27 ms·

Does America need a Pirate Party?

290 points by woah 13y ago

LoganCale 13y ago
Why not a Hacker Party?
- Zikes 13y ago
  To the lay person that would have an equally negative connotation, as most people would associate it with illegally accessing private information such as what Anonymous often does. It also conjures up imagery that's unattractive or otherwise unappealing, and carries with it a measure of exclusivity in regards to computing skills or literacy. In the case of pirates there is at least a level of romanticism around the idea. And since nobody is really a pirate, anybody can be one.
tbirdz 13y ago
America does have a Pirate Party: http://uspirates.org/ http://uspirates.org/
- cleinias 13y ago
  And there are state affiliates already existing or forming in many states, even some not listed on the US pirate party page. Texas, for instance, is starting to get organized.
- smacktoward 13y ago
  It was founded in 2006. Has it managed to field a single candidate for office anywhere in the United States? As far as I can tell, it has not. Has it raised a single dime to support candidates who follow its principles? As far as I can tell, it has not. Has it done a single day of door-to-door organizing, either for its own growth or for a candidate it supports? As far as I can tell, it has not. By all appearances it's just a group of people who chat together on IRC. That's fine, but it's not a political party.
_k 13y ago
I think the name is easily misunderstood.
geneticmaterial 13y ago
no, no but we do need a privacy party.
btown 13y ago
As the article hints at in saying that the Icelandic Pirate Party garnered enough votes to have a single seat in the parliament, a Pirate Party, or any niche-issue political party, really only makes sense in a proportional representation system ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation ). There is simply not enough support or funding for any candidates to have a chance at a national level. However, there is a small chance at a state legislature level, since (to my knowledge) most US citizens don't care much about state legislature elections, and a sufficiently charismatic and well-funded Pirate Party candidate might be able to amass enough votes in a relatively well-educated area. Thus the current US Pirate Party's focus on having state-level organization: http://uspirates.org/about/get-involved/ http://uspirates.org/about/get-involved/
- polshaw 13y ago
  PR would be great (I struggle to see FPTP as really democratic to be honest- it systematically supports entrenched interests), but if you aren't actively working on changing the system, then you have to work with the system. The partial saving grace of the existing system is that even though niche parties will never get elected, their aims can still be achieved-- enough votes to a 3rd party can scare the main players into changing their policies. No one ever won an election for women's suffrage, but the policies still got adopted.
  - walshemj 13y ago
    Looking from out side from a country that has FPTP But the USA still doesn't have two parties in the modern sense you have two wide coalitions (18th century style) with a considerable amount of horse trading and pork keeping people on side. Read Williams Hugues bio of pitt the younger to see what I mean.
    - aptwebapps 13y ago
      Inverse TL;DR: "Read Williams Hugues bio of pitt the younger to see what I mean."
- 13y ago
ruv 13y ago
I think that a major reason for the entire problem spectra of US is them being a "two party" democracy - It hardly counts as a functional democracy at all. The entire republicans vs democrats chatter seems ridiculous to an outside observer... More like a gang turf war than anything else.
Apocryphon 13y ago
It seems like if Zuckerberg and co. want to effect real change with FWD.us, they should lobby for institutional reforms such as proportional representation to give minority parties a greater chance of getting members elected. Of course, such reforms are not sexy, nor politically expedient, and stand against centuries of entrenched systems, and so this will never happen.
pseudometa 13y ago
The name alone would kill any chance such a party ever gaining traction in the United States and would mark it boldly as a fridge group. Purely from a marketing and PR standpoint, you would need to use a term that has a very broad positive connotations. Even so much as to be socially unacceptable to dissagree with the name. For instance, just look at the names of bills that congress uses to gain support for their causes such as the Patriot Act. You would be much better off with a name such as the Freedom Party, Hope Party, United Party, Liberty Party, Independence Party, etc... However in this instance, my personal favorite would be: Patriot Party
- guruz 13y ago
  Not necessarily, it just needs some education about the name. See for example also the OK results in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Party_Germany#German_State_and_Regional_elections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Party_Germany#German_St... Think about what a childish and ridiculous name "Google" is and still it got adopted worldwide.
  - bahman2000 13y ago
    I don't have any stats, but anecdotal evidence suggests that education on the term "hacker" hasn't been very effective, yet.
    - tg3 13y ago
      In my experience hacker has gone from "definitely a criminal" 5-10 years ago to "maybe a criminal" today. When I tell people (not in the tech scene) that I read a site called "Hacker News" they don't assume that it's some CC swapping forum. I'd say that's progress.
- nawitus 13y ago
  The name has been succesfull all around the world. There's already Freedom Parties etc. in United States, and nobody cares about those parties. A Pirate Party, on the other hand, can utilize the global movement's brand. Of course, the core problem is not the name of the party, it's the lack of a democratic voting system.
1337biz 13y ago
Sure, exactly what we need. Another fringe party, with a weird name, marching under the "we come from the interwebs" banner. At least on a national level 3rd parties are poised for failure unless there is some massive financial backing and a strong leadership. In my opinion the smarter way would be to focus on lobbying efforts and bundling money and manpower for pro-internet candidates. Considering that there are politicians in both parties that have excellent positions on tech related issues but not that much in common in regards to other policies, making this about one issue and not about ideology seems a much more promising approach.
rayiner 13y ago
In a first past the post system, starting yet another fringe party is pointless. If technologists want to have a real impact on American politics, the solution is to take advantage of the current disorganization within the Republican party. If the tea partiers can do it, so can the technologists (so long as there are a few deep Silicon Valley pockets willing to bankroll the escapade). "Obama's NSA is spying on your church groups and trying to figure out how many guns you own" would be a pretty powerful political platform that could get a few people elected.
- flyinRyan 13y ago
  This is exactly right. I predict a backlash against the Democrats after Obama's epic failures (that doesn't mean most people will vote Republican, but it probably means a lot of dems simply don't show up next time around). And you're spot on about pulling a "Tea Party". The fact is, politics is a nasty business. We need a large group of people willing to say whatever it takes to get voted in. Once in, the only goal should be voting reform. If we can get rid of FPTP we can fix everything else eventually.
- sporkologist 13y ago
  > If the tea partiers can do it They were backed by the billionaire Koch Brothers. We'd have to get Bill Gates or someone like that to pull off something similar. I propose something called "The 4th Amendment Party" which directly addresses privacy issues, in the US anyway. An international Pirate Party could be used for hopefully countering the negative effects of multinational corporations.
  - tlrobinson 13y ago
    Peter Thiel?
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
  - rayiner 13y ago
    Surely Silicon Valley can round up a few billionaires? Heck, take advantage of Citizens United and get Google, Facebook, etc, to chip in. If, as has been extensively speculated in other threads in the last few days, NSA surveillance is a dire threat to the global competitiveness of U.S.-based online companies, they have a legitimate business interest in funding such groups. Heck, CBS's entire market cap is only $30 billion, which Google could buy with cash on hand. How much for just the news divisions? I bet you could get a major presence in US media with just a $5-10 billion acquisition.
mindcrime 13y ago
As a hardcore techie, software developer and tech entrepreneur, you would think that I'd be lining up to support the Pirate Party. But, alas, other than cyber-security and digital rights issues, I don't necessarily agree with them about anything else. I also don't necessarily disagree but since they don't appear to have much a published platform and planks, it's hard to say. But I've seen some Pirates describe them as a "progressive" party, and I'm pretty skeptical of "progressives" and their policy positions. Anyway, for my money, it's the Libertarian Party that represents the path forward, not the Pirate Party. Unfortunately, the problem in the US isn't that we don't have enough parties. We have tons of political parties in the US, ranging from the Libertarian Party, to the Green Party, to the Pirate Party, to the Worker's World Party, to the Prohibition Party, to the Modern Whig Party. No, the problem is plurality / first-past-the-post voting. As Duverger's Law notes, a plurality / FPTP voting system almost always results in a two party dominated system (like we have). Switch voting to Approval Voting, Range Voting, or a Condorcet method, and we might see some meaningful change.
- flyinRyan 13y ago
  The fact that the "libertarian party" is a "thing" in the US is a large sign of what the problem is. But in any case, what we need to do is get a party going who's only platform is voting reform. The only goal that matters right now is the end of FPTP and the two party system. Once that's done having all these "fringe" parties will be a good thing because my "progressive" parties will agree on a lot of policy with your libertarians (e.g. surveillance, world police force, etc.).
  - mindcrime 13y ago
    The only goal that matters right now is the end of FPTP and the two party system. Once that's done having all these "fringe" parties will be a good thing because my "progressive" parties will agree on a lot of policy with your libertarians (e.g. surveillance, world police force, etc.). I agree that voting reform is crucial. Everything else really hinges on that. The fact that the "libertarian party" is a "thing" in the US is a large sign of what the problem is. Could you elaborate on that a little more? I think I get the gist of what you mean, but I'm not sure. FWIW, I'll just point out that the "libertarian movement" (or whatever you want to call it) in the US is bigger than just the "Libertarian Party". There are, for example, the "little l libertarians" within both the Republican and Democratic parties, who espouse and advocate for libertarian views. There are (or have been) multiple "libertarian" parties in the US. There's obviously the "Big L Libertarian" party, but there was also the "Boston Tea Party"[1], for one. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party_(political_party) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party_(political_par...
detcader 13y ago
What's wrong with Jill Stein?
mtgx 13y ago
When US becomes a more democratic country (in the literal sense of the word), sure.
flyinRyan 13y ago
Yes! But don't call the party "Pirate party". Call them "Republicans" because that is likely to be backlash against the Democrats after Obama's miserable performance.
amikula 13y ago
The United States needs any viable third party. Unfortunately, the Republicrats have a lock on our political system, and the only way to get a viable third party is to change the rules about how we vote. Specifically, first past the post voting provides a disincentive for third parties to compete because they are most likely to harm the candidate who is closest to their own position. Something like score voting, approval voting, or instant runoff voting is needed to break the deadlock. Approval voting is probably the best bet because people who want to support a third party candidate could also vote for the first or second party who is closest to their position. It's simple, and much easier to support and understand than the other options. This would allow third parties to get a real sense of how well they are really performing before pushing their supporters to actually stop voting for the first and second party candidates.
chris_mahan 13y ago
One would just need one seat in the US Senate to really make waves. Every contentious issues that came down to one vote would look at the Pirate Party Senator.
- Torgo 13y ago
  The shitty part is that committees, who have the power to decide what Congress even addresses, are basically organized along party lines which severely limits the impact a non-Democrat, non-Republican congressperson can have.
opdemand 13y ago
Whether you agree or disagree, this is a non-starter in the US due to the entrenched two-party system. Best option is to build a "digital activism" caucus in one of the two parties.
hwh 13y ago
The German Pirate Party should be seen as a try to institutionalize as a political party what was there before in other forms. The protests that made people aware of data retention policies and legislation were organized by (subject focused) civil liberty unions. Matters that touch technology issues are discussed by hacker (in the good old positive meaning) groups like the CCC. Those groups do get reputation and traction. Trying to institutionalize this protest and form a political party was what the PP was about. I'm not sure they succeeded (here in Germany). While they managed to form political positions regarding policies touching technological matters, information acts and data retention, they fall short on anything else on the political scale. They were able to gain traction in state parliaments, but the outlook for the nationwide elections coming up in fall aren't good at all. They have immense personal problems - often connected to the fact that in the areas not covered by their agenda, they are quite diverse. Building a political party makes sense only if it can influence decisions in parliaments. I fear the PP won't get there here in Germany. Special interest parties don't work in many democratic parliament systems. A much better fit are in most cases civil liberty unions who can gain public recognition as experts and make it hard for parties in the parliament to ignore their statements.
Falkvinge 13y ago
Yes.
pizza 13y ago
There's a small reddit community called the American Pirate Party that's existed for 3 years now: http://www.reddit.com/r/americanpirateparty http://www.reddit.com/r/americanpirateparty
themgt 13y ago
The American Pirate Party needs to take a clue from the Tea Party and the way the American elections are structured, and act primarily as a force inside the Democratic party, electing "pirate-friendly" Democrats and taking over the party from the inside.
- nooneelse 13y ago
  Why just from withing the one party? Why not have two wings and field primary candidates in both parties? That way, if ever a sufficient density of such candidates make it into office in some part of the nation, they can switch over to the new party in a coordinated manner.
- cobrabyte 13y ago
  Why just the Dems? I dislike both parties but find myself hating Republicans a little less than Democrats -- mostly for fiscal reasons. I've got to believe there are similar people in both parties that are fed-up with what the government has become. If you ask me, both parties need 'agents' like you're talking about. People that are rational and don't party-line vote. Take each issue into consideration. Dragging the leftists/rightists to the middle to actually discuss items in a civil manner -- total consideration for the citizens that elected their asses. I fear this country is toast within 50 years if we can't get away from bipartisanship and party line votes. -Frustrated
lettergram 13y ago
To be honest I don't think the United States needs a Pirate Party. I know I would not vote for them. I agree we need a free as possible internet, but the Libertarian party already supports that (and has a larger political platform) so that would be what I would vote. I believe most Americans would vote similarly.
ISL 13y ago
Is there a district in Silicon Valley small enough to support a Pirate/Silicon Party representative in the house?
bcheung 13y ago
How can you build a legitimate party based on the concept of theft?
ihuman 13y ago
I don't know if anyone else here remembers, but there used to be an American pirate party. However, it never gained any traction, so it decided to split up into multiple local pirate parties.
mindcrime 13y ago
In addition to everything else that's been said in this thread, let me point this out: In at least some states (my own North Carolina, for example) it's VERY difficult to get a new political party recognized by the State, and certified as eligible to put candidates on the ballot. Now, to be fair, NC has some of the worst ballot access laws in the country, but the point is that it's not necessarily easy to organize a party, get candidates on the ballot, etc. Here in NC, you have to gather enough petition signatures to equal, IIRC, 10% of the total votes cast in the last Presidential election, in order to certify a new party. That winds up being > 100,000 signatures, and you just can't collect that many signatures using only volunteers, which means you need to hire paid petitioners. Last I heard, it cost about a dollar per signature. Oh, and you actually need about 25% more signatures than the nominal requirement, because a bunch will get thrown out by the Board of Elections for one reason or another (not from NC, no birthdate listed, etc.) You're basically talking about a 4 year long effort and over $100,000.00 to get on the ballot here. And here's the rub: If your party's candidate for President or Governor doesn't garner at least 2% of the vote, you get bumped back off the ballot and have to repeat the whole process again. And so on and so on and so on... Now, 2% isn't that bad, but they only just lowered it to 2% from, IIRC, 10%, a few years ago. For context: Since the modern (current) election laws went into place, only one party in NC has ever gotten ballot access outside of the Democrats and Republicans, and that was the Libertarian Party. And until they lowered the retention threshold to 2%, we had to go through that "petion, petition, petition every 4 years" cycle essentially constantly, which meant that we had very little money (or energy) to dedicate to supporting candidates, advertising, etc. It was a nonstop war just to retain ballot access. Also, for context, no 3rd party candidate in NC history has gained 10% or more in race for President or Governor. We have managed to hit the 2% threshold the last two election cycles though, which is nice, since it frees up time and energy and money to do other things besides petitioning. Anyway, the point of all that is just to show that it takes a lot of effort, time, energy and money to organize a political party and get on the ballot (at least here. Each state is different). And that's just getting on the ballot. Actually winning elections is even harder.
- jlgreco 13y ago
  I have never quite understood the weird limbo the "party system" seems to be in. On one hand, how they run themselves is not law, they just do it according to a bunch of internal rules each agreed on. There certainly isn't anything in the constitution about them either. On the other hand you have state laws like North Carolina's that legally recognizes and enforces the concept of a "party". All very bizarre.
sinak 13y ago
No mention in the article of the most interesting aspect of the Pirate Party, the Liquid Feedback software platform that they use to make decisions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiquidFeedback http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiquidFeedback Read about it, there are some fascinating ideas about how participatory politics can work in the world of software.
- joelthelion 13y ago
  I love the idea, but I wonder how robust such a system would be to large scale use. At the scale of a country, could it withstand the attacks of all the people seeking to game the system?
  - eli_gottlieb 13y ago
    Or, even more likely, people who decide to troll the legislature.
vog 13y ago
Before talking about "advanced topics" like a Pirate Party, the US citizens should start to vote a third party into their parliament. Any third party would be a huge improvement over the current situation, be it a Pirate Party or a completely different party. Unfortunately, the electoral system of the US appears to be prevent that kind of development, as it makes it exceptionally hard for non-established parties to enter the parliament. So fixing the electoral system would be a prerequisite, but how to fix that without having a parliament majority in the first place?
ttrreeww 13y ago
We need a constitutional party.
jebblue 13y ago
No. Pure democracies enable power elitists to run the show to the detriment of the minority; even when the minority view would otherwise have likely been that of the majority. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy#United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy#United_States
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
ForFreedom 13y ago
I read it as "Does America need a Private Party?"
mung 13y ago
good luck with that, if they gained any traction they would be tapped, discredited, marked as terrorists, a danger to all that's good and decent and the American Way(tm) and eventually destroyed.

290 points by woah 13y ago

LoganCale 13y ago

Why not a Hacker Party?

Zikes 13y ago
To the lay person that would have an equally negative connotation, as most people would associate it with illegally accessing private information such as what Anonymous often does. It also conjures up imagery that's unattractive or otherwise unappealing, and carries with it a measure of exclusivity in regards to computing skills or literacy. In the case of pirates there is at least a level of romanticism around the idea. And since nobody is really a pirate, anybody can be one.

tbirdz 13y ago

America does have a Pirate Party: http://uspirates.org/ http://uspirates.org/

cleinias 13y ago
And there are state affiliates already existing or forming in many states, even some not listed on the US pirate party page. Texas, for instance, is starting to get organized.
smacktoward 13y ago
It was founded in 2006. Has it managed to field a single candidate for office anywhere in the United States? As far as I can tell, it has not. Has it raised a single dime to support candidates who follow its principles? As far as I can tell, it has not. Has it done a single day of door-to-door organizing, either for its own growth or for a candidate it supports? As far as I can tell, it has not. By all appearances it's just a group of people who chat together on IRC. That's fine, but it's not a political party.

_k 13y ago

I think the name is easily misunderstood.

geneticmaterial 13y ago

no, no but we do need a privacy party.

btown 13y ago

As the article hints at in saying that the Icelandic Pirate Party garnered enough votes to have a single seat in the parliament, a Pirate Party, or any niche-issue political party, really only makes sense in a proportional representation system ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation ). There is simply not enough support or funding for any candidates to have a chance at a national level. However, there is a small chance at a state legislature level, since (to my knowledge) most US citizens don't care much about state legislature elections, and a sufficiently charismatic and well-funded Pirate Party candidate might be able to amass enough votes in a relatively well-educated area. Thus the current US Pirate Party's focus on having state-level organization: http://uspirates.org/about/get-involved/ http://uspirates.org/about/get-involved/

polshaw 13y ago
PR would be great (I struggle to see FPTP as really democratic to be honest- it systematically supports entrenched interests), but if you aren't actively working on changing the system, then you have to work with the system. The partial saving grace of the existing system is that even though niche parties will never get elected, their aims can still be achieved-- enough votes to a 3rd party can scare the main players into changing their policies. No one ever won an election for women's suffrage, but the policies still got adopted.
- walshemj 13y ago
  Looking from out side from a country that has FPTP But the USA still doesn't have two parties in the modern sense you have two wide coalitions (18th century style) with a considerable amount of horse trading and pork keeping people on side. Read Williams Hugues bio of pitt the younger to see what I mean.
  - aptwebapps 13y ago
    Inverse TL;DR: "Read Williams Hugues bio of pitt the younger to see what I mean."
13y ago

ruv 13y ago

I think that a major reason for the entire problem spectra of US is them being a "two party" democracy - It hardly counts as a functional democracy at all. The entire republicans vs democrats chatter seems ridiculous to an outside observer... More like a gang turf war than anything else.

Apocryphon 13y ago

It seems like if Zuckerberg and co. want to effect real change with FWD.us, they should lobby for institutional reforms such as proportional representation to give minority parties a greater chance of getting members elected. Of course, such reforms are not sexy, nor politically expedient, and stand against centuries of entrenched systems, and so this will never happen.

pseudometa 13y ago

The name alone would kill any chance such a party ever gaining traction in the United States and would mark it boldly as a fridge group. Purely from a marketing and PR standpoint, you would need to use a term that has a very broad positive connotations. Even so much as to be socially unacceptable to dissagree with the name. For instance, just look at the names of bills that congress uses to gain support for their causes such as the Patriot Act. You would be much better off with a name such as the Freedom Party, Hope Party, United Party, Liberty Party, Independence Party, etc... However in this instance, my personal favorite would be: Patriot Party

guruz 13y ago
Not necessarily, it just needs some education about the name. See for example also the OK results in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Party_Germany#German_State_and_Regional_elections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Party_Germany#German_St... Think about what a childish and ridiculous name "Google" is and still it got adopted worldwide.
- bahman2000 13y ago
  I don't have any stats, but anecdotal evidence suggests that education on the term "hacker" hasn't been very effective, yet.
  - tg3 13y ago
    In my experience hacker has gone from "definitely a criminal" 5-10 years ago to "maybe a criminal" today. When I tell people (not in the tech scene) that I read a site called "Hacker News" they don't assume that it's some CC swapping forum. I'd say that's progress.
nawitus 13y ago
The name has been succesfull all around the world. There's already Freedom Parties etc. in United States, and nobody cares about those parties. A Pirate Party, on the other hand, can utilize the global movement's brand. Of course, the core problem is not the name of the party, it's the lack of a democratic voting system.

1337biz 13y ago

Sure, exactly what we need. Another fringe party, with a weird name, marching under the "we come from the interwebs" banner. At least on a national level 3rd parties are poised for failure unless there is some massive financial backing and a strong leadership. In my opinion the smarter way would be to focus on lobbying efforts and bundling money and manpower for pro-internet candidates. Considering that there are politicians in both parties that have excellent positions on tech related issues but not that much in common in regards to other policies, making this about one issue and not about ideology seems a much more promising approach.

rayiner 13y ago

In a first past the post system, starting yet another fringe party is pointless. If technologists want to have a real impact on American politics, the solution is to take advantage of the current disorganization within the Republican party. If the tea partiers can do it, so can the technologists (so long as there are a few deep Silicon Valley pockets willing to bankroll the escapade). "Obama's NSA is spying on your church groups and trying to figure out how many guns you own" would be a pretty powerful political platform that could get a few people elected.

flyinRyan 13y ago
This is exactly right. I predict a backlash against the Democrats after Obama's epic failures (that doesn't mean most people will vote Republican, but it probably means a lot of dems simply don't show up next time around). And you're spot on about pulling a "Tea Party". The fact is, politics is a nasty business. We need a large group of people willing to say whatever it takes to get voted in. Once in, the only goal should be voting reform. If we can get rid of FPTP we can fix everything else eventually.
sporkologist 13y ago
> If the tea partiers can do it They were backed by the billionaire Koch Brothers. We'd have to get Bill Gates or someone like that to pull off something similar. I propose something called "The 4th Amendment Party" which directly addresses privacy issues, in the US anyway. An international Pirate Party could be used for hopefully countering the negative effects of multinational corporations.
- tlrobinson 13y ago
  Peter Thiel?
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- rayiner 13y ago
  Surely Silicon Valley can round up a few billionaires? Heck, take advantage of Citizens United and get Google, Facebook, etc, to chip in. If, as has been extensively speculated in other threads in the last few days, NSA surveillance is a dire threat to the global competitiveness of U.S.-based online companies, they have a legitimate business interest in funding such groups. Heck, CBS's entire market cap is only $30 billion, which Google could buy with cash on hand. How much for just the news divisions? I bet you could get a major presence in US media with just a $5-10 billion acquisition.

mindcrime 13y ago

As a hardcore techie, software developer and tech entrepreneur, you would think that I'd be lining up to support the Pirate Party. But, alas, other than cyber-security and digital rights issues, I don't necessarily agree with them about anything else. I also don't necessarily disagree but since they don't appear to have much a published platform and planks, it's hard to say. But I've seen some Pirates describe them as a "progressive" party, and I'm pretty skeptical of "progressives" and their policy positions. Anyway, for my money, it's the Libertarian Party that represents the path forward, not the Pirate Party. Unfortunately, the problem in the US isn't that we don't have enough parties. We have tons of political parties in the US, ranging from the Libertarian Party, to the Green Party, to the Pirate Party, to the Worker's World Party, to the Prohibition Party, to the Modern Whig Party. No, the problem is plurality / first-past-the-post voting. As Duverger's Law notes, a plurality / FPTP voting system almost always results in a two party dominated system (like we have). Switch voting to Approval Voting, Range Voting, or a Condorcet method, and we might see some meaningful change.

flyinRyan 13y ago
The fact that the "libertarian party" is a "thing" in the US is a large sign of what the problem is. But in any case, what we need to do is get a party going who's only platform is voting reform. The only goal that matters right now is the end of FPTP and the two party system. Once that's done having all these "fringe" parties will be a good thing because my "progressive" parties will agree on a lot of policy with your libertarians (e.g. surveillance, world police force, etc.).
- mindcrime 13y ago
  The only goal that matters right now is the end of FPTP and the two party system. Once that's done having all these "fringe" parties will be a good thing because my "progressive" parties will agree on a lot of policy with your libertarians (e.g. surveillance, world police force, etc.). I agree that voting reform is crucial. Everything else really hinges on that. The fact that the "libertarian party" is a "thing" in the US is a large sign of what the problem is. Could you elaborate on that a little more? I think I get the gist of what you mean, but I'm not sure. FWIW, I'll just point out that the "libertarian movement" (or whatever you want to call it) in the US is bigger than just the "Libertarian Party". There are, for example, the "little l libertarians" within both the Republican and Democratic parties, who espouse and advocate for libertarian views. There are (or have been) multiple "libertarian" parties in the US. There's obviously the "Big L Libertarian" party, but there was also the "Boston Tea Party"[1], for one. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party_(political_party) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party_(political_par...

detcader 13y ago

What's wrong with Jill Stein?

mtgx 13y ago

When US becomes a more democratic country (in the literal sense of the word), sure.

flyinRyan 13y ago

Yes! But don't call the party "Pirate party". Call them "Republicans" because that is likely to be backlash against the Democrats after Obama's miserable performance.

amikula 13y ago

The United States needs any viable third party. Unfortunately, the Republicrats have a lock on our political system, and the only way to get a viable third party is to change the rules about how we vote. Specifically, first past the post voting provides a disincentive for third parties to compete because they are most likely to harm the candidate who is closest to their own position. Something like score voting, approval voting, or instant runoff voting is needed to break the deadlock. Approval voting is probably the best bet because people who want to support a third party candidate could also vote for the first or second party who is closest to their position. It's simple, and much easier to support and understand than the other options. This would allow third parties to get a real sense of how well they are really performing before pushing their supporters to actually stop voting for the first and second party candidates.

chris_mahan 13y ago

One would just need one seat in the US Senate to really make waves. Every contentious issues that came down to one vote would look at the Pirate Party Senator.

Torgo 13y ago
The shitty part is that committees, who have the power to decide what Congress even addresses, are basically organized along party lines which severely limits the impact a non-Democrat, non-Republican congressperson can have.

opdemand 13y ago

Whether you agree or disagree, this is a non-starter in the US due to the entrenched two-party system. Best option is to build a "digital activism" caucus in one of the two parties.

hwh 13y ago

The German Pirate Party should be seen as a try to institutionalize as a political party what was there before in other forms. The protests that made people aware of data retention policies and legislation were organized by (subject focused) civil liberty unions. Matters that touch technology issues are discussed by hacker (in the good old positive meaning) groups like the CCC. Those groups do get reputation and traction. Trying to institutionalize this protest and form a political party was what the PP was about. I'm not sure they succeeded (here in Germany). While they managed to form political positions regarding policies touching technological matters, information acts and data retention, they fall short on anything else on the political scale. They were able to gain traction in state parliaments, but the outlook for the nationwide elections coming up in fall aren't good at all. They have immense personal problems - often connected to the fact that in the areas not covered by their agenda, they are quite diverse. Building a political party makes sense only if it can influence decisions in parliaments. I fear the PP won't get there here in Germany. Special interest parties don't work in many democratic parliament systems. A much better fit are in most cases civil liberty unions who can gain public recognition as experts and make it hard for parties in the parliament to ignore their statements.

Falkvinge 13y ago

Yes.

pizza 13y ago

There's a small reddit community called the American Pirate Party that's existed for 3 years now: http://www.reddit.com/r/americanpirateparty http://www.reddit.com/r/americanpirateparty

themgt 13y ago

The American Pirate Party needs to take a clue from the Tea Party and the way the American elections are structured, and act primarily as a force inside the Democratic party, electing "pirate-friendly" Democrats and taking over the party from the inside.

nooneelse 13y ago
Why just from withing the one party? Why not have two wings and field primary candidates in both parties? That way, if ever a sufficient density of such candidates make it into office in some part of the nation, they can switch over to the new party in a coordinated manner.
cobrabyte 13y ago
Why just the Dems? I dislike both parties but find myself hating Republicans a little less than Democrats -- mostly for fiscal reasons. I've got to believe there are similar people in both parties that are fed-up with what the government has become. If you ask me, both parties need 'agents' like you're talking about. People that are rational and don't party-line vote. Take each issue into consideration. Dragging the leftists/rightists to the middle to actually discuss items in a civil manner -- total consideration for the citizens that elected their asses. I fear this country is toast within 50 years if we can't get away from bipartisanship and party line votes. -Frustrated

lettergram 13y ago

To be honest I don't think the United States needs a Pirate Party. I know I would not vote for them. I agree we need a free as possible internet, but the Libertarian party already supports that (and has a larger political platform) so that would be what I would vote. I believe most Americans would vote similarly.

ISL 13y ago

Is there a district in Silicon Valley small enough to support a Pirate/Silicon Party representative in the house?

bcheung 13y ago

How can you build a legitimate party based on the concept of theft?

ihuman 13y ago

I don't know if anyone else here remembers, but there used to be an American pirate party. However, it never gained any traction, so it decided to split up into multiple local pirate parties.

mindcrime 13y ago

In addition to everything else that's been said in this thread, let me point this out: In at least some states (my own North Carolina, for example) it's VERY difficult to get a new political party recognized by the State, and certified as eligible to put candidates on the ballot. Now, to be fair, NC has some of the worst ballot access laws in the country, but the point is that it's not necessarily easy to organize a party, get candidates on the ballot, etc. Here in NC, you have to gather enough petition signatures to equal, IIRC, 10% of the total votes cast in the last Presidential election, in order to certify a new party. That winds up being > 100,000 signatures, and you just can't collect that many signatures using only volunteers, which means you need to hire paid petitioners. Last I heard, it cost about a dollar per signature. Oh, and you actually need about 25% more signatures than the nominal requirement, because a bunch will get thrown out by the Board of Elections for one reason or another (not from NC, no birthdate listed, etc.) You're basically talking about a 4 year long effort and over $100,000.00 to get on the ballot here. And here's the rub: If your party's candidate for President or Governor doesn't garner at least 2% of the vote, you get bumped back off the ballot and have to repeat the whole process again. And so on and so on and so on... Now, 2% isn't that bad, but they only just lowered it to 2% from, IIRC, 10%, a few years ago. For context: Since the modern (current) election laws went into place, only one party in NC has ever gotten ballot access outside of the Democrats and Republicans, and that was the Libertarian Party. And until they lowered the retention threshold to 2%, we had to go through that "petion, petition, petition every 4 years" cycle essentially constantly, which meant that we had very little money (or energy) to dedicate to supporting candidates, advertising, etc. It was a nonstop war just to retain ballot access. Also, for context, no 3rd party candidate in NC history has gained 10% or more in race for President or Governor. We have managed to hit the 2% threshold the last two election cycles though, which is nice, since it frees up time and energy and money to do other things besides petitioning. Anyway, the point of all that is just to show that it takes a lot of effort, time, energy and money to organize a political party and get on the ballot (at least here. Each state is different). And that's just getting on the ballot. Actually winning elections is even harder.

jlgreco 13y ago
I have never quite understood the weird limbo the "party system" seems to be in. On one hand, how they run themselves is not law, they just do it according to a bunch of internal rules each agreed on. There certainly isn't anything in the constitution about them either. On the other hand you have state laws like North Carolina's that legally recognizes and enforces the concept of a "party". All very bizarre.

sinak 13y ago

No mention in the article of the most interesting aspect of the Pirate Party, the Liquid Feedback software platform that they use to make decisions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiquidFeedback http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiquidFeedback Read about it, there are some fascinating ideas about how participatory politics can work in the world of software.

joelthelion 13y ago
I love the idea, but I wonder how robust such a system would be to large scale use. At the scale of a country, could it withstand the attacks of all the people seeking to game the system?
- eli_gottlieb 13y ago
  Or, even more likely, people who decide to troll the legislature.

vog 13y ago

Before talking about "advanced topics" like a Pirate Party, the US citizens should start to vote a third party into their parliament. Any third party would be a huge improvement over the current situation, be it a Pirate Party or a completely different party. Unfortunately, the electoral system of the US appears to be prevent that kind of development, as it makes it exceptionally hard for non-established parties to enter the parliament. So fixing the electoral system would be a prerequisite, but how to fix that without having a parliament majority in the first place?

ttrreeww 13y ago

We need a constitutional party.

jebblue 13y ago

No. Pure democracies enable power elitists to run the show to the detriment of the minority; even when the minority view would otherwise have likely been that of the majority. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy#United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy#United_States

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

ForFreedom 13y ago

I read it as "Does America need a Private Party?"

mung 13y ago

good luck with that, if they gained any traction they would be tapped, discredited, marked as terrorists, a danger to all that's good and decent and the American Way(tm) and eventually destroyed.