The word Socialism is a broad term. There are different streams of socialism. On one end of the spectrum, there is the extreme form of socialism known as communism infamous for its stringent following of its ideology, which was practiced by countries such as the erstwhile USSR (present Russia) and currently by China and Cuba. And at the other end, there is the more humane form of socialism as practiced by countries such as India and Sweden. That is right, India is a sovereign socialist democratic republic nation as stated in the constitution of India.
And before any of you point at the problems faced by India, let me tell you most of those problems are due to its burgeoning population and should not be attributed to its socialist aspect. And as far as Sweden is concerned, it is ranked as the 4th least corrupt nation in the world. A clue that it's people lead contented lives. And Sweden enjoys an ultra low unemployment rate of around 4% which is the least in the European Union.
Simply put, socialism is a process of control of resources by a community or state in varying degrees. So the big question is does the Free Software movement enjoy any relation with socialist ideology ?
If you go by the definition of Socialism, I would say yes. The source code is open and is controlled by the Free software community at large. And it is the community which largely decides and dictates the direction of a software's progress. Each decision is taken through consensus and by interacting with its users. Though at times there is bound to be a lot of bickering and clash of egos, for the large part, the job gets done splendidly. And socialism works in the software realm when it is a massive failure when implemented in an extreme form (read communism) in real life is because unlike the resources in real life, software is a replenish-able resource. You can literally make millions of copies of your source code and distribute it to others free of cost and still you will be left holding the original copy of the source code.
Having stated my views about this topic, I came across this lengthy article which talked about the inherent link between Free software and socialism. What held my attention was the insidious way in which they had portrayed the 'X' in Linux with a hammer and sickle - the trademark of communist movement. If anything, Free software movement is far removed from the mess that is communism.
13 comments:
On the contrary, Free software is the opposite of Socialism.
Free software isn't generated by the state or even partially by a state. It's individuals that create free software and they open it up to anyone. Individuals still own decision making power under the GPL, they don't surrender it. The fact that they offer the source for free modification has nothing to do with giving up control of it. It's simply allowing others to use and modify it freely.
If free software were like Socialism, the Linux kernel would be taken from Linus Torvalds and the group could override his decisions on what goes in the kernel. This (fortunately) does not happen. Linus still has the final say.
In effect, Free software is freedom at its best; individuals controlling their works. The fact that they open their code and permissions to modify further extend individual freedom.
You gotta love liberty!
Socialism and capitalism etc are all ways of trying to control the distribution of scarce resources. But software is not scarce. The cost of reproducing a piece of software is effectively zero. So I think your whole point is moot.
I really enjoy all the articles you write. But on this one I have to agree with "anonymous" comment above.
Free software cannot be compared with socialism or any other kind of isms because these "isms" are related to finding ways of controlling scarce resources and software is never going to be a scarce resource.
sad piece of typing as you don't even know what socialism is compared to totalitarianism, or one-party authoritarianism.
Ignorance lumps these all together under a power-induced self description of 'socialism.'
These countries you mention weren't socialist just because their leaders said they were.
To compare free software via your political ignorance is laughable.
Better do better in your jr. high poli-sci class tomorrow, dude.
@anonymous
sad piece of typing as you don't even know what socialism is compared to totalitarianism, or one-party authoritarianism.
Ignorance lumps these all together under a power-induced self description of 'socialism.'
Well for your information, there are different kinds of socialism and whether you like it or not, communism is a form of socialism and call it by any other name, it is a fact that communism was the basis of governance in the USSR.
Wikipedia lists around 12 different forms of socialism. Check it out
There are several forms of socialism, so far so true. The various definitions also are not quite coherent. One common way is though to describe it the following way:
Communism is the end-form that communists and anarchists strive for in which the state has completely vanished and all the means of production are held in the common.
Before we reach that goal though, we will go through various other stages. Communists usually imagine this to be a period where the state will grow and grow and nationalize everything in order to then wither away. Anarchists believe that during this period the power of the state will already fade away.
The point made by Marx is that any system of production is connected with a certain stage of development of the means of production, when it is most effective. In other words: in the stone age, liberal democracy /capitalism would have been very inefficient. Some form of chief based system was most appropriate for the tools the people had at the time. And for the 19th century, capitalism was a lot more effective than monarchism or feudalism.
In the same way though, Marx predicted that at some point of time capitalism would be inefficient compared to a new form of economic/control system -- socialism/communism.
And I think that is what the open source/free software movement shows: programs can gradually be produced more efficient through it than through the capitalist mode of production used at Microsoft & co. At the same time, capitalism doesn't go away by itself. With pattern claims, copyrights, etc. they might still kill it all, although it is more efficient.
Socialism would come with necessity some day if we had an infinite time line. However, we might just all die way before that due to capitalism produced climate crisis.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs! might just as well be the motto of free software.
Michael Burschik
Stalinism ruled Soviet Union and was followed by other states: China, Cuba and others. Stalinism is a kind of centered in State "Communism". To be correct Socialism, because Communism is the end of a procces not the means and Socialism is the means.
Stalinism was recognized by Trotsky as a degeneration, this is not from nowadays but from days Trotsky still alive. Many understand Stallin as non applying marxist theory, but his own.
So I beg your pardon not accepting your conception of Communism as inherent infamous, but understand as being a cultural conception.
To sake of honestity existed and exists countries that experienced dictatorship in form of capitalism.
Respectfully,
LCChueri
Socialism does not have to be controlled by the state. Please look up the term Libertarian Socialism (sometimes called anarchism).
So some say Free Software is like socialism, others argue it is more like capitalism. I would say it is both and neither, it transcends left/right politics. It is anarchic.
Free Software is no more socialist than Mathematics. There is no altruistic element. There is no controlling authority. There are, however, many way to use it in capitalistic enterprises.
Yes, it is futile to start confusing Marxism with various implementations of socialism and even more pointless to throw them all into one big grab bag. Stalin is a world away from Lenin and Mao and don't even mention benign the great liberator of Cuba - one of his first actions was to outlaw racial discrimination. As for any correlation with the free software movement, I see none whatsoever. If I had to align it with any political movement at all it would have be the romanticism of the Rousseauian anarchist movement of the 1880's.
"And as far as Sweden is concerned, it is ranked as the 4th least corrupt nation in the world. "
This is hardly a scientific test as to whether socialism works better than any other system.
"Anonymous said... Socialism and capitalism etc are all ways of trying to control the distribution of scarce resources. But software is not scarce. The cost of reproducing a piece of software is effectively zero. So I think your whole point is moot."
Well said. I don't see ANY connection between the idea of socialism and free software.
As i understand free software movement and open source software are two different things. And they ARE related to socialism and communism.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-free.html.and let me remind you of the co-operative system where the people got together and formed "bussinesses".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative
therefore i can not agree with the argument "Free software isn't generated by the state or even partially by a state".
to me free software is like radical communism and open source software is like socialism. comments anyone?
Post a Comment