Thanks @Mozart and @AndrewDowning for the replies. I do see how the name “Pirate” doesn’t have mass appeal, and can be a barrier to entry / barrier to growth. So the question there is: how much growth and direct influence do we want? As @piecritic and others have pointed out, the party has done a good job of getting issues noticed, and having other parties adopt our policies. Are we content to keep playing at that level, so to speak, and hopefully just keep growing slowly?
OK, here goes. Bear in mind that if the answer to the above question is “we want mass appeal”, that probably trumps all these.
- All the members presumably like the name
- In the context of the Pirate movement, the name has a history/narrative. Whether or not the movement has tanked globally or in other places, there’s still value in being a part of that narrative. It speaks of where we came from, how our ideals and such have developed.
- “Pirate” in pop culture has connotations of “sticking it to the man”, a mistrust of authority, a certain sense of honour, and so forth. These are good images at a time where many, many people are suffering from politikverdrossenheit (political apathy/disenchantment).
- Bearing the above point in mind, actually, any even slightly unconventional name is better than something “normal”.
- Changing the name is going to involve a non-trivial amount of effort. Re-branding web sites, re-educating our current supporters and others we’ve dealt with in the past, placating any members who are really opposed to a name change ;), etc. Is the effort worthwhile?
I also have a specific argument against any name with the word “libertarian” in it. It’s become too toxic. I know exactly what it’s meant to mean, but it’s going to scare people off.