Re: [Marxism] trouble with Thunderbird

[Intense Red <intnsred@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

 > We are building a political movement, not a fucking isolated
 > cooperative.

   There are many factors to consider before dumping Microsoft (e.g. you might
require some proprietary software that only runs on Microsoft platforms) in
order to adopt free software, but I basically agree with Michael's
sentiments.

   I don't see it as an "isolated cooperative"; if you surf the free software
world, you'll see constant references to the free software "community."
There are millions of GNU/Linux and *BSD users on every continent.  GNU/Linux
is used in most large businesses and in devices running from mainframe
computers to cell phones.  Marxists should have a knee-jerk reaction to favor
"communal" rather than "proprietary" forms of commerce.

   Microsoft does have a monopoly lock on the market.  And they produce a
product that is arguably flawed and certainly more insecure and bug-ridden
than what the free software movement has produced.

   If one looks at the free software movement, it is communist in its nature.
It's built on a sort of technical meritocracy, with sharing everything to all
people at its core.  Those are wonderful things!  While there are certainly
many people who are paid to develop free software, it's not going too far to
say that the core of the free software movement is people creating software
for the love of it -- a direct application of the Marxist principles of
removing the alienation from labor.  (And we now have a firm example that
removing alienation results in better products.)

   There are a couple of interesting aspects to Carroll's comments.

(1)   It's one thing to "put up with" a monopoly or typical capitalist
industrial/development model in order to gain the benefits of that capitalist
model.  This is why Marx saw his version of communism as a post-capitalist
system -- to reap those benefits of capitalism.

   Free software's development model *is* a post-capitalist model and uses the
tactics and innovations of capitalist software development yet turning the
tables to (1) reduce alienation of labor and (2) make the benefits available
to anyone.

   Wrapped tightly in their technical cocoons many of the developers working
in free software do not look at it this way -- they primarily look at free
software simply as an efficient and cheap way to solve problems and are not
even aware of their own radical actions in applying these technical
solutions.  The only thing I can say about this dynamic is: cool! :-)

(2)   A common tactic of the exploited is to boycott various companies.  This
is a reactionary approach but it has been used for years and years and is a
tried and true method of creating awareness and change.

   Urging one to boycott a monopoly company who produces shoddy, inferior
products -- Microsoft -- is a valid approach simply from a consumer's point
of view.

   Urging one to boycott Microsoft and to adopt free software is a far more
dramatic stance!  I don't think it's too much to say that it's a downright
revolutionary approach.  Microsoft -- the largest software business on the
planet -- is *seriously* worried about free software radically changing the
entire software industry from a proprietary model supported by intellectual
property laws to a communal free software model.  This is great stuff!

   It's not the type of revolution we typically imagine, but it *is in
essence* urging the migration from a monopoly capitalist form of production
to a social/communal form of production -- *with* direct benefits to the end
user of that social/communal form.  How can Marxists oppose such a migration?

   Michael's claim that moving from commercial software to free software is "a
real litmus test" is perfectly valid, though probably a bit overstated (that
never happens in e-mail, right?! :-).

   The test is obfuscated by the fact that computers and software are damned
technical and complicated (whether we're talking about Microsoft or free
software), and it may well be a valid argument for many users to say "the
switching to free software is not worth the time and headaches involved in
moving away from monopoly capitalist software."

   But then again, arguments for inaction can be made for most any political
or social issue.

 In solidarity.

--
Tired of worms and viruses, security holes, expen$ive upgrades, and blue
screens of death?  Sick of software snooping and privacy violations?  Want
stability and efficiency?  Then why aren't you running GNU/Linux?  Why pay
for a buggy/limited OS when GNU/Linux is free? <http://linux.com>

_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism