TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Macropathy vs. The Swarm

The current fight between the old and the new — characterized by file sharing, the Arabian Spring, the Occupy swarm, the success of the Pirate Parties, etc — goes way beyond a few laws on the surface. It goes right down to the heart of our views on what kind of society we desire.

We have seen this phenomenon many times: an organization that has been set up to accomplish a specific purpose or drive a certain development, once it becomes big enough, gains a sense of self-preservation. Once it has reached this stage, given the choice between fulfilling its ultimate goals or sabotaging that development to survive as a power factor in society, it will choose the latter.

A concrete example is that the companies who sell quit-smoking aids don’t have any incentive for tobacco use to stop altogether. If it did, they wouldn’t sell any more quit-smoking aids. There are many more subtle examples of this happening as we speak.

The Polish psychiatrist Andrzej Lobaczewski talked of macropathy, the sickness of being too large:

“…governing such a country creates its own unavoidable problems; giants suffer from what could be called permanent macropathy (giant sickness), since the principal authorities are far away from any individual or local matters. … The main symptom is the proliferation of regulations required for administration; they may appear proper in the capital but are often meaningless in outlying districts or when applied to individual matters. Officials are forced to follow regulations blindly; the scope of using their human reason and differentiating real problems becomes very narrow indeed.”

This strikes a chord in every activist’s heart. We have seen rules being applied blindly in everything from forced sterilization to torture and segregation; for a bureaucrat, the question is is it the law?, but for an activist, the question is is it the right thing to do? Is it good?

I write a lot more on this specific topic in my article Lawful Good, Lawful Evil where I elaborate on the fact that the book of laws and the act of good do not coincide, and that it is crucial to understand that there is a difference between Law and Good.

But it is bigger than that, still, that which is going on right now. We are looking at a complete questioning of the very concept of top-down authority. What I see right now is that people are finally, after centuries, starting to re-examine the legacy of the old monarchies, the assumption that governments have a right to rule over the citizens as were they monarchial subjects.

I challenge this notion. And so do hundreds of thousands of activists in this very moment.

We, the People, employ politicians as our civil servants to govern the chores of administering the details of society. In this, it is no different from hiring a housekeeper to take care of things you don’t want to do yourself. But the employed do not have a right to set the conditions of their bosses — and in particular, they do not have the right to keep secrets from their employers that relates to how they do their work.

United States President Obama is an employee of the United States citizens. So is European Commission President Barroso of the European people.

You note that this is a complete turning of tables on the view — yes, the perspective — on who gets to decide what. And it is the final shedding of the legacy of the feudality and monarchies. Monarchs could keep secrets from their subjects and rule them at their whim; you could say that we have been in a birth-century of democracy where we elected our monarchs. But this is changing. We are starting to think in terms of employing administrators who are our employees, not our monarchs.

Now, the ramifications of this shift in perspective are enormous. But the shift is already underway, well underway.

We see this in how the swarms are overtaking the old, centralized, rule bound structures. People cooperate in the tens of thousands, volunteering, helping, making and taking a stand on changing the world. Every piece of activism, every piece of action right now is a statement that the decentralized, resilient movements are winning over the old centralized, stale bureaucracies.

In the Middle East and North Africa, people have been swarming to do good, rather than accept the lawful evil on account of being “the law”. This has spread to the West, and will continue to grow in waves.

For the first time since 1968, I see that people feel empowered. And we are. Nobody is asking permission anymore to help their fellow human being, to speak their mind, or to express their art. And, truly, why should anyone?

What could be observed as a movement of bits using BitTorrent, being a decentralized, resilient reaction against a corporate stranglehold on culture, has grown to become a movement of people in all of society, rejecting the notion that centralized structures have any power to stop people who decide to do good. The insight that there are no limits but those within you is causing mental handcuffs to drop in slow motion all over the West.

And new swarms are forming daily, all while the old politicians try to create new rules to quench people’s realization that they are free to reject the imposed limits. The politicians haven’t understood that the very notion that they can make those rules, monarching the people, is being questioned.

Thanks to Bengt Jonsson for inspiration to this article.

About The Author

Rick Falkvinge is a regular columnist on TorrentFreak, sharing his thoughts every other week. He is the founder of the Swedish and first Pirate Party, a whisky aficionado, and a low-altitude motorcycle pilot. His blog at falkvinge.net focuses on information policy.

Book Falkvinge as speaker?

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • Anonymous

    m? b?st fri?nd’s brother is making $ 82 per h?ur working from home. h? was ?ut ?f his j?b f?r eight m?nths but this september his salary w?s $ 8000 only by w?rking ?n th? c?mputer f?r ? f?w h?urs a day.
    for more info go to ? ? S H S H ? R ? . ? ? ?

  • Anonymous

    m? b?st fri?nd’s brother is making $ 82 per h?ur working from home. h? was ?ut ?f his j?b f?r eight m?nths but this september his salary w?s $ 8000 only by w?rking ?n th? c?mputer f?r ? f?w h?urs a day.
    for more info go to ? ? S H S H ? R ? . ? ? ?

  • Gargamel

    Good article Rick. Good analogy on the situation. I hope I am still alive to one day see this change occur at a true Government level but I very highly doubt it.

  • Anonymous

    Are you seriously putting file-sharing in there with the Arabian Spring and the Occupy movement? There have been actual revolutions in those nations, there have been/still are civil wars and the introduction of democracy is iminent…and that fits alongside sharing a few films?

    Sorry, can’t take this seriously.

    • Gargamel

      And you expect someone to take you seriously when you hide behind the handle of Anonymous. Idiot.

      Oh wait..maybe you think your cool and part of ze haxor l33t movement! ROFL.

      • Floppy Copy

        It’s funny watching some of the regular trolls here attempt to attack and lessen the meaning behind this article. It shows that they don’t understand it at all, and because of that it shows where they’re coming from. They are people who have a vested interest in the status quo, a status that is slowly collapsing as people remember what freedom is all about. Writing laws in an attempt to stop this is fallacious. People who are evil don’t obey the laws that actually do matter, so what makes them think good people wanting to do good things for others will be even more bound by the laws preventing them from doing so? Thou shalt not share! This article is a great analysis of what is happening right now. This is why it is so hard to attack, not just because it is true, but because we’re actually seeing it all unfold right now as we speak. We see it every day, and the movement is growing. Those in government have forgotten the mandate that comes first and foremost above all else. They are indeed NOT our rulers, but our employees, and it’s high time we all remind them of that. Power to the people!

        PS: I have no idea why Robocop just popped into my head while writing this comment. Usually it’s Vendetta that I think of. Perhaps it is because it displays a dystopian society where the corporations are in charge of nearly everything, or perhaps it is Robocop’s mandates. Serve the public trust, protect the innocent, uphold the law, with a fourth hidden directive to ignore the corporate suits at the top. I can’t help but laugh when thinking of that against the world we endure today. Isn’t it interesting how the morals of the majority in North Americans come not only from their peers, but even more so from the cinema they grew up with? The suits say we shouldn’t do this and that, yet a large part of the reason for doing this and that comes from what Hollywood has taught us over the years. Good always triumphs over evil, with evil always being the usual things like greed, pettiness, and selfishness, things commonly attributable to those running the show. Talk about ironic. Would anyone even watch a movie where the corporations always win and the average consumer knows how to stay in his place at the bottom of the totem pole? Nope.

        • http://falkvinge.net/ Rick Falkvinge

          People who are evil don’t obey the laws that actually do matter, so what makes them think good people wanting to do good things for others will be even more bound by the laws preventing them from doing so?

          +5, Insightful.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

          ” I have no idea why Robocop just popped into my head while writing this comment. Usually it’s Vendetta that I think of.”

          Small note on Vendetta. The comic is FAR better to the movie, simply because it takes the source material and destroys it twenty ways from Sunday. It turns into a political statement against the current UK structure which has since lost its meaning, while the one in the book speaks much closer to the author’s pure intents.

          People who are evil don’t obey the laws that actually do matter, so what makes them think good people wanting to do good things for others will be even more bound by the laws preventing them from doing so?

          I’m stealing that phrase.

        • http://openid-provider.appspot.com/hugo.forss Arakun

          I’d flattr this comment if I could.

      • StevO

        I think your the idiot, Gargamel. Torrenting is nothing on the scale of other things happening around the globe. It doesnt even shed a light on the general publics knowledge. The article is more like , “Dream on buddy.”

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

          People aren’t going to the old power structures for guidance but using decentralized methods to communicate new ideas of commerce, entertainment and innovation? This is something you fail to understand?

          Wow… Just… wow…

        • Scary Devil Monastery

          Filesharing = Distribution of information vested powers wish not to
          be distributed.

          Government dissidence = Distribution of information vested powers wish not to be distributed.

          Same methods used. Just that filesharing has distributed these methods to the point where everyone in the street can apply the distribution of information in relative safety. Without filesharing these methods would still be the province of less than 1% of the population, and thus the 99% would remain powerless.

    • Guest

      It’s all the same movement generated by horizontal communication. Horizontal communication was once limited to the pub, school yard or the dinner table, now it’s global.

      Government and big business hate horizontal communication because they cannot stand in the middle directing all the traffic. It is disempowering for them, as disempowering as it is empowering for everyone else.

      Torrents are just as much a part of this new movement as anonymous, occupy or anti-sec – it’s all the same movement, driven by the same factors.

      • http://falkvinge.net/ Rick Falkvinge

        Exactly.

    • ThumbsUpThumbsDown

      The meaning of a “tin” ear is that it hears only what it is predisposed to hear; and, that it achieves that only imperfectly.

      I think Rick hears perfectly your sense of outrage that an “illegality” has occured each time a copyrighted film is downloaded, but he expressed clearly and constructively that copyright laws, which have been legislated under monopoly controls to disenfranchise individual citizens in perpetuity for the benefit of a few corporate monopolies, are not a mere “illegality” but an actual Evil. He directs his outrage toward this Evil, this Abomination, rather than any mere illegality.

      Not only is this a distinction worth making. It’s a distinction worth having a revolution about.

      • CCF

        Monopolies are actually very fragile.
        See how long a monopoly exists if you stop feeding it money.
        Boycott Hollywood, properly, and they go bust.
        A new industry will arise to fill the gap.
        Educate the people, job done.

        It doesn’t take a revolution, just common sense.

        The right to freedom of information and free speech is a different matter.

        • Guest

          But when we boycott them they start making laws to force us to buy their shit… and in the end revolution will happen.

    • Scary Devil Monastery

      The irony in your comments is profound:

      Filesharing = Distribution of information vested powers wish not to
      be distributed.

      Government dissidence = Distribution of information vested powers wish not to be distributed.

      See the problem with your statement now? The same tools, the same methods, the same form of information control attempted.

      Filesharing helped spread the methodology on this not only to tech-savvy diehard idealists, but to the common population. With that shift, power was suddenly transferred to the average John Doe instead of being the exclusive property of techheads and small die-hard resistance factions.

      That’s where you get the people in general debating an uprising and anti-government sentiment in relative safety when the government in question wants to clamp down on dissidence with draconian methods.

    • http://otester.myopenid.com/ PiRat

      You’re right, the OWS is largely backed by ignorant retards (majority have and will vote for Obama again) and the Arab Spring was Western backed.

      File-sharing is for the educated.

  • WiseUp

    The world, unfortunately, is still filled with law abiding citizens.
    I don’t mean by that, that they are law abiding by nature; more by nurture.
    We are raised to follow the rules of society and the justice systems of this world create these rules ‘for the better’ of those respective societies.

    If they rule that stealing a car is unjust, the majority would agree, so it is considered a just law.
    If they rule that copying a car design is unjust, the majority wouldn’t care less if it gave them a cheaper car.

    There is a difference between anarchic statements (as those above) which look to instil the belief that every person can change the law, and educating people as to how to change an existing (considered unjust) law.

    Individuals can’t. Or else, by the current count of the earth’s human population, you could expect potentially 7 billion different ideas of what a specific law should be.

    Groups can. They can do it very effectively. And they do when it necessitates it.

    If your article is to educate people as to their potential for creating change within an unjust system, you’re still going to fail. Here’s why.

    The world, unfortunately, is still filled with law abiding citizens.
    I don’t mean by that, that they are law abiding by nature; more by nurture.
    We are raised to follow the rules of society and the justice systems of this world create these rules ‘for the better’ of those respective societies.

    If they rule that stealing a car is unjust, the majority would agree, so it is considered a just law.
    If they rule that copying a car design is unjust, the majority wouldn’t care less if it gave them a cheaper car.

    There is a difference between anarchic statements (as those above) which look to instil the belief that every individual can change the law, and educating people as to how to change an existing (considered unjust) law.

    Individuals can’t. Or else, by the current count of the earth’s human population, you could expect potentially 7 billion different ideas of what a specific law should be.

    Groups can. They can do it very effectively. And they do when it necessitates it.

    If your article is to educate people as to their potential for creating change within an unjust system, you’re still going to fail. Here’s why.

    Because most people are law abiding, deep down inside, the majority of them consider the rule of law frightening. To go against it risks state punishment. The democracies of this world remain stable because of fear of state retribution. We have all grown to like the benefits of our wealthy, capitalist, spoilt societies. So much so that, if the law says this is the way a thing is going to be, then that’s the way it will ultimately be. We are not expected to rebel, and the majority are too frightened to even overturn a stack of beans in a supermarket, never mind a government.

    There is no fight in us because we do not all share the burden of misrule, of draconian measures, of torture and abuse that third world megalomaniacal governments and dictatorships are so very good at.

    We, the citizens of a democracy are equal…in our fear of it, and our fear of being ostracised from it.

    The conditions in the rest of the world do not apply here in the west.
    There will be no change for the foreseeable future.
    There is nobody likely to take up arms here.
    If s/he does they will be branded a psychopathic terrorist…an enemy of the state.
    Nobody relishes that, do they?

    • WiseUp

      Not sure what happen there. Bad cut and paste. but you get the idea. Lol.

    • Tim

      @WiseUp
      Way over your head. For simpler world views that you might actually understand visit Fox News.

      • CCF

        Rubbish. The entire banking system of the West collapsed, threatening to put the entire population of every democratic country in penury.

        Did you see the populous rise up against the bankers? Did anything actually change? Was the system even overhauled? No,

        The masses excepted it, meekly and quietly as good citizens should.

        @WiseUp is probably right. Nothing will change. Not for a long time.

        • CCF

          excepted = accepted. Sorrree!

        • Scary Devil Monastery

          Well…people are starting to at least look at alternatives to handling money. A small minority for now, but I believe we will see cryptocurrency gain rapid popularity once people start getting wise to the fact that you can’t trust banks any longer.

          When it becomes a tacitly acknowledged fact that the financial systems of the day are building their business models on quicksand, people start taking notice.
          When you see large cash handlers such as VISA, Mastercard and PayPal cutting off recipients because they receive calls from single people deemed important enough it further undermines the trust the citizenry has in such services.

          I’ve heard even completely ordinary colleagues on the job choking with outrage over having to suffer a third-degree questioning by two bank managers every time they try to withdraw cash funds for an ordinary vacation (due to new money laundering laws).

          Today there is at least doubt regarding the system. And every time a new finance bubble bursts that doubt becomes more profound. And people start looking for other options. I think the Euro will be gone as a currency in twenty years. And unless the US manages to curb the hyperbolic swings of the economy caused by shadow banking (fat chance), the dollar will have taken at least quite a few severe blows.

          Once the really big banks actually start dropping, or demonstrate they can’t function without repeated bailout packages of taxpayer money – that’s when we’ll see real change.

        • Scary Devil Monastery

          Well…people are starting to at least look at alternatives to handling money. A small minority for now, but I believe we will see cryptocurrency gain rapid popularity once people start getting wise to the fact that you can’t trust banks any longer.

          When it becomes a tacitly acknowledged fact that the financial systems of the day are building their business models on quicksand, people start taking notice.
          When you see large cash handlers such as VISA, Mastercard and PayPal cutting off recipients because they receive calls from single people deemed important enough it further undermines the trust the citizenry has in such services.

          I’ve heard even completely ordinary colleagues on the job choking with outrage over having to suffer a third-degree questioning by two bank managers every time they try to withdraw cash funds for an ordinary vacation (due to new money laundering laws).

          Today there is at least doubt regarding the system. And every time a new finance bubble bursts that doubt becomes more profound. And people start looking for other options. I think the Euro will be gone as a currency in twenty years. And unless the US manages to curb the hyperbolic swings of the economy caused by shadow banking (fat chance), the dollar will have taken at least quite a few severe blows.

          Once the really big banks actually start dropping, or demonstrate they can’t function without repeated bailout packages of taxpayer money – that’s when we’ll see real change.

        • CCF

          @Scary Devil Monastery

          It begins :)

          http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/15519124

          How long the Revolution do you think?

        • http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes

          I humbly disagree CCF.

          The ‘masses’ did not accept anything. The masses are too busy working, looking after their kids and worrying about paying bills, how to feed the cat and heat the house in Winter to be bothered about ‘high-level’ topics such as global economics, the expected and continuing failures of un-regulated Capitalism as well as the global failure of our so-called politicians to resolve this repeating cycle of misery, war and destruction of people’s lives and families.

          Or should everyone be so educated as to have a ‘relevant’ opinion and vote too?

        • Scary Devil Monastery

          @CCF

          “It begins :)”

          Heh, no, it “began” twenty years ago or some such when shady economists decided it was possible to convert debt claims with extremely shaky coverage into “real” assets usable for taking further loans against.

          This created bubbles which started bursting at a low-tier level.

          However, the idea of banks going out of business or the need for bailout packages on a massive scale? That’s new. We haven’t seen an economy this mismanaged on all levels since the 1920′s, and the main problem is that governments around the world, whether they can see what is going on or not, have only one default option: Put some makeup on the pig and keep presenting it as the savior of the market.

          Imho the main problem are the bailout packages – if an entire industry demonstrates conclusively that it cannot support itself then it should be allowed to burn. That may cause a twenty-year recession but given historical evidence, at least means the end of that recession will see fiscal responsibility emerging again.

          The bailouts – in the eurozone and in the US – doesn’t repair the broken system. It’s a desperate gambit to play for time. Even if some time is gained though, there is no good way of fixing the financial system without enforcing a policy of fiscal responsibility (which will hamper growth and thus is an extremely unpopular option).

          Governments and financial organizations today run on metamphetamine and insists they really need the performance enhancer. And that the side effects are minor.

        • Scary Devil Monastery

          @Rob8urcakes

          “…the expected and continuing failures of un-regulated Capitalism…”

          The problem isn’t so much “unregulated” capitalism. The problem is that we’re running a hybrid model of badly regulated capitalism with socialistic bailouts.

          In an unregulated economy a bank, if it mismanages it’s money, will fail. If it’s big enough this will cause a recession. When a number of companies mismanage the public trust, the public cease to trust such institutes and look for other alternatives.

          However, what we’ve done is to send the message loud and clear – “Let the market run as it will and for any actor big enough, the taxpayers will be there to bail you out if your incompetence causes you to crash and burn”.

          I.e. we are running a combination of the worst aspects of capitalism and socialism both. That’s why we are where we are right now. The only “cure” is to abolish each and every help package to private organizations. A bank which gambles away it’s customer’s money should expect only a fraud charge, not assistance. And people need to learn not to invest the way their local banker tells them blindly.

    • Jean Chicoine

      That’s basically true, but there comes a point when even the silent majority, the law-abiding citizens, can’t take it anymore.

    • http://twitter.com/akaSassinak A. David

      You’re soooo right. They have won. And when they take your house, or cancel your pension, or cut you from healthcare, or shear you naked and then cut your throat, make sure to bleed properly so they don’t lose a drop of your blood.
      Until then, enjoy your McDee.

  • GigglesaBit

    ok. So, we overthrow Obama and Cameron and French, German and every other democratically elected whoever. Who’s to say that what replaces their justice sysems is any better. Good God! It might be a million times worse!

    • Floppy Copy

      The simple answer is to replace them with people who are less corrupt. Of course, this is nearly impossible to do as anyone you put in power will just end up corrupted too. Money and power always do that.

      It’s human nature to share, it’s human nature to want to stay within the boundaries of law in order to prevent being ostracized from society, it is human nature to be greedy, and it is human nature to despise those who you perceive as “the enemy”. So long as human nature doesn’t change, there will be no end to the current conundrum.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

        No, the US voting system is the culprit. Having only a two party system ensures that no one has a vote that matters. If you vote for a third party, it’s wasted. If you vote opposite of the mainstream contenders, you may work to hurt a candidate that’s closest to you. If anything, you would need a voting system that allows for others to have a chance and run offs for the top spot.

      • Guest

        Machine that control planet Earth’s resources – Jacque Fresco.

    • ThumbsUpThumbsDown

      Truly the right question. Thanks for raising it. Needs an answer.

    • Scary Devil Monastery

      …and also @FloppyCopy

      The answer is that we can’t just replace the individuals. We need to change the system itself to be robust enough to withstand corruption and incompetence by individuals.

      That means dismantling most of the dilution of responsibility, mainly. The main problem with the current system is that plausible deniability and lack of any accountability carry the day.

      Most original government systems account for this but the problem is that the vast increase of bureaucracy which accretes around such systems rapidly removes that robustness. Leading to the current status quo. Systems where the government can do everything consistently wrong without any party or incumbent becoming truly motivated to amend the policy.

    • http://falkvinge.net/ Rick Falkvinge

      Replacing the names in office with other names will accomplish nothing, when the problem is that the office itself corrupts the names within.

      See Stanford Prison Experiment for a good example.

      • CCF

        I believe that was the question: when the office goes what is there to replace it?
        These systems and methodologies are entrenched in our society, hell, they may even represent the backbone of capitalism.

        Experiments are useless after the fact. A bloodless coupé is more likely to result in a meltdown of society rather than a change. The cost simply of readjustment would probably bankrupt a nation.

        It’s big talk but pointless. If a new method was created then it too would become corrupt within two generations. That’s human nature.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

          These systems and methodologies are entrenched in our society, hell, they may even represent the backbone of capitalism.

          Cronyism, maybe, but not capitalism. Capitalism is allowing the market to work without the government trying to guide it.

          A bloodless coupé is more likely to result in a meltdown of society rather than a change. The cost simply of readjustment would probably bankrupt a nation.

          Sorry, but I would need proof of this. Changing a few details of society could make untold amounts of change in (MO) 5 years to 10 years time. Would it bankrupt the US? I don’t think so. Would it be expensive? Only to those that don’t want these changes.

          If a new method was created then it too would become corrupt within two generations. That’s human nature.

          But the only constant in this world is change. NOTHING can stand still forever. A new system corrupts only when people forget this very important lesson. It’s the ones that nostalgically attach to their own ideas of family values, using whatever force they can muster to enact such laws.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

          These systems and methodologies are entrenched in our society, hell, they may even represent the backbone of capitalism.

          Cronyism, maybe, but not capitalism. Capitalism is allowing the market to work without the government trying to guide it.

          A bloodless coupé is more likely to result in a meltdown of society rather than a change. The cost simply of readjustment would probably bankrupt a nation.

          Sorry, but I would need proof of this. Changing a few details of society could make untold amounts of change in (MO) 5 years to 10 years time. Would it bankrupt the US? I don’t think so. Would it be expensive? Only to those that don’t want these changes.

          If a new method was created then it too would become corrupt within two generations. That’s human nature.

          But the only constant in this world is change. NOTHING can stand still forever. A new system corrupts only when people forget this very important lesson. It’s the ones that nostalgically attach to their own ideas of family values, using whatever force they can muster to enact such laws.

        • Scary Devil Monastery

          @Jay

          “Would it bankrupt the US? I don’t think so. Would it be expensive? Only to those that don’t want these changes.”

          Actually, if the US hadn’t handed out vast amounts of cash in bailouts, bakruptcy might very well have occurred. Still, I’d compare that to a cancer patient suffering from his chemotherapy – a vital step necessary to ensure survival.

          Point is, given an enforced back-to-basics approach of smaller government, better fiscal responsibility and an open market, the US could and would rise again.

          The main issue is that the US (and the Eurozone) simply refuses to take it’s medicine as they see a 20-year hiatus from world power status with a shot credit rating completely unacceptable. And the solution seems to be to compensate for a flawed system by taking heavy painkillers in form of government stimulus instead. Which doesn’t fix any of the problems causing the mess.

          It’s something of an embarrassment to have to acknowledge that the Chinese “communists” are far better at practical market economy than we ostensibly “capitalist” countries are.

      • Scary Devil Monastery

        The answer is to implement a system robust enough to take local failures into account. That’s easy enough. Keeping the system that way is not.

        The original US government was set up in such a way, implementing “checks and balances” ensuring a distribution of power where each set of stakeholders would ideally have a different motivation in how he/she voted.

        Meaning that the body politic could accomodate all sorts of vested interests without such interests being able to unduly influence future legislation.

        The problem, of course, is that any stakeholder with an interest in an issue then creates a network in order to be able to influence all levels of the body politic simultaneously, and that opens the door for disproportionate influence by the lobby.

        Which then generates a strong need for obfuscation visavi the public as those ungrateful voters might actually feel offended at having their elected representatives being cat’s paws for Big Tobacco, Big Oil, Christian fundamentalists and the MPAA/RIAA/Ifpi umbrella corporations.

        At least in a brilliant burst of foresight the US also implemented a constitutional court capable of overturning ill-conceived legislation in violation of the basic principles on which the nation was founded.
        If there’s anything we truly need in europe, it’s constitutional courts in each country manned by ultraconservative judges whose main motivation for the last thirty years has been to fervently defend the national constitution, irrespective of what the political flavor of the month happens to be.

  • Pingback: Macropathy vs. The Swarm | We R Pirates

  • Jean Chicoine

    Question the nature of your orders.
    Hawkwind, Coded Languages

  • Anonymous

    That looks like its gonna be really good.
    anon-web.us.tc

  • http://twitter.com/AlyssaBlindy Alyssa Blindy

    I have always been saying, since the start of Occupy, that Intellectual Property will get stuck in the middle of it all. I have felt like, to some people, the Pirate Parties are going to begin looking bad, and will be tagged to views such as socialism, communism, and even it’s complete opposite, anarchism. I have felt something coming on, and now I am beginning to see it a little bit better.
    In simple words, my response to this article is that, there is so much to all of this. Some people even go as far as to link the Pirate Party with a new world order, with no borders, etc. etc. However, I am not sure about all that; I am trying to make sense of a huge group of views which are placed out in front of me for my use and analysis.
    I know this may not make sense, but truly, this, is how I feel after reading this.
    So many people tag one of two or three words to everything. Doing that, and not considering every part of what is being heard, will not help you see the big picture.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

      The Pirate Party of the US is actually more Libertarian in its beliefs. If we could get a few into the government, you would see a LOT of changes in how copyright issues form.

      • Anonymous

        At this point all I care is to get rid of the current assholes in office of both parties and put in new people who will not take big money from corporations/rich people nor will they accept any money lobbying at all.And if someone tries to pass you the buck when lobbying show them the door never to return to your office.
        and they must support Israel my Jewish Homeland and the only Democracy in the Middle East and probably the only one you will ever see in that area of extremists and terrorists.

        • still kicking

          Well now. Since you brought it up first I’m going to make a few comments about your wonderful Israel and the mess we are in. I’ll even tie it to file sharing and obsolete business models.

          Israel, and their hard core supporters in the US, are responsible for most of the current messes through the Middle East. Their state sponsored terrorism against poor innocent people so as to steal their land, their labor and their soul has helped create a mass of alienated individuals and societies that now go far beyond the Arab/Islamic world. Outside of the US with its carefully controlled media most of the world recognizes the corruptness of the Jewish state and the racist underpinnings of Zionism.

          Moving towards the current financial collapse that has surrounded the world it is hard not to notice the almost complete domination of the most deeply involved firms by executives who are not only Jewish but quite often members of the ultra rich and nationalistic power groups in the US. The CEOs, past and present of Goldman Sachs have embedded themselves into both private finance along with government positions of monetary authority so as to insure that real reform that would hinder the actions of these firms in their incessant greed to control ever larger sums of money simply will not take place. Paul Ruben, Jon Paulson, are just a few of the names from this infestation of a firm.

          Where this comes together with the current economic failures is the uncomfortable, for a PC type person anyway, reality that people and their cultures/societies are not inherently equal. The reason why foreign born Asians attain success in the US within several generation while foreign born Mexicans do not lies within how each group views things like education, family size, and planning for the future. Some cultures highly stress particular areas while others completely ignore them. This is reality. Also reality is that the Jewish culture puts a strong emphasis on education, the acquisition of money, and the unfortunate attitude of arrogance towards others. So much of the failures in the financial realm go straight to core beliefs of the dominant players: obscene amounts of money solely to show off and rub it in the faces of others and then, when things go wrong, adamant denial of their own responsibility.

          One more paragraph and I’m gone. We all know the history of file sharing and how the media providers had repeated opportunities to, if not take control, at least to direct a viable stream of revenue towards themselves. And yet they have refused time and time again preferring to somehow maintain a business model that clearly no longer works. So what gives here that some very smart CEOs, CFOs, and the like cannot see the reality? Take a look at the overwhelming majority of these people in terms of their cultural/religious background. You find the same deep vein of greed and arrogance which refuses to accept change, or in a broader sense as applies to places like the Middle East, and attempts to lock people into a restricted area of movement while sucking out everything possible from them.

          If this all sounds totally crazy just remember the next time you are relaxing on a Carnival Line Cruise ship that its founder retired a billionaire to his adopted country, Israel where he then built a palatial estate upon the land that was arranged to be stolen from some Palestinian families whom had lived there for generations. Those people now become embittered refugees ready to embrace extremist ideologies that have broadened their battle grounds to include Europe and the US for terrorist attacks. Also remember that the incredible riches this man made are being funneled into Jewish controlled banks, hedge funds, and other mechanisms to become ever larger in quantity. And when some of this money is lent to places like Greece, which cannot and never could replay the loans, instead of the financial institutions taking the hit for their poor judgement, the sick corrupt super 1% elite gets together with their counterparts in government to, once again, pass the losses on to the public. And the masses begin to see why their life styles are declining and want to know who is responsible.

  • Pingback: === popurls.com === popular today

  • http://MakeCash2.com Tracy Ellis

    @AlyssaB Good article Rick. Good analogy on the situation…my buddy’s mom makes $68/hr on the laptop. She has been fired from work for 7 months but last month her pay was $7375 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Go to this site http://x.co/ajLA

  • Guest

    I think you’re taking your own values and projecting them onto other movements, particularly the Arab Spring movement. It seems like this interpretation of events is what someone would like to think is true, even though it isn’t. It’s not that people are just fighting against all authority, for most people, they just don’t like the current authority. In the Arab countries, many people would accept another dictatorship if it fulfilled all their needs and allowed for productive economies.

    Don’t take these movements to be people accepting our principles. It’s a step, but for most people, authority remains a good thing. And to a point, it is. We just don’t have a good authority in existence now.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IZ5BM5GNLA54OADSWGSXAMA7SY Jay

      Authority by appointment is one of the worst ways to govern ever. Some people have natural leadership capability. But if you try to command by just being elected, it’s not going to carry over well. Leaders form in a number of ways. Circumstance, deeds, actions, intellect among a few other variables.

      I would make the argument that the election process in the US has been usurped as I described above. If you really want to see it changed, it would have to be through a process that gives people more choices and is more fair to them. I just don’t believe that people want authority in their lives when things such as OWS make that notion stand on its head.

  • ThumbsUpThumbsDown

    I value very much in Rick’s article the sense that a new kind of political perspective taking root in our conterporary democracies might yet find enough space in the public conciousness to make the difference in how we as individual citizens can continue to have electoral primacy and make our needs met in public life.

    I hear repeatedly the same bitter complaints that I make: That corporate monopolists have crowded us out of our legislatures; that they have disenfranchized us with an endless spiderweb of boilerplate fine print; that they have distributed revenues pyrimidaly to the one percent that has everything from the ninety nine percent that has not; that they have nickle and dimed us out of our sanity; that they have kept their gains and billed us for their losses; and, that they have currupted our legislators into criminalizing our presence in those civil spaces where we are most fundamentally free, moral, and human.

    Yet, I’m concerned that what Rick is reporting on is not so much the emergence of a new political perspective capable of guiding effective mass resistence, but the undeniably louder mass accumulation of complaints. This distinction is crucial. Why?
    Because an infinite accumulation of mere complaints do not an effective political perspective make. Perhaps a million or a billion scattered rabbits complain loudly and eloquently as they confront the wolf every day. Perhaps they complain loudly right up to the moment that they become wolf food. But that mysterious instant when the scattered rabbit stops, turns, and confronts the wolf with at least a final dying scratch, that is the moment of effective political perspective. Can it be said that with respect to the dominance of monopoly corporations in our civil life we see signs of such an effective political resistence?

    One observation: You will see the scattered rabit stop, turn, and, perhaps, gouge an eye from this particular monopolizing wolf, when leaders like Rick act to deny corporations the rights to be present and represented in our legislatures “with all the rights of natural persons” for the purpose of enacting new law. Why? Because it is this priveledge, above all, that allows corporations access to the state and police powers by which they attain precedence over the voices and needs of individual citizens. It is there that monopolies are nurtured and grow into perpetuities. On the day that you see leaders like Rick mount an effective publick challenge to this “personhood” previledge of corporations, you will know that someone, somewhere in our publick life has discovered his personal moment of effective political perspective and has stopped, turned, and gouged the wolf deeply in the eye.

    Afterward, we’ll talk more confidantly about how we get close enough to cut off the wolfs balls.

    • http://falkvinge.net/ Rick Falkvinge

      Your observations are very astute. However, I’d like to challenge you on one point, that the key difference lies between a heap of complaints and an alternative forward-looking vision.

      I argue that it is a matter of maturity of the movement, and that is it merely a matter of where on the stage of maturity you look. You can’t get to forward-looking alternatives without starting out with complaints.

      When you look at all the large recent political movements (liberalism, labor, green), they have all started out as a reaction to current conditions, the heap of complaints, and evolved from there into forward-looking vision.

      What is your take on this observation?

      Cheers,
      Rick

      • EducatedGuest

        You might want to look into the the Spanish “governmental” organization of the syndico-anarchist communes during the Spanish Civil War.
        There’s a very good lesson for an actually working, partly horizontal leadership system. Unfortunately, a lot of substitution and extrapolation needs to be done because of the war-footing…

      • ThumbsUpThumbsDown

        It is of course all about the maturity of the movement.

        In that regard, I express again how much I value the sense of a new effective political perspective expressed in your article. I made the stark contrast between my sense of those scattered inputs through which we regularly understand the meaning of expanding corporate dominance over our lives (outrage as complaints) and those necessary attributes that I would take as persuasive evidence that a politically mature resistence is now present among us.

        If time were on our side, this would be a strictly academic distinction; but, as it stands, given the rate at which technological change multiplies the monopoly power of corporations, it makes sense to fear that the rights of citizens are being erased at a rate that can not be reversed: If you acknowledge the possibility of one new unthinkable and unbearable fact in history, Is there such a thing as an absolute moment in time when “they” win and “we” lose?

        I pointed out that your willingness as a leader to act boldly to restrict the current right of corporations to be present in legislatures “with all trhe rights of natural persons” would address the living core of corporate power and would evidence the hoped for new political perspective to contrast favorably with the mere accumulation of random complaints.

        I take your point that the necessary movement exists, is growing, and, is becoming more “mature” each day. Yet, in our infancy are we not all the natural prey of the wolf? Is not “Adulthood”, the emergent attribute which allows us to confront the wolf on our terms and earn the destiny we want and discard the destiny we have been assigned? What promise of effective change do you see when you cast your eyes over all the other legislators that surround you?

        Thank you always for your best and better efforts.

  • Theswarm

    Exactly is right Rick ;)

    We’re on our way to a new law in the land. It will be very much different from the old.

    Star Trek anyone ……………..

    RESISTANCE IS FUTILE !!

    lol

  • Pingback: Macropathy vs. The Swarm « Diychica’s Blog

  • Pingback: Macropathy vs. The Swarm - whitewalls's posterous

  • Mwhahahahahahaha

    Oh there’s nothing like a little blind idealism of an afternoon.

    I do heartily agree with with the points you raise on democratic ‘monarchy’, but I’m not sure in reality how far reliance on the swarm would go. Would people band together to help feed a starving family who no-one really liked much? Would you let people band together to go and fight crime and inflict punishments on their fellow members of society?

    As for employing our leaders as administrators, who’s administrator are they? Do they enact my version of law and societal good-behaviour? The one where everyone gets a free cup of tea and a scone? Or do they enact my nice nieghbour’s? He’s a lovely chap and lends me things cheerfully, he even voted the same way as I did last time. but here’s a problem. he is incredibly racist and thinks all foreigners are generally criminal in their intent. And if they have an arabic surname, he’d just lock them up with no oversight.

    The fundamental problem with a swarm led society is that it can quickly, very quickly turn into a society which bullies and inflicts hardship on those who don’t agree with it. This is all very well and good when the few it doesn’t agree with are members of a corrupt elite, such as we’ve seen in the arab spring. What happens when those few are gay? or black? or jewish?
    Swarm democracy can become mob rule if there aren’t over lying structures in place. Otherwise you’re just back to that same old mantra of the ideal liberal elite:
    “wouldn’t it be nice if every one was nice”.

    Well yes, and it is a feeling I hold myself, but not everyone is nice.

    There is still sadly a need for top down authority in our lives as we can’t trust everyone to obey the rules. Rick, you’re clearly a very intelligent and incredibly nice person. But not everyone is like you. Far from it. You shouldn’t judge the entirety of your society based upon what you and your acquaintances are like. Do you never chat to someone online and walk away thinking “and they’re allowed to vote?!” because they’ve said something utterly stupid, racist or hateful?

    Democracy as we know it is, sad to say, the best of a bad bunch of options. To wish for better is good, to encourage more people to want more than we have is very good. But to expect governments to put authority and more importantly, money and power in local hands is wishful thinking. Especially for a country with a budget like the USA.

    Take a look sometime at the back issues of a UK magazine called Private Eye, they run a rotten boroughs page where every edition they point out the ineptitude and blatant corruption of local politicians. This is the inevitable conclusion of local people taking care of local manners. We’re all corruptible.

    I’ve been a member of 38 Degrees for a while now and watched as this swarm movement has made not one jot of difference to the NHS organisation in the UK. Organization which ironically wants to give localities more power rather than top down governance for our health care.

    Both Dr.s and patients are against this increase in their authority but its being forced upon them. So in this case a ‘swarm’ is actually pushing for less local power. Where does that leave your argument?

    Still it was a nice piece to read, I just hope you have a healthy dose of reality to go along with your idealism. Keep up the hoping!

    • Scary Devil Monastery

      “You shouldn’t judge the entirety of your society based upon what you and your acquaintances are like. Do you never chat to someone online and walk away thinking “and they’re allowed to vote?!” because they’ve said something utterly stupid, racist or hateful?”

      I don’t know about Rick, but it happens to me on a regular basis.

      The problem isn’t democracy but the problem that democracy as it’s practiced today isn’t representative.

      I went to school for a year in germany when i was 9-10. One of the things which struck me was that german public school at that time actually taught the lessons learend by the second world war. An entire generation grew up with the knowledge of what, exactly, happens when you fail to make your leaders accountable, and when you fail to shoulder your own burden as a citizen to both defend tolerance of dissenting views or to go to elections with a critical mind.

      Today the Pirate Party polls 10% in Germany across the board, from a platform of open government, freedom of information, personal integrity and education. Many of those voters aren’t “young”. They’re the generation which learned about how democracy fails at basic school in early years, while looking soberly at their next-door neighbor, the DDR.

      By and large the screaming bile-spewing trolls, both on the internet and irl are a decided minority. Most of the rest of the public is capable of making proper decisions when they are given the proper tools to understand what they are deciding about.

      Our main problem today is that it is in the interest of very few parties to actually teach people to think for themselves. And so across the board, almost every nations now skips out on teaching children what a democracy is and how it can fail at an age where those teachings could set.

      We ought to borrow the teachings of Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the Jesuits. Teach people when they are young and they will forever look at the world with the eyes they were given then.

  • Pingback: Macropathy vs. The Swarm | TorrentForce Blog

  • http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes

    My local politician wasn’t elected by me because I chose to vote for the Pirate Party candidate.

    My local politician is a devout member of his Party.
    That Party makes policy via their manifesto promises in the hope enough people vote for those promises.

    My local politician and his Party claims to represent me in parliament because I’m a constituent in the area he stood for election.

    Does my elected politician serve me, his Party or his manifesto promises?
    The nature of modern democracy is at risk due to a failure of proper representation given that we now have far more access to ACCURATE information and knowledge than ever before.

    Is it not the case then, that the Party-system of politics is itself undermining democracy in the 21st Century?

    I think it is – do you?

  • Anonymous
  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • The Pirate Bay Isn’t Down Completely, Just Having a Few Issues

    Twitter and Facebook, not to mention the TorrentFreak inbox, are currently alive with complaints that The...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.