standars, and so on and so forth, because these do not oppose
essentially any of the basic values of any party (at least any I
know). Right and left is tradionatilly distinguished by distribution
of (scarce) resources. Distribution of infinetely reproducible
resources is orthogonal to that. Nationalist, eurosceptics, pro-EU,
pro or against globalisation, etc. are mostly about who decides which
and where power is located. Religious or traditionalist party don't
have much of a precednet with computer networks, so they can adapt to
anything. Votes show that information policy issues depend more
on whether a representative "gets it" than his or her political colour.
It is most useful for us to join our prefered party if we
have one and enlighten them on inmmaterial goods and information
society, so that all parties push for a resonable policy, or
at least for different but all reasonable policies, instead of
just legislation who does not match reality. Another option is
to join no party and try to enlgihten them all in campaigns for
specific topics.
Yet, if you don't like any party, and you don't like to talk to
all of them on a single issue, you are encouraged to start a
political party. But when you do that, please set up a program
in all kind of political decisions, not just information policy.
Anyone may want to know what the party is going to do on
environment, trade, taxes, health, education, etc before joining it.
And you can give priority to information policy, but I guess
you are not going to abstain in all the rest if you get to government,
do you ?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------050707000605070600050509--