• azimir@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    12 minutes ago

    It should just be that the government doesn’t patrol the high seas, of course! Every ship should enter into personal 1-on-1 contracts with each pirate for a market appropriate rate to ensure they don’t get attacked. The Libertrian way won’t cause any issues of scale, rampant loss of merchant ships, and an eventual ending of all oceangoing shipping outside of the handful of ships that can afford their own navies to escort them… /s

  • Jikiya@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Is the assumption here that the navies, of the various countries that have one, capture commerce ships to bring back to the home country? If so, I have some bad news for you. Hell, even in war they don’t capture said ships.

  • Ioughttamow@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    13 hours ago

    No greater crime in capitalism than to hurt your fellow capitalists. You’re supposed to squeeze the proles

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Look how they did that little weasel Martin Shkreli. Insurance companies can steal from the people, but that little shit stole from them so they nailed him to the fucking wall.

  • yucandu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    The age of piracy existed before anyone had uttered the word “capitalism”. It was an age of mercantilism and agrarianism, not capitalism.

  • Maiq@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    One set works within a system that they have set up to benefit only themselves.

    The other works outside that system either for themselves or a separate collective. Working outside the measured control system is a direct threat to the profits the beneficiaries of that system.

    • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyzOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Except that piracy has always been explicitly endorsed by the beneficiaries of the system, they simply change the name, structure the conditions such that their piracy is considered part of the system even if it isn’t and then proceed to be pirates.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privateer

      Things get even more muddled when you consider that selfish agents may believe they are structuring a system for selfish gain when they are in fact destroying the system for everybody including themselves.

      • yucandu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 hours ago

        This is all notwithstanding the fact that most of where we get our modern day depiction of pirates as evil ne’er-do-wells is from Robert Newton films.

  • JayleneSlide@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I have a hypothesis that the Nassau pirates were a successful socialist economy. The Flying Gang/Republic of Pirates was founded mostly from former privateers (legally sanctioned and “licensed” marauders). The democratic and socialist nature of the republic was a growing threat to royalty and the American ruling class, especially given that Africans could be full crew members and even captains with all the rights afforded those roles. Furthermore, European royalty and American capitalists were the only ones “allowed” to pillage native lands. The pirates were in turn sacking European and American ships of their ill-gotten and exploitative gains.

    Having a socialist, comparatively egalitarian and equitable society amidst the Carribean sugar plantations was too much of a threat to the ruling classes. The pirates were ruthlessly pursued and purged from history. Sure, King George I (and some others? don’t recall) first tried to bring the Nassau pirates (back) into the fold with offers of amnesty. This is analogous to offering modern engineers well-paying jobs; most terrorists whose names you know start out as engineers*. The ruling classes first wanted to put the pirates’ skills to use for their own gain. Benjamin Hornigold was one who returned, hunting down his former peers.

    *think about that the next time you run across a bored, disgruntled engineer

    I find it very odd that books on the golden age of piracy all remark how the pirates supposedly kept no records, yet discuss at length how the pirates had healthcare, disability, pensions, equitable wealth distribution… these things all require assiduous record-keeping. And so my bullshitspiration is that there were records. But the campaign to wipe out the pirates was so thorough that we are now led to believe that the pirates were just brigands and chaotic anarchists.

    • Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Just to say, they were still semi-anarchist in nature, but not in the modern sense where it means “chaos” rather the political sense where it means “absence of hierarchy and horizontally-structured self-governance”, which is representative of the confederated nature of the Flying Gang where the different crews were considered equal and all had a say in their governance, based in a mutually agreed upon code of conduct. Within the crews themselves, captains were more like delegates who were chosen to take on leadership responsibilities but were at the whims of the crew. Power came from the bottom up, not the top down. If a crew was displeased with how their captain led the ship they were well within their right to depose him and appointed a new one.

      Anarchism is not the bad “chaos and disorder” that the ruling class would have you believe.

  • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    I’d assume that capitalists aren’t happy about getting their ships nabbed by hostile navies, either. Generally, the only ones who get rich off this kind of violence and usually get away with it are the capitalists who build weapons, and only if their country never gets occupied.

  • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Legalities aside, pirates are stealing from people with more resources, which is why they’re pursued by these naval forces. The logic of capitalism dictates that the biggest fish eats all the smaller fish and the wealthy are the big fish while the pirates are not.

    I’m not sure what you mean by “worse” but you don’t see the US Navy attacking and looting UK ships for example, which is why most people would consider pirates to be “worse.”