Piracy a symptom of approaching social change?

[Comrade-Z]

I was reading through a list of seminar courses for my college scheduling. One of the seminars was entitled, "The Golden Age of Piracy." And it hit me, when was the "Golden Age of Piracy"? In the century or so preceding the major bourgeois revolutions. What gave rise to this golden age of piracy? The establishment of a world market and massive commodity trading and transport--in short, the developing stages of capitalism within the old feudal society--at a stage when the relations of production had not yet changed to correspond to the already revolutionized factors of production, at a stage when the old state apparatus was ill-suited to protect the interests of the new, rising ruling class. I think it was no coincidence that one of the first major endeavors that the new American government--a government determined to protect the newly enshrined rights of "private property"--set out upon was the suppression of the Pirates of Tripoli, the last major pirate stronghold in the western world.

So then I thought, what about the transition between slavery and feudalism? Anything like this happen there? Why yes, we see that in the last days of the Roman Empire, barbarian plunderings of Roman property--and Rome itself--were quite common. Power was shifting to the latifundia manors, which were breaking away from the central Roman regime, and Rome was having tremendous problems paying its armies and finding new recruits. Mercenaries became increasingly relied upon by all sides, and while the Roman Empire's machinery of collecting slave wealth was breaking down, the latifundia were becoming the productive centers of society, and these latifundia could better afford mercenaries and alliances with the plundering barbarians.

And once again we seem to be entering a "golden age of piracy," this time centered around the newly-established worldwide digital marketplace and all of the revolutionary changes that it implies. Once again we see the old relations of production becoming ill-suited to these emerging digital factors of production. We see the old state apparatuses, their laws confined to national boundaries, well-nigh impotent when trying to combat the spread of digital piracy, partly because of its fluidly international character and partly because of its sheer scope. Just as we might have seen private merchant vessels hiring mercenaries to protect shipments on the high seas, we now see private companies buying and utilizing various anti-piracy schemes, whether it is anti-piracy chips or whatnot--but, like before, our modern pirates are always clever enough to out-maneuver these feeble protections.

So, does the modern emergence of a new kind of piracy foreshadow a more radical transformation of society soon to come?

[Whitten]

Very early stages. digital piracy is unique in that it requires no real labour. Information, unlike physical produce, requires no labour to reproduce one it has been created, thus the bourgeois laws of private ownership of property break down when applied to information alone.

[RevSouth]

A very good analysis Comrade Z, but like Whitten, I feel that information is a bit different than traditional piracy. Though it does require the capitalist governments to unite, which is troublesome, as they have to synchronize and make their laws in correlation with one another, which the common person might not like, and may be as you suggested, the indicator of a changing of times.

[Leo]

:lol: A very interesting topic!

Well I can certainly see a rejection of all that intellectual property bullshit in piracy.

Hackers for example, similar to pirates on oceans, can be free from the system just with a computer.

Technology and the digital world is extremely important in the global world, and its importantce is growing significantly every day, similar to how the importance of sailing growing when piracy became popular.

We will see if this prophecy of revolutions we make by seing the golden age of piracy will be accurate or not.

[Janus]

I wouldn't go so far as to say that the new trend of piracy can be compared to the barbarian invasions.

I suppose that it could be similar to the suppressions of the Barbary Pirates and pirates in general. When nations or businesses in this case see themselves threatened by certain enterprises they will want to crack down on them.

I think the example of intellectucal property rights is one major case in which capitalism is actually blocking further technological development. If this continues to be a growing problem, which is most likely the case, then we will have a much more interesting scenario in the future.

[ComradeOm]

I'd view piracy as merely another form of a nation's ruling class expanding its foreign holdings and markets. The Conquistadors would have formed the first wave of these European agents in the "new world" while the other European nations quickly sponsored pirates to compete with Spanish hegemony. The aim of these trailblazers was to secure bases and resources for the European capitalists… and so were almost certainly a factor in the growth of the bourgeois (not however a defining one).

But I don't see anything unique about the pirates nor the time in which they lived. The exploitation of the West Indies would begin roughly three centuries before the establishment of a bourgeois Europe and the East Indies trade routes were always far more lucrative. It makes more sense to view the pirates as soldiers, of an unconventional sort, sent out to "crack" the new foreign markets. In that regard they are no different from the soldiers serving in Iraq today. A more direct comparison would be the pioneers that travelled into the "Wild West" during the US expansion.

By this token the comparison with the Roman barbarians is flawed. The barbarians were not sent by Rome to expand its holdings but instead invaded the rotting Empire to conquer for themselves.

[Whitten]

Dont confuse Pirates with Privateers. Piravteers were in the employ of the bourgeois, pirates were free from that

[Comrade-Z]

I'd view piracy as merely another form of a nation's ruling class expanding its foreign holdings and markets.

But I'm talking about pirates which pledged no allegiance to any nation, nor in the employ of any master. I don't quite think the soldiers or Halliburton mercenaries in Iraq qualify.


By this token the comparison with the Roman barbarians is flawed. The barbarians were not sent by Rome to expand its holdings but instead invaded the rotting Empire to conquer for themselves.

But that's indeed why they were pirates, of a sort. They owed no allegiance to Rome, they were able to take advantage of the decaying social order, and they defied the existing property relations. Although perhaps the barbarian plunderings aren't the best example.


Very early stages. digital piracy is unique in that it requires no real labour.

I wouldn't quite say that. Computers need electricity in order to run, and there's labor in that. I suppose there's also a minimal amount of labor in the file-sharing process itself. But yeah, it doesn't require very much labor at all.

Another thing I realized--there was a certain degree of democracy and shunning of authority among the pirates of the 17th century, although that's not to say they were saints, though. But certainly they were nothing like the Hollywood stereotypes. Similarly, there exists a bit of a democratic, anti-authority culture among digital pirates (although there are also small numbers who just like to fuck with people and spread malicious code, just like there were probably small numbers of pirates who were corrupt and oppressive towards their own pirate crews.)

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by Comrade-[email protected] 8 2006, 01:16 PM
But I'm talking about pirates which pledged no allegiance to any nation, nor in the employ of any master. I don't quite think the soldiers or Halliburton mercenaries in Iraq qualify.
Almost all of the original wave of pirates were in possession lettre de marque from a European power. They were essentially sponsored to wage a proxy war against Spain while the other powers could expand their bases of operations in the Caribbean. Its no surprise that the decline of the pirates came when the Europeans powers were well established in the new world and the pirates preying on merchants became a nuisance more than a boon. Bear in mind that this decline of piracy occurred well before the advent of capitalism.

I'd also be interested in your thoughts on current piracy of the Horn of Africa and the South China Sea.

[Janus]

Almost all of the original wave of pirates were in possession lettre de marque from a European power
That was mainly during the Colonialism/Imperialism period and they're technically considered privateers. Early pirates and those in the East generally acted of their own accord.


Its no surprise that the decline of the pirates came when the Europeans powers were well established in the new world and the pirates preying on merchants became a nuisance more than a boon. Bear in mind that this decline of piracy occurred well before the advent of capitalism.
Pirates are still thriving in international waters particularly in the East and the Horn of Africa which you mentioned.

I would say that due to the inability of state powers to project their authority into their areas, pirating has become a lot easier especially after the Cold War.

I would say that taking care of this phenomenon is basically similar to taming a frontier or suppressing bandits, hardly something that would move us into a new age.

[blake 3:17]

I was reading through a list of seminar courses for my college scheduling. One of the seminars was entitled, "The Golden Age of Piracy." And it hit me, when was the "Golden Age of Piracy"? In the century or so preceding the major bourgeois revolutions. What gave rise to this golden age of piracy? The establishment of a world market and massive commodity trading and transport--in short, the developing stages of capitalism within the old feudal society--at a stage when the relations of production had not yet changed to correspond to the already revolutionized factors of production, at a stage when the old state apparatus was ill-suited to protect the interests of the new, rising ruling class.

So piracy is founded on exchnage value. Makes sense. I've watched a few thrillers lately on rerun -- Ocean's Eleven, the Italian Job -- and exchange value was key to the booty and its bootiliciousness. Aside from gold and precious stones, drugs and sugar would be primary. no?

[Dean]

Piracy as a revolutionary catalyst is not realistic. It reflects an instability in the remaining social order, not the oncoming revolution. If the internet can make the government sufficiently unstable, which China seems to have shown unlikely, than the piracy would reflect an instability of the regime, but I don't see that happening. The power held in movie and music rights is not grave for national security.

[Intelligitimate]

You might find this interesting, Comrade-Z.

Copyright vs, CopyLeft: A Marxist Critique (http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue7_3/soderberg/).

[RedKnight]

http://www.cinemanews.gr/v3/other_images/soundtrack/PiratesOfTheCarribean.jpg

[Ol' Dirty]

Arrgh!

[bezdomni]

The last two posts were really pointless. :P

Fuck, so was this one.