1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
|
---
title: Demokratisk kommuicationsinfrastruktur som motståndsform
subtitle: Technology infrastructure as a common googd
author: Gustav Eek <gustav@fripost.org>
date: tor 13 jul 2017 20:18:26 CEST
...
Proposal to FSCONS 2017
# Abstract
In this lecture I will present the democratic principles of Fripost
and demonstrate how also complicated resources, such as infrastructure
for electronic communication can (and must) (*underställas folkligt
demokratiska pricesser?*) (I argue that central communication
infrastructure should be viewed as a resource).
I will start in a (well known) critique of Garret Hardin's (*Vem
talade om detta FSCONS 2015?*) classical tragedy of the commons
(*referens*) (one that has been presented many times before).
# Description
The importance of Internet as communication medium can not be
questioned. For those who take user freedom seriously it is saddening
to see how the Internet has changed from being a common and highly
distributed network to the increasingly privatised web we encounter
today.
In this lecture I will present the democratic principles of Fripost,
the free email association which was founded as a reaction to that
development. I will demonstrate how also complicated resources, such
as infrastructure for electronic communication can (and must)
(*underställas folkligt demokratiska pricesser?*).
Fripost and its foundataion and principals has been presented several
times since its constitution in 2010, also at FSCONS. This
presentation, however, takes a different and broader stand.
I will start in a (common) critique of Garret Hardin's (*Vem talade om
detta FSCONS 2015?*) classical tragedy of the commons (*referens*)
(one that has been presented many times before). The fault lies in the
dikotonomy *public-private* and in the idea that every resource needs
an owning (*huvudmann?*). What is not managed can not yield profit. In
the case of the (*inhängdad?*) of the commons, management in it self
causes the scarcity, it is not the scarcity that requires management.
It is not obvious, however, how digital technology and technology
based on Internet can be recognised as a resource and common
good. Though "friendly" in its usage, it is intrinsically intricate
and complicated in its internals, and the distance is far between the
providing and consuming ends.
Here Fripost becomes an example of central communication
infrastructure that implements democratic "ownership", maintenance,
and development. And democracy is equal influence: it does not stop at
gathering of opinion.
Equal influence is ambitious, and how it is interpreted in Fripost
will be discussed in its details, but in short the key is that
Fripost's commitment (*åtagande?*) is equally much social as it is
technical: all decisions originates from the members, short term as
well as strategical; activities are balanced between the association's
three legs: (a) technology, (b) adult education, and (c) propaganda;
and sustainability is the leading word.
I humbly recognise that what we do is small in scale and ambition. But
I still want to put it in the context of important local struggles
that with global implication. In the world, farmers fight for land,
urban folks for water, and students for independent universities. We
fight for the right and free access to Internet and the means for
communication. Internet is designed to be distributed and for equal
unlimited access for everyone. That sounds quite much like a common
good, and commons require equal influence.
The moral of the presentation is of course that we should fight back
against the privatisation process, particularly that of the
web. Fripost illustrates that it is possible and also suggest how it
can be done.
|
