Loomio
November 30th, 2019 18:26

Constitution amendment: Remove second item from goals

Pirate Praveen
Pirate Praveen Public Seen by 141

Currently second point in Goals section of our constitution states, "We would like to engage with more young and educated citizens and bring positive change with their involvement."

As suggested by @Kannan V M https://www.loomio.org/d/SFfYwagX/associate-requests/183 I think we can remove it. This was there from the original draft but no one thought it as a problem till now.

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 20th, 2019 18:21

If you are worried about the subject, it can be changed as well.

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 20th, 2019 18:20

You need a new thread only when you want to propose a different amendment.

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 20th, 2019 18:19

Why you need a new thread? This were all the discussions happened. You can just create a new proposal here itself.

Kannan V M

Kannan V M December 20th, 2019 18:08

okay, then I'll create a new thread for it

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 20th, 2019 07:31

https://www.loomio.org/g/7qmru1SG/indian-pirates?q=Constitution%20amendment all threads start with "constitution amendment" in subject and can be easily found by a simple search. If we create a single thread that will easily become big and right now we cannot create any new sub groups (once we move to codema.in we can think about it), even then it means everyone will need to join that sub group. I think search option is sufficient to discover all amendments easily.

Kannan V M

Kannan V M December 20th, 2019 07:23

I think there should be a thread for constitution amendments, or subgroup. Otherwise amendments to constitution threads will scatter everywhere. Should I start a new thread just for this amendment or should we start thread for amendments in general?

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 7th, 2019 06:45

You came up with the wording. But it does not really matter who proposes it. I hope Kannan will propose it.

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 7th, 2019 06:44

Anyone can propose. It does not really matter, what matters is members support it and there is no disagreement. Can you propose it?

Akshay

Akshay December 7th, 2019 04:37

I didn't come up with the need for this amendment. So, me proposing it would alter the history of the amendment.

Kannan V M

Kannan V M December 7th, 2019 04:33

Associate can propose?

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 6th, 2019 12:54

@Akshay can you propose the amendment then? @Kannan V M can you propose this as new goal? As for official language, English became the de-facto language. We can record it if that helps in some way.

Kannan V M

Kannan V M December 6th, 2019 11:17

Like "we recognize language is a barrier for communication and we understand the need for information available in different languages. We will do efforts for making information available in different languages with availability of volunteers."

Official language will be English? (this could go for a voting)

Kannan V M

Kannan V M December 6th, 2019 10:50

I agree with @Akshay 's wordings. We can add reachoit and translation as a different goal.

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 5th, 2019 17:11

If @Kannan V M @Bady @Abraham Raji and @michael john sinclair. agrees to the new wording. You can propose this change. I will close the current proposal.

Akshay

Akshay December 5th, 2019 16:13

"We engage with people who have the energy and the inclination to change the system." is something I think crisply captures the idea which can still sound inclusive.

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 5th, 2019 14:19

OK I can remove that. Once @Kannan V M and @Akshay agrees to this text, I will propose a vote.

MJS

michael john sinclair. December 5th, 2019 12:48

Its getting better good to see that we are moving forward with discusion, eventually is not needed.

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 5th, 2019 12:05

Also you can use the reply button below a specific comment for better readability of the thread.

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 5th, 2019 12:04

How about this, "We would like to engage with people who have access to the internet and can speak English initially (until we have a critical mass). We understand this is a limitation we need to overcome eventually. We seek to remove the barriers of language and technology which prevents others from participating. This could include actions such as translation of content and finding ways to reach out to people who are denied access to the internet. Once we find enough people willing to do the translations, we can include more languages for participating in decisions too."

MJS

michael john sinclair. December 5th, 2019 11:27

Intelligent people exist without Education so we could use this to.

But Citizen is exclusive because not all the people in the world have citizen status,

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 5th, 2019 09:00

It is not the principles that is unique to us, it is the process we have to arrive at these principles and update it that makes us unique. We don't have some holy ideas we will hold on to whatever happens, that is more like a religion. Every idea we have is open to questioning and change. For that to be meaningful, we need everyone to be able to participate in that process. And that by nature exclude some people. So if we want to include everyone, we need to accept the our limitations (language and access) and actively eliminate the limitations. And that is not as easy as removing this line. It is a long term process and can take generations to overcome. In the meanwhile, we can try to address some of it by actively reaching out to people who are excluded.

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 5th, 2019 08:53

We want people to participate in our decision making process, ie, the crucial difference we propose and what makes us different from other organizations. So we must accept the requirement to participate (internet access and English) as a limitation. Unless we make conscious efforts to fix this, just removing the line will not make us inclusive (this is what I understood from Akshay's objection).

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 5th, 2019 08:16

How about this change "We would like to engage with more young and educated citizens initially. We understand this is a limitation we need to overcome. We seek to remove the barriers of language and technology which prevents others from participating. This could include actions such as translation of content and finding ways to reach out to people who are denied access to the internet."

MJS

michael john sinclair. December 5th, 2019 07:36

I would go with young and old people. Scapping Educated Citizens both exclusive wording.

Bady

Bady December 5th, 2019 07:28

i agree with what you said except the last part, technically speaking there's an issue with the last part you said:

I don't think it's fine in any context for our constitution to say we only wish to work with a certain privileged class of the society.

please note that the word 'only' is not there in the original goal. the word 'only' definitely make us non-inclusive, while the existence of the second goal in its current form creates a confusion regarding inclusion. it's due to that confusion it causes, i voted in favor of removing it.

also, from the following words of @Akshay we can see that he isn't against reaching out to others:

If people think they have to reach out to others, adding that as a separate goal seems more appropriate.

Abraham Raji

Abraham Raji December 5th, 2019 06:53

@Akshay So it's like in this organization we do 'a' because we are capable of 'b'. Since 'b' is required for 'a', we need not worry about those who are not capable of 'b'. Sounds fair right? Except, 'a' isn't that important to begin with. The organization is it's ideals not it's methods, the methods are just means for the organization to implement it's ideals. If the need arises I'm sure we will change the methods, not compromise on our ideals but change the way we work. It is also worth noting that we're only capable of 'b' because we were born at the right place in the right time and through no virtue of our own. I don't think it's fine in any context for our constitution to say we only wish to work with a certain privileged class of the society. Your argument just sounds like an excuse someone would make to justify a class system.

Akshay

Akshay December 5th, 2019 03:04

Indian Pirates is a political organization that primarily operates through loomio, matrix, mastodon, diaspora, etc. From the beginning it has been web based and the principles of direct democracy find no other application. In that context, I find nothing wrong when one of the goals said that it is the young and "educated" that Indian pirates wants to work with. It definitely is a privileged section. I find nothing wrong that a small party decides to keep that as a goal. If people think they have to reach out to others, adding that as a separate goal seems more appropriate. That's why I said removing this suddenly doesn't make Indian Pirates inclusive. Also, when sentences are taken out of their original context, a lot of meaning is lost. That's why I request @Pirate Praveen who wrote it originally to clarify what was meant of it and what has changed.

Abraham Raji

Abraham Raji December 4th, 2019 18:42

Well said 👏👏👏

Bady

Bady December 4th, 2019 18:26

Removing the sentence doesn't make us suddenly inclusive towards non-young, non-educated citizens. Neither does existence of that sentence make us not inclusive.

@Akshay i disagree, existence of that sentence in the constitution does make us non-inclusive. it means we consider a special section of society as more important than others. this is different from giving importance to Women or Dalit issues because in such cases we're supporting under-privileged sections of the society to realize equal life chances which is definitely not the case with young and educated citizens. being young is a special, unearned advantage which qualifies as a 'privilege'. so i kindly request you to reconsider this proposal based on the terms of 'privilege'.

Akshay

Akshay December 4th, 2019 15:45

If you can propose an amendment to change the text to a more accurate representation of the goal, I can agree.

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 4th, 2019 15:43

I think I only added it in the very first draft. No one thought it was problematic until @Kannan V M brought it up. Now looking deeper with more exposure I can see there is potential for misunderstanding.

Abraham Raji

Abraham Raji December 4th, 2019 15:43

But where is that definition in our constitution. The Constitution shouldn't create ambiguity. Your definition of educated may not be mine and a third person may have an entirely different understanding. Either way a cleanup is in order.

Akshay

Akshay December 4th, 2019 15:40

@Abraham Raji I don't disagree with you. But we have to see the context in which the goal was originally added and see what has changed. I don't know who added the sentence. @Pirate Praveen ?

Akshay

Akshay December 4th, 2019 15:32

What we consider as educated is educated (by whatever life experience it takes) to understand how a democracy works.

The young ones in a society have more to lose or gain because they will be living longer in that society.

Abraham Raji

Abraham Raji December 4th, 2019 15:31

@Akshay Don't you think that the statement might imply that we're only interested in engaging with educated youth? Tbh I believe what we mean by that is too engage with people who think in a more open, inclusive and 'modern' (for the lack of a better word) way that would bring good changes in the society. I think it's better if we remove or change it in a way that is more inclusive as there are people in our country who can't afford formal education or have boycotted the education system because of thier own reasons. On top of that I don't think anyone here thinks of education as a necessity to work with us or that a person's educational status is indicative of his/her intelligence or experience. So the clause 'educated citizen' is unnecessary in my opinion and hence should be removed.

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen December 4th, 2019 14:57

@Kannan V M @Akshay I think both of you need to find a common ground that both can agree.

Akshay

Akshay
Disagree
December 4th, 2019 14:24

It is just a goal. Removing the sentence doesn't make us suddenly inclusive towards non-young, non-educated citizens. Neither does existence of that sentence make us not inclusive. Extending that goal with more goals is a better approach, IMO.

V

Vishnup
Agree
December 1st, 2019 16:28

Abraham Raji

Abraham Raji
Agree
December 1st, 2019 15:45

Another aspect of the problem is what we consider as being educated. We have people without even primary education in our country building aircrafts, capable of classifying various species of snake on sight, various artist and authors who have played important roles in forming the conscience of the society. Calling them uneducated is simply prosperous. Education is beyond a degree or cert. We need try and redefine what the term educated means. But until that changes we may have to take this out.

Abraham Raji

Abraham Raji
Agree
December 1st, 2019 15:37

Another aspect of the problem is what we consider as being educated. We have people without even primary education in our country building aircrafts, capable of classifying various species of snake on sight, various artist and authors who have played important roles in forming the conscience of the society. Calling them uneducated is simply prosperous. Education is beyond a degree. We need try and redefine what the term educated means. But until that changes we may have to take this out.

Sooraj Kenoth

Sooraj Kenoth
Abstain
December 1st, 2019 04:13

Bady

Bady
Agree
December 1st, 2019 03:24

I wonder why no one, including me of course, didn't think about it before. Thanks @Kannan V M for pointing it out.

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen
Agree
November 30th, 2019 18:28

Something that needs cleanup

Pirate Praveen

Pirate Praveen started a proposal November 30th, 2019 18:28

Remove second Goal from constitution Closed 10:41pm - Thursday 5 Dec 2019

Outcome
by Pirate Praveen December 5th, 2019 17:12

We need to reword it as @Akshay objected to removing it.

Remove "We would like to engage with more young and educated citizens and bring positive change with their involvement." from constitution as it is not inclusive.

Results
Block - 4
Disagree - 1
Abstain - 1
Agree - 0
6 people have voted (0%)