Slashdot Mirror


Iceland Taps Facebook To Rewrite Its Constitution

An anonymous reader writes "Iceland is finally overhauling its constitution, and it has turned to the Internet to get input from citizens. More specifically, the 25-member council drafting the new constitution is reaching out to its citizens through Facebook. Two thirds of Iceland's population (approximately 320,000) is on Facebook, so the constitutional council's weekly meetings are broadcast live not only on the council's website, but on the social network as well. 'It is possible to register through other means, but most of the discussion takes place via Facebook,' said Berghildur Bernhardsdottir, spokeswoman for the constitutional review project."

7 of 264 comments (clear)

  1. public-private partnership by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I guess "reliance on large private corporations for operation of and participation in government" is going to be part of the new constitution? Not that it isn't de facto part of every other modern Western constitution, but now they've announced the overhaul it seems to me the right time to start being open about how the world runs now.

    1. Re:public-private partnership by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 3, Informative

      Iceland has set a shining example to the rest of the world on how NOT to be subjected to never-ending corporate control. An example that other countries citizens are fighting in the streets (literally) to try and follow.

    2. Re:public-private partnership by Rei · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Indeed. So many people are perpetuating this false notion about the Icelandic crisis.

      1) Iceland *has* taken austerity measures, and pretty significant ones -- about 40% cuts, 60% revenue.

      2) Iceland *did* pump significant money into their banks -- nearly a year's worth of GDP as loans. However, they did it *after* the banks went into receivership. This let them fully bail out their own citizens while not fully bailing out the citizens of other countries who invested. This is actually the basis for the legal case against them.

      3) This action is the reason that, contrary to popular misconception, the Icelandic crisis is *far* from over. This isn't about banks, the IMF, some shadowy cartel, or whatnot trying to force Iceland to pay back vague "debts". Rather, it's about paying back UK and Dutch citizens for their maximum insurable losses in their Icesave accounts. Individuals, not institutional investors, and the entities seeking the payback are the UK and Dutch governments. Iceland rejected reduced settlements with them in the referendum, so now they're having to fight paying back the *full* cost in the EFTA court system. If they lose, things will go very badly for them. One thing that may help is that the estates of the collapsed banks appear to be larger than expected, so they may be able to pay off most if not all of the overseas accounts just from that.

      4) In a way, this is as much aggravated by old rivalries than anything else, esp. with the UK. It certainly didn't help matters that the UK invoked a provision designed for terrorists against Iceland to sieze Landsbanki assets in the UK. It's so crazy that I sometimes run into British people online talking about how they should sue Iceland for the volcanoes.

      I don't know that Iceland's approach was right or wrong. They definitely got themselves into a lot of trouble with their domestic bailout. But as for taking things to the EFTA, only time will see how that goes. I do find it admirable that they've thrown their legal system not just at the bankers that caused the mess, but the politicians who stood by or were complicit in allowing it to happen. Their real problem is that their banking crisis was so much larger than their economy, so when other nations wanted them to insure against the losses from their banks, well...

      --
      Seen on a Japanese food processor: "Not to be used for the other use."
    3. Re:public-private partnership by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have little sympathy for people who invested in Icelandic banks from overseas. They gave very favourable interest rates and returns in exchange for greater risk, and people are now complaining that they never expected that risk to actually materialise. Well, too bad, you took a chance and lost. The system in the UK compensates you up to (IIRC) £35k if you are a private individual but beyond that you are on your own.

      I had an account with an Indian bank for a couple of years to get their high interest rates, but I never expected the same security as from a UK bank.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  2. Farcebook by Spad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    'It is possible to register through other means, but most of the discussion takes place via Facebook,' said Berghildur Bernhardsdottir

    Because we thought it would be fun to actively discourage 1/3 of our population from being involved in the discussion...

  3. Let me guess... by spectrokid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    you are living in the country on earth that spends the most $$$/inhabitant on healthcare, yet bungles somewhere around Cuba in elementary healthcare statistics like child mortality and cancer survival rates. You firmly believe in printing your own money backed by a gold standard, but are posting from a shiny laptop you could never have bought if your government wasn't borrowing shitloads of money from the chinese. You have absolutely no clue about the damages which alcohol abuse historically have done in ALL countries close to the polar circle. Therefore you couldn't imagine that in a very thin spread population, in a country with tons of gravel roads, "I'm homeschooling my kids", could easily mean "I 'm too drunk to drive them to school.". The social and pedagogical effects of a child growing up on a remote vulcano and never meeting other kids is totally lost on you. Oh fuck it, this is boring...

    --

    10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then

  4. Re:They cannot possibly get it right by Kjella · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No State monopoly on security / police

    If any private party can claim police power, they can also claim the right to search your property and papers. Oh, and any complaint of illegal searches would go to the same system. That's the end of the 4th amendment.

    No State monopoly on Law
    No State monopoly on courts

    I guess you don't believe much in the "with liberty and justice for all" thing. I'd rather not be hauled before a kangaroo court or get no protection if I have no protection money, thank you very much.

    No State theft of resources (Taxation)

    Without income, there's no public services whatsoever. Go to Somalia or some other anarchist state if that's your ideal society.

    Yet another country where the people have been reduced to the level of property; the property of the State.

    There are equally bad or worse fates, like being the property of your parents. Children are not pets and even pets have laws against animal cruelty. Any state that lets children grow up with no minimum standard of education is neglecting that child and its human rights. They may be your offspring but they are not your prisoner - physically, intellectually or otherwise. If I was to use as much hyperbole as you, I'd say you demand the right to brainwash your children. My country, Norway, has also outlawed home schooling but there are private schools like Montessori or Waldorf education. They have to document a competent staff, their plans and methods of teaching and adherence to minimum guidelines set forth by the government. And I think it's a good thing, YMMV.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings