« | Home | »

Rise of the Pirates

Tags: |

The first European Pirate Party emerged in Sweden in 2006, when a group calling itself the Piratpartiet was formed to campaign for the right to download everything. The German Pirates were first elected to the Berlin Landtag last September. Saarland and Schleswig-Holstein followed, and now they have been elected to the assembly in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany’s most populous state. The Pirates have won support at the expense of all the other parties, and there is talk of their joining a coalition government after the federal election in September 2013.

The party claims to have 30,000 members, though apparently only 13,000 have paid their dues. They have certainly shaken up the political class in the past six months, not least with their informality. Pirates sit in talk shows fiddling with their smart phones. They communicate with each other in a curious mixture of Neudeutsch and web English. Pirates often start their tweets with ‘Ahoi’ and one of the few female pirates began a conference speech with the words: ‘Hi Assembly!’ (It sounds as stilted in German as it does in English.) She has since dropped out of the leadership to finish her degree. But many of the Pirates’ elected members are older than you might think: the chairman is fifty, and has a job in a Berlin ministry.

Their manifesto is thick on rhetoric, thin on substance. They call themselves the ‘party of digital freedom’ and call for an overhaul of copyright law, to fulfil ‘the ancient dream of compiling all human knowledge and culture and to store it for the present and future’. In answer to writers and musicians who see this promise of freedom as a threat to their livelihoods, the Pirates say they want new, innovative ways of rewarding creative activity, though they haven’t said what those ways might be.

The manifesto also says, quoting Willy Brandt, that we should ‘risk more democracy’:

We Pirates aim for maximum democratic equality among all people. The Pirate Party therefore strives to increase and promote every individual’s direct and indirect opportunities for democratic participation.

The Pirates pride themselves on the openness of their debates. At their recent conference, the delegates were all tweeting away like a dawn chorus, but when it came down to brass tacks – should there be a basic income for all, should public transport be ticket-free – only about 1500 party members were involved. Participation is good, but where does the buck stop in a digital voting system?

The Pirates’ activities in the Berlin Senate arouse some doubts about their staying power. One triumphantly announced that the rise of the party could only be compared to the rise of the Nazis in 1930, and another was expelled for expressing extreme right-wing views. They say they have to learn the ropes to steer the ship of state, and want to gather opinions on such policy areas as taxation, the role of the military, health and pensions. The talk of more democracy, open discussions and greater participation is still attractive to Germany’s jaded voters who have stopped listening to the established parties. But the votes for the Pirates at regional level are probably what the Germans call a Denkzettel – a warning that they should not ignore to get in touch with their supporters.

Comments on “Rise of the Pirates”

  1. semitone says:

    “The party claims to have 30,000 members, though apparently only 13,000 have paid their dues.” For a group of people whose common desire is to get something without paying for it, this is actually not bad going.

Comment on this post

Log in or register to post a comment.


  • Recent Posts

    RSS – posts

  • Contributors

  • Recent Comments

    • andymartinink on Reacher v. Parker: Slayground definitely next on my agenda. But to be fair to Lee Child, as per the Forbes analysis, there is clearly a massive collective reader-writer ...
    • Robert Hanks on Reacher v. Parker: And in Breakout, Parker, in prison, teams up with a black guy to escape; another white con dislikes it but accepts the necessity; Parker is absolutely...
    • Robert Hanks on Reacher v. Parker: Parker may not have the integrity and honesty of Marlowe, but I'd argue that Richard Stark writes with far more of both than Raymond Chandler does: Ch...
    • Christopher Tayler on Reacher v. Parker: Good to see someone holding up standards. The explanation is that I had thoughts - or words - left over from writing about Lee Child. (For Chandler se...
    • Geoff Roberts on Reacher v. Parker: ..."praised in the London Review of Books" Just read the article on Lee Child in a certain literary review and was surprised to find this rave notice...

    RSS – comments

  • Contact

  • Blog Archive

  • From the LRB Archive

    Chris Lehmann: The Candidates
    18 June 2015

    ‘Every one of the Republican candidates can be described as a full-blown adult failure. These are people who, in most cases, have been granted virtually every imaginable advantage on the road to success, and managed nevertheless to foul things up along the way.’

    Hugh Pennington:
    The Problem with Biodiversity
    10 May 2007

    ‘As a medical microbiologist, for example, I have spent my career fighting biodiversity: my ultimate aim has been to cause the extinction of harmful microbes, an objective shared by veterinary and plant pathologists. But despite more than a hundred years of concentrated effort, supported by solid science, smallpox has been the only success.’

    Jeremy Harding: At the Mexican Border
    20 October 2011

    ‘The battle against illegal migration is a domestic version of America’s interventions overseas, with many of the same trappings: big manpower commitments, militarisation, pursuit, detection, rendition, loss of life. The Mexican border was already the focus of attention before 9/11; it is now a fixation that shows no signs of abating.’

    James Meek: When the Floods Came
    31 July 2008

    ‘Last July, a few days after the floods arrived, with 350,000 people still cut off from the first necessity of life, Severn Trent held its annual general meeting. It announced profits of £325 million, and confirmed a dividend for shareholders of £143 million. Not long afterwards the company, with the consent of the water regulator Ofwat, announced that it wouldn’t be compensating customers: all would be charged as if they had had running water, even when they hadn’t.’

Advertisement Advertisement