate Movement by being an initial member. Please do the needful.

I have read and accept the constitution. I would like to be an Initial Member. I would also like to propose the addition of the right to energy in Article 1, Section 3 of the constitution.

@naveenkumar welcome as an Associate Member. @akshay welcome as an Initial Member, now propose those amendments! Also we need to make membership requests easier, me and @balasankarchelamat were discussing a form based membership process.

@arjun you can see them at https://codema.in/g/7qmru1SG/memberships

I accept the constitution in its spirit and want to apply for Associate membership.

@praveenarimbrathod hey! Where can I go check our groups list of members?

@naveenkumar state your acceptance to constitution here for the record.

@akshay laws are always made for the powerful in any society and there was always struggles to change any unjust laws. Look at slavery, it was legal when Martin Luther King opposed it, even making salt from sea water was illegal in British rule. Criticizing British rule was illegal as well. As Aaron Swartz rightly said, there is no justice in following unjust laws. But we will use non violent ways to achieve our goals of changing the copyright system. So we can clearly state, it is our goal to change the copyright laws so that sharing knowledge is not illegal. See Pirates are already winning in Europe http://torrentfreak.com/in-europe-pirates-are-writing-the-copyright-law-150104/

I concur that copying is not theft. And making some knowledge public can be greatly beneficial for the humanity.

But like I said, I cannot wrap my head around copying something against someone's will. That is essentially violation of their privacy. I can definitely see it as a violent mean to achieve political aims.

Analogies:
Wearing of burqas or veil. It will be violent if someone forcibly removes those veils.

Consent in vaccination, treatment, etc. It is violent if you vaccinate someone, or treat someone against their wish, even though it is healthy for them to undergo treatment.

Okay, these analogies are not perfect if you consider that the publishers had no right to keep the knowledge with them.
Then a better analogy would be zamindars or landholders.
Would it be right to rob them? Maybe.
But that'll necessarily cause some mental trauma to the zamindar.

Would that trauma be justified, because the zamindar doesn't have the right to the grains? Not sure.

But copying is not theft. Probably this concept is very new and originated only after computers came up. So the public perception of copying being equivalent to theft is or could be wrong.

Still the existing laws consider copying a punishable offence. These laws have to be changed obviously. Yet they are formed by a democratic body. And they need to be respected while they prevail.

Maybe we should just stay away from leading "illegal" activities. For the sake of political correctness.

@akshay you can propose those changes if one more member supports your membership request.

@akshay First of all knowledge cannot be considered the same as physical property. When you copy knowledge the original is not lost. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4

The act of hiding knowledge that can benefit humanity is the violence here. All the scientific knowledge locked up by publishers is shared heritage of entire humanity.

Since cooperation by itself is not our aim, it should be expanded to something more like "We should cooperate with each other for the benefit of humanity" or something that clarifies when the cooperation is warranted. Because obviously there can't be cooperation in negative activities.

For knowledge,
Maybe mix in ideas frm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libre_knowledge
We should be creating knowledge that is Libre knowledge, and we should be lobbying on existing knowledge "owners" to make them liberate the knowledge that they conceal from others.

To be specific, I still haven't gotten my head around the ethicality of downloading articles against the wish or intent of publishers. And since this is akin to violence (although not physical) which we are against in section 6, there should be no support of "pirating" knowledge as in the Geurilla Manifesto.

If those suggestions seems reasonable, consider my concerns cleared and accept my application to be a member.

@akshay historically, it was "All humans are equal. We should cooperate with each other". We updated the first part and we should clarify the second part. Suggest new wordings that can better explain the cooperation spirit.

@akshay we means all humans, and section 4 is Knowledge should be free. We are in the process of clarifying each statement so we can still discuss and improve the wordings.

There has been lots of amendments to clarify each statement recently, see https://codema.in/g/rBujPIAJ/indian-pirates-initial-members

Last two amendments are yet to be updated on the site.

I accept the constitution in its spirit and want to apply for initial membership pending the following clarifications on the basic principles:

Section 2: "We should cooperate with each other"
Who are the "we" here? How is cooperation defined? Is it absolute and mandatory?

Section 4: "Education should be free"
What is the definition of "free" here?

I agree to the constitution.. I'd like to join the movement.. Honestly I don't really know much about computers and networks.. Just the basic stuff a layman would know.. I have been following the various issues surrounding Internet privacy.. I stand for Internet freedom..
I won't be able to be a full time member because of the nature of my work and I don't really know how I could be useful.. But I do wanna do something useful and I'm so glad there are like minded people in India..

Really looking Forward to be a member and do something.. Anything useful for the movement..

Thanks

@neelgupta you can request membership to associate members group. Once we work together some of us would be able to support your full membership request. We can discuss about equality over here https://codema.in/d/sAa2Im3E/equality

I agree to the constitution as is.

(I advocate Freedom and Respect for freedom of others, instead of Equality.)

@neelgupta , you have to state you agree with the constitution and get support from two existing initial members to be an initial member. You can become an associate member straight away if you agree to the constitution. We are working on making the membership experience smoother. You can also help complete it at https://gitlab.com/piratemovin/beapirate

The membership request form should ask the following details about the person: name, email, phone (optional)

Then we should frame questions on each of our core ideas and see if they really agree to our constitution or not. Many times people just click I agree without reading anything.

If we find out differences during the survey, we should add them as potential members and ask them to discuss the differences with us. If either of us change our opinions they can be a member. It would be a good real world test of our constitution too.

I have started a project - https://gitlab.com/piratemovin/beapirate

@akshaytarfe you have to state your agreement to the constitution http://www.pirates.org.in/constitution/

If you have any disagreements with any of the points, we can discuss them here.

We would also like provide a smooth experience for folks interested to join us by providing a web registration form.

@balasankarchelamat start a project on our gitlab area and we can discuss details here.

hey its akshay , geography and political science student from Mumbai . Looking forward to work with you guys. Believe that another world is possible. so support my membership and lets get to work
cheers. peace out

@akshaytarfe you have to apply for membership here and you need support from two other initial members, you can also join as an associate member.

@rajudvindane , welcome! You are an initial member now.

@shirish you are an initial member now... Welcome.. :)

@arkarjun you are an initial member now! welcome! @praveenarimbrathod Can we have two proposals at same time in the same discussion?if it is ok, then @arkarjun can make a proposal for @rajudvindane

@balasankarchelamat i'll close the Ark's proposal., you can start one for @shirish . :)

@praveenarimbrathod Can we have two proposals at same time in the same discussion? I couldn't find it. Lets close the one for Ark first, then I'll start one for Shirish. :)

I राजु देविदास विंदाने (Raju Devidas Vindane) has read & understood the constitution of the Pirates Movement. I affirm that I agree to the Constitution and request to be an initial member of the Pirates Movement of India.

@rajudvindane , you have to publicly state your acceptance of constitution and get support from 2 other initial members to be an initial member.

@balasankarchelamat please propose a vote for accepting Shirish as an initial member.

@balasankarchelamat you are an initial member now! welcome!

I,arjun , have read, understood and agree to the constitution of the Pirate Movement and would like to join the movement as an Initial Member as well.

I, shirish, have read, understood and agree to the constitution of the Pirate Movement and would like to join the movement as an Initial Member as well.

@suneesh you are an initial member now! welcome! Create a proposal to accept @balasankarchelamat as initial member.

I, Balasankar C, have read, understood and agree to the constitution of Pirate Movement and would like to join the movement as an Initial Member.

Yes I agree to the constitution

@suneesh say if you agree to the constitution or not. Once two initial members approve, you'll become an initial member.

i am suneesh states that from now i am a part of the pirate movement of india, and also initial member of the pirate movement of india

@suneesh please state your acceptance of constitution here.