this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2024
419 points (83.1% liked)

Linux

48122 readers
651 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 36 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Idk, technically voluntary association is a key tenet of volunteerism/anarcho-capitalism, so if we're just using volunteering as the basis we might as well say it's volunteerism. I think anarcho-communism and anarcho-capitalism are a bit more nuanced than "sharing."

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 29 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Anarcho-capitalism is a contradictory term that is mostly used to imagine neofeudalism.

[–] AnneBonny@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

mostly used to imagine neofeudalism

what else is it used for?

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 5 points 10 months ago

Those advocating for it also use it to display their total lack of perspective and analysis of the mechanics of capitalism. I.e. one can use it as a sign on one's head saying "not at home for the moment, try again later".

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Anarcho-Capitalism isn't a thing, it's just Libertarian Capitalists LARPing with Leftist aesthetics. The very rejection of individual ownership rejects Capitalism, it's like saying Worker Co-operatives are an example of Capitalism because markets tend to not care what makes them up.

Just because FOSS would be "allowed" in Capitalism doesn't mean it's an example of Capitalist principles.

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yes and they'd argue that anarchism isn't exclusively leftist (well, I'D argue that depends on one's definition of left/right, because depending on who you ask it's either good/bad, collectivism/individualism, or lib/auth, and by the latter definition they would then be leftist capitalists, which is funny to think about.) They support individual ownership without rulers, however they still promote sharing of things you own with your community if you can/want.

Right, and just because sharing is "allowed" in communism doesn't mean sharing is communism. It being allowed in both not being necessarily representative of either is my whole point.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Regardless of what AnCaps argue, the fundamental fact is that Anarchy is a rejection of hierarchy, whereas Private Property itself requires both the Owner/Worker hierarchy, and a monopoly on violence that cannot be reasonably contested to uphold Private Property protections. As such, it can only be considered Libertarian, as it both maintains hierarchy and maintains some semblance of at minimum a nightwatchman state.

As for Left/Right, the standard definition is Collective/Individual ownership of the Means of Production, not necessarily collectivism/individualism or lib/auth. Individual ownership by definition is supporting rulers, the larger Capitalists are effectively no different from a Feudal state.

Sharing being allowed does not mean FOSS aligns with AnCap principles, that's like saying bagel consumption is AnCap.

FOSS isn't simply "sharing" either, it's quite literally a rejection of Individual ownership and creating IP for the collective to use, fork, maintain, and distribute as they see fit. It isn't a coincidence that FOSS enthusiasts overwhelmingly lean left, just like Lemmy tends to.

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Regardless of what AnCaps argue, the fundamental fact is that Anarchy is a rejection of hierarchy, whereas Private Property itself requires both the Owner/Worker hierarchy, and a monopoly on violence that cannot be reasonably contested to uphold Private Property protections. As such, it can only be considered Libertarian, as it both maintains hierarchy and maintains some semblance of at minimum a nightwatchman state.

Regardless is right, because my comments were never about espousing the benefits of anarcho-capitalism, I was using them to make the point that simply because things share a similarity with a political ideology it does not in fact make them "that ideology." Arguing about ancapistan in this instance is a "strawman."

Sharing being allowed does not mean FOSS aligns with AnCap principles, that's like saying bagel consumption is AnCap.

No this is my point, you get your own.

use, fork, maintain, and distribute as they see fit.

"Sharing."

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

No.

Your argument is that because FOSS would be permissible in AnCap society, FOSS being fundamentally constructed upon AnCom principles of rejecting Capitalism and centralization in favor of decentralized and collectively owned and distributed property makes it not in line with Anarcho-Communism.

When the article is giving an example of how Anarcho-Communism would work, Linux is a fantastic example. Nobody is saying Linux is Anarcho-Communism, or that Linux cannot exist within broader contexts, but that in an Anarcho-Communist society, the structure of Linux and FOSS would be the common structure.

You're being contrarion for the sake of it.

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

No.

Yes.

Your argument is that because ~~FOSS would be permissible in AnCap society..~~

Because voluntary association and sharing is also a core tenet of volunteerism/anarchocapitalism, as they also are of anarcho-communism..

FOSS being ~~fundamentally constructed upon AnCom principles of rejecting Capitalism and centralization in favor of decentralized and collectively owned and distributed property~~

FOSS being similar to AnCom because both share principles of sharing

makes it not in line with Anarcho-Communism.

makes it not necessarily Anarcho-Communist.

You're making false equivalencies for the sake of it.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

"This rejection of profit and ownership made by a self-admitted leftist is actually completely in line with for-profit individual ownership just because AnCaps don't murder people for doing charity"

You're just trying to be contrarion for the sake of it, lmao. Again, the article was showcasing examples of gift economies and how Anarcho-Communism would function, and Linux fits that definition. It wasn't arguing that Linux is Anarcho-Communism itself. It is not an example of how Anarcho-Capitalism would function, as Anarcho-Capitalism is Capitalism, and FOSS is decidedly anticapitalist, even if said Capitalists wouldn't murder Linus for rejecting Capitalism.

You're again being needlessly contrarion, Anarcho-Capitalists don't advocate for setting up networks of mutual aid and FOSS software, they don't care about gift economies either. Using Linux as an example for AnCapistan would get you laughed out of the room, if calling yourself an AnCap didn't already result in that.

I'm done, this is pointless.

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 10 months ago

Lmao know what? Money must me made of grass, seeing as both are green, you've convinced me.