1. All people have the fundamental rights to self-determination and self-expression, and must be freed from all manner of infringement upon those rights – including within their musical life.

Music is a vital element of culture and means of self-expression worldwide, and thus it is the most basic of rights for a musician to conceive of and organize sound in a manner that expresses their artistic vision and/or their cultural milieu. The forced assimilation of much of the world’s music into the strict time-grid and fixed 12 tones of Western music, via colonial and authoritarian influence over technology, is the primary extant threat to this right. Once aware of this dire condition, failure to take action to remedy it (even as a self-proclaimed “microtonalist” or “xenharmonicist”) is to allow oneself to be co-opted by the colonial machine. We refuse to be complicit in consigning once-vital musical traditions to the dustbin of history, withering and dying as modern technology leaves them ever further in the distance. Without freedom of intonation and freedom of rhythm, there is no freedom of musical expression.

2. In contradiction to its current manifestation, digital technology actually holds immense potential to liberate musical organization, composition, performance, and listening – potential that must be unleashed.
   
   The creation of music involves the manipulation of elements having a certain pitch and/or timing – both elements easily represented by numerical data. However, the choice of what gamut or set of units to use in classifying those elements is largely arbitrary, and therefore potentially subject to the musician’s creative capacities. From a computational standpoint, the difference between representing two different musical frequencies or time intervals is virtually nonexistent, which makes the Western assumptions baked into nearly all music software deliberate and onerous barriers erected against the vast majority of musical possibilities. Furthermore, the proprietary nature of various standards and applications restricts the ability of countless individuals around the world to fully participate in contemporary musical life, even within the 12-tone system. It is our duty to tear down these barriers by developing free, libre, and open-source alternatives that open this vast and fertile realm of musical potential up to the maximum number of people.
   
   

3. The miserable and exploitative conditions under which most artists and creative workers labor must be overthrown.
   
   The channels by which the vast majority of humanity records, performs, and listens to music lie firmly in the iron grasp of a few multinational corporations. The injuries inflicted by these greed-animated golems are innumerable, but to sample the most pertinent: fraudulent accounting practices that keep artists in debt slavery while labels profit hand over fist; the relentless inflation of prices for both performing artists and their audiences via “junk fees”; stealing sacred cultural heritage from peoples across the world and stamping it with their copyright; and deploying every means at their disposal to violently repress any individual or organization that dares to resist their abuses. We must utterly reject this wretched regime, within which the people who work hardest to produce their art are rewarded the least. We shall, wherever possible, avoid participating in these systems in any capacity, and work to build and support fair alternatives.
   
   

4. Inclusivity, a moral and practical imperative, cannot be achieved without maintenance of political principles and space for political expression.
   
   Given that certain bodies and minds are inexorably politicized in contemporary life, there can be no such thing as an “apolitical” organization – only one which unconsciously perpetuates the unjust status quo. From the 20th century accusations of quarter-tones representing a “primitive, even barbaric condition of a lower cultural level”, to the 21st century where nearly all musical technology is shackled to 12-tone, step-sequenced “normality”, it is clear that the fight for rhythmic and intonational freedom in music exists in the shadow of supremacist ideologies, and cannot be separated from other liberatory struggles. We thus condemn all ideologies and tendencies that promote the ideas of innate and immutable superiority of one kind of person over another, and/or any license to supremacy and exploitation. As this principle cannot be acted upon without a healthy public sphere, we welcome political expression, dialogue and critique within our ranks – as long as it is conducted in good faith, with respect, and oriented towards mutual benefit and understanding.
   
   

5. Change requires action. We must test theory against material reality, learn the lessons of those tests, and use that knowledge to effect real and lasting change.
   
   No matter how advanced and impressive our theorizing (and theorists) are, we must always remember that “the map is not the territory”. Only well-earned experience, applying and developing these theories, can elevate our capabilities to fulfill both our artistic and political missions. A healthy state of affairs in any arena of thought – be it technical, political, or musical – consists of a continual dialogue between theory and practice, a feedback loop that results in both of them becoming more refined and more effective in application. To sever this connection results in desiccated ivory-tower academia on one hand; and on the other, rote “theme park versions” of traditions, shrinking and frozen in time. Even if some of us fully intend to revisit the traditions and theories of the past, as the venerable organ-builders Fratelli Ruffatti put it, “tradition is strong only as long as it continues to develop.” SoMuLib intends to create a durable legacy of intonational and rhythmic freedom in music, and to do that, we must consistently plan and execute concrete actions towards that mission.