Pirate Party Time

Three days ago, members of the Pirate Party were celebrating their victory in a disco in Berlin. The party managed to win 8.9% of voter support in Berlin, 3.9% more than necessary to win seats in the German parliament. This marks the first time that a new German political party has managed to do so since the Green Party in the 1980’s.

Now, you’re probably wondering what the Pirate Party is all about. It isn’t some Internet phenomenon type of joke, but rather a leftist party mainly centered on Internet freedom. The Pirate Party also advocates internet transparency, the installation of a minimum wage, and the legalization of “soft” drugs.

Lead candidate Andreas Baum admitted that they were amateurs, even saying that they didn’t even have business cards yet. Their entire campaign was viewed as somewhat of a joke; with few expecting them to overcome the 5% vote necessary to win seats in parliament. This was especially evident in their campaign, with their often humorous posters and slogans, proclaiming things such as: “Privatize religion”. 

Members of the Pirate Party celebrating in Berlin

In response to hearing the news, pretty much all other political parties in Germany (especially the Green Party and the Social Democrats) expressed outrage, arguing that voters only elected the Pirate Party out of protest and that they were far too unprofessional. In my opinion, if the people are in fact so dissatisfied with their current political party, it seems more than reasonable for them to voice their protest by voting  a more progressive and liberal political party into office. Even though this party should not be taken too seriously seeing that it does not really even have an official platform, it is still astounding that they managed to attain almost 10% of the popular vote in Berlin and thereby buy themselves a ticket to the German parliament.

Sebastian Nerz, the leader of the Pirate Party, on the other hand, simply called the historic moment "cool" in front of television cameras. 

Wrong Focus in Libya

Every day, newspaper headlines are full of stories regarding the rebellion in Libya. Today, the major headline was that rebels were stuggling to advance towards Bani Walid, one of Gaddafi's last loyalist strongholds. Yes, that might sound like good news, but the next day, newspapers will probably be reporting that loyalists are pushing back rebels in town XYZ. Day by day, the media make it sound like the situation in Libya is drastically changing.

Anti-Gaddafi graffiti in Libya 

However, Gaddafi has been ousted, a significant part of his army has fled across the desert, and it is really only a matter of time until the last remnants of his regime are either gone or completely suppressed. So why is the media still bent on reporting rumored hideouts of Gaddafi and his family members? Even though Libya's National Transitional Council has already been recognized by most countries and now has an official U.N. seat, it seems that little attention has been devoted to Libya's reconstruction. Right now, Libyans are united under the common goal of getting rid of their former dictator. But, now that their government has been recognized and that Gaddafi is essentially gone, we should be very concerned about Libya's reconstruction. Libya has a unique population, with a diverse group of trial ties, many of whom are loyal to the former regime. It will be impossible to install a stable government that can satisfy the needs of the entire country. Ethnic tensions will flare and it is vital that both Libya and foreign countries help ensure that this transition to a more stable government occurs with as little violence as possible.

My point is, we shouldn't be celebrating just yet. I know that once Gaddafi is finally found, the same type of fervor that occurred once Bin Laden was killed will sweep the world. But this kind of perspective is completely useless and ignores the most important question at hand: How can we ensure that Libya manage to transition to a stable and free country?

Looking Ahead or Stuck in the Past?

After I snapped out my daydream in politics class, I seriously started thinking about what my professor was ranting about: nationalism. He made the point that pretty much all people boast a fervor of nationalism, without actually considering how their nationalism came to be. Nationalism can simply be defined as a pride in one’s people and the belief that they have their own sovereign political destiny. Usually, countries boast a sense of “civic” nationalism, claiming that anyone within their borders is a part of their nation.  Today, countries and people use selective memory to remember the glorious parts of their history and try to forget instances of persecution, expulsion, or in the extreme, ethnic cleansing. What almost all people fail to recognize is that their own countries enacted policies like this to exclude essentially all ethnicities other than their own.

But don’t think that all these acts of forced separation and persecution are over now. Especially today we can see examples of ethnic segregation in the supposedly most advanced countries of the world. In France, for instance, the government has already made strong efforts to ban Muslim women from wearing burqas and have even tried to expel their Roma populations. Yes, there are significantly worse problems and leaders today like al-Assad in Syria, but countries, and more importantly people, should first think about how they view their own history and how they treat their own people, before trying to “help“ the rest of the world. 

But as we all know, ethnic tensions take place because of various ethnicities vying for political power. So is it a good idea to encourage ethnocentrism? Or should countries try to foster a “melting pot” identity like in the United States? I think countries should try their best to assimilate everyone in their society, instead of supporting a superiority complex for a certain group of people. Even though it may be harder this way, future generations would no longer have to feel a sense of guilt just because their ancestors took the easier way out in the short run.  

Protesters in Marseille, France fighting against the government's crackdown on Roma population

Intro Rant

Roughly 10,000 years ago, investigative journalists like Upton Sinclair vied to challenge social injustice and exploitation in the United States. Yes, we might learn about famous examples of underdogs defying all odds and dismantling big businesses such as Standard Oil. However, today we largely ignore major problems like corruption, or fail to attribute the proper reasons for things like global poverty and the war in Iraq. Fact is, social injustice still persists everywhere in the world. It's more than important for us to try and unveil the problems of the modern era as modern muckrakers.

But I’m not just into current affairs. I’m crazy about soccer, especially the German national team, so I’m going to have to rant about that too.