German Pirate Party Enters 2nd State Parliament

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."

Comments

Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" wins

[ivi]

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.

Copyright vs Education

[GoodNewsJimDotCom]

If we just did something outrageous and said,"All copyrights expire after 7 years", we'd have a great wealth of free media for the uneducated. We could put K-12-College books on 100$ laptops. Then schools, instead of paying 10,000$ for books for k-12, kids could get a laptop and schools could save 10 grand on each student. Schools keep complaining they're strapped for cash. Well, here is a solution. Not to mention how great it'd be for third world kids with OLPC.

Re:Copyright vs Education

[Cyberax]

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

[cheater512]

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

[dkleinsc]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, because the publishers make sure the free ones are never picked by major education.

Re:Copyright vs Education

[risom]

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:Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" w

[poetmatt]

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).

Ugh

[Formalin]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[MachDelta]

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

[robmcdiarmid]

There's no reason why you couldn't design a proportional system that forced each party to pre-post an ordered list of candidates. That way, you'd know exactly whom you would get for each percentage chunk that resulted in another representative from that party. And, if a specific individual within a given party is causing more people to not vote for the party than to vote for it, it's in the party's best interest to dump them, or at least put them lower on the candidate list.

Re:Ugh

[Anonymous Coward]

First past the post. "Throwing your vote away". "Letting the worse of two evils win by wasting your vote".

Re:Ugh

[The Snowman]

And what exactly is stopping the 3rd party to arise?

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

[maweki]

Funnily enough, this is almost exactly how it works in Germany. There is a pre-ordered and published list but we have a mixed system where you can vote for your district's candidate directly and the guy or girl who wins a district overrides his position (if placed) in the list. But the list/party-vote guarantees that the party is at least that represented.
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:Working within the rules can still work

[countach]

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

[GumphMaster]

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:Better: Some new "Pro-Electric Vehicle Party" w

[bfandreas]

...also all of these parties have a lot of overlap.
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:Working within the rules can still work

[rrohbeck]

"The US has one party with two right wings."
- Gore Vidal