| Disclaimer: I voted for the Pirates last time I could. It sounds you are with the Greens from your statement (Disclaimer 2: I voted for them in the years before). Saying that the Pirates are basing their stances on idealistic views might be fine. Using that as a contrast to a party that more or less embodied idealistic (and sometimes unrealistic) positions for as long as I followed their way seems awkward to me. Yes, the Greens matured. I .. think one of the reasons is that there's a generational gap now. Around me, Greens are represented by people in their 40s-50s that - while still believing in the core environmental values - gave up a little and made peace with a more realistic (as you put it) stance. The Pirates, for me, are what the Greens probably (wasn't there, in my early 30s here) were for my parents generation.. My bottom line: I agree that the Greens are/were important. But it doesn't make sense to ignore the similarities in 'idealism', the youth factor etc. - the Pirates are what the Greens couldn't be. It's a failure of the Greens that they couldn't capture the young generation. In spirit they are similar. In practice, the Greens grew up. Became mature, parents (or grand parents) and (Disclaimer 3: obviously this whole piece is one big opinionated mess) old and boring. |
The Pirates are very similar to what the Greens were. They may "mature" in the same way, or in a different way, or they may disintegrate, but just like the Greens, they definitelly will not forever be the hip, rebellious party that voters flock to who are disillusioned by established parties.