Open Source Advocacy

Collaboration
Collaboration

It’s hard for men of my generation to fathom life without the Internet. Sure, I can survive for extended periods of time without checking my email or browsing the web. In fact, I enjoy going minimalist camping for a few days at a time, cooking Spaghetti-Os over a campfire, thumbing through Julius Evola’s books, and reflecting on how Tradition relates to me in the contemporary American context.

But no matter how completely I believe I’ve removed myself from “the grid”, I’m never truly removed from it. After all, how would a mere high school graduate from small-town Indiana stumble onto Evola? It’s not like his trenchant analyses of modernism are available at my local library. In fact, they weren’t available at the big college library, either. They sure as hell wouldn’t have been mentioned on television. Before relatively recently, very little of his stuff was even translated into English and what little had been translated was only familiar to some very small circles of New Right intellectuals sharing it with a handful of associates in their ideological ghetto.

The generation that grew up after the Jewish oligarchy achieved a stranglehold on American media, academia, and theology never had a chance. This was a true Dark Age of absolute censorship of dissident ideas in America, one which most acutely affected the Baby Boomer generation. One of the interesting things about the recent CofCC conference was the abundance of the very old veterans of the George Wallace campaign and other anti-integration battles and the abundance of relatively young computer geeks. An entire generation in between is largely absent. It’s been hopelessly brainwashed with the vapid mythology of “the 60’s”, of “The Dawning of Aquarius”, and of American history as a steady process of successive liberations of victimized identity groups.

A Glimpse Into the Baby Boomer Mind

The Internet changed everything. This completely decentralized new medium empowered us to bypass the filter altogether and follow our paths of inquiry in absolutely any direction they led. A new generation of White Advocates converged from a variety of backgrounds. Academics like Kevin MacDonald who would have struggled to find a handful of readers a couple decades ago became capable of sharing their ideas with millions. It’s in this context that millions of young men like myself were able to escape the prevailing dogma and arrive at heretical interpretations of reality which had been virtually extinguished by the regime.

Most people of my generation are still drinking the multicult kool-aid. But most people don’t matter. The information is readily available to men determined to seek the truth and this numerical minority embodies a “majority of will”, if I may adopt an epigram from Dr. Pierce. Most Americans are glued to their couches, soaking up the latest pop culture filth. They’ll assuredly remain glued to those couches while we’re taking it back.

And how might we actually take it back?

We’ll take it back by leveraging the Internet’s capacity for facilitating massively collaborative projects. We’ll instantiate a framework for coordinating “open source” advocacy, translating the phenomenal success of community-driven software development into political activism. I believe we have a motivated core of activists who currently lack the infrastructure necessary to collaborate toward accomplishing quantifiable goals. By adapting processes from the open source software development community, we can create a lightning rod to gather up the best and brightest from across America to catalyze the revolution.

The Cathedral and the Bazaar

Eric S. Raymond’s seminal work on the nature of open source software development, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, outlines necessary preconditions for initiating a successful bazaar-style project. One of those is a plausible promise. The community needs to share a vision of the completed project and have a skeletal framework around which to begin working. A talented project leader needs to be capable of both designing the core of his project and communicating his vision to potential collaborators.

Ideally, he has access to an incubator, a workspace conducive to collaborative project development. In the open source software development community, the most popular example of this is SourceForge. It provides each project with a source code repository, discussion forums to facilitate communication, a home page, a wiki for documentation, and a front-end that helps developers and end-users find the projects.

The challenge is in translating this proven model toward accomplishing White Advocacy goals.

1. What services should an incubator offer to project collaborators?

2. What kinds of projects would be well-suited to this framework?

3. How willing would you be to contribute your time and talent to a collaborative advocacy project?

22 Comments

  1. I created a thread in the new Continental Army forum for tracking and coordinating this project.

    http://www.occidentaldissent.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2386

    This doesn’t imply that I’m trying to be the project leader.

    I’ll have a post explaining the Continental Army thing up shortly. I hadn’t anticipated an ambitious project spontaneously emerging from the comments.

    There’s nothing controversial or ideological about the “Continental Army” thing. It’s essentially a centralized location to work on projects which will feature some helpful tools and resources moving forward.

  2. skypelanguageteacher

    at

    gmail dot com. Get in touch. Also, sign in over at the forum so you can send me PM’s.

  3. DanielJ wrote, “I’m very serious about donation campaign. Think about it as well.”

    DJ, I was one of the commenters on your original TOO “Call to Action” who said I would pledge and deliver some $$. I will contact you via the site info you gave above.

    Unfortunately I cannot help with the Russian-English part, but will help with cleaning up any English pages done by people who aren’t sure of their command of the target language.

    This project is a fantastic idea for two reasons.

    1. In itself, it’s something that truly needs doing, and will be another bullet in the head of the alien consciousness of the culture distorters.

    2. It is ONE EXAMPLE of open-source collaboration. Since I’m not a “tech guy”, I can’t suggest any platforms for enabling this collaboration outside of this comment thread; but probably someone here could.

    This project is one example of the potential CONTENT of a larger, more general collaboration platform which could enable “work” to be “distributed” to those with “interest”, and even enable payment for the work via “sponsorship” of the work in small modules. There are many people who will pay for something if it’s got a tangible “result” they can take some credit for moving forward. Think of it like sponsoring one of those little black kids in a mud hut in Africa: doesn’t cost much, but the sponsor gets some warm-fuzzies. (Bad analogy! Many of those are probably frauds, and we’d be helping our won, not the “other”!)

  4. Who are the current copyright holders? Translating for distribution without permission would be an infringement of federal law and can be prosecuted and if found guilty offenders may face up to 5 years in federal prison. Further I am not sure whether or not this whole discussion falls under the Rico Laws and some of you here might not be arrested and charged with criminal conspiricy.

  5. I think a good project would be to use music to get messages across, as the other side uses it and it is very effective with it. Also some well edited videos and documentaries. Have one person to do research for content, another do script or lyrics writing,etc.

    A printed monthly newsletter might be worthwhile, a few articles selected, formatted, made into a pdf, and then printed on the front and back on a printer at home. People could commit to each distribute x number on x day of the month locally.

    I don’t know anything about farming but it seems like local farms would be a wise thing to get started, this site also could be used to raise funding for projects.
    http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/bkfarmyards/bk-farmyards-developing-a-1-acre-youth-farm?pos=6

  6. Sorry, in my post above I wrote DanielJ when I meant RF. It was RF who spearheaded this project.

  7. “neoStirner says:
    June 11, 2010 at 7:07 pm
    Who are the current copyright holders? Translating for distribution without permission would be an infringement of federal law and can be prosecuted and if found guilty offenders may face up to 5 years in federal prison. Further I am not sure whether or not this whole discussion falls under the Rico Laws and some of you here might not be arrested and charged with criminal conspiricy.”

    Well there are many things come into my mind after reading this jew’ (?) post. Most of them, however, are not allowed for expression in a civil company because of their brutishness. So I will abstain. But you can come for me, dear. Or better go and f… yourself.

  8. I’m just warning others who don’t want to pay any penalty you’re happy to submit to. Also the web owner might not like having to lose all he worked for because you want to be a big man.

    I believe in telling people about any possible risks. That is responsible. So call me a jew if you like for caring enough about the other posters to advise them to take care and go slowly and not get swept away.

  9. Really your lack of feeling for what may happen to the other posters and the web-site owner here is telling. Are you trying to get this site shut down?

  10. “neoStirner says:
    June 11, 2010 at 7:07 pm
    Who are the current copyright holders? Translating for distribution without permission would be an infringement of federal law and can be prosecuted and if found guilty offenders may face up to 5 years in federal prison. Further I am not sure whether or not this whole discussion falls under the Rico Laws and some of you here might not be arrested and charged with criminal conspiricy.”

    Are you flippin serious? Do you have any understanding of how and why RICO Act is used? What you imply would be quite an expansion of it to say the least.

  11. “This is NOT a NOVEL”

    Indeed. The historians were too cowardly to address the topic, so a novelist reluctantly stepped forward to do the work of a historian.

  12. It would fall under the Organized Crime Control Act for conspiracy, part of which is RICO. Since RICO is more ingrained in people’s minds than OCCA I used it. And yes, my intention was to get people to thing about the conspiracy they were possibly getting themselves into.

    What you are doing is probably against the law. Until you check to make sure it is legal you should desist, immediately.

  13. Does anyone know if you have a right to translate and distribute this work? Does Prozium know you are planning to commit a possible federal crime which is a crime in itself? Well?

    Or does that some how not matter?

    Just check up on it. That is all I am saying. Until you are sure I advise people to keep their mouths shut.

  14. Perhaps the translation will have ot appear anonymously on the Internet.

    http://www.translatorsbase.com/articles/42.aspx

    Copyright in translations

    The Copyright Act provides that copyright subsists in any original work of authorship that is fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Originality means that the work was not copied from some-one else and possesses at least a small amount of creativity.

    Does the work of translators and indexers meet the requirements for copyright? The matter has been debated among indexers and translators for years, and the answer may not be the same for translations as for indexes and may differ for various types of either. The Copyright Act actually mentions both translations and indexes. This column focuses on translations; next month’s will address the copyrightability of indexes.

    A translation is a derivative work, and only the copyright owner can authorize a translation that will be distributed. This envisions a work that is translated into another language and distributed in parts of the world where that language is spoken. Derivative works are infringing if they are not created with the permission of the copyright holder. Thus, a work of fiction or a best-selling biography cannot be translated into French and distributed without the original author’s or copyright holder’s permission. If the author authorizes a French translation, the author owns the copyright in the translation since it is a work for hire. According to the statute, for a work for hire, the employing party is the author. In fact, the translator’s name may not even be revealed in the work.

    In 1976 UNESCO recommended that member states ensure through legislative action that translators be given copyright protection because of the importance of translations in culture and development, including translations of scientific and technical literature. It defined translations broadly, whether the initial work or the translation is intended to be published. (1)

    The United States has not generally followed this recommendation.

    There are translations that definitely would meet the originality requirement–for example, a new translation of an ancient Greek play or epic poem. The underlying work is in the public domain; thus, the translator may claim copyright if she is working from the original or an early version. Although it is a derivative of a public domain work, there is likely enough originality to make the translation eligible for copyright since these original works often exist only in fragments and different versions.

    There is a second type of work for hire where there is no formal employment situation but when the translation nevertheless may be considered a work for hire. According to section 101 of the Act, a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work is also a work for hire. The statute then includes a list of the nine types of works to which this may apply, and one of these is a translation; but the parties must agree in writing that the work will be a work for hire if it falls into one of these, categories in which case the employer is the author and owns the copyright. Thus, there are three requirements to make the non-employment, situation work a work for hire:

    1. The work must be specially ordered or commissioned.

    2. The work must fall into one of the nine listed categories (which translations do).

    3. There must be a writing specifying that the work is a work for hire.

    Other Translations

    A more common situation faced by libraries, especially those in the for-profit sector, is when the library engages the services of a translator or translation service to translate a scientific or technical article for use within that company. This activity does not usually generate copyright concerns, but it certainly could. An article is translated and a single copy is delivered to the translator’s customer (a company). Traditionally, that copy is passed around to the researchers who need to see it. The translator is paid for his services, but in no way claims copyright in the translations he produces; the copyright is in the underlying article. What happens when a company decides that it wants to digitize these works and make them available over the Internet? Over the corporate intranet?

    The answer is clear for distribution over the Internet: the company has caused an unauthorized derivative work to be created and has infringed the copyright in the original article by distributing the translation. Posting something on the Internet is the equivalent of publishing the work. Absent permission from the owner of the copyright in the article, posting is infringement.

    The answer is less clear for internal use of the translation. Few copyright holders have complained when a translation service produces a translation for a single corporate client. Whether it has been considered fair use or not by copyright holders is not known. Even when applying the four fair use factors, it is not clear whether this type of translation is a fair use.

    Purpose and character of the use is for research, scholarship, etc., but the Texaco decision held that companies in the for-profit sector are less likely than nonprofit users to be able to claim fair use under this factor.

    Nature of the copyrighted work might favor such a translation since the underlying work is a scientific or technical article, factual in nature.

    The amount and substantiality factor does not favor a finding of fair use in this situation since the entire work is reproduced by the translation.

    Market effect is more difficult to calculate. The article is not available in English; thus, in order to use the information in the article, it must be translated. The company has paid for one copy of the article in its original language, either through a subscription or because it has acquired the copy from an authorized document delivery service. Further, only a single copy of the translation is produced to permit its use within the company.

    Most translations of scientific and technical literature are works for hire in a sense, but not in the copyright sense. Typically, in copyright law, a work for hire relates to the underlying copyrighted work. Here, the company hires a translator, but the company has no ownership rights in the copyright of the underlying article. Thus, it is not a work for hire under the copyright law.

    Corporate and government agency libraries have routinely retained copies of these translations produced for their staff. Recently, these libraries have considered scanning the translations and putting them on an intranet so that they are accessible by all of the employees of that organization. Clearly, this amounts to mass reproduction and distribution of the translation; further, the translation is an unauthorized derivative work. While having the article translated and one copy maintained in the library may be fair use, wide distribution via an intranet is unlikely to be fair use. It is possible that the publisher would grant permission for posting the translation on the intranet, but permission should be requested before undertaking such distribution.

    So some translations may qualify for copyright protection by possessing sufficient originality, but generally they are works for hire. Whether an unauthorized translation of an article produced for a particular company is a fair use is not clear. Distribution of these unauthorized translations, whether internally on an intranet or on the Internet, likely is infringement. Moreover, in this situation, the company is the infringer, not the translator who produced a single copy for use within the company.

  15. That guy neoStirner is such a stereotypic Thug – it is so ridiculously apparent
    http://www.toqonline.com/2010/03/join-the-dance/

    Why dont you desist from here? Rights PROBABLY belong to his children – probably, because they do not reply on inquiries. And you know, Russia is not under jurisdiction of USA, neither the country I currently live in.

    And books are FREELY available for download from the official website
    http://www.solzhenitsyn.ru/proizvedeniya/

    Again, please do all us a favor-do what i suggested you to do in my previous post

  16. “Perhaps the translation will have ot appear anonymously on the Internet.”

    Thank you. There is a time to use your balls and a time to use your brains. Now everyone knows who is who perhaps this thread can be deleted.

  17. So far nothing happened to Butler. BTW, there is no evidence that this work is covered under US law. In case of notice, it will be quickly transferred somewhere else. And I am NOT under jurisdiction of the USA, and I am willing to take the risk.

    What is important is not WHO personally gets the credits but whether the work is done. We can simply do it in private and I will post it on my site. If they shut me down I will move the site into a banana republic.

  18. The translation project is good for several reasons, only one of which is a downloadable English translation of Solzhenitsyn’s book will bring people to OD (with links to other WN blogs) and a link to a free trade/barter system forum. The free trade forum could be modeled after craigslist only using zipcodes instead of cities. This could help build local real world WN communities.

    Here’s how it could work: at the free trade forum page type your zipcode in a box. The zipcode and a list of surrounding zipcodes comes up. The geographical area of search can be expanded to include many zipcodes or narrowed to one. When you click on a zipcode(s) two options come up: items wanted and items offered. Click the one you want. You are taken to the page of items wanted or items offered in that zipcode area. The free trade forum could also incorporate the ebay format where people could create a store where all their items offered and items wanted are listed. Click on the item for more details and a contact link.

    Besides trading things and establishing a barter system for when the economy fails, a free trade forum would provide a safe pretext for white nationalists to meet other white nationalists in their local areas to build WN communities. There could even be a link to a WHITE ACTION network page. The action page would be a forum for WN to discuss actions that can be taken locally, again expanded or narrowed by zipcode.

    The homepage could include the OD blog, links to other blogs, Solzhenitsyn’s book, free trade forum and White Action network. I have no idea how much it would cost to set up and run a site like that but like somebody here said think big.

  19. Sorry RF, we have to be real careful with the law. I’ve been in the Movement 10 years now. They arrested a woman, Kristen Greenwood, because she had a can of gas and a box of nails in her garage. That’s all. A can of gas and a box of nails. Hundreds of millions of Americans have a can of gas and a box of nails in their garage! “Bomb making materials,” they called it.

    I think she fought it and won, but she had ot pay a lawyer. Had to do the orange jumpsuit perpwalk get her name dragged through the paper. Ridiculous. There’s no consequences on prosecutors who do bogus indictiments. There should be.

    So we go real cautious. Neo-stirner has a point — they could call our little discussion about translating a novel a “criminal conspiracy.” The charge wouldn’t stick, but they could give us a lot of problems while we defended some bogus charge.

  20. My comment above was written before I read the posts regarding copyright infringement. It’s possible “they” would use copyright infringement to not only shut this blog down but also prosecute people involved in the translation project. It sounds to me that this is something that needs more legal research.

    Still a great idea–if it can be done legally.

Comments are closed.