Subscribe to our feed
Follow us on twitter
Listen to the podcast
Andrew Robinson
John Barron
Philip HuntHow to spot an extremist political party
8th March 2010 19:59 | by Andrew Robinson
Today, the BBC published a survey on worldwide public attitudes to the internet. The results are a loud and clear wake up call to political parties that thought they were safely in the middle of the road.
75% of UK adults agree, or strongly agree with the statement "Access to the internet should be a fundamental right of all people." To put this into some perspective, that's a wording that we, the Pirate Party UK, thought was too extreme to put in our manifesto. All the major political parties in the UK are collaborating on a Digital Economy Bill that will give copyright holders an unprecedented new power of collective punishment, a power to cut off people's internet connection. They will be able to do this to you even if you can prove that that you are innocent of any copyright infringement, and prove that somebody else is responsible.
It's time for the other parties to wake up and realise that they are a long, long way out of step with public opinion.
Only the Pirate Party is fighting for the public's right to connect to the internet. Only the Pirate Party is anywhere near as keen on internet freedom as the average person in the street.
Elsewhere in the survey more shocks are in store for politicians. We would like to think that UK citizens enjoy more freedom of political self-expression than in other, less enlightened countries, but when presented with the statement "The internet is a safe place to express my opinions" just 16% of UK adults strongly agreed. We rank ourselves lower for freedom to express opinions than do residents of Russia, Thailand, or Pakistan, and more than twice as badly as citizens of Mexico, Nigeria, Ghana and Egypt. The public believes we live in a country with worse than third-world standards of free expression. Only the Pirate Party even recognises that this is a problem.
Most shocking of all is the response to the statement "The internet should never be regulated by any level of government anywhere." The BBC say 33% of UK adults agree with a policy even more radical that the Pirate Party position.
The message to other political parties is clear: You are the extremists, not us.
Only the Pirate Party is in tune with public opinions about internet freedom.
5 comments
Having discussed the BBC article with a few non pirates, it has to be said that a lot does depend on how you interpret the BBCs questions. One non pirate told me they strongly agreed with the statement that "The internet should never be regulated by any level of government anywhere.", but of course child pornography must be banned. Another said they strongly disagreed with it, because child pornography must be banned. Two identical positions, but two exactly opposite responses.
@Anothergreen on twitter told me the Green party also fight for access to the web and for foss, so I went to read up on their policies... my head is still spinning trying to work out what they are saying. Here's an extract, which I think is their policy on web censorship:
CMS206 The Green Party is opposed to all forms of censorship in the media and cultural activities for adults. The state and persons holding positions of power to control activities shall not censor freedom of artistic expression or freedom of speech. Where there is a conflict between the right to free expression or speech and the responsibility not to cause offence this should be dealt with by allowing the offended person equal right of reply.
CMS207 The Green Party recognises that not all freedoms may be appropriate for young persons. Parents and guardians have a responsibility to protect those in their charge from inappropriate material. In the case of material targeted directly at children the relevant authorities may have a duty to control content in loco parentis. (in the place of a parent)
... I don't for one moment think the Greens actually want to outlaw forum moderation, legalise child pornography or introduce state censorship of web sites targeted at children, but that's what a literal interpretation of these policies implies. If anyone could point me to a clear and concise explanation of Green internet polices, I'd be very grateful.
While they may have tech-geeks in their party, as do the libdems, they don't seem to ask them for help when formulating policy for the internet, "it's only a bunch of tubes", seems to be the more widespread than we thought.
(this is me with my angry systems administrator hat on!)