Linux Mint Forums

Of Course. It is.

Damn! Who blew our cover?

Socialist vs Capitalist -- Does anybody really care anymore?

In this world of economic turmoil . . . GNU/Linux and Open Source is Free -- and Free

Last but certainly not least -- is the fact that GNU/Linux and Mint are FREE Open Source software (FOSS).

It's free in price, yes . . . but, it's also free for you to use - however you want.

LMAO ... they say a picture says 1,000 words. You can has cheeseburger certainly does.

Socialist ... which definition, interpretation or opinion of what that means ? Overall though ... not at all. That's just silly, everyone knows Gnu/Linux is the work of and a well hidden conspiracy by hairybrainsucker monsters from outerspace ... HEEL BENT ON INTERGALACTIC DOMINATION !!!! D:

Anyone wanna do the group hug thing ... or no ?

It's important to note that capitalism and socialism are both economic systems that attempt to address the issue of scarcity. Well, in programming, there really is no scarcity. If I put a program out on something like Sourceforge, it gets duplicated many times, but its value isn't increased or decreased based on the number of downloads. The misconception of socialism is that it equates to "free stuff". The textbook definition simply defines it as "worker ownership" over the means of production. Of course, you can establish communally-owned businesses under a free-market economy as well, so even those definitions get blurred.

Therefore, the only answer is that open-source is neither capitalistic or socialistic. To label it as one or the other is like saying the screwdriver you have must fit into that definition. It's simply an a-political tool, like a hammer. It just happens to involve a lot of people.

Socialism works well as long as there is a big capitalist funding and protecting it

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

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

Good for you, Justin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGMQZEIXBMs

That word "choose" implies values, and you're the only one who gets to decide yours.

mockturtl - excellent video!

It is not a left vs right thing. It is a top vs bottom thing. It is not a socialism vs capitalism thing. It is a anarchism/libertarianism vs authoritarianism thing.

See the Political Compass at http://politicalcompass.org

Linux is anarchistic/libertarian as opposed to authoritarian.

Take the test and find out where you fit in one of the four quadrants. If your score is negative on the Y axis, you will be attracted to Linux.

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. There are not just two economic systems to choose from: market and command. There is also the subsistence and gift economies.

Subsistence is any type of DIY production that is outside the exchange-market economy. Not just Home Depot projects around the house, but backyard gardens, Linux computing and so on. And don't forget, subsistence production is INCOME TAX FREE!

The Gift economy is not just volunteerism, but also the growing free open source ANYTHING that is growing alongside software. And don't forget, gift receiving in INCOME TAX FREE; and gift giving, in some cases, is only taxable to the giver if if exceeds $10,000 per receiver per year.

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.

*shakes head* That's a false dichotomy, and I don't care if David Nolan or the entire Libertarian Party says otherwise.

Who decides, for instance, whether helping a person fix his motorcycle is a "social" or "economic" transaction?

(Note: values -- the motive force in the volition of acting -- are always at work, even with gifts, or among strangers. They are necessarily perceived, and conceived, by the individual mind.)

If the values you exchange are not denominated in money, what prevents a political authority from appraising some such price, so the event becomes de jure taxable (as happens with, say, land improvements)? Conversely, if motorcycles are outlawed, how much money do you charge to fix one?

It is a anarchism/libertarianism vs authoritarianism thing.

That's right. I think the word "voluntary" captures the distinction exactly.

Libertas ("freedom") or ἀναρχία (watch that χ, contrast, κ: "no master," if my survey of English will service) works, too.

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. Enjoy

Where is the polit bureau telling you peoples worker party gunts what to do and how to do it?

Socialism doesn't give you unlimited choices, it sets up a death panel that decides whether or not you should die

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.

The above two quotes sum it up for me.

i can say that socialism is a cancer for human race. i am from Romania and i know what i am talking about.
but now that i found that the founder of linux is a communist, i am more willing to see this OS as a bad option.
an OS driven by a communist, no way!
in the communist regime, the whole country was like a big corporation with working class as slaves, all working for the good of communist elite.
so, you people, who have spent your entire life in a capitalist country, you dont know what you are talking about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GTVV6XHfP4

that is communism for you baby!

The one who started Linux a Male. So this is a Male dominated operating system. Yes, I am bored also.

L