[Igor_Bratnikov]

As someone on the ground in Germany I can tell that a lot of Germans, even techies are still confused and not sure what the Pirate Party represents or what their actual political program is, which greatly devalues what ever recent wins they have acquired. Unfortunately a political party must be about more than just transparency and better IP policies (I agree with both though) or at least that is how the Germans see the Pirates.

[Tichy]

While that is true, I don't think it is so clear what the other parties stand for, either. At least when it comes to spending the billions. It doesn't seem as if the established parties where so successful with their economics.

[moe]

As a techie my perception is that the pirate party is not about a program, it's about the process.

They use an internet based system called "liquid feedback" for collaboration. Every member can propose stuff. Every member gets one vote. The highest voted stuff becomes the program. All of this happens online.

Yes, it's still young and immature. But please compare to how your conventional political party operates and tell me with a straight face it doesn't sound like a good idea.

https://lqfb.piratenpartei.de/

[runn1ng]

I think it is a terrible idea.

Politicians should vote based on their visions and beliefs or visions and beliefs shared by the party. This is just random, populistic and doesn't have any real meaning.

I want to know from a political party how will they deal with real issues. With low employment rate. With bad economy. With good economy. Where will they invest, where will they cut.

"We will vote about that later" is definitevely a terrible answer.

[A1kmm]

Voting yes or no without discussing why doesn't lead to good policy outcomes.

Consensus works far better for policy; 90% of people might read something and think it sounds good, while 10% of people might spot a terrible flaw. Simply voting would let the policy be ratified with the flaw, while in a consensus process the facilitator would let each side present their views, and someone might come up with a proposal that addresses the flaw and satisfies everyone.

Consensus doesn't need 100% agreement, and even when you get down to the most fundamental agreements, people with the same facts who are aware of each others viewpoints can still disagree (at which point the majority view has to win), but the process should continue until that point is reached. This process does require some subjective decision making (e.g. around when consensus has been reached), so it can't yet be fully automated.

[moe]

I'm not a member of the pirate party (so can't speak for them), but I want to avoid fueling concerns with my simplified description of their system.

I don't think their goal is automating the decisions, their goal is to add much needed efficiency and transparency to the process by taking it online.

When you look at their software then it's a web-forum with a purpose-built voting/karma system.

For the first time I (a non-member) can go to the website of a political party, read their discussions, learn who is proposing what, who is voting for what and what the dominating opinions are.

You and I may not agree with their (lack of) positions on various subjects. But, as I understand it, it takes nothing more than an online-registration to join in on a discussion, and to present your own ideas on a level playground.

As far as I am concerned that's an overdue breath of fresh air.

Unless you prefer the state-of-the-art; backroom-politics with an "old boys club" calling the shots...

[gersh]

What are their IP policies? Do they want to abolish all copyrights and patents? Do they just want shorter terms?

[sqrt2]

According to their latest election manifesto (https://wiki.piratenpartei.de/Bundestagswahl_2009/Wahlprogra...) their main points are:

* legalisation of non-commercial copying

* prohibition of DRM technologies

* right to derive from existing works

* reduction of copyright terms (expiration with death of the author or earlier)

* (continued) prohibition of patents on software, business models, genes and seeds

[treo]

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&...

This are their current goals. They want to allow private copying. So selling the copy would still be illegal.

Concerning patents: "We reject patents unanimously onto organisms and genes on business ideas and also to software"

[yason]

Ideally, it shouldn't need to be more than that. A voting system where you rank, say, five candidates from different parties could support several small parties which are biased against in most current democratic systems.

[eru]

Yes, but at least proportional voting isn't as bad as first-past-the-post in this regard.

[muuh-gnu]

If you thought first-past-the-post was bad, wait for the new innovative top-two system to further spread, which is flat out eliminating the third party completely.

* http://www.stoptoptwo.org/about/ * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_14_%2820...

[eru]

Sounds like a run-off voting system. The French use a similar system to elect their presidents, as far as I know. Is that right? Have you looked at the French experiences?

[IgorPartola]

It sort of should. Otherwise, one-trick candidates who really have no idea about economics or foreign policy can win, say, a presidential election on a campaign based on, say, pro-life vs pro-choice or prohibition or their stance on one particular social program.

[repsilat]

Germany has proportional representation. It's absolutely reasonable for parties in those systems to run on small policy platforms, especially if they're not expecting to receive a large share of the vote.

The Pirate Party, if it gets into government, will invariably be a member of a coalition with limited power to influence policy. In the aftermath of elections it may have limited bargaining power as a balance of power/kingmaker party. In both of these situations it makes sense for it to be a "one-trick candidate", using its influence to deal with the issues that it cares about, and staying more or less quiet on issues that the larger parties care more about.

[IgorPartola]

What happens for positions where you cannot have proportional representation? Positions like President, Prime Minister, Supreme Justices, etc?