Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Swedish Voters Keelhaul Pirate Party

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the ye'll-get-im-next-time-buckos dept.

299

Billosaur writes "Apparently the 'scurvy dawgs' are still in control. Results from Sunday's Swedish national election were not favorable for the Pirate Party, according to Wired News. According to the article, 'The Pirate Party not only failed to score the 4 percent required for a seat in Sweden's Parliament, but appears to have missed the 1 percent that would have afforded the party state assistance with printing ballots and funding staff in the next election.' However, the party sees this as a learning experience and morale is still good."

cancel ×

299 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

This was not good to start with (1, Insightful)

Xamedes (843781) | more than 7 years ago | (#16137986)

A political party for illegal actions? come on!

Re:This was not good to start with (2, Funny)

coolgeek (140561) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138000)

Harrr laddy, looks like yer takin' a good long pull from a shot of reality.

Re:This was not good to start with (5, Insightful)

TheWoozle (984500) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138004)

Something is "illegal" if there is a law against it, by definition. No law, no problem. Hence, I see it as an entirely practical way to tackle the issue.

Re:This was not good to start with (4, Funny)

CmdrGravy (645153) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138318)

Surely you meant "an entirely piractical way to tackle the issue ?"

Re:This was not good to start with (0, Offtopic)

fotoflojoe (982885) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138373)

Surely you meant "an entirely piractical way to tackle the issue ?"

Somebody watched Wife-swap last night...
Off topic I know, but then danger's my middle name baby, yeah!

Re:This was not good to start with (5, Insightful)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138021)

Obviously the point of the party is to use the power of democracy to ensure that such actions are no longer illegal. Do you think Marxist parties should be shut down just because the state ownership of industry they advocate is not permitted under current laws? I thought America was supposed to be better than other countries since it allows any ideas to participate in the democratic process.

Re:This was not good to start with (1, Insightful)

Xamedes (843781) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138122)

As valid as your point is regarding the marxist party, there are other parties, too. there is a northern country (forgot which) who has a party, which wants to legalize sex with children. so there is the question: is the "pirate party" nearer to marxism than to a fellony?

Re:This was not good to start with (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16138230)

While almost nobody will agree with the idea and they won't win any election, as long as they are not actually DOING that they should be allowed to voice their opinion that they WANT it to be legal, right? The point is both groups are trying to go about changing the law in the right way. As people here always recommend, if you don't agree with the law try to change it. Vote or run for office

Nothing wrong with advocating for change. (5, Insightful)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138345)

there is a northern country (forgot which) who has a party, which wants to legalize sex with children. so there is the question: is the "pirate party" nearer to marxism than to a fellony?

And to put it quite bluntly, this is perfectly fine. The point of a democracy is that it responds to the will and wishes of its citizens; if they want a law changed, then they have the right (and, I would argue, the responsibility) to attempt to change it within the structure of the system, if possible.

The only difference between the Pirate Party and NAMBLA (I think that's the 'sex with children' thing you're talking about) is how personally offensive you find the behavior they want to legalize. As long as they're not doing the behavior in question while it's still illegal, they're perfectly within their rights to campaign for a change in the laws. This is why political speech is protected by the First Amendment in the United States, and why we tolerate things like the Nazi Party and the Stalinists and any number of other kooks.

For a less extreme example, consider the people who advocated for the repeal of Prohibition in the 1930s; history has shown that they were probably doing the right thing, but at the time they could have easily been accused of "advocating illegal behavior."

If you didn't allow people this freedom, then democracy would be nothing but an irreversible march into an oblivion of illegality.

Re:This was not good to start with (3, Interesting)

portmapper (991533) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138177)

I thought America was supposed to be better than other countries since it allows any ideas to participate in the democratic process.

I think you forgot to add [/ironic] ;-)

Charlie Chaplin was deported due to his anti-war opinions, while there was attempts to do the same for John Lennon. Now, imagine you are not famous, rich and happens to be a muslim.... (deportation [zmag.org] )

The new documentary "The U.S. vs. John Lennon" tells the story of Lennon's transformation from loveable moptop to antiwar activist, and recounts the facts about Richard Nixon's campaign to deport him in 1972 in an effort to silence him as a voice of the peace movement. The filmmakers got lots of people to talk about Nixon and Lennon on camera, including Walter Cronkite, Gore Vidal, Mario Cuomo, George McGovern, Angela Davis and Bobby Seale, with G. Gordon Liddy representing the other side; the film also includes archival footage of Nixon and J. Edgar Hoover, and stars John Lennon and his biting wit and great music. It opens Sept. 15 in Los Angeles and New York City, and nationwide on Sept. 29. The story of Nixon's attempt to deport Lennon is relevant today because deportation, and the larger issue of immigrants' political rights, has become a central problem in American politics.

Re:This was not good to start with (1)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138320)

Which I always found funny, because Lennon was one of the more sensible voices in the peace movement. "if you're gonna be carrying pictures of Chairman Mao, you can count me out".

Re:This was not good to start with (5, Informative)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138024)

A political party for illegal actions? come on!
Might I remind you that the founding politicians of America were violating many English laws and guilty of leading revolts against the British Crown ... punishable by death if I'm not mistaken.

Just because a political party is advocating something currently illegal doesn't mean it's a bad idea to elect them and change that law. Especially if it's a stupid law or is detrimental to the populace.

Let the people vote.

Re:This was not good to start with (4, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138268)

Very insightful. In fact, there's hardly a point to having a political party that is advocating legal actions, unless those legal actions are under threat. An "anti-theft" party, which thinks it should be illegal to steal car stereos, for example, would be downright stupid. The only reason I can think to start a political party is when you're unhappy with the current laws, or to combat laws that you're afraid might be passed in the future...

Re:This was not good to start with (4, Informative)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138359)

It probably falls under the same umbrella as the Marijuana parties [wikipedia.org] that exist in certain countries.

Re:This was not good to start with (1)

AgentX24 (797752) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138367)

Let the people vote

They did...

Re:This was not good to start with (3, Insightful)

Tweekster (949766) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138025)

Well considering those actions are not against the law, they are not illegal (please try and remember, different countries have different laws...)

This wasnt all that suprising, they had a lot of interest, but they failed at getting it together into votes. This was their first attempt and a lot of the probs were related to learning how to do political party things.

If copyright < life + 50 then no WTO for you (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138077)

Well considering those actions are not against the law, they are not illegal (please try and remember, different countries have different laws...)

But if you don't harmonize or harmonise your laws to those of the United States and European Union, you won't be able to join the treaty organizations that can get you favorable trading status with the developed world.

Re:If copyright life + 50 then no WTO for you (1)

Tweekster (949766) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138145)

Yes but you still get to choose what is legit for copying under fair use...

Re:This was not good to start with (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138038)

Huh? Looking at politics, you'd consider that a requirement.

Re:This was not good to start with (-1, Troll)

brisey (1003269) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138059)

Agreed 100%. They seemed to advocate that anyone could copy anyone elses intellectrual property without permission. Best summed up as the abolition of conventional capitalism. If they had just been honest and renamed themselves the 'communist party' they might have done a bit better. Hopefully now people will see them for the freeloading jokes that they are.

It Is Necessary (3, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138107)

They seemed to advocate that anyone could copy anyone elses intellectrual property without permission. Best summed up as the abolition of conventional capitalism. If they had just been honest and renamed themselves the 'communist party' they might have done a bit better. Hopefully now people will see them for the freeloading jokes that they are.
I would like to first begin by saying that nowhere have I read the Pirate Party will abolish all rights to personal property (as Socialism aims to achieve). Secondly, conventional capitalism can function fine under the engine of providing a service or a good in exchange for money.

Yes, intellectual property is free for anyone to copy but these are just ideas. Capitalism can function just fine if everyone can use anyone's idea for free -- you just suffer less incentive to come up with innovative ideas since copying someone else's is easier.

Freeloading, maybe ... but not the whole way. And it's nowhere close to the extremes of socialism, only in one aspect of it. Most people on /. hate IP laws anyways, let the party run and see what happens. Stop calling them names and let Democracy take it's course!

Re:It Is Necessary (0, Troll)

brisey (1003269) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138154)

"you just suffer less incentive to come up with innovative ideas since copying someone else's is easier. " read that as ZERO incentive. Whats the point of making new music / movies / agmes / software, all of which is copied trivially. Kiss goodbye to all those industries. Also, kiss the pharmaceutical industry goodbye too, why bother researching cures when you can copy the next persons. Face facts, this hippy philosophy works fine for swedes IF they can copy all the IP made by other countries in Europe,japan, and the US. Does the 'pirate party' advocate only copying products made by other swedes? or are you happy to leach purely off other people? "Freeloading, maybe ... but not the whole way." ha, that makes it ok then. Thanks, I always thought your party was nothing mroe than a bunch of freeloaders, nice to hear it from one of you, openly. "Most people on /. hate IP laws anyways" wow, what a cutting argument. most people I know hate paying taxes. lets abolish them! yipee! im sure theres no downside! maybe you can persuade people in other coutnries to pay all the taxes so you lucky swedes can freeload from them eh? This isnt a legitmiate political party. Its students who have yet to experience the way the world works. Thankfully they got the electoral ass-kick they deserved.

Calm Down (4, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138246)

Thankfully they got the electoral ass-kick they deserved.
Ok, first calm down. This is (supposed to be) a level headed discussion (no, I'm not new here).

Second, learn to use the <br> tags. They are your friends and do wonders for your readability.

Third, they ran and lost. That's how Democracy works. Maybe they'll do better next year, maybe they won't even be around, who knows? But one thing is for sure, when you outright say they shouldn't even exist, you're starting to hinder the goal of Democracy. Sounds like you have a pretty closed mind, my friend.

Also, thanks for writing me off as a hippie. I'm glad you took 2.5 seconds and one post to know me and I highly value your (fairly incorrect) stereotype. I was only trying to point out where they're coming from, not advocating it. You either need to do more reading or stop talking because you really don't understand the goals of this party.

Re:This was not good to start with (4, Insightful)

bentcd (690786) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138158)

Copyright laws institute monopolies on cultural goods and as such represent the antithesis of capitalism. In a capitalist system, anyone would be entitled to manufacture and offer the goods for sale. Supply would then fluctuate with general interest in the goods and the profit that could be made from providing them, unlike the fixed pricing schemes we are seeing with today's monopolistic situation.
Of course, part of the point of a capitalist system would be that we'd get affordable items - it isn't difficult to understand why the entertainment industry would rather maintain the status quo.

Re:This was not good to start with (2, Interesting)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138207)

Agreed 100%. They seemed to advocate that anyone could copy anyone elses intellectrual property without permission. Best summed up as the abolition of conventional capitalism.


'[A]bolition of conventional capitalism?'

Tell me, exactly, what is 'capitalistic' about the current 'intellectual property' system? Do you know what capitalism is? How is the scenario promoted by the Pirate Party, i.e., the legalization of 'piracy', causing the means of production to be somehow not private? Under the legalization of 'piracy', do you think that capitalists in a free market system would not find a way to make money? Did the popularity of Napster and later peer-to-peer networks put the RIAA and its member compannies out of business? Did it even come close?

Perhaps you should do some reading and understand what is captialism and what is communism before posting such comments.

Re:This was not good to start with (-1, Offtopic)

brisey (1003269) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138235)

oh dear, I dared to question the immature slashdot groupthink regarding it being ok to pirate stuff. instant troll moderation.

Re:This was not good to start with (1)

CmdrGravy (645153) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138371)

No, you wrote what basically equates to a lot of ill informed, nonsensical and illogical crap. Instant troll moderation.

Re:This was not good to start with (1)

TechnoBunny (991156) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138164)

But thats what all political parties do - stand on a platform of measures which they propose should be put into statute. Just like that paedophile party that stood in Holland. They were campaigning ofr it to be legalised, as is their right - just as it was the right of the electorate not to vote for them.....Being allowed to only comapign for things that are already lawful/permitted is absurd.

Re:This was not good to start with (1)

RingDev (879105) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138200)

The actions are only illegal because the existing political party made them illegal.

At one point in time it was illegal to free slaves in the US. And you'd be hard pressed to find an elected official at this point that would still defend that stance.

-Rick

Re:This was not good to start with (1)

Billosaur (927319) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138261)

At one point in time it was illegal to free slaves in the US. And you'd be hard pressed to find an elected official at this point that would still defend that stance.

Except for perhaps Jesse Helms...

Re:This was not good to start with (1)

JanneM (7445) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138201)

A political party for illegal actions? come on!

That's how you go about changing laws you dont agree with. This is nothing wrong - indeed this is exactly right. You work with the political system to have the law changed.

Re:This was not good to start with (2, Informative)

lawpoop (604919) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138249)

As pointed out in the commentary to earlier slashdot articles, the scandinavian idea of piracy (the high seas kind) goes hand-in-hand with economic liberalism. While the British and Dutch were establishing monoplies on commodities, controlling ports, pursuing embargoes, and charging tariffs, there were captains who traded goods freely with little concern for the laws of foreign governments.

Of course, this free trade threatened the income of the empires, so they outlawed piracy and charged their own captains to capture ships, sink ships, absorb crews, and confiscate booty of free-traders who ignored tariffs and embargoes. Free-traders chose to arm themselves instead of giving up their livelihood, and the ensuing violent arms race gave us our modern popular perception of pirates today.

Re:This was not good to start with (1)

orcus (21207) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138357)

A political party for illegal actions? come on!

It works in the US of A.

Re:This was not good to start with (1)

mad_minstrel (943049) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138374)

No. A political party that wants to change law so that some things now illegal become legal.

Re:This was not good to start with (1)

WillyPete (940630) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138435)

Read your history, hoss.

One of the central planks of the (then) new Republican party was to free slaves, an illegal act in southern states.

America walked THAT plank right into the Civil War.

I'd speculate that voters were told and recognized that putting the Pirate Party in power (even a tiny bit of power) would have been reacted to harshly by U.S. companies and government agencies who are still no doubt smarting from the failed Pirate Bay closure. I hope the environment changes for the better, and we can one day hoist the Jolly Roger over Sweden's White House (whatever they call it).

Nelson: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16137999)

Harr Harr!

logic explained (3, Funny)

thedrunkensailor (992824) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138005)

I just ran for president of Sweden for the pirate party. Obviously the "DrunkenSailor" was a write-in and I lost. But it's for the better; who wants to lead a country that houses dirty war and drug money and is known only for neutrality (not of the net) and watches and knives. oh wait. there are hot chicks there, write me in damnit

Re:logic explained (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16138051)

Sweden, Switzerland, it's all the same!

Re:logic explained (1)

thedrunkensailor (992824) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138066)

it is to a pirate! GARRR!

No They're Not! (1)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138185)

Sweden, Switzerland, it's all the same!
it is to a pirate! GARRR!
Ah, I have to disagree with you here. Switzerland is landlocked while Sweden has many bountiful ports to be plundered. No way in hell you'll get me off my boat, even for watches and knives.

Besides, the only fighting tactic I know is "crossing the T." And, it just doesn't work as well on land ... with the horses and the stabbing and the need for more wooden appendages.

Re:logic explained (1)

wwiiol_toofless (991717) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138052)

There's Switzerland and Sweden. All the same to a drunken sailor, I suppose.

Re:logic explained (1)

AceCaseOR (594637) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138100)

Arrr! Ye would think not, as Switzerland be land-locked. Naught but land-lubbers there, me hearty!

Re:logic explained (1)

thedrunkensailor (992824) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138118)

they do have quite the navy though!

Re:logic explained (2, Funny)

Lex-Man82 (994679) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138232)

That's because they've got money falling out of every orifice. The average wage is something like $300K. They buy loads of great army type stuff insist that everyone has to spend a little while in there army defending there country, while refusing to go to war with anyone.

noobs.

Bodensee (1)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138413)

Well, they do have a pretty big lake [wikipedia.org] ; you could try plying the not-so-high seas there. Maybe they'd give you a letter of marque to pillage the French.

Re:logic explained (1)

LSD-OBS (183415) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138067)

I think you mean Switzerland. As in, Swiss knives, Swiss chocolate, Swiss borders that are a whole lot less anal than most other European countries, etc.

Sweden is where the good pr0n and cheap furniture comes from.

Re:logic explained (1)

chrismcdirty (677039) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138069)

Sweden has the bikini team. Switzerland has the watches, knives, chocolate, and cuckoo clocks. Two different countries.

Re:logic explained (1)

thedrunkensailor (992824) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138162)

I was really pushing to combine the two - neither has enough good to be alone. they go together like honey and ham. [touche though]

Re:logic explained (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16138070)

I think you've mistaken Switzerland for Sweden. Sweden is in Africa.

Re:logic explained (4, Funny)

LSD-OBS (183415) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138135)

Argh. It's far too easy to confuse that with the Japanese island of Swaziland.

Re:logic explained (1)

Proud like a god (656928) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138151)

Erm it's the Swiss with the banks, watches and knives...

Re:logic explained (1)

Ana10g (966013) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138174)

who wants to lead a country that houses dirty war and drug money and is known only for neutrality (not of the net) and watches and knives.
Isn't that Switzerland, not Sweden? As in the SWISS army knife, SWISS watch, SWISS bank accounts, etc? Sweden is, however, mostly neutral militarily speaking. And the Swedish bikini team will totally beat the Swiss bikini team, because the Swiss don't have an ocean.
Gosh!

Re:logic explained (1)

thedrunkensailor (992824) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138220)

so wait - other than women who are beautiful (which is enough), what does sweden have thats cool?

Re:logic explained (1)

_Laban_ (166315) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138334)

The climate.

(well, it was 24C a week ago here in Gothenburg, but it sounded good :D)

Re:logic explained (4, Informative)

Per Wigren (5315) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138339)

so wait - other than women who are beautiful (which is enough), what does sweden have thats cool?

IKEA, Volvo, Ericsson, MySQL, The Pirate Bay, ABBA and meatballs.

Re:logic explained (1)

Friggo (765910) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138398)

Winters.

More likely (1)

BenSchuarmer (922752) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138209)

It was those scurvy dogs from Diebold!

First lesson... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16138008)

... rename the party.

Re:First lesson... (1)

Apocalypse111 (597674) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138166)

Of course they should rename the party! Pirates are so lame. To ensure success, they should have called themselves the Ninja Party. Clearly a superior title.

Avast, me hearties! (5, Funny)

geckosan (78687) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138011)

Arrr, 'tis International Talk Like A Pirate Day! What a fell blow to pirates everywhere! Let's keel-haul the negative vibes by keepin' the parlance circa 1700's, me hearties!

Re:Avast, me hearties! (4, Funny)

Apocalypse111 (597674) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138079)

Encrypt the data holds, batton down tha security patches, argh thar be spyware abound!

Re:Avast, me hearties! (1)

Tackhead (54550) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138172)

> Arrr, 'tis International Talk Like A Pirate Day! What a fell blow to pirates everywhere! Let's keel-haul the negative vibes by keepin' the parlance circa 1700's, me hearties!

Arrrr! And next time, we'll win, by gum, for we'll have Diebold votin' machines doin' the countin' for us! (Get away from my poop deck, CmdrTaco :)

It be a Ninja Conspiracy (1)

everphilski (877346) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138202)

thar ninjas [realultimatepower.com] , they be conspirin to bury the pirate party in ol' Davy's lockaaar.

I am a pirate. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16138014)

I use bittorrent to get files for free. It's cheap, fun and easy.

A shame (4, Funny)

riffzifnab (449869) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138016)

Tis grievous black news this most sacred of days to pirates round the globe: Talk Like a Pirate Day. Arrrr, it does bring a tear to my eye. Pas me grog and this one be fer ye, pirate party.

Re:A shame (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16138104)

omg n00b, reel piratez spk lyk dis, often on IRC chnls called #w4rez

Re:A shame (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138361)

omg n00b, reel piratez spk lyk dis, often on IRC chnls called #w4rez

l4m3 p0z3r n00b. scr4m b4 i pwn ur b0x!

How about a transhumanist party? (1)

Cybert4 (994278) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138018)

Transhumanism promises things far greater than free copying. We promies lifespans in the trillions of years. The elimination of sleep. A brain the size of Jupiter. Beats rice subsidies, eh?

Re:How about a transhumanist party? (1)

FhnuZoag (875558) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138029)

But how many votes does a hive mind get?

Re:How about a transhumanist party? (1)

SigILL (6475) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138078)

But how many votes does a hive mind get?

As many as it wants.

Re:How about a transhumanist party? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16138095)

I joined the Transhumanist party because once I achieve singularity, I'll be able to copy much more free stuff.

Re:How about a transhumanist party? (1)

iced_773 (857608) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138385)

A brain the size of a Jupiter.
A brain the size of a planet and all people want it to do is copy files... :(

WHAT! (3, Funny)

_PimpDaddy7_ (415866) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138030)

THey did this on Talk Like A Pirate Day?! [talklikeapirate.com]

ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
Shiver me timbers!!!!!!!!!!

Pirates and global warming (1)

TheeBlueRoom (809813) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138215)

According to the Pastafarian belief system, pirates are "absolute divine beings" and the original Pastafarians. Their image as "thieves and outcasts" is all misinformation spread by Christian theologians of the Middle Ages. In reality, Pastafarianism says that they were "peace-loving explorers and spreaders of good will" who would distribute candy to children.

Re:WHAT! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16138233)

Shiver your own timbers, wise-guy.

Serious (2, Insightful)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138056)

Perhaps if they have a serious name, and carried themselves in a more serious manner, people would have voted for them. I agree that someone needs to look into privacy and intellectual property laws who understands them. But I wouldn't seriously vote for a "Pirate" party.

Re:Serious (1)

Apocalypse111 (597674) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138181)

Perhaps a Ninja Party instead?

Re:Serious? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16138267)

Who takes *any* politician seriously?

Dawgs?? (0, Offtopic)

Any Web Loco (555458) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138081)

Pirates be straight outta Compton!

About 1 issue Parties (1)

Azeron (797264) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138094)

Regardless of how much merit the Pirate Pary may have about copyrights, I think that making a party just about abolisihing the copyright may have been a strategic mistake. as a voter, I would never vote for a party that basically just did away with copyrights, because of all the things the government does that affects my life, copyrights are only a small part of it. I am more concerned about taxes, jobs the crime rate. If I felt all this was being taken care of, then I might vote for a "pirate party", but as clearly demonstrated in the election, most sweeds have a bigger problem with the socialists than the copyright laws.

Re:About 1 issue Parties (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16138436)

I think that making a party just about abolisihing the copyright may have been a strategic mistake.
That's not their position, please inform yourself first.

The "lost vote" argument (2, Interesting)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138096)

That's most likely what they tipped over: It's a "lost vote" 'cause they won't make it anyway and so on.

In fact, if you do the math, you'll see that in the long run, it does usually not matter. Coalitions are rarely formed with a single vote majority, usually the majorities are held with substancially more seats than the one or two that MIGHT have been to their favor if you just didn't vote for the "underdog" party instead.

In fact, though, they want that seat, if for no other reason than to sit on of their guys there and cash in more for their party from the governmental pot. So, if you vote for a party that furthers your agendas, even if they don't make it into parlament, the parties that are in there will try to get that odd 2 percent of voters by adding that agenda to their portfolio.

In short, your vote will move more with the underdog party than with the one that you could vote for instead. When you're already in, 2% is not a significant change when it comes to coalition talks. But it's usually one or two seats in parlament, and boy, they want that seats!

Single issue parties (1)

DeadPrez (129998) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138099)

are at least as bad as single issue voters.

Now get on that position paper to describe why IP freedom will improve government services, shrink the cost of healthcare, decrease taxes all while creating both long and short term job growth and increasing global competitiveness.

oh well, (4, Insightful)

joe 155 (937621) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138134)

It's important that they've learnt things from this and it's interesting to note that they did get quite a few votes. I know people will see less than the 1% limit for government help with adverts etc as a loss, but consider that this is a party which has been around for what... a year? It is so new, it is taking such a radical idea, and it got over 0.5% of the national vote?
That is fantastic!

Don't forget that this is people's vote in a general election. Any are a big deal and most people won't make a choice lightly. They might see votes as a waste because they might not even get anyone in parliament which puts people off voting for them as they want their vote "to count". Also a lot of people in the country will already have aligences to parties and even though they might really agree with the message they might be reluctant to turn against the party which represents what they want overall better. Its hard to have a successful "single issue" party, I'm not sure what their other policies are but they will be important and you need to tell people what these are to let them know that your not just a one trick horse.

Overall though, it's a good effort, don't get too down on them.

Re:oh well, (2, Interesting)

joe 155 (937621) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138245)

replying to myself... I might be insane :S

In the Swedish elections there were issues of massive importance going on. The right of centre party actually won on a promise to cut down on what has been the jewel in the crown of the worlds welfare states, a social democratic state (to use the terms of Esping-Anderson) and one with a high degree of decomodification. This was a big deal to a lot of people. If you look at pretty much any of the literature on the subject of welfare states then you'll see that most people saw the Swedish one as institutionalised and one which would be fatal for anyone to cut back on. A lot of people will have been rallying desperately to increase or at least not move their cradle to grave welfare state. This, as far as I can see (being external to Sweden) would be the big issue, and would take precedence over the right to have a torrent site or not.

As a side note I would say that it is quite shocking that they have voted out the social democratic party, especially when their conventional wisdom says that the two track tax burden (high personal tax but low corporate tax) was working and the welfare state was doing them the world of good.

If anyone is interested in why it might be logical to think this, or just learn more about the politics of welfare states, way you might want to look at an excellent book called "The Real Worlds of Welfare Capitalism" and/or Esping-Anderson's "The Three Worlds of Welfare capitalism". Both are excellent... OK, I know that I've spent too long learning about Welfare states.

Re:oh well, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16138259)

It is so new, it is taking such a radical idea, and it got over 0.5% of the national vote?
That is fantastic!


No, it really is not.

In the US various write-ins get more then that. Mickey Mouse, Darth Vader, Laura Croft, etc... .5% is nothing.

Sure, they get an A for effort, then again in the real world, effort is not worth much.

The problem is not their cause (4, Insightful)

Xiph (723935) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138139)

But that it's scope is way too limit to warrent a political party.

I mean, i support a lot of what they lobby for, but I'd much rather vote for a party which also supports my ideas on a whole range of other issues.
This goes in particular in an election that's been running so close as the swedish one did this time.

Single issue parties, should really stop being parties, and start doing some serious lobbying instead. I do understand that they're doing it, since i realize it can be very hard for young people to be heard by politicians on new and controversial ideas on an old subject.

I hope noone ever gets voted into parliament anywhere based on such a narrow issue, I really feel it would be a double loss for democracy, the first because it should never be the only way to be taken serious, and the second, because once they get in, you'll have no clue on how they vote for issues that are very important to all of us.

Re:The problem is not their cause (1)

Daniel_Staal (609844) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138272)

Single-issue parties can work quite well under some systems of government. In fact, from what I've seen, in a system that supports them they are as good or better than lobbying is in other systems.

But you have to have a coalition-style ruling government for them to have any useful effect. I don't know how Sweden's government is set up, and whether it can support single-issue parties as part of the government.

Pirates should go to Pittsburgh (1)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138142)

Well that city seems to love the losers named Pirates. Even the stadium threatened to leave the city [theonion.com] if better team is not found. Still they keep the Pirates. So the city is sending a clear message to the world. Are you a loser? Are you named Pirates? Welcome. You are now a honorory Pittsburgher

Re:Pirates should go to Pittsburgh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16138205)

Mmm... Burger.

The Lo Down on the Pirates (1)

neonprimetime (528653) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138390)

The Pirates aren't as bad as their record. They'll be half-way decent int he next year or two. They got some young studs like Jason Bay, Jose Bautista, Freddy Sanchez, Zach Duke, Ian Snell, Chris Duffy, Mike Gonzalez, and Ryan Doumit. They just need a few veterans in their pitching rotation, and they need to get rid of the following anchors: Jack Wilson and Jeromy Burnitz.

... hmmm.... (1)

hyfe (641811) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138176)

Given the outright comedy*, cynicism, back-stabbing in the pre-elections, and the political parties going from scandal to scandal, I'd assume that the minors would be in a really good position to pick up a lot of stray votes.

* ie: the "hacking" scandal , involving a user with same username and password, which from no usefull information was found. A couple of corruption charges (all ridiciously minor compared to what's legal over in the US) and general aggresive debating.

It's time to accept it. (2, Insightful)

InfinityWpi (175421) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138204)

Between this and the whole 'Snakes on a Plane" fiasco, I think it's time for us to accept that the Internet is not the 'force to be reckoned with' that we all would like it to be, and that 'net geeks, as a whole, aren't cohesive enough to have that much pull when compared to the mundanes.

There's got to be a better way to enact the changes we want.

Re:It's time to accept it. (1)

publius1234 (615205) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138314)

I would start by not using the term "mundanes" to describe the people whose votes you will eventually need.

Re:It's time to accept it. (1)

JockTroll (996521) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138386)

I think it's time for us to accept that the Internet is not the 'force to be reckoned with' that we all would like it to be, and that 'net geeks, as a whole, aren't cohesive enough to have that much pull when compared to the mundanes.

Accept that this is Jock World, and that the Internet is just a tool, and that you geeks got your heads pushed into the toilet bowl once more.

You have NO pull at all. We simply swat you aside. You're nothing. Accept it and eat a bullet.

Larger change in Swedish politics (2, Interesting)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138211)

The Social Democrats just got ousted from power by a moderate coallition that is seeking to introduce some market reforms into Sweden. Gee, you think that might have something to do with a fledgling party whose property rights philosophy is probably left of the Social Democrats not getting any attention?

Nah, couldn't be that...

Eh? (1)

Ricken (797341) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138347)

What do you mean? The votes arent even counted yet. They'll be done tomorrow (wednesday).

Exact figures (2, Informative)

hweimer (709734) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138368)

The Swedish election authority currently lists [www.val.se] them at 0.64%, with about half of the districts being processed.

EU Parliament next (1)

perrin (891) | more than 7 years ago | (#16138401)

Despite needing a much higher % of votes to get an MP for the EU Parliament, it might be easier to get in there. Scandinavians consider the EU Parliament a joke anyway, so why not just vote for a "less-serious" party? Voter turnout is much lower, so any party that can mobilize its core constituency can do well. Once inside the EU Parliament, there is a lot that can be done, it will mean lots of publicity, and lots of money will pour into the party coffers.

Also, getting 1% in the first election so fast after being founded isn't bad, and if it can stay around until the next election, it will be an "established name", and gain more credibility that way.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>