Slashdot Mirror
Somali Pirates Open Up a "Stock Exchange"
reginaldo writes to clue us that pirates in Somalia have opened up a cooperative in Haradheere, where investors can pay money or guns to help their favorite pirate crew for a share of the piracy profits. "'Four months ago, during the monsoon rains, we decided to set up this stock exchange. We started with 15 "maritime companies" and now we are hosting 72. Ten of them have so far been successful at hijacking,' Mohammed [a wealthy former pirate who took a Reuters reporter to the facility] said. ... Piracy investor Sahra Ibrahim, a 22-year-old divorcee, was lined up with others waiting for her cut of a ransom pay-out after one of the gangs freed a Spanish tuna fishing vessel. 'I am waiting for my share after I contributed a rocket-propelled grenade for the operation,' she said, adding that she got the weapon from her ex-husband in alimony. 'I am really happy and lucky. I have made $75,000 in only 38 days since I joined the "company."'"
Have we got a great deal for you!!
They're freaking pirates! This woman is an idiot if she expects any money from this. It's not like she's seeding a movie!
Historically, pirates (in the 1600s US/Caribbean/Europe trade route sense) observed a fairly strict code of conduct which included reimbursing investors their fair share; widows/orphans got their ex-father's share, and generally they did a lot less killing than their reputation suggested.
It sounds like modern pirates appear to follow fairly similar rules, which makes for some interesting cognitive dissonance in those who romanticize the old-school version but demonize the Somali version.
Actually, by virtue of a large number of competing governments, and very low barriers to entry, the free market now provides Somalis with some of the finest governance available!
That's how it works, right?
The difference in attitude comes from four things: First, the pirates who are primarily romanticized are pirates from European countries. Since the people doing the romanticization are Westerners this makes them more appealing since they potentially share more (geographicaly, culturally, ethnically etc.) Notice how Americans don't romanticize the Barbary pirates. Second, Somalia in particular has a history of problems interacting with the United States (remember the battle of Mogadishu?) and so the attitude their carries over directly to anything Americans hear anything connected to Somalia. Third, the current piracy more directly impacts our society's well-being. It is much harder to romanticize people when they are taking your goods and capturing people who are alive and have family to tell their stories and hardships to the media. This is directly related to the fourth point, romanticization is much easier when it is something that happened a long time ago. In that regard it is similar to humor (joking about the Inquisition, ok but potentially tasteless. Joking about the Holocaust. You need to be careful. Joking about 9/11? Yeah, that's going to be hard to pull off).
All of that said, I don't think people really romanticize historical pirates that much. Most of it is deliberately silly. Look at all the Ninja v. Pirate junk. The closest one has to genuine romaniticization are the Pirates of the Caribbean movies but those were a) Disney movies and b) utterly ridiculous (heck, the so called pirates did very little actual pirating unless they were clearly the bad guys).
This has always puzzled me about lie-bertarians. To a dispassionate eye, the line appears to be so random and convenient only for the small-medium capitalists who incidentally provide the basis for this ideology to begin with. Why is it government function to protect only property, and human rights (which conveniently exclude the rights to basic food, shelter, job, and health care) ? And why the property is so sacred, of all the things a human being needs, such as "true" freedom (not just freedom to die from hunger), good health, or a family?
So pirates are more honest than bankers/stock investers/politicians?
That i can believe in!
"Don't Forget to Salt the Fries"
Ya, those cargo and tanker ships are a real threat to the fishing...
If their gripe is with foreign ships fishing in their waters they should be going after the frakking fishing ships, not the merchant ships well outside their territorial waters.
That’s an interesting thought. So the woman gets paid and then the next day is robbed and killed by a roving gang or a warlord’s hunt and terminate party. The other investors complain to the Somalian Stock Exchange that they don’t feel safe investing because their money can’t be guaranteed. Business suffers as a result until the Stock Exchange or some other business springs up and offers protection for that money. For only a few percentage points off the top they can keep you safe. And hey, now that you have all that money and you are safe you might want to spend it and get the good things in life. Right? So you start to make purchases and start to acquire things. New businesses have to come into being to supply you with the food and housing and coca cola that you lust for. Given a long enough time a middle class emerges that begins to demand not only protection but running water, electricity, communications, etc. It wouldn’t be the first time that a group of criminals have created a society.
That is the propaganda and lies that the pirates have been using to rationalize their lawlessness and I'm surprised anybody literate enough to post to slashdot is foolish enough to fall for it. They have been seizing ships far outside the 12 mile territorial limit and even far outside the 200 mile exclusive economic zone. They are now seizing ships off the Seychelles, which is many hundreds of miles south of Somalia. Seas outside of the exclusive economic zone are free to fish for any nation's fleet. So if this is their reason, why are they seizing yachts which are clearly not outfitted with commercial fishing gear and are hundreds of miles outside of the Somali EEZ? Because they are murderous thieves and thugs; that's why.
Wait, so...
The shipping companies don't lose money because they're insured, and the insurers don't lose money because they up the premiums, yet the premium increases don't come out of the shipping companies' pockets?
Sir, I think you have described a perpetuum monetare, a perpetual money machine. While Madoff would be proud, the second law of thermoeconomics says it can't exist.
Think of it this way: if a set of goods is on one set of hands instead of another, the other set of hands is (duh) not having those goods. It lost the equivalent to the amount of money those hands value the goods at. It can spread the loss around (some to itself, some to the insurance company, some to their customers, for instance), but there is a loss.
Otherwise, contemplate the world where I steal everything from everybody, own all the land, and won't trade with anyone; you can all shuffle dollar bills back and forth between insurance companies and the insured, but that won't get you your cars, computers or factories back.
This is a commonly noted reason, but another major reason is that contrary to the Call of Duty playing internet crowd's belief, engaging in a firefight with multiple decade battle hardened militants isn't actually that safe or easy an idea.
People sailing the boats are civilians, they do not have military training, they have never been in combat, by putting them up there against the pirates you're risking far more people getting shot, whilst being hijacked sucks, it's better than having the crew killed.
I'd imagine many people have this vision of the crews being able to see the pirates coming and just gunning them down with a chaingun, but the reality is the pirates often manage to sneak up on vessels either using bad weather, blind spots or the cover of night, so many firefights would involve close quarter combat on the decks of the ship itself. That's really not something you want civilians to be doing against people who have been in a country where they have been shooting at each other for near 20 years now. This is especially important to note also when you realise that against crews of 15 you're sometimes seeing as many as 80 pirates- even if you catch them before they board the ship do you really want to put yourself in the line of fire of even 50+ pirates and start trying to pick them off under fire of 80 or so AK-47s and the odd RPG being returned at you?
The mentality of many people online of "just shoot them" as a solution to many problems is rather ignorant to the difficulties of the reality of the situation. If it was as simple as many online commenters seem to believe, then they would have simply done it by now. The legal barriers are the least of problems, because if it was a real solution to just arm crews then as this is a problem that basically has unilateral agreement from the world's major nations including the 5 permanent security council members then an exception for ships passing through Somali waters would be no big deal. Perhaps the closest solution to arming the crew that would not be as likely to involve the death of half the crew of each ship that encounters pirates would be for security companies like Blackwater (now Xe services) to keep a supply of trained security professionals both north and south of the troubled areas such that ships could pick up a squad of security personnel at one end and drop them off when safely at the other, but of course, whether shipping companies would be willing to foot the bill is a different story and it's questionable how much use even trained personnel would be when outnumbered, and even they're still not immune to hails of gun and RPG fire in return either.
I'd imagine many people have this vision of the crews being able to see the pirates coming and just gunning them down with a chaingun, but the reality is the pirates often manage to sneak up on vessels either using bad weather, blind spots or the cover of night, so many firefights would involve close quarter combat on the decks of the ship itself.
Most of your post is very good, but this is somewhat misleading. Pirates are generally in small (30') open boats with minimal radar profile and difficult to detect. Target vessels are generally intercontinental cargo ships with deck 100 feet off the water. Pirates don't sneak aboard these boats with grappling hooks, they threaten violence and the target crew lowers a boarding ladder for them.
Interestingly, the most effective pirate deterrent is the ship's fire suppression system. If you've never seen one of these in operation, it's quite impressive, and can literally hide the ship behind a curtain of water. It's completely impossible for a small boat to approach a ship with its firehoses running. The point of the pirates' RPGs is to make the captain turn off the firehoses.
Comment removed based on user account deletion