Below here are (can be) limited web-space for D.A.V.I.D. system supporting political groups. I am not responsible for what these groups do or say, though I'd remove content that conflicts with the law and good taste (my taste at least I guess [1]). The purpose of this (free) space is to make starting parties easier, it is not meant to be a complete list, or to say that these parties/groups are good groups [2]. Merely stating favor for a D.A.V.I.D. system would be enough to get space / link (use of local language encouraged.)

Currently (may 2009) and are the same because that is cheaper. If DAVIDWE becomes something, then would only contain a "party website," and would contain maybe some small things & redirection, just as it could work for other D.A.V.I.D system supporting parties (including existing parties who change/update their program). I guess a reasonable upper limit for using web-space is up to 500 KB - 1 MB, and keeping it much smaller if/when you have your own site (cheaper for me!).

Example: a group of 2 people in Sri Lanka decides they want to set up a party to see how that goes, to build up a DAVID economic system (of some flavor). They put some miniscule front-page together, and mail it to me, I put it on HOW-THEY-CALL-THEIR-AREA/ HOW-THEY-CALL-THEIR-GROUP/ Then someone from Sri Lanka browses the web, finds my site, finds, finds that party, joins up with them.

Example: the existing party NCPN in the Netherlands decide they like the DAVID system a lot after all - it certainly is better then raging capitalism isn't it. So they come out that they're not all that much against it. I notice this, and add a link here.

Example: in some dictatorial country, the secret service decides it is a great trick to set up a shell DAVID party, so they send me their front page and I put it up not knowing it is a shell game. Someone from that country finds this page, contacts that false party, and is thrown into jail as a result.

Example: in some dictatorial country, some group decides to go ahead and set up a DAVID system supporting party. The authorities let them go on. Once the party has grown, the authorities throw everyone in jail. They just waited until they thought there where enough people ("subversives") collected there.

So you better make sure not to trust something merely because it gets listed here. Depending on local circumstances it could just be the opposite of what it appears to be. Even if it actually is a good group of people, it may still be a trap in the end.

You have been warned, don't blame me for listing groups or efforts that go wrong, because I really can't know from here. Be careful and when in doubt don't join up but be independent / non-organized, or set up your own group(let) with people who you trust. Notice how putting up a link or site here could also be an easy way for subversive secret services to find out and target you. When in doubt don't ask to be listed here. Parties who are listed here are not superior/better then those who aren't, or the other way around I suppose. It is merely one way to find out about what someone has apparently claimed.

Obviously you can always ask to get your material removed/altered. An easy way to verify such a request is some hint/text of that request on your own webspace (sending a link to your domain/space with the new content, which assumes sender has access to that domain).

Example: some good group starts a party, but a rival group or secret service sends me a notice that this group is in fact a secret service trap. Me not knowing what is what (how can I know?), I list these lies under GROUP-NAME-anti. Consequently that party suffers public relations damage and the goal of the rival group or secret service has been achieved.

Example: some subversive group starts a shell DAVID party, and some good people send me a warning. I list the warning under GROUP-NAME-anti, and consequently some people are spared some trouble. [3]

Example: someone reads all these warnings and gets scared while there was in fact nothing to fear. As a result political action toward a DAVID system suffers.

There are a few possibilities, which tend to vary across the world and through time. Just don't be too naive on my account, thank you. In the end, anything is taking a risk, and sometimes it will in fact go wrong (common sense). You are responsible for the choices made.

[1] Things such as using sculls and/or bones as part of the repertoire means definite exclusion. For the rest I probably don't care in the slightest, the more the better. From the more cultural backgrounds support for a DAVID system arises, the more change for peace & justice there is ! Even if certain movements have been at odds with each other, it would be great to find a common ground in support for a DAVID system, even if it might be for different reasons.

[2] This listing/linking and limited webspace service does not imply any organizational structure of any kind whatsoever. Under the rules of "political party apparently supporting a DAVID system, not using skulls for symbols," I would be compelled to list even organizations I want to have nothing to do with otherwise, organizations who might have suspected criminal ties. No rights or obligations of any kind whatsoever are implied by being listed here, or using limited webspace. People who know nothing about DAVID parties here may assume some kind of organizational structure because of this list, maybe federalized or maybe meeting up, but it isn't there. It could be of course, but that has nothing to do with this list / webspace whatsoever. It is only a means of finding parties. What flows or doesn't flow from that finding is completely and utterly undefined. I don't manage these parties and I don't want to manage them. Neither do they have a voice in the content on this site (besides their own to a limited degree, depending on what I want). The closest thing to this list is someone making a list of all the "socialist parties" or all the "liberal parties" and so on. Does that list imply an organization structured under the authority of whomever made that list ? Clearly it doesn't. It is just a list, and it may very well be competing with other (better) such lists. The list maker meanwhile might or might not agree with any or all of these parties, might or might not want to have contact with them.

Whomever assumes some special rights by being listed here or using space, is probably going to get removed from this list immediately.

I have the right to remove anyone from this list for whatever reason, including on a whim or no reason at all but a mood swing. If you wish to retaliate for being removed, you can do so on your own webspace, and we'll all go our own merry ways.

You might want to assume I'm not capable of investigating any group / person, and that I've taken whatever information at face value only [4]. It doesn't really bother me to list bad (what is bad?) groups, because it is not my responsibility to sift out bad from good groups. If some groups make extensive alterations to what they call a DAVID economy, in general it wouldn't bother me to list them anyway. If some groups wish to promote a DAVID system merely because they want social upheaval, it wouldn't bother be either to list them anyway. Standards for inclusion are low, and in general I really don't care much. The burden to do the research is on those in the area (if any), and so on.

[3] Having a GROUP-NAME-anti directory filled with warnings, might be an indication of honor or dishonor, unless you somehow know what is the truth you just don't know. Maybe some group is such a positive club of people, doing so much good and hard work, that people not wishing to see peace & justice win decide to launch a defamation campaign. On the other hand, it might be a group full of lazy people looking to skim off subscription fees; or worst of all a subversive secret service trap for political control, or eventually toward prison or worse, about which only one heart felt and true but anonymous alert arrives. It all means very little, unless you somehow are able to find out. I may or may not list warnings, literally or not, depending on space. Note that even my own party DAVIDWE could easily be taken over by secret service - and I just wouldn't know it. One trick is I suppose: if number of people in the group is very large, you can reach a stage where you can be relatively certain the majority just can't be secret service. Note that secret service people are also people, who may in fact turn and work for the DAVID system. This is actually quite likely to happen a lot, I think, though that too could be falsely played of course. In general, a good way to deal with secret services is to only have open information, and that which otherwise should be a secret just doesn't get noted, recorded, listed, and in general is of zero consequence if possible. For example, suppose one secret service agent turns, and a few people know. Then you could make a list of whomever falls in that category, and then you'd be sitting on a secret. Better yet: keep the secret very local (for instance confined only to that secret service agent), make no lists, don't be bothered by it anyway, what's the use of it anyway (to make a list of turned agents). Should the turned agents go to a "turned agent support group, secret service anonymous" ? The marginal benefit of such doesn't weigh against the danger of the list being broken into by active subversive secret service agents, and then the turned agents might be played or whatever else.

Part of the party-politics game, particularly the parties who want greater change of society, is to deal with subversive secret agents and secret services. These secret agents tend to be more controlled by the type of political movements who have more taste for such subversive tactics, which unfortunately are the right wing reactionaries (or I suppose "corrupted communism," which can be as reactionary as anything else).

What is the best defense against subversive secret agencies ? A population who actively resists all torture, who takes political power in its own hands, who does not tollerate human rights abuses by the Government. When these basic rights are protected better, political parties have little to fear from subversive secret services (subversive to the will of the people, the democracy, the civil process). Strength in numbers is also a very great protector here, because the subversive secret services can not lock up or kill everyone (usually).

Minor warning to the secret services: hi there, realize that we will be running the Government one day, and be in control of your organizations from the top down. You go figure out what that means. Are you sure every document can be shredded ? No colleague of yours will turn ? No traces be left ? Nah, didn't think so either. Play nice, and we will too, or face jail through civil/criminal court. Orders or no orders - should have chosen a different line of work then. I don't mind mere general information gathering that much personally (others may disagree), but using it subversively is something else. Look but don't touch, know but don't (strongly) influence, and I personally consider it fair play. If the Dutch people really minded secret service information gathering, they had had to outlaw it all together. But political manipulation from the inside isn't very nice, is it ? We'll have molls in your structures pretty soon though, haha, isn't that the game. We own you now already because we will, how's that. Tick tock, it is a matter of time. Truth lasts longest, doesn't it, or do you fancy yourselves smarter. Ding dong hear that ? It is us being your boss (heh, the clock here just rings). Think about it!

On a side note though: groups committing violence, or who can be enticed into violence (excluding the violence committed and instigated by the subversive secret services themselves of course), they are criminal organizations without honor (even terrorist networks maybe), rather then civil political organizations. I suppose it is a good thing if such are disrupted and broken up, unless the Government is equally violent and oppressive (or worse) and such activities should be categorized under courageous civil resistance to state oppression. A component of state political oppression usually implies no freedom of speech, no freedom of organization. Since these for example exist in Holland (in my opinion), violent resistance seems uncalled for. Things can be changed through mass vote, ultimately mass protest, strike, and civilized revolution, and if these can't win in the civilized way they certainly can't win through violence. Violence being uncalled for in Holland currently (may 2009), then a violent group can not be a honorable political organization deserving of being left to its own civil process without secret service or police interference. The violence strategy under oppressive states may also be problematic, but when oppression is also physical and violent, eventually it may have to be overthrown with violence as well. In such oppressive states the secret service might be a form of a criminal organization itself, a highly organized terrorist network in control of taxation money and the state monopoly on violence.

The kind of situation a DAVID system is meant to prevent. So think about what side you want to be on (this being the good side, in my opinion). You can turn any day, the latest activities being most important.

[4] But if I want to launch my own in depth investigation, including possible parent organization, sister and daughter organizations, historical behavior, historical symbols of the wider movement, organizations members are also part of or express sympathy for, and so on, then I'll do that, and may decide on a whim if you get listed here, or not ! You just can't say anything about this list here. It would be a shoddy, incomplete & distrusted reference, the best I can do.