















Good for you, Justin.crutch145 wrote:The keyword you used that proves it is not socialist is "voluntary." Nothing that is voluntary is socialist... it is most definitely a byproduct of free market capitalism. People have the choice to participate... no one is forced to use Linux. It is just like donating to a charity. If Linux is socialist, then so are all charities and those that donate to them. But they are not, since people choose to donate to charities (even the most outspoken free market capitalists choose to donate).
Justin




*shakes head* That's a false dichotomy, and I don't care if David Nolan or the entire Libertarian Party says otherwise.sloebs wrote:It is not a left vs right thing. It is a top vs bottom thing. It is not a socialism vs capitalism thing.
...
In the US, we are made to believe in the false dichotomy of a one-dimensional left-right socio-economic spectrum. In reality the social spectrum and the economic spectrum create a two-dimensional cartesian plane.
That's right. I think the word "voluntary" captures the distinction exactly.It is a anarchism/libertarianism vs authoritarianism thing.






crutch145 wrote:The keyword you used that proves it is not socialist is "voluntary." Nothing that is voluntary is socialist... it is most definitely a byproduct of free market capitalism. People have the choice to participate... no one is forced to use Linux. It is just like donating to a charity. If Linux is socialist, then so are all charities and those that donate to them. But they are not, since people choose to donate to charities (even the most outspoken free market capitalists choose to donate).
monkeyboy wrote:Linux is an inanimate and unaware pile of zero and ones. So anything of a political nature that is ascribed to it is a function of the observer and not of the program.





Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests