The language of open software is increasingly being applied to politics, as people talk about and develop "open government" projects. However, much of this discussion does not unpack the politics of "openness", instead taking for granted that it involves a technologically-enhanced model of existing liberal democratic ideals. However, there are other ways to interpret what free and open source politics might look like. One is to more thoroughly apply the politics espoused by key figures within the free and open software movements, such as Stallman and Raymond. Another, more radical, route is to take the commitment to decentralisation of power that lies at the heart of free and open source software and apply it not only to an analysis of politics, but also to the existing free and open source software movement. This route demonstrates that there are useful lessons to be learned from looking at the interaction between free software principles, anarchism, and feminism.

1. 'Open-source politics': some
critiques and suggestions
Dr. Sky Croeser
Curtin University
Bluestocking Institute
@scroeser
http://skycroeser.net

2. Introduction
● A sketch of 'open-source politics'.
● Some critiques which, unsurprisingly, will draw
heavily on anarchism and feminism.
● What might open-source politics look like?

3. Open-* politics
● Increased transparency,
● Increased accountability,
● Increased participation, often technologically-mediated.
● Shifts in organisational forms.
there is a new kind of public sector organization emerging: open
government. This is government that opens its doors to the world; co-
innovates with everyone, especially citizens; shares resources that
were previously closely guarded; harnesses the power of mass
collaboration; drives transparency throughout its operations; and
behaves not as an isolated department or jurisdiction, but as something
new―a truly integrated and networked organization.
Don Tapscott, Open Politics, 2010, p. xvi

4. Assumption 1: we need to make the
system better
how might this open, online collaboration improve
governmental decision-making?
…
To bring about the new revolution in governance, the
next president ought to issue an executive order
requiring that every government agency begin to pilot
new strategies for improved decision-making.
Noveck, B. S. (2008). Wiki-Government. Democracy
Journal, (7). pp. 3 and 5

5. Assumption 2: what we need is
more information, and more
dialogue
The values engendered by our fledgling networked culture may, in fact,
help a world struggling with the impact of globalism, the lure of
fundamentalism and the clash of conflicting value systems. Thanks to
the actual and allegorical role of interactive technologies in our work and
lives, we may now have the ability to understand many social and
political constructs in very new contexts. We may now be able to launch
the kinds of conversations that change the relationship of individuals,
parties, creeds and nations to one another and to the world at large.
Rushkoff, D. (2003). Open Source Democracy: How Online
Communication is Changing Offline Politics. Demos, pp. 15–16

6. Assumption 3: 'innovation' and
'entrepreneurship' will solve
problems
In the U.S. and many other jurisdictions, government is becoming a
stronger part of the social ecosystem that binds individuals,
communities, and businesses―not by absorbing new responsibilities
or building additional layers of bureaucracy, but through its willingness
to open up formerly closed processes to broader input and innovation.
In other words, government becomes a platform for the creation of
public value and social innovation. It provides resources, sets rules,
and mediates disputes, but it allows citizens, nonprofits, and the
private sector to do most of the heavy lifting.
Tapscott, 2010, pp. xvi–xvii

7. Assumption 4: collaborative,
decentralised organisational forms
are new
“With an open source awareness, [people] are free
to discover that the codes of the software have
been arranged by people, sometimes with
agendas that hadn’t formerly been apparent. One
of the most widespread realisations accompanying
the current renaissance is that a lot of what has
been taken for granted as ‘hardware’ is, in fact,
‘software’ capable of being reprogrammed.
Rushkoff, 2003, p. 58

8. Critique 1: the existing system is
fundamentally flawed
The liberal-democratic state:
● Is inherently repressive.
● Ultimately rests on control of force (sustained
through ideological hegemony).
● Disproportionately controls those who are
marginalised: women, particular ethnic groups,
'othered' sexualities...

9. Critique 2: focusing on information
and dialogue hides power
inequalities
● Policy is not necessarily poor simply because
decision-makers don't have enough
information: policy is shaped by vested
interests.
● Understanding other perspectives doesn't
necessarily mean those with power are willing
to give it up.

10. Critique 3: the market is not your
friend
● 'The market' only provides services which can
make a profit.
● A system which relies on constant growth in a
world with finite resources creates problems.

11. Critique 4: anarchists and feminists
have been doing this for a while
(and they weren't the first)

12. What might 'open-* politics' +
anarchism + feminism + … look
like?
● No blueprints: processes must be continually
revised. The means determine the end, not
vice versa.
● A pragmatic utopianism.
● A nuanced critique of hierarchy, including
invisible hierarchies.
● Intersectional analysis.