Reading about FOSS philosophy, degoogling, becoming against corporations, and now a full-blown woke communist (like Linus Torvalds)

  • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    Linux and open source in general completely blow apart capitalist arguments that profit motive is necessary for innovation and technological advancement. Open source ecosystem primarily run by volunteers has produces some of the most interesting and innovative technologies that we’ve seen. The reality is that people make interesting things because they’re curious and they enjoy making stuff. Pretty much nobody makes anything interesting with profit being the primary motive.

  • ConfusedLlama@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    rant:

    I have been using Linux since 2006, a lefty and against the super-rich and big corporations since I remember (to the point of avoiding their products like the plague), also never having understood or accepted gender roles and other stupid traditional concepts, yet never turned into a communist 🤷

    It baffles me that so many people think that respecting gender equality, understanding the evil in big corporations and avoiding them, valuing community and being tolerant (except for intolerance) and against discrimination somehow equals communism… I say this because I’ve been called a communist by many people who know me, while I have always rejected it explicitly!

    /rant

  • StaySquared@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Am I doing it wrong because I’ve use Ubuntu (12 years) and Kali Linux (8 years) and… I’m still not a marxist?

    • Zombie-Mantis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      My brother in Christ Comrade in the revolution, Communism is a stateless, moneyless, classless society. Whatever self-proclaimed “Statist Communists” thare are, are no-more Communist than the National “Socialists” who sent our kind to the death camps.

      • EchoCT@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        The end stage of the dialectic is that, yes. But that’s doesn’t just appear from nothing. Read state and Revolution or What is to be done.

    • AnanasMarko@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Disagree. If FOSS were an anarchism what would be the point of FOSS lincences of which some are very long legal documents? Also corporations would just take your code, say its theirs and tell you to go fuck yourself.

      • SailorMoss@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Foss licenses are copyleft, they bar individuals from enclosing the commons built by the collective for profit. Anarchism isn’t just letting people do whatever they want. Anarchism means against hierarchy. Having rules that prevent unjustified hierarchies from forming is entirely with in the bounds of anarchism. Including rules that prevent using copyright as a coercive hierarchy.

        • AnanasMarko@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Honest question: “Without any authority who gets to enforce the rules?”. Everyone, as they see fit it seems. What makes “your” hierarchy better than “my” hierarchy?

          • Sarcasmo220@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Everyone sort of enforces the rules as they see fit now. The difference is there is an expectation to not resist when someone is abusing their power because they are an authority figure. Under anarchism, it is your peers holding each other accountable, and your right to question actions against you is accepted.

  • mwguy@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Ironic as I went the other way. I was a Communist when I got into FOSS and as I got older I realized I could never defend the historical record of Communism.

    • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      This is what happens when everything you know is based on vibes instead of actually reading any theory or history from primary source historians instead of third.

        • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          I’m saying I don’t believe you’ve ever engaged with communism. I don’t believe you’ve read a single book. I don’t believe you’ve even read a single pamphlet. I don’t think you could give me a simplified breakdown of what historical materialism is and I don’t believe you could tell me what the 5 basic classes are that marxists define, along with a simple 1 sentence description of their scientific definition. I don’t think you were a communist and I don’t think you know anything about the “historical record of communism” beyond what you have passively consumed from the far right wing fuckwads that you’ve surrounded yourself with and allowed to rot your brain. I’m saying that the confident manner in which you bullshit about these things is a severe personal failing.

          All of these are 101 things that anyone who has actually engaged with the topic of socialism for more than like 1 single week would be able to answer instantly and easily.

          I’m saying that your political opinions and knowledge of history is based on vibes that you have attained from the massive quantity of propaganda you uncritically consume and not from any actual meaningful knowledge.

          Clear enough?

          • mwguy@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            You’ve not looked into Communism too much have you?

            Marx had the opportunity to see Communist movements rise in his own timeline. And he opposed the implementation of Communism in a Democratic manner. And wrote about it in his criticiques of the Germany’s Communist movements source. In his criticiques he lays out how he believes a transitional state should be laid out, how it should be organized. And later Lenin refers extensively to this blueprint in his written works and it’s clear to me upon reading that he truly believes what he says.

            In my experience about almost every modern day Communist hear arguments made about the USSR not being based in Communism and have failed to even hear of this critique of the mythic Democratic Communism they believe I’m so much.

            Read the critique, and given everything you know about human beings tell me honestly, do you truly believe a multi-generational dictatorship of the proletariat, led by you (or someone whom you’d champion), would really work?

            I’m saying that your political opinions and knowledge of history is based on vibes…

            I’ve been on the internet a very long time. But this is the first time I’ve seen a Communist (or anyone really) ague their position based on the vibes of the person their arguing against.

            • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              Yeah so you’re avoiding everything I said and injecting a completely different topic that you also don’t understand.

              Marx’s critique isn’t with democracy it’s with bourgeoise-democracy. You would understand this if you understood even the basic bare minimum about marxist theory. All you are doing here is demonstrating that you do not understand the difference between what marxists refer to as a bourgeoise-democracy and what marxists refer to as a proletarian-democracy. Or if you prefer, the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie vs the dictatorship of the proletariat.

              Marx’s “opposition to democracy” that you are utilising for bullshit propaganda here is opposition to using the mechanisms of bourgeoise-democracy to achieve socialism (because they’re designed for the bourgeoisie and to produce outcomes the bourgeoisie want) and instead advocates for revolution to destroy that dictatorship-of-class and install a new democracy of the workers, a new dictatorship of class but one instead run by the working class (the vast majority) instead of the former ruling class (the bourgeoisie, the vast minority).

              These are incredibly basic 101 concepts that, if you were a communist as you claim, you would already be aware of and understand. You were not a communist. You haven’t even read a pamphlet like the manifesto, let alone the Critique Gotha Programme that you’re linking to. I have though. And to anyone that actually HAS read these things that you’re pretending to have read you look like and absolute clown who is winging it.

              • mwguy@infosec.pub
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                9 months ago

                Marx’s critique isn’t with democracy it’s with bourgeoise-democracy.

                Marx’s critique isn’t with democracy, it’s with democracy that disagrees with him.

                All you are doing here is demonstrating that you do not understand the difference between what marxists refer to as a bourgeoise-democracy and what marxists refer to as a proletarian-democracy.

                I do understand the difference. The difference is that to transition from the former to the later, Marx advocates for violent revolution and the establishment of a dictatorship to “re-educate” the populace. It’s practically hand waved over by Marx and modern Communists, but it’s the most important part of the process. Who controls that dictatorship has all the effective powers of a dictatorship and has the ability to make life for the people they rule hell. Essentially Marx unironically created a worse version of Feudalism where there was no check on the power of the ruler(s) on the assumption that compassion.

                a new dictatorship of class but one instead run by the working class (the vast majority) instead of the former ruling class (the bourgeoisie, the vast minority).

                Unfortunately, even in a post revolution environment; the working class will never voluntarily choose to rule in the fashion that Marx things they would. No matter the re-education instilled.

                You haven’t even read a pamphlet like the manifesto, let alone the Critique Gotha Programme that you’re linking to. I have though. And to anyone that actually HAS read these things that you’re pretending to have read you look like and absolute clown who is winging it.

                My interpretation of it is essentially Lenin and Mao’s interpretation of it, just with the benefits of historical hindsight. I imagine, a younger, more idealistic me in 1920s St. Petersburg would have been a proud Bolshevik with the utmost confidence in the party leadership to lead us into a glorious, worker led future. If that makes me a clown whose winging it; my only request is that I get some ranch dipping sauce so at least I can get my vibes right.

                • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  “Dictatorship” doesn’t mean the same thing when Marx uses it vs what you understand the word to mean. Marx is talking about a dictatorship of CLASS. IE a large group of people within society. In liberal democracy the “ruling class” are the bourgeoisie, the capitalists, the billionaires and millionaires. They are the ruling class because when they led the revolutions to overthrow feudalism they designed the new system so that they would be the ruling class. That’s how it works. A dictatorship of CLASS.

                  Marx calls for exactly the same thing. A revolution that overthrows the current ruling class and installs a new ruling class. When the bourgeoisie overthrew the monarchs and their aristocracy they installed themselves as the ruling class, Marx calls for overthrowing the bourgeoisie and installing the proletariat as the new ruling class.

                  This isn’t a downgrade to democracy it is an UPGRADE to democracy. The current system only produces the results that the bourgeoisie wants. Socialism on the other hand with the proletariat in charge produces the results that the proletariat want.

                  My interpretation of it is essentially Lenin and Mao’s interpretation of it, just with the benefits of historical hindsight.

                  No it isn’t because your description above is fucking wrong. I’m telling you what Lenin and Mao’s interpretation is literally right now. This is basic as fuck stuff.

                  Who controls that dictatorship has all the effective powers of a dictatorship and has the ability to make life for the people they rule hell.

                  You’re acting like socialist countries don’t objectively provide a better quality of life than capitalist countries when compared at an equal level of development lmao. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2430906/

                  Your understanding of any of these topics is incredibly vulgar. A warped and contorted understanding that you’ve only learned through extremely passive engagement with the topic.

  • rk96@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I am a full blown capitalist, and I despise google and the entire online ad industry and its tracking, I’d say all of my apps (except for games) are foss or atleast somewhat open source

      • rk96@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Im sure you know more about me then I do, But I wont get into this argument, seems pointless

        • LoudWaterHombre@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          You are probably right, it does seem kinda pointless. A full blown capitalist embraces capitalism to its fullest and believes in its values. FOSS kinda contradicts that and hurts capitalism. You should support the economy and pay other companies to develop, manage, license, (…) your software.

          • rk96@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Did you see me ask for regulation againts it? I dont think so, again, this seems pointless

            • LoudWaterHombre@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              What kind of argument is seeing you pushing regulations against it? The question was if you are a full blown capitalist and if you support FOSS, you are most certainly not. You have to stop coming off as an american.

              • rk96@lemmy.one
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                Im not an american.

                Supporting foss doesnt make me not a capitalist, capitalism in its root is personal choice, and I choose FOSS over proprietery, and its fine