Slashdot Mirror
The Pirate Party of Canada Is Official
wasme writes "The Pirate Party of Canada has become the first Pirate Party outside of Europe to become an official political party. Elections Canada confirmed with the party that the PPCA has gained 'eligible for registration' status, and can run in elections starting June 14. From the PPCA's official announcement: 'We are pleased to announce that as of April 12, 2010, the Pirate Party of Canada is officially eligible for Party Status. After 10 months of dedication and hard work, we have reached eligible status, which only leaves a 60-day "purgatory" period. After that, we will field candidates in subsequent federal elections, and begin the real work of a political party.'"
May the seas be open and the winds be fortunate. Although I can't help but wonder if the name "Pirate Party" for all the pirate parties isn't a bit too ... daring. Maybe even misleading.
Pirates of the Saskatchewan, by the Arrogant Worms
And it's a hi (hey) ho (hey) coming down the plains,
Stealing wheat and barley, and all the other grains.
And it's a ho (hey) hi (hey) Farmers bar your doors,
when you see the Jolly Rodger on Regina's mighty shores.
--------
But seriously, great news, and best of luck to 'em. Now go get those CRIA hosers.
I am officially gone from
Americans shoot pirates (the seagoing kind), we need a better name for the Copyright Reform party on this continent. Let's call it the Broadside Party! As in, "Give them a Broadside!". Also has a copyright-related punny meaning. Or maybe the U.S. version can be the Upside Party, as in "Smack them Upside Da Head!"
Fifteen men on a dead man's chest, yo ho ho and a bottle of rum etc...
Political campaigning for rights in the digital domain is a "good thing". Clearly individual freedoms are under attack by large corporations and governments. We want to reverse this trend - we want control over our own computers / digital devices, we want reform of copyright and patent law, we want guarantees of privacy and we want fair Internet access, perhaps even as a fundamental right.
However, by using the name "pirate" (pirates in the physical world are dangerous, armed criminals), the parties are alienating a potentially broader public. As far as I can tell the parties are not generally in favor of "piracy" (stealing intellectual property) but in favor of giving the buyer / consumer of intellectual property many more rights than they currently have.
Change the names to "digital freedom party" or whatever, but stop alienating large groups of people with this pirate nonsense. Rights in the digital domain are much more important than this schoolboy stuff.
When Kennedy ran for President of the United States of America, there was a very vocal opposition faction that didn't want him because he was Roman Catholic. The fear was that he would prioritize the Church over country when making decisions, and that electing him would give carte blanche to the Pope and Rome to govern within the U.S.
Those fears were never realized, since Kennedy knew he was an American first. His goals did not include sharing power with Rome.
But what worries me about the Pirate Party is precisely that it is fundamentally international in nature. The goals of the party are essentially dictated centrally from Sweden and then implemented throughout the world wherever the PP has any power to do so. Luckily, they only have one real goal, so their total impact is limited. However, the formation of international parties (much like the well known International Socialist Organization) bodes ill for countries on an individual basis.
Turning over power to multinationalists is a bad idea because generalized solutions do not necessarily fit the specific needs of any particular country.
Have there been any reactions from Big Media / Big Patents to this? Their strategy in the past has been to label these folks as common criminals when lobbying governments.
How do they swallow the fact that the Pirate Parties are now taking a legal and official route to copyright reform?
Have they issued any formal statements?
Maybe with more Pirates sailing the seas of governments, we will finally get information about what this super-secretive ACTA thing is all about.
I can't say if I am for or against the ACTA . . . because I don't know the details.
I do have a problem with so-called democracies sealing international treaties, while keeping their citizens (subjects) in the dark.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Although the "Pirate Party" is a good name to get some publicity in these early hours, I believe that on the long term a new name must be found which reflects the main issues the party stands for.
Pirate can be changed into Privacy - still a P, so not such a change.
But I would run with this name for the next months or even years.
...not as extreme promoters of the abolition of copyright, but the catalyst that led the eventual restoration of copyright as a tool to promote cultural innovation, instead of hampering it.
I can dream, can't I? :)
.: Max Romantschuk
isn't this a null issue due to the cd tax in canada?
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
their 'party platform' consists mainly of greed/fear/ego based glowbull warmongering, & every night is prom night to them.
never a better time to consult with/trust in your creators. you know the rest?
Show the current government how extremist the other way its current policies are. I wish you a fair wind and clear sky.
Praise Gawd - and may the winds be fortunate to our pirate brothers' sailing in Canuckistan !
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
Have there been any reactions from Big Media / Big Patents to this? ... How do they swallow the fact that the Pirate Parties are now taking a legal and official route to copyright reform?
I'm thinking they'll just shrug their shoulders. They'll probably make a little money from this, by running human interest stories about the new "joke party" that started up. And they wouldn't be too far off the mark in calling it a joke party, either.
... and then they built the supercollider.
It actually seems they view pirate parties as legitimate, and do participate in debates with them.
I thought Australia had a pirate party already? OP says Canada is the first outside Europe?
Seven Days with Ubuntu Unity
Another Canadian political party siphoning off left-leaning voters. Already that vote is split between Liberal, NDP, Green, and (some would argue) the Bloc. This vote split is why the conservatives can continue to hold political power with 38% of the popular vote.
In political systems with fully proportional representation (example: Israel) these sorts of political parties make sense: the hurdle to get representation in the legislature is surmountable and you may even be brought into a coalition government. However, in first-past-the-post systems (Canada, US, UK) these vanity parties are only self-defeating. Whichever side of the political spectrum is best able to AVOID this fragmentation is almost guaranteed power. To use a Canadian example, look at the solid Liberal control in the 90s, made easy by a 3-way fragmentation on the right (the old PC party, Reform, and Alliance). Once those parties re-coalesced into the current Conservative party they were able to take over from the perpetually fragmented left.
If you have a particular issue that you want to advance in a first-past-the-post democracy, the correct move is to identify which of the major parties is most receptive to your goal, and organize within that party. Form an organization, raise money, make noise. If you're a visible constituency within a major party (and can be counted on to bring in votes, donations, and volunteers) then they will have reason to differentiate themselves by embracing your issue.
If instead your constituency says "ha! We're going to take our votes and make our own damn party" then BOTH major parties will simply say "ok, no need to listen to care what those guys want -- they're not going to vote for us anyway". You're only making copyright reform HARDER to achieve.
There ain't no party like a pirate party because a pirate don't respect intellectual property laws.
If you mod me down the terrorists will have won
Is the Pirate Party the first example of a political party that is operating in multiple countries at once? Surely that deserves some recognition at least?! Perhaps they will one day rule the majority of the world! :)
What we need is a party to split the right. I would be happier to see a pro-intellectual property, family values, pry gun from cold dead hands, anti-abortion, anti-gay rights party announce, something that could siphon votes away from the Conservatives.
Hey, Preston, how's about giving that Reform thing another whirl?
Loose lips lose spit.
Arrr, eh ?
1% APY, No fees, Online Bank https://captl1.co/2uIErYq Don't let your $$$ sit in a no-interest acct.
But what worries me about the Pirate Party is precisely that it is fundamentally international in nature.
What worries me is that many political parties which should be international in nature pretend to be merely local. For example, the UK's Official Monster Raving Loony Party http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_Monster_Raving_Loony_Party should expand internationally. Entry by the OMRLP into US politics could be disastrous for both the Republicans and the Democrats, since the policies of all three parties would be so closely clustered (on the sanity scale).
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
That's all I have to say about the pirate party.
The pirate party consists only of fat nerds who didn't achieve anything in their lives. Therefore they had to build this so called "party" to fool themselves and their so called "friends" (lol). Now they can think they aren't the useless human waste that they really are. LOL!
So I propose they change their name to "Privacy Party".
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
because they all pushed the "R" button.
"Waste not one watt!" - CZ
More like:
"In matters digital, downloadable and musical,
I am the very model of a modern torrent client."
I should think.
The return of pirates... as if boating on the Great Lakes wasn't already a bit hazardous at times.
You might as well have called it the Criminal Party for all it shows the general population. Still never let real political ambitions get in the way of a jolly good joke. Kids eh.
Still, let em have their fun. They'll grow out of it.
Arrrrrrrrrh!!!!
Your argument is the exact same one I hear all the time in the USA, when it comes to the Libertarians. (In fact, the man most people probably consider the quintessential Libertarian figure today -- Ron Paul? He's run on the Republican party ticket since the mid 1970's!)
The problem with the entrenched 2-party system is, the 2 parties tend to align themselves with certain "goals" they want to achieve. Individuals signing up to run under one of their party names who have different ideas quickly get marginalized or "shut down" by the majority in the party.
Now, if you've really only got a single issue you're trying to advance, sure ... your best best is to pick which of the 2 major parties would be more receptive to it, and try to weasel in there. Whether you agree with many other things they want to do or not, you pretend to care while you try to "wheel and deal" to get your idea out there. (And so far, I'd have to say, that's my problem with the current "Pirate Party". They really do only seem to focus on one issue - copyright. They may pay some lip service to holding other political beliefs, but I've never seen them make any effort to, say, become outspoken on environmental issues or discuss whether or not government intervention of certain type might boost an economic recovery.)
But I think it's dangerous to cling too tightly to that belief that a 3rd. party "only helps one of the other 2 major parties, so it's pointless". If he actually cared to do so, Ross Perot could certainly have become one of our U.S. presidents, despite his 3rd. party affiliation. And if enough people get disgusted with the way the Republicans and the Democrats of today both seem to have the SAME agenda on so many major issues (Obama is pretty much just following the same advisers Bush did about what to do with the war)? We're ripe for a 3rd. party to step in and take control.
I wish the pirate party would be more associated with the Pastafarians.
Good for them. At this point I'd take a Pirate Party here in the US too.
Arrrrr! Bring me the booty!
I can't say if I am for or against the ACTA . . . because I don't know the details.
I don't have to know ANY of the details to be against it -- why would they keep it a secret if they thought it was benign? There are media companies and governments, NO input from citizens, and "my" representatives are keeping it secret from me. What's not to hate?
Free Martian Whores!
I'm all for this, but based on my "admittedly limited" exposure, it seems that the only issues that the Pirate Party have ever really talked about much are copyright issues. No qualms there, I'm all for that, but do they have an official stance on anything OTHER than copyright?
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
it describes esxactly what the party is:
A bunch of ignorant kids who think the world owes them free entertainment and software
and have absolutely no comprehension of how business or the free market works.
Plus a bunch of communists who resent having to pay for anything, because in moms basement they have decided that all people who charge money for their work are evil rich fat cats.
You didnt think this was a serious party for grown ups I hope?
LOL @ the arr tag. Congrats guys. Greetings from the Dutch Pirate Party!
tweet tweet
two major parties means they pander to the middle. this is actually a good thing, as it means the government actually represents the will of the people: the middle. of course cranks on the left or right will complain about the leaders being too liberal/ conservative, but this is only because they consider the MIDDLE to be too liberal/ conservative. but the job of the government is to represent the people, and when you have two parties fighting over votes from the middle, and adjusting their message accordingly, the people actually get represented and THIS IS A VERY GOOD THING
but in coalition governments, you have all these factions, and they freely completely betray their ideology in order to get in bed to share power with other factions, having nothing whatsoever to do with advancing whatever fringe position you believe in, but everything to do with a craven grab for power. ask any german. in other words, you look to other systems as if they were better than the two party system. but that's only because you are unfamiliar with the awful evils of coalition governments and other forms of democracy. you would complain just as loudly as you are now in another democratic system. because there's ALWAYS a betrayal and weakness somewhere
you don't recognize the strengths of the two party system. so be careful what you wish for, and know the actual truth of politics for what it is: ugly, no matter what the system. personally, i believe the two party system is superior, if you analyze the pluses and minuses impartially, rather than simply moan cynically out of unawareness of other weaknesses in other systems. two systems pandering to the middle is wonderful for stability and keeping fringe left leaning and fringe right leaning voices out of our government
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
This is so hilariously wrong.
They exist for numerous reasons. To entertain. To call attention to a certain theme. To criticize the political process itself. To parody other parties. Etc.
However ideal the agenda of the party might actually be, the term 'pirate' is very heavily associated with anarchy and activities that involve breaking the law, rather than the far more positive notion of working within the legal system to effect the potentially revolutionary changes that the Pirate Party wishes to advocate. Unfortunately, people who have never heard of them will take one look at the name and judge the party based on that, rather than investigate what their actual platforms are. Without a name change, they don't have a hope in hell of making a difference. They are likely going to be taken about as seriously as the Rhino Party.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
but are often as a group the targets of bigotry from other members of their own party
They are often the targets of bigotry from themselves.
From your Wikipedia link:
Don't both.
Real political parties don't exist on niche platforms.
Please forgive my previous comment. I just downloaded Grey's Anatomy off the pirate bay to avoid the commercials and... well I got a little carried away.
How do they swallow the fact that the Pirate Parties are now taking a legal and official route to copyright reform?
If it comes that far, they will just claim that copyright can only be strengthened, not reduced, because of international treaties with no expiration dates and no exit clauses, exactly as they were designed by the lobbyists. Just like our politicians like to blame bad stuff on the EU (despite the fact that new directives have required a unanimous approval in the Council of Ministers), yours will likely blame it on international treaties and international law.
"Do what you want cause a pirate is free, you are a pirate! Yar - har - fiddle-dee-dee."
i used to help these twits
then
came there new leader a man with connections to actors and hollywood
he uses apple products galore
has connections to govt run cbc reporters
and you begin to wonder whose running it now and its why its nothing more then any other party in canada
people wanting POWER
when you have to threaten callign the org , anti-p2p cause they dont recognize downloading well you know they are NOT A PIRATE PARTY
Treaties are indeed an exceptionally powerful restriction on popular choice. The are IIRC sub-ordinate to the Constitution, establishing an amendment with more appropriate copyright and patent terms would override any treaties specifications, and Santa, I would also like a pony.
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
I'm no expert in the fine details of US politics.
But since the Green party unwantingly helped Bush the victory in
2000. To fix this, would it be possible to form a Green part within
the Democrates?
And a PirateParty part and so on.
If this has any tiny chance of working, plz try it.
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
Sure it is, every collegiate knows how much booze they can swill before they pass out.
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
I wonder if they are going to use this as their campaign video?
http://www.youtube.com/v/yL3pYTyF8Zk&hl=de&fs=1
It is nice to see a different point of view LOL
We have had Mickey Mouse (tm) political parties forever, big media and their bumbling irk are well represented. I expect they won't have much to say until after the election,
With a first-past-the-post election system the Pirate Party are all but certain to not be represented in parliament, but they may gain enough votes for public funding and, since we've run minority governments the last 3 elections, the other parties are likely to pay close attention to where their votes go and adopt some of their platform.
This is a very good thing for Canadian democracy, copyright reform, and the digitally enlightened voter. Even for those that disagree with the PP platform, it will help push digital issues onto the table.
I'm going to Canada!
I can't say if I am for or against the ACTA . . . because I don't know the details.
If you want to know the details, the full text of the treaty (as of March 23rd anyway) is out there.
I love this so much I must break the law and improve it...
First, understand the song;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major-General's_Song
Second, watch the best performance of this ever;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSloW2coCDQ
Third, lyrics again slightly modified;
This is the very model of a modern pirate metaphor.
We're needed as our leadership is clearly challenged heretofore.
They call it theft for reasons that are clearly quite subliminal.
In order to support a model that is quite primordial.
Infringement is a civil matter, extortion is quite criminal.
But legislation's killing our new highway that is digital.
And so we need a party that will argue antithetical.
In order to preserve our freedoms are indispensable.
Finally, if you're young, put this in perspective;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLsJyfN0ICU
(GP poster here)
> In fact, the man most people probably consider the quintessential Libertarian figure today -- Ron Paul?
Well that brings up a few points:
1. The Libertarians are a good example of my premise. Ron Paul might be a Presidential long-shot, but he actually does manage to get elected to Congress. His son has a good shot at getting elected to the Senate, last I heard. There have also been libertarian-ish Republicans who have one other high offices (for example, Gary E. Johnson was governor of New Mexico for 8 years).
Meanwhile, despite decades of political organizing, how often is the Libertarian party actually viable in an election? Most places you couldn't get elected as dogcatcher under their banner. So I'd say that the individuals that have been most effective in advancing their message have been the ones who have avoided the party and instead worked within the Republicans.
2. Libertarians are in a somewhat difficult position because they are a multi-issue party with some of their policies more attractive to republican (smaller government) and some are more attractive to democrats (personal liberties). This means that a libertarian voter could lean towards either of the two parties depending on what PART of the libertarian message is more important to themselves.
Still, I think if instead of trying to compete as a political party the Libertarians renamed themselves "Republicans For Personal Liberties" or "Democrats For A Small Government" they could get their ideas taken more seriously.
As an example, look at the "Religious Right". If they formed their own party they wouldn't be electable many places. In fact, since they would siphon off Republican voters and just end up electing more Democrats. Instead, they're shrewd enough to become a vocal faction of the Republican base. (Yet, they have their own organizations, their own events, etc) Their message clearly gets heard in the halls of power as a result, because there are hundreds of congresspeople who know that the RR helped get them elected.
3. I'm an outside observer to libertarian politics so this last point is probably biased by my personal disagreement with their economic theories. I also believe that the libertarians have an issue because its actually made up of several sub-constituencies which aren't very compatible. If they were ever to wield actual political power, I suspect the fractures would begin to show. It seems to me that there are three types of libertarians:
A. The true-believers in the message. Jokingly referred to as "Republicans who smoke pot". They truly want a tiny government, and vast civil liberties. Kudos to them: like I said, I disagree strongly with their economic policies, but at least they have a consistent, defensible platform.
B. The western rancher-types who are irked that they live in an area where the feds own so much of the land. Basically, they don't REALLY want government to leave them alone, they want the government to give them a multimillion dollar handout of federal land. They kind of dress up their arguments in libertarian terms, but they're really no different than every other agricultural-lobby looking for government subsidy.
C. The Paul-ites. I call these people "economics as explained by old USENET kooks". You can tell if you're dealing with one of them if they won't shut up about the Federal Reserve, or if they don't understand how the gold standard is an anachronism. I don't know how these people feel in aggregate about personal liberties (as long as you don't outlaw tinfoil hats) but I think they mostly embrace the libertarian banner because it's the only one marginal enough to listen to hem.
there are pluses and minuses to every system. i happen to view pandering to the middle to be extremely important. and i don't accept that two parties is for some reason why iraq was invaded, that if it weren't two parties, iraq would not be invaded, which to me is a ludicrous wild suggestion on your part
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
According to the Berne Convection, while you have to respect the copyright for work produced in other countries for as long as they wish (up to 75 years), you can reduce your own copyright limits (for works produced in your country). If the PPs actually get any influence in many countries, it could effectively reduce copyright terms.
Dilbert RSS feed
weird petrifying helplessness
"I'm saying in a two party system the electorate can't punish them for this decision to go to war (UK case), or for anything else the general public thinks were bad decisions."
uh... they vote?!
"Your claim is that two party system is pandering to the middle. But the way I see it is that the middle is dragged to wherever the two parties want to take it - because the middle has no choice in the matter anyway."
uh... maybe they vote?!
have you ever heard of VOTING?
wtf?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
that gore would have invaded iraq
tell me with a straight face that mccain would overhaul healthcare
its' like this: from out in the prairie, two peaks in the rocky mountains look the same. but in the valley between those mountains, they couldn't be more different
the two parties ARE different. VERY different in HUGE ways. but not different enough for you. but that's only because your perspective is from far away. being on the fringe though, frankly, your perspective doesn't matter and shouldn't matter: the middle, and only the middle matters, and should matter, in a stable democracy
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I thought the pirate party was official in Australia? I was sure I heard they would be contesting the next federal election.
(pirates in the physical world are dangerous, armed criminals)
Who protect Somalia's marine ecosystems, by the way.
NDP are also notorious for running Ontario and Saskatchewan into the ground,
I think you mean Ontario and BC. The saskatchewan NDP saved us from bankruptcy the last time they were in power, and spent a decade cleaning up the mess the PCs left us in, only for the saskatchewan public to forget the whole thing and vote the PCs(oop, I mean Sask Party) back in again, who have proceeded to predictably start running the province into the ground again.
In general I think the federal NDP are kind of a mix, and what you can expect from them is only partially what you could expect at the provincial level on average.
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
Christian Heritage Party, you know the ones who were brought in by the human rights tribunal lately for thoughtcrimes?
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
I know I'm replying to a post you made about a week ago.... so not even sure you'll see or feel like replying at this point? But you bring up some great points and arguments -- and I'd be interested in talking about this a little more in-depth.
I'm not sure your "3 types of Libertarians" is really accurate.... I grant that your choice B. may in fact be correct. I haven't really spent a lot of time listening to what western ranchers are complaining about, I suppose, but plenty of people are looking for a govt. handout, using whatever angle they think works best for them. But I take some issue with the labeling of people as "Paul-ites". That seemed to me, more than anything, a knee-jerk response from those with opposing beliefs, upon seeing that Ron Paul was actually gaining some popularity and traction.
Most of the libertarian-minded people I've encountered who are very educated about things are *both* in favor of a tiny government and vast civil liberties, AND see that the Federal Reserve is one of the areas of govt. that needs to be examined closely (and quite possibly eliminated). At the very least, I'm not sure how anyone can defend the current "leadership" in the Fed, given their history of working for the very investment firms on Wall Street that caused much of our economic downturn, with their deceptive and shady practices.
Whether or not the gold standard is an anachronism is a good subject for debate, but I think the downsides of moving away from it are very clear today. (Bottom line: When you're forced to back your nation's currency with a hard good of equal value, you make it *impossible* to print money out of thin air whenever you find it convenient to have some more to spend.)