German Pirate Party Enters 2nd State Parliament 188
An anonymous reader writes "After its recent success in the Berlin elections, the German Pirate Party scores 7.4% of votes for the state parliament of Saarland, earning them 4 seats out of 51. While the campaign didn't center around copyright issues and/or ACTA (the party's stance is well-known), it centered around open government, access to education, and participative governing models, effectively ridding the party of its 'one issue' notion."
Working within the rules can still work (Score:5, Interesting)
To me, this sort of win, the power that it gives them to promote and further the gains that they stand for is likely to have a MUCH bigger impact on the actual lives of their constituents than all the Occupy movements put together. Recently in Australian politics, the Green Senators have shown themselves to be a wonderful constant badgering voice calling Bullshit when needed and keeping the government here in check. I can't help but hope that the Pirate Party in Australia has similar success.
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:5, Interesting)
This works in places with a system of government where getting 7% of the votes translates to a voice in government.
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:2)
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:3)
I realize many slashdotters think this is a result of the two-party system, and I respect that opinion, but I still think the problem has far more to do with the voters. I think giving them more options will merely give them more ways to vote against their own interests.
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:5, Insightful)
"The US has one party with two right wings."
- Gore Vidal
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:4, Informative)
That's a pretty good summary from an European point of view.
It's funny that "left" and "right" are very relative terms. What we consider "right" in Europe would fit the center of the US, while our "left" simply doesn't exist on the US radar. From the vantage point across the pond, the US has a moderate right party and a conservative right party.
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:2)
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:3)
it got "bush" elected, I'll pass, I "don't think" we can top the worst president in history(any country)..,
Yet Obama managed it somehow. Bush has a good edge over the 3rd place, which makes Obama's accomplishment all the bigger.
One word: Iraq.
Obama would have had/will have to accidentally nuke Beijing or Berlin or something to equal that level of politico-military stupidity.
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:2)
Dude, look what he ran against. A water cooler running with a doorstop would have been a better option than a corpse and a dud bombshell.
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:3)
I think giving them more options will merely give them more ways to vote against their own interests.
That's illogical, Spock. For example, someone you love smokes marijuana. A friend, a son, a cousin... in your circle of people you care about, some smoke pot.
Very interesting example, I'm glad you brought that up. I live in California, where pot is decriminalized and largely ignored (except when the police can make a profit off of it, or arrest someone who is a minority, etc.)
Last year, a proposition to fully legalize pot came up. Law enforcement was divided on the issue, with some organizations pointing out that it was a waste of time and money, was counter productive, and only served to strengthen the mexican drug cartels. Other people pointed out how California's defacto biggest product being legalized and taxed could help out with California's massive budget problems. Many conservatives, having finally started to see the light, agreed.
And it failed. Californians THEMSELVES voted to keep it illegal, voted to prevent the state from funding schools with money from a product that was being consumed anyway, voted to waste taxes fighting it, and voted to keep locking people up for a crime that no one actually thinks should be a crime.
This was not a partisan issue. The two party system had absolutely nothing to do with it. This was just voters acting against their own interests.
And it gets worse. The most vocal opponents to marijuana being legalized? The idiots who grow the stuff. They didn't want competition, they didn't want free market forces making the process more efficient, and obviously, they didn't want to pay taxes. They decided they would rather see their consumers risk going to jail for the product that they sold than compete fairly, they decided they'd rather risk law enforcement cracking down on them than actually work.
It's not just the sunshine state either. There is a strong effect from the police unions to keep their cash cow going, but that's not the only reason marijuana is illegal. The other major component of that is that the voters themselves won't vote for it. 70% of the country has smoked pot, yet there's no real political pressure to legalize it.
Pot is a key example as to why I say "Giving them more options will merely give them more ways to vote against their own interests."
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:3)
That is a problem. The Libbies don't want your loved ones in jail, but they want to dismantle the EPA. The Greenies don't want to incarcerate your loved ones either, but they have their own craziness I can't support. The Constitution party would likely reform copyright in a good way, but they're way too right wing in other areas.
There are no good choices.
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:3, Insightful)
Our voting system is more complicated than the various first-past-the-post systems. Generally, however, 7% of the popular vote scores little representation in the Australian House of Representatives either, e.g. Greens hold 1 seat [http://results.aec.gov.au/15508/Website/HousePartyRepresentation-15508.htm] out of 150 on 11.76% of first preferences [http://results.aec.gov.au/15508/Website/HousePartyRepresentation-15508.htm]. In our Senate the electoral system works differently and the result is more proportional (e.g. Greens hold 6 of 40 seats on 13.11% of first preferences). The minor parties in our senate hold no direct control of government, but collectively their votes are typically the difference between a measure passing or not given the fairly even balance between the major parties. This is what gives them a voice.
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:4, Informative)
This is still something that has some serious impact on the politics there.
When you look at the changes [tagesschau.de] against the last elections, you will almost certainly notice two big losers: FDP and Left Party. Now, the FDP is a given, considering it's "the neo-con party" and neo-con positions have a rather tough times in times when it becomes noticeable that the idea of unbridled economy isn't quite working out so perfectly. The FDP has a general crisis and is getting kicked out of parliaments recently with losses unparalleled in history (aside of a time in history when parties were outlawed...).
Now, what drove people away from the FDP? A survey [tagesschau.de] amongst former voters labels, in this order, "too much infighting", "has a leader I cannot agree with" and "is a party of social chill" as the three contributing factors why they didn't vote for them anymore. Oddly, it seems that made the PP an alternative, or so it seems. More likely, though, I think that former FDP voters didn't vote this time, and instead people who did not vote earlier went this time, now that they actually saw a party that they can identify with. Personally, I'd call that a very good development, to see people rekindle their interest in politics.
As a German stand up recently said, people are not fed up with politics, people are fed up with politicians. If anything, a result of 7% from zero is a pretty good indicator that this is actually the case. Those 7% are now 7% that are missing from other parties and that make certain combinations of coalitions possible, or rather, impossible. And that's where those 7% actually start to mean something.
Looking back at the seats [tagesschau.de] in the parliament now, those 4 seats the PP gained actually wield some power and meaning. Not going into detail how they would have been distributed under other circumstances (first of all that would depend how people who voted for PP would have voted otherwise, if at all, and how the elections arithmetics work), my estimate would be that those seats would have gone to Die Linke and the Greens instead. An SPD/Left Party coalition would have been possible. Not possible now. An SPD/Green coalition, too. Not possible either.
The fact that these four seats went to the PP now forces a large coalition between CDU and SPD onto the parliament. No other majorities are (sensibly) possible. As odd and unwanted as it may be, the success of the PP saved the conservative's asses on the government bench.
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:2)
As if the lesser evil is in any way lesser evil...
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:2, Insightful)
The Greens are a mixed bag. Half the time they do a great job of calling Bullshit. Half the time they are the purveyors of the bullshit.
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:2)
Half the time they are the purveyors of the bullshit.
[Citation needed]. No, seriously, I'm genuinely interested.
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:4, Interesting)
> [Citation needed]. No, seriously, I'm genuinely interested.
Flat-out refusal to support anything with the word "nuclear" is one thing the international Slashdot crowd will get:
http://greens.org.au/policies/climate-change-and-energy/nuclear
They wish to close Australia's only nuclear reactor, a research reactor whose main product is radioactive isotopes for medical imaging. The policy also blindly ignores things like thorium cycle fission reactors or even nuclear fusion reactors if they were viable.
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:2)
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:3)
Surely in Australia you could simply capture all the billions of huge venomous spiders and use them to power treadmills to generate electricity?
Yea...naaah, mate! No need for it, drop bears and hoop snakes generate plenty.
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:3)
Yeah, the Greens can be a mixed bag, but aren't they all? I also notice in your link that while #17 is to close that reactor, #16 is to promote an alternative method of getting those medical isotopes. I daresay the former isn't going to happen until the latter does.
Re nukes, while I disagree with any policy that wants to ban nuclear reactors outright (they are still important research and medical tools), as far as commercially-operated nuclear fission reactors go I no longer want them. It boils down to this approximation:
Technology (Fission Reactors) + Species (Humanity) + Dominant Motive (Profit) = Trouble (With a Chance of Nocturnal Luminescence).
Or more simply put: we can't be trusted with nuke plants in a commercial setting.
Like the GP, I'd be seriously, genuinely interested in a workable solution, but it seems like that old internet meme: "Your idea to get rid of spam is technically sound, but will not work because: [X] Humans are involved." Maybe if plant management was under the code of military justice rather than civilian law? People might think thrice about skimming the margins if they knew the result could be a firing squad instead of a golden parachute (but then again, maybe not; stupid people are stupid, and the military is not magically immune to corruption).
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:2)
I read that page and it all seems fairly sensible. Australia doesn't need nuclear power and has vast renewable resources, far more than it could ever need. You guys don't have a big nuclear industry but do have significant amounts of waste to deal with. Developing thorium cycle or fusion would be extremely expensive and for no apparent purpose or gain. Green issues aside it wouldn't even make economic sense.
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:2)
Which part of it is bothering you ? The content, or the flowery writing style ?
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:2)
"Fellow Earthians,
Never before has the Universe unfolded such a flower as our collective human intelligence, so far as we know."
Bob Brown's latest speech. Complete BS.
Why is it complete BS? Do you have evidence of anything equal or superior to collective human intelligence anywhere else in the universe?
Re:Working within the rules can still work (Score:2, Informative)
"Fellow Earthians,
Never before has the Universe unfolded such a flower as our collective human intelligence, so far as we know."
There is more of this sort of inanity from Bob Brown [greensmps.org.au] in the speech.
The Greens talk BS far more than they call it.
Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" wins (Score:2, Insightful)
Frankly, I'd prefer to see some issue-specific "Green" party get in: Eg, the Subj ones.
There are, after all, some more critical (eg, to life on Earth) issues to be solved here.
Re:Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" w (Score:5, Insightful)
don't underestimate the destruction caused by patents, copyright, etc. The damage to our culture has barely begun to show - while it's not direct, our culture is being less and less documented as a result.
Patents around green products can affect the life on earth issue, and patents on medicine cost actual lives (and money).
Re:Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" w (Score:2)
That's not even counting the fact that most "green" political parties (at least in France) are a bunch of opportunistic retards that are just there for politics, not at all about ecology.
Re:Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" w (Score:2)
Re:Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" w (Score:5, Informative)
Frankly, I'd prefer to see some issue-specific "Green" party get in: Eg, the Subj ones.
They have a green party in Germany and they are also just got voted in and will be sitting "right beside" the "pirates" in the state parliament after this election there in Saarland.
There are, after all, some more critical (eg, to life on Earth) issues to be solved here.
A party who opposes censorship, data retention and supports more government transparency is also needed and these issues do matter there, because the "pirates" got 7,4 % of the votes in Saarland so their program is more supported then that of the green party who barely got over the 5 percent threshold with their 5,0 %. I think you just said something without knowing the political situation there, or am i wrong?
But besides all these things got me wondering... in Germany even new and small parties have a chance to get into parliaments and now there are six different bigger parties (cdu/csu, spd, the green party, the left party and now the pirate party) and many more small parties there to chose from, but in the us they just got stuck with two, why? I don't get it where is the democracy in that?
Re:Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" w (Score:4, Insightful)
Any combination of parties starting a coalition with another has already been tried. Amazingly most seemed to be functional.
This is why a new party like the PP doesn't NEED a party stance on everything. Besides, parliamentarians can and should have their own conscience and vote along those lines. The PP doesn't need a consensus on EU milk quotas, the recession(there is none in Germany at the moment) and other issues. The Green Party started like that and became a party with a complete programme within two decades.
There are safeguards against fragmentation. You need at least some percentage to actually get a seat in parliament. Most commonly that's 5%. That keeps the kooks out.
Also if a big enough portion of your population votes for a party that doesn't make it into government then government still has to take their needs into account. Otherwise you don't have a democracy but a dictatorship of the majority. Which never is a good thing.
Re:Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" w (Score:3)
The Green party is well established in Germany anyway. They actually took a beating in Saarland this time, but they are running the state of Baden-Württemberg with the SPD as their junior partners and they are participating in several other state governments.
I think the PP is an important addition - I agree that green issues are vital, but we also need to protect the foundation of our democratic system, otherwise we have no chance of addressing these issues. The main problem with stuff like ACTA etc is not even the content of the treaty (though it's bad enough) but that the route taken to implement it, basically subverts democratic control. That needs to be stopped urgently.
Re:Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" w (Score:2)
I could very well be that the Green party has lined the German coffers with gold and Muesli.
Also that party grew up quite a bit over the last 20 years and I suspect that it isn't even in the slightest comparable to the counterpart in the US. Although the fundamentalist wing of Die Gruenen has a problem with being in power and the realist wing has a problem with not being in power. Fun times for all are guaranteed.
Don't read German newspapers in the next few weeks. You've been warned.
Re:Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" w (Score:2)
5 minutes until someone comes and declares how the US are a Republic and not a Democracy. As if that made any difference in that matter...
Re:Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" w (Score:2)
Left/right politics?
Where?
From a European point of view, I can see the right, but the left? What you have is far right and moderate right politics to choose from.
Re:Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" w (Score:2)
Personally I envy countries that have a real choice amoung political candidates and parties (I'm from UK which is just as bad as the U.S.A.).
The trouble here in the UK is that we actually turned down the Alternvative Vote system in the referendum last year, so in a way we're even stupider than the USA.
Re:Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" w (Score:2)
Green and Pirate issues do have some overlap. Currently pure rent-seeking counts as economic activity, and so long as someone in your country is getting revenue from somewhere else, can perversely appear as growth. This is not a trivial problem; the UK has been a heavily IP-based economy for a long time (look at ARM: a UK company making one of the most ubiquitous architectures in the world that doesn't itself ever make a single chip. Pharmaceuticals are another good example.)
This can mask underlying problems in the physical economy - which should be of concern to Greens. Anything that allows you to maintain business-as-usual whilst oil prices rocket and we head towards a permanent energy crisis is obviously dangerous.
Re:Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" w (Score:2)
Who owns and controls which information under which rules, *is* a major issue in the information-age.
It's not only, or even primarily, about copying of entertainment. Who owns and controls, and under which rules:
Computers. Personal information. Inventions. Knowledge. Art.
This ties in with education, with corruption, with medicine, with an awful lot of very important issues pretty much all over the map.
It doesn't cover the -entire- map, but as "single" issues go, this one is a biggie, I'm not at all convinced that the "green" issue is any bigger, or cover more of the map.
Re:Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" w (Score:2)
I don't know about the Greens in your country, but in mine they have changed from an ecology party to a "minority support" party. Whatever minority group there is, the Greens want to be their spokesperson. They have no time for ecology anymore, they're too busy saving the minorities from the oppression of the majority.
Copyright vs Education (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:5, Insightful)
There are lots and lots of free textbooks. That has never been a problem.
The problem is to start actually using them.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:5, Insightful)
There is a massive stigma that if it is free then it can't be any good. Its the 'open' movement's worst problem, whether it is books or software.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:3)
All of which are incredibly hard to promote to people who are used to paying for things. Sure, nerds like us understand the technical qualities of free solutions, and accept them, but we aren't the majority. Managers want somebody to call 24/7 for tech support, and someone to blame when things break. Downloading an operating system from some random mirror in another country then purchasing support from a completely separate entity just doesn't make sense to traditional business folks.
Remember the push against Wikipedia when it first came out? It took several years and many studies of accuracy to find that it's just as good as any other encyclopedia, and teachers still often won't accept it.
Try telling a potential employer at an interview that though your degree is in liberal arts, you learned engineering from Khan Academy. I doubt you'll get too far with it.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, because the publishers make sure the free ones are never picked by major education.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:2)
That's the way my kids' schools are going anyway.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:5, Interesting)
an informed population will not be one that submits to state (and now, corporate) control.
they don't want an educated population. they REALLY do not.
that's all I have to say on this subject.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it's safe to say that the Germans know all about the risks of totalitarianism. Especially those over the age of 25 living in former East Germany. I'd be very very surprised if they'd forgotten that lesson.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:5, Interesting)
No. Not being able to buy a western car, and not being able to fly to a tropic vacation location were enough to overthrow the former GDR. There were three main topics in the 1989 turnover: freedom of travel, west german money, and better environmental protection. They got all three of them, and they like it.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:3)
The people who harbour nostalgia for that regime do so with rose-tinted glasses and from personal experience which wasn't neccessarily bad. If you behaved and accepted you supposedly could have a nice life. I on the other hand have been to the archives containing the steaming slimy paper trail of mindless cruelty, indifference, red tape and cynicism(all for the greater good of all, of course...well, most). I can tell you that you do not want to know what happend if you caught the attention of the powers that be.
The urge to vomit drives tears to my eyes.
On a personal level, the East had a very popular children's TV programme that aired early in the evening. It was also popular in the West(if you could) get it. I loved watching it as a kid. 15 years later I learned that the wife of the last head of state(may he rot in his grave) was heavily involved in the programming. If there was shortage of some goods then they weren't allowed to show it. If there was abundance of others then they should show that in a feast.
A totalitarian regime leaves NOTHING untainted.
The urge to vomit still drives tears to the eyes.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:2)
I grew up in Eastern Germany, and I know exactly what you are talking about from personal experience. My family was not completely aligned with the dictated mainstream, and so we got snags thrown in our way all the time.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:2)
Honestly, I don't know if I would have gotten into trouble on the other side. It takes a lot of courage to speak up especially when there is no certainty to actually gain something from it. Not all of us have the courage required.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:2)
But if they actually want the GDR back, why does the Linke party just scores around 20% of the votes there, matching very well the percentage of the membership in the SED of the adult population before 1989? That means that 80% of the people actually going to elections don't want the communist dictatorship back.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:4, Insightful)
That means that 80% of the people actually going to elections don't want the communist dictatorship back.
The "people actually going to elections" part ist not to be underestimated - in the states of former eastern Germany voter turnout is hovering at about 50%, sometimes even lower. So 80% of the voting people are actually 40% of the people giving their vote - and therefore the minority :)
I also doubt that people want the "communist dictatorship" back, what they probably do want are things like not having to fear about their economic future, no fear of not being able to afford healthcare for their kids, not being discriminated as a woman, being able to sleep without worries about their idiot boss, not having to work their asses off for an oligarchy of multi millionaires etc. I assume they would be pretty happy to archive that without the dictatorship part.
To put it differently: people voting for the center-right parties (Greens, SPD, CDU) sure as hell are not happy with "capitalist democracy" along with the accompanying ills like the economic crisis, dwindling retirement pensions etc.
It sure is easy to write off the fond memories of people from Eastern Germany as results of brainwashing. But first, the same argument works for western Germany, too, and second do platitudes like this seldom help to get nearer to the true nature of things.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:2)
Germany spent 10 years eliminating safeguards in job safety and we have learned to embrace the personal risk. Trouble is, that quite a lot of people fall besides the tracks and that is not who we are supposed to be. If you work hard then you should bloody well be able to provide for your family without needing another job. Or benefits. That's not too much to ask for.
The SPD(original remaining mainstream left party) had been instrumental in shifting Germany into what we are now. I helped us through when everybody else was in a recession, but that was the cost.
I've not been brain-washed(much...we in the west have TV ads for that) and even I can see that.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:2)
The "people actually going to elections" part ist not to be underestimated - in the states of former eastern Germany voter turnout is hovering at about 50%, sometimes even lower. So 80% of the voting people are actually 40% of the people giving their vote - and therefore the minority :)
It just means that 50% of the electorate don't care about the next government. If they are sitting and ranting how much better it was in the GDR, who cares? They actually don't want the communist dictatorship back urgently enough to do something about it.
People who don't vote, vote for the majority. People who are ranting without going to vote when they can don't deserve it any better.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:2)
Not quite true. They exported lots of it to the west. It's a little known fact that control electronics for almost all major west-german brands of household appliances were produced by Robotron. The dish-washer of course still had a "Made in West germany" stamp on it. "Assembled in..." wasn't needed back then.
Likewise, most of IKEA furniture was produced there, until countries farer east and far cheaper became accessible for business after the fall of the soviet union and the german reunion.
But everything produced there that had at least a decent quality was assigned to the export to get some hard cash. The people there could only by the leftover crap that was unsellable even in the USSR.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:2)
Jenaer Glas was quite sought after in the West. If we even had heard of it. And anybody who ever drove on the Transit remembers ORWO DER FILM AUS WOLFEN.That is still quite popular amongst photographic enthusiasts. Including the cameras. Booze was also quite nice. Books were dirt cheap.
I always bought books and records although I suspect the stuff I bought was barely tolerated so I usually put a Constitution of the GDR and Das Kapital(nothing by Trotzki, preferably) on top of the pile. No monkey guarding their end of the border would touch those two to look what's underneath.
Being classified and certified as Mostly Harmless by the GDR authorities propably also helped.
The GDR supplied top-notch high tech to the world. Optics, electronics, machines, the lot. Proceeds of course went mostly to the brothers a bit further to the east.
Re:Copyright vs Education (Score:2)
an informed population will not be one that submits to state (and now, corporate) control.
they don't want an educated population. they REALLY do not.
that's all I have to say on this subject.
I imagine that the average person in the West nowdays is a lot better informed and educated than the people involved in the French or Russian revolutions. They're also a lot freer and a lothappier, so the prospect of revolution is not high.
Opinions on the Pirate Party (Score:3, Interesting)
We bound to have some German slashdoters here, so it would be good to have a first hand opinions on them:
- What is your opinion on the party?
- On what issues do you agree with them and which do you disagree?
- Do you think that they will be able to affect the policies or are they an ineffective tongue-in-cheek gesture?
- What do you see will be the biggest challenge for them in the future?
Re:Opinions on the Pirate Party (Score:4, Informative)
-They are a breath of fresh air in a stale bureaucratic system
-All of the ones I have heard their position on (yes I read their party manifesto)
-This one is hard to answer, time will tell. I do think that merely by being there they influence the frame of public debate slightly.
-Not going stale and becoming just another brick in the wall. German bureaucracy is pretty soul crushing sometimes
Re:Opinions on the Pirate Party (Score:2)
They have a very good chance to become THE liberal party in Germany as opposed to the current one that is now imploding over errors made in the 80ies.
Due to the unique way we vote(one vote for a party, one vote for a parliamentarian) you can have your Pirates flavoured Red, Black, Green, Pink(but not brown or yellow, that doesn't quite blend).
I can totally see them occupy ten seats in the federal parliament. They are the right ones to oppose the gerontocratic old parties. Just like The Greens used to be in the 80ies.
I can also see Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, our current minister of justice join them. Ever since the nineties she was the gal to watch. She has always been against government snooping, keeping IP logs for donkey's years, blocking IP addresses FOR TEH CIHLDRNS and strong on humanitarian issues. Her stance on ACTA is well known and frankly, she is everything that made the old liberal party electable(FDP). Hence my hope of her moving out of that moribund outfit.
Re:Opinions on the Pirate Party (Score:5, Interesting)
A small warning for American readers, some views of mine will contradict what you believe is right and wrong, we have public health care here (i think this is how it should be) and other things you don't like so don't get too upset and also what i consider liberal could be something other then what you do. And my also my view of things can differ from the views other Germans have.
- What is your opinion on the party?
Germany needs a liberal party and not a neoliberal party in my opinion, so i think the pirates can be a win for the political landscape. There is/was a other liberal party the FDP who just got voted out of the parliament there in Saarland and they are also Germany wide in big trouble not only because the pirates but also because their economic liberalism isn't liked by the people in here anymore. People rights and opposing the rise of government surveillance where just a small fig-leaf in the end they didn't really deliver and right after the last federal election they made a big mistake on focusing on some tax cuts for the hotel lobby. That upset many people because if the rich pay lesser taxes then the rest has to pay more or the government has to cut spending and in the end this will result in a big decrease of the living standard here because a working government is better than a not working one and money is needed for that. The FDP then did cut some spending in our health system and the people got even angrier with them but they didn't listen and now they are at there dawn and i think the pirates are on the rise if they stick to their main program of more transparency, less government surveillance and if they don't try to cut the social safety net.
- On what issues do you agree with them and which do you disagree?
The pirates and there are a lot of issues the don't cover so it's hard to point out thing i truly disagree but if i think if they just focus on freedom and don't on social justice then in the long-view the freedom part can not be full-filled in my opinion. A party who cuts taxes for the rich and then also cuts government spending on social security is, in my opinion not liberal, because then Germany would be in a state as bad as England or the USA are now and no German citizen in their right mind would really want that. So if the would try to copy the business policies of the FDP than they won't ever get my vote. But the points that led to the founding of the German pirate party, which i had already had some listed above, these are the things (more government transparency, less government surveillance, no internet censorship, and a fairer copyright and patent law) i can agree with.
- Do you think that they will be able to affect the policies or are they an ineffective tongue-in-cheek gesture?
The funny thing is that even just by "jumping" over the 5% threshold and now having seats in two state parliaments (Berlin and Saarland) has the other parties in uproar and could lead to some opinion changes. How they behave in a coalition with other parties has yet to be seen. The theory how this could play out is one thing but how it will play out is the other. They got many votes from people who don't want to vote for the other five big pirates anymore, so if they now or some time in the future screw this up, this could be a blow to democracy here. Because if people get the feeling of powerlessness it could lead to more radicalism (left and or right).
- What do you see will be the biggest challenge for them in the future?
This year there will be many elections in other and bigger Federal states and the challenge for them is the same as in Berlin and Saarland, they have to get in the Parliament by "jumping" over the 5% threshold which is also their goal for the upcoming federal elections in 2013. And another challenge will be their increasing attention to the media here and also how the other parties will now react, now that they have seen that the pirates could possibly more than a one hit wonder.
Re:Opinions on the Pirate Party (Score:3)
I'm a german /.er
In my opinion, a party without a fixed policy is the best thing that can happen to parliamentarism over here, because this means debates would get their whole reason d'être back: convincing the members of parliament to vote for or agains something, based on arguments.
Currently, we're paying 625 people to raise there hands based on party policy instead of personal beliefs and opinions. Predictable as it is, it's a waste of time and money.
The biggest challange for the PP is their lack of a party policy, that renders them too unpredictable for the average voter.
Re:Opinions on the Pirate Party (Score:2)
Not German either, but close enough to follow German politics quite closely.
1. The PP is currently the only party in Germany that actually embraces a system of personal liberty and freedom. The FDP, the self proclaimed "liberals", have shown their face as taking a mostly neo-con position with "liberal" only meaning unfettered and unbridled economy with little to no concern about personal freedoms. Hence also their recent crash to rock bottom in elections. The PP is also the only party that openly and sternly opposes the erosion of liberties and the police-state-like development recently, with total surveillance and politicians who want to sell your privacy to corporations, if they don't want to eliminate it for their own gains.
2. So far the PP hasn't shown its position on all pressing topics, which makes their success even more a surprise and to some degree it even frightens me. A party that rides on the "freedom and liberty" issue, without having too many "official" opinions on various other topics (at least their position is not too well known to many) that STILL gains nearly 1/10th of the votes tells you more about the other parties than about itself. What I agree with is their liberty position, actually. And if that's all they really care about while letting the rest ride and sort itself, all the better! The less government digs into our business, the better! Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not for anarchy, but Germany is in a position where they certainly need LESS government.
3. They will not affect politics directly, at least not in the short run, but their agendas will. Looking back at the 80s, I can see history repeating itself. The ecology issue was ignored long enough by the established parties to let the Greens gain momentum, they attracted voters, also back then pretty much with the only topic "ecology and environment" and gained 5-10% of the votes that way. Wanting those votes back, the established parties started to integrate ecology and environment issues into their program. Likewise, I'd expect the other parties to pick up the issue now that they see that these issues are actually interesting to a sizable amount of voters. My expectation is that their influence will be indirect rather than direct.
4. their main challenge, IMO, is the same the Greens faced in the 80s, coherence. They are a young party with many members having very different opinions on various topics. They are "glued" together by their ideals of liberty and personal freedom, but that's not enough to keep a party coherent. Their main problem in the near future will be to stay together instead of falling apart into smaller fractions with fringe interests. The deciding moment will be when they try to find a "party line" for other issues aside of their main topic. The Greens nearly fell apart over it (and actually some splinter groups formed), and only if they can overcome this challenge they will prevail.
Re:Opinions on the Pirate Party (Score:2)
We bound to have some German slashdoters here
Lucky no-one's mentioned the War then!
Re:Opinions on the Pirate Party (Score:2)
The same has been said about the Greens in the 80s. It's funny how history repeats itself. Too disorganized, too fractured, can't find a party line, they won't survive... yet they did. It took time and yes, the first years they certainly would not have made a suitable government party. Neither does the PP right now.
The PP currently gains its speed from the general voter apathy and the fact that people are disillusioned by ALL parties. Now there's an alternative that actually isn't a "lost vote", that isn't loaded with ballast from the past like Die Linke, and that's quite attractive. Add that people who want a liberal party who are now utterly disappointed by the FDP turning out to be not a liberal but a neo-con party needed a new home, the timing was perfect.
As stated above, 7% for a party with a little-if-at-all known program (not even by its members) tells you more about the other parties than that party.
Ugh (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm so jealous of proportional representation. Here 7% of the vote would get you 0% of the seats, barring some sort of miracle - like all of your votes being concentrated, instead of low level throughout the popular vote.
This makes it pretty difficult for new ideas to get out there... If large party A, B (or sometimes even C!) won't buy your idea, it's not getting represented.
Re:Ugh (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm so jealous of proportional representation. Here 7% of the vote would get you 0% of the seats, barring some sort of miracle - like all of your votes being concentrated, instead of low level throughout the popular vote.
This makes it pretty difficult for new ideas to get out there... If large party A, B (or sometimes even C!) won't buy your idea, it's not getting represented.
This is why America desperately needs a 3rd party. This two party system we currently have does not come close to representing the voice of many Americans.
Re:Ugh (Score:2)
Sure. Like in England, where you're conservative and vote Conservative Party and instead support some "Conservative-Liberal Democrat" coalition that makes no idealogical sense and is basically a purely political creation to check Labour.
Re:Ugh (Score:2)
Every time a third party arose, all it meant was that one of the two established parties vanished. Look back in the history of the US and tell me a single time when there were actually three important parties for a sensible amount of time. Let's start at, say, 1800.
Re:Ugh (Score:2, Insightful)
First past the post. "Throwing your vote away". "Letting the worse of two evils win by wasting your vote".
Re:Ugh (Score:5, Funny)
First past the post. "Throwing your vote away". "Letting the worse of two evils win by wasting your vote".
Ah... I see... "stuck in local optimum" when better optimum points exists.
Hmmm... I'd recommend a "reheating the system in simulated annealing", but I feel that the things should go much worse for such a thing to happen.
Re:Ugh (Score:2)
I heard they had a bit of reheating in the UK last year.
Re:Ugh (Score:2)
Re:Ugh (Score:5, Insightful)
First past the post voting, for one. Instant runoff would be a huge help to get even a small number of non R or D candidates into offices that matter. Second, proportional representation.
But the real thing preventing a viable third party is the first two parties. They are the ones in government, they are the ones that passed laws in every state (e.g ballot access restrictions, electoral votes being winner take all) making it extremely difficult to get elected if you don't have an R or D after your name.
Re:Ugh (Score:5, Insightful)
One problem with any kind of proportional system (hybrid or otherwise) is that you always end up with members whom the public has not elected directly. They can be whatever lunatic attack dog the party wants to appoint (or vote internally). Unlike a plurality system, you can't really vote those idiots out.
The biggest problem with democracy is that it promises far more than any practical solution will ever deliver. There is no perfect system.
Re:Ugh (Score:2)
The biggest problem with democracy is that it promises far more than any practical solution will ever deliver. There is no perfect system.
The biggest problem with democracy is that it is used as an excuse for the state to actively harm people. There are many ways democracy enables the state remove or dilute our primary liberties. No system (democratic or otherwise) should allow this to happen.
Re:Ugh (Score:4, Informative)
There is no perfect system.
Obligatory reference to the Arrow Impossibility Theorem [wikipedia.org].
Re:Ugh (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Ugh (Score:5, Insightful)
And if there are more candidates that won directly than the percentage would allow for (in terms of representation), we add seats to the parliament in order for every directly elected representative to have his place.
Re:Ugh (Score:2)
After hearing some bull coming always from the same senators from the same backwards states I can only say: It's not a bug, it's a feature.
Re:Ugh (Score:3)
Uh uh no no, it does not turn out that way in practice. We have the system you describe in Italy and it's really rotten.
The result is that several parties put unpopular, but powerful candidates high in the lists so they are guaranteed a place in parliament. These are often crooked politicians, plain simpletons, or even mafiosi like Nick Cosentino [wikipedia.org]. The parties run the campaign promoting their logo, ideology or possibly the presentable candidates in their list (who are sitting so low that they do not stand a chance to be elected anyway). People are mostly dumb and do not notice.
Why having mafiosi in parliament? They get immunity (like the above mentioned Nick Cosentino did, he should be sitting in prison for several counts of mafia), and you get a lot of evil karma with their friends. Why simpletons? They are incapable of independent thought, and they will simply obey party leaders. It's party leaders, after all, who decide on their career, not voters.
I know this system works in countries such as Germany and Norway. To work, the system requires parties that are not just pretending to fight, but that actually oppose each other. In the US, I think you would get a situation more similar to Italy than Germany, with e.g. Dick Cheney having a permanent seat in Congress and steering the GOP as if it was his thing, and some just as crooked democrat on the other side.
What is necessary is to take power from the hands of party leaders and give it to the people. The parties may present a list, but citizens must be able to choose which candidate to vote, and whether someone is voted in or not must not depend on the position on the ballot list but only on the received votes.
Re:Ugh (Score:2)
I think the difference here is that you'll loose lots of the vote percantage if you don't put the popular candidates on the top of teh list.
Re:Ugh (Score:2)
Actually such a system exists in some countries, IIRC it's also the case in Germany. You get the list of candidates presented, and if you don't like it, you can rearrange them.
Of course that leads to ballot papers that are a few square meters large and about as easy to understand as the average laws created by the very people on that list, but hey, you get the free choice... if you ever figure out how to make it.
Re:Ugh (Score:3)
Don't like the guy? Don't vote for the list he is on. If you still like the politics of his list/party, then why do you care if he is an a-hole?
Re:Ugh (Score:3)
How so?
When I vote in elections using a proportional system I rank individual candidates. If I don't like Bob Smith from party X I can put him last even if I put John Jones from party X first.
Re:Ugh (Score:2)
Exactly, it's very frustrating.
It's like getting 30 points in every tennis games but still losing 6-0 6-0 6-0.
While I don't care that much about tennis, it sure is a shame that we cannot get proper political representation.
The biggest problem is that in order to change this, A & B should vote for it. They don't have any incentive to.
Re:Ugh (Score:5, Informative)
I think what you're referring to is the Free State Project [slashdot.org], which is a libertarian effort to implement their ideas in New Hampshire.
It hasn't fallen apart, really - they moved to NH and elected a bunch of state reps (not that difficult, since each represents about 4500 people). They then discovered very quickly that many of their ideas had already been adopted, and received a pretty warm reception from the established political leadership. Anyone who joined up gearing for a political fight would have been a bit surprised to find that instead of a fight they basically got handshakes and smiles.
This was partially possible because New Hampshire has an incredibly responsive and functional state government, and a strong tradition of believing in democracy more than in partisanship. That means, for instance, that the Secretary of State has stayed in his appointed office for a couple of decades, despite several changes in the party affiliation of the governor, because he's very good at his job and treats people fairly.
Hyperlinking (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Hyperlinking (Score:2)
It's maybe not a "one trick pony" anymore, but on the other hand, there's also precious little information about their positions on issues outside the areas of copyright and personal liberty.
I guess those 7% are more a statement about how fed up the people are with politics altogether rather than how successful the PP is.
Social Justice (Score:3)
A survey found 40% of Pirate voters naming "Social Justice" as the most significant issue, even though the Pirates didn't exactly campaign on this in the state (though their platform on the federal level includes it).
Re:Social Justice (Score:2)
This adds to my impression that many, many voters just voted for them because they are fed up with the old parties and system. It may very well be that these voters will leave for greener pastures in the future, causing the PP to fall below 5% again (meaning they won't get seats in state elections). Also, a good percentage of the voters are previous FDP (liberals) voters. The FDP had two positions in the past, neo-liberalism with open markets and freedom for the financial sector, and civil rights. They nearly completely expunged the latter from their party over the years (apart from the national minister Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger), and now they are paying for it: They are part of the national government, but didn't even get 2% of the votes in the Saarland. Most analysts assume that the voters left for the other bigger parties and the PP.
Re:Social Justice (Score:3)
If the FDP kicked out all Foreign Secretaries who don't speak Ze Englisch, get rid of people of so interchangeable qualification that they can take care of our health system AND our economy and all the other people who weren't considerate enough to jump out of an aeroplane with a dodgy chute then they would actually be electable. The tragic thing is Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger has been the last true liberal in the FDP for decades. Her record for the last 20 years is spotless. If there is a voice of reason in this country then it is hers. Somehow the curse of Otto Graf Lambsdorff didn't affect her. An honest politician with a conscience. Who'd have thunk it?
I reckon quite a few pirates do admire her.
Re:Social Justice (Score:2)
It makes sense if you see the big picture.
The biggest loser of this election was the FDP (as usual), that even dropped out of parliament altogether. In case someone doesn't know: The German government is a coalition between CDU and FDP. One of the currently ruling parties dropped out of a state parliament due to a lack of votes. Just to give you an idea what that REALLY means. And it was almost the same back a few months in Berlin.
The FDP is now the (self-proclaimed) "liberal" party of Germany. They are even called "Die Liberalen" in elections sometimes. My assumption, now, is that their liberal voters, i.e. the ones that voted for them because they come from a strong liberal background and want liberal politics, noticed that the FDP are actually NOT a liberal but a neo-con party. Their position on personal liberty has eroded to the point where they are only concerned with economic liberty and unrestricted economy, to the point where they actually went and put the freedom of market over the interests and liberty of the people. And that's something a liberal will not tolerate.
Part of a liberal position (at least in Germany) is actually "social peace". Peace, rather than justice. And a firm belief that everyone should have the means to create and force their own fortune. That's not the case in a world where the economy gets favored and the whole system gets lopsided, the balance tilted towards (big) companies dictating how the world should run.
So, as odd as it may sound, I can well see how "Social Justice" is a big issue with PP voters. Social justice encompasses more in Germany than just government handouts. Actually, that's not what it means over here. Social justice is actually pretty much a liberal position here, with everyone having the same right to "make their way" without being forced and pressed into a system where they cannot escape the treadmill and cannot break the glass ceiling, and with nobody holding you back just because he has more money than you and thus can keep you down.
Improvised (Score:2)
This whole thing was pretty improvised. They followed their gut and didn't stress the digital issues they have(since they are well known to those who actually care) and explored what else they can stand for.
There were a lot of pirates going ARRR, and ding-a-ling while they drove around on their bikes hanging up posters. Pieces of eight were not looted.
A train station that had been in planning for 30 years got protested and that's about it. The Occupy movement wasn't very strong in Germany. That's why. We tried sit-ins and teach-ins and bed-ins(well, our parents did) and being sprayed by cops is all hunky-dory but ineffective. The tendendcy to Get Things Done this country shows from time to time is actually quite impressive. Usually it involves football, peace, endangered bugs, availability of beer, freedom, slightly more vacation so to push us even further over the European mean(gotta lead at least one board, amirite?) and now social equality. It's very hard to argue against any of that.
Re:"pariament" (Score:3)
Re:"pariament" (Score:2)
A place for untouchables to feel important. Everyone's valuable today, always remember that.
Re:One of the corners of the world, fixed. (Score:5, Informative)
My stepbrother was born in Kaiserslautern, so he technically has German citizenship.
Only if he has a German parent, or in some specific cases is of German descent.
Germany doesn't have "ius soli":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_nationality_law [wikipedia.org]
Re:interesting (Score:2)
well... I'm here.