I do want to add this: I’m not big on theory. There was a time when I found that stuff interesting, but ever since I became acquainted with the concept of map and territory, I’ve been skeptical of any kind of total systems models because I think they tend to be far closer to the imaginal than to reality.
I want to keep my feet closer to the ground. Which is why I find a lot of the debates and flame wars about each person’s preferred -ism to be rather pointless. Every system that tries to meet reality with tangible results must contend with hostility from competitors both within and without. No ideology survives this fully intact.
That all said, I think an understated reality is how wildly successful the software and information freedom movements have been, particularly in our capitalist world (if you want to call it that). At least in the sphere of information itself, the gpl and other copyleft licenses lowkey have the potential to strike at the heart of capital, and have gradually been eroding private property wherever it manages to establish itself. At this point it is unstoppable.
Open-source is a communist, or socialist, or anarchist project because it turns private property against itself and builds commons anew. And yes, property is theft.
What you’re describing is the “all models are wrong, some are useful” problem.
the gpl and other copyleft licenses lowkey have the potential to strike at the heart of capital
The problem is they are legal fictions enforced and upheld by a state that is fundamentally controlled by capitalist interests. If they played by the rules of their own game you would be correct, but they have shown repeatedly that the rules are irrelevant only the outcome matters and the outcome you are hoping for is not one they will allow.
I wholly reject your view on software and capitalism. Libre-software has given capitalists a commons to rape and the ability to accrue capital at a rate that’s new. It’s the bedrock of surveillance-capitalism.
(I have an issue with the name: it’s really just capitalism. I am not convinced by Shoshana’s writings that it needs distinction. Because it’s about computers and software it immediately becomes opaque to laymen and accrues a type of mysticism. Commodification of a new product does not necessitate a new sub-type of capitalism, otherwise there should be distinctions between oil-capitalism, consumer-capitalism, marketed-capitalism and so-forth into an endless jumble of nonsense.
Shoshana’s writings are reactionary. They’re the concerned mumblings of a previously privileged class becoming increasingly exploited as capitalism necessitates new markets to exploit–and that new market now necessitates the surveillance of their class to generate data from which services can be sold.)
Libre-software is a very clear example of why socialist programs fail in competition with capitalist endeavors when the structures of capitalism are not dismantled. The reality is the internet and the economy now operates via libre-software. Just as the working-class is exploited for their labour the commons of libre-software is plundered. Both are undeniable.
The plundering of libre-software does not weaken the capitalist’s position. It only strengthens it and reinforces it. It’s the reason you have the Americans attempting to create a technocracy or techno-feudalism.
I do want to add this: I’m not big on theory. There was a time when I found that stuff interesting, but ever since I became acquainted with the concept of map and territory, I’ve been skeptical of any kind of total systems models because I think they tend to be far closer to the imaginal than to reality.
I want to keep my feet closer to the ground. Which is why I find a lot of the debates and flame wars about each person’s preferred -ism to be rather pointless. Every system that tries to meet reality with tangible results must contend with hostility from competitors both within and without. No ideology survives this fully intact.
That all said, I think an understated reality is how wildly successful the software and information freedom movements have been, particularly in our capitalist world (if you want to call it that). At least in the sphere of information itself, the gpl and other copyleft licenses lowkey have the potential to strike at the heart of capital, and have gradually been eroding private property wherever it manages to establish itself. At this point it is unstoppable.
Open-source is a communist, or socialist, or anarchist project because it turns private property against itself and builds commons anew. And yes, property is theft.
What you’re describing is the “all models are wrong, some are useful” problem.
The problem is they are legal fictions enforced and upheld by a state that is fundamentally controlled by capitalist interests. If they played by the rules of their own game you would be correct, but they have shown repeatedly that the rules are irrelevant only the outcome matters and the outcome you are hoping for is not one they will allow.
You read big yudds regurgitated philosophy and just decided to fuck’n’ yeet that baby out with the bathwater huh?
sadly most Foss supports capital. Copyleft and stallman-y radicalism have always been fringe vs permissive licenses and projects paid for by corpos.
I wholly reject your view on software and capitalism. Libre-software has given capitalists a commons to rape and the ability to accrue capital at a rate that’s new. It’s the bedrock of surveillance-capitalism.
(I have an issue with the name: it’s really just capitalism. I am not convinced by Shoshana’s writings that it needs distinction. Because it’s about computers and software it immediately becomes opaque to laymen and accrues a type of mysticism. Commodification of a new product does not necessitate a new sub-type of capitalism, otherwise there should be distinctions between oil-capitalism, consumer-capitalism, marketed-capitalism and so-forth into an endless jumble of nonsense.
Shoshana’s writings are reactionary. They’re the concerned mumblings of a previously privileged class becoming increasingly exploited as capitalism necessitates new markets to exploit–and that new market now necessitates the surveillance of their class to generate data from which services can be sold.)
Libre-software is a very clear example of why socialist programs fail in competition with capitalist endeavors when the structures of capitalism are not dismantled. The reality is the internet and the economy now operates via libre-software. Just as the working-class is exploited for their labour the commons of libre-software is plundered. Both are undeniable.
The plundering of libre-software does not weaken the capitalist’s position. It only strengthens it and reinforces it. It’s the reason you have the Americans attempting to create a technocracy or techno-feudalism.