Yes that’s right folks. Lets not kid ourselves. Linux is not a democracy. Linux is anarchy. Everyone going in their own damn directions. It’s not about working together. It’s about works for me! It’s not Yes We Can, it’s Yes I Can. Link
Early in my adventures with linux, i realized that for linux to have mass appeal it will have to loose its exclusivism and pander to the needs of the common man. One of the reasons linux as a whole is failing in this aspect is the prevailing anarchy and the pro-anarchy framework which comes with FOSS. I ma not against FOSS, mind you and Use linux myself, but it pains me to see the high handedness of the avg linux user to people who want some order and sanity. I must admit the at least ubuntu is becoming increasingly user friendly, but i still would not install it on a Friend’s computer if he or she is not computer savvy, and if i cannot be around to troubleshoot. You can google and fix almost any common problem you may face in XP, of even Vista, but try that in linux and you will either end up with fifteen diffrent ways of doing the same thing, all requiring command line knowledge, or stupid stuck up morons who say, “works for me, you must have screwed up”.
This is not a linux bashing blog, and neither is this post cathartic, I am just pointing out that, anarchy needs to be clearly distinguished from freedom, and checked. Freedom requires accountability, and responsibility and the maturity to realize that other’s needs are important.
IF you have not read any blog about linux, and you want to read something funny and informative, read linux haters blog. also try linuxhaxor, both are opposite in intent but often have similar lessons to offer.
Ciao
Schizo
4 responses so far ↓
1 Mojo // Aug 31, 2008 at 5:15 pm
It is a shame, if very understandable given the pervasive dogmatic propaganda in popular culture separating the word from it’s true meaning and intent, that the word anarchy evokes images of chaos and disorder. Anarchism, well understood, evokes principals of self determinism but recognizes that chaos is something separate from anarchy. A well rounded anarchist philosophy stresses a realistic view of human inter-relations. And so it follows that age-old common sense regarding how we conduct ourselves with one another is still pertinent advice that we all would do well to heed. It is in all of our best interests to play nice together. And that ethos is an important part of anarchist thinking. Anarchism at it’s heart is a philosophy of non-violence, personal responsibility, and co-operation. Practicing anarchists tend to be builders of community, not destroyers.
Anarchy *is* freedom. But since the word is so loaded, perhaps we can substitute “self-determinism” for “anarchy” in the following sentance…
“…[self-determinism] needs to be clearly distinguished from freedom, and checked.”
That is absurd. “Checking” someone’s self-deterministic behavior is not freedom, it is control. But I am not suggesting that it is somehow “okay” for people to run amok pillaging and raping each other. What I am saying, however, is that just because you don’t like or disagree with another’s behavior does not give you the right to forcibly stop them from doing as they please. No matter how you may wish to dance around it, you are advocating the use of force to control another’s behavior and equating that with “freedom”.
Now it is a different matter if someone is, by their actions, using force to prevent you from following your own will. Meeting or resisting that force is simply defending your self, and perfectly legitimate. But quite realistically, most of the time when we find ourselves in contention with another, we will work it out amongst ourselves without the need for some third party to come in and police people for us. Personal responsibility, remember? Do it yourself. Enlist help from those willing if need be. Likely your cause would have to be just for you to find others to champion you of their own free will.
It is the old programmed tendency to trade liberty for “security” by advocating an “authority” be instituted to “control” this “anarchy”, this “freedom”, whilst deluding ourselves that we are “protecting” freedom. This is simply not sane reasoning. And perhaps part of the reason it is so hard to recognize in our selves, or admit to our selves when pointed out to us. Who wants to admit to themselves that they have been so wrong, so un-sane in their thinking? It can be unsettling to face the possibility that perhaps more of our thinking is flawed and based on faulty assumptions.
You say, “Freedom requires accountability, and responsibility and the maturity to realize that other’s needs are important.” No, not exactly. Though the implication is there I suppose. It is more correct to simply state that a healthy and stable society requires the maturity to realize that others’ needs are important. But this sort of mature and egalitarian attitude in a society is not in opposition to anarchist philosophy. It is, perhaps, quite central. We do not need little (or big) Napoleons to tell us how to carry on with each other. But we will have to learn to work out our differences with each other in a civil manner. Our modern “civilized” culture is really and quite terribly authoritarian and divisive. Far more than most people consciously realize.
GNU/Linux. “Yes that’s right folks. Lets not kid ourselves. Linux is not a democracy. Linux is anarchy.”
Thank God. Who needs the tyranny of the 51st percentile anyway?
“Everyone going in their own damn directions.”
Hurray! Everyone is free to follow their own direction. It’s a beautiful thing, this freedom, is it not?
“It’s not about working together. It’s about works for me! It’s not Yes We Can, it’s Yes I Can.”
Well, now, that is a matter of opinion, or perhaps perception. In truth, there is a great deal of community and involvement. Quite a lot of “Yes We Can!” Even more so, without a substantially non-trivial amount of co-operative effort the GNU/Linux community would simply not exist. Linux is most certainly a community of “Yes We Did, and DO”. And they DO it themselves. By free association. Self-organized. Yes, organized. Not chaos, as you perceive it.
Freedom is a wonderful thing. The GNU and Free Software Movement philosophy promotes a degree of ordered anarchy. Though it does yet rely on concepts of property ownership in copyright law (intellectual “property”, no less), and the systems of coercion that enforce such laws. So it is not perhaps as completely free as it could be. Certainly not a true anarchism. Yet, certain freedoms are paramount. Especially, the freedom to fork. (See freedom #3 of the Free Software Definition at http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html.) This freedom gives us the anarchy of development in multiple directions at once. But that’s a good thing, my friend. It is healthy for the software ecosystem over time. You should recognize that it serves a very similar purpose to the meanderings of evolution. It is though these meanderings that resilience and adaptability arise giving life, through evolution, and free software, through the freedom given to evolve, that the free software will, inevitably, prevail over time.
In essence I agree with much of your sentiment with regard to elitist and exclusionary attitudes. They are not helpful. But you approach Linux with a mind-set not terribly different from those dependent on their government to feed, educate, and mend them. You are crying at the door to the cathedral complaining about how they are not doing things the way you like, or catering to your preference. That, and to a community who for the most part gives you so much already, gratis. What was that adage about looking gift-horses in the mouth? You are not the customer here. And if you paid for Linux, you paid for support from those individuals, not some authority over the independent developers out there writing this stuff.
This isn’t the cathedral. This is the bazaar. The whole wide world of novelties may be found here. But no one is in charge to go complaining to if there seems no cohesion or focus that suits your liking. Linux, like anarchism, requires a certain amount of personal responsibility. If you want to see change, you can, first and foremost, BE the change. Take it upon yourself to correct the ills you see. It doesn’t have to be about changing the code yourself. But by free association, you can choose to communicate with people who actually do the development work and try to convince them to see things your way. But they are free. They are not slave to your will. You have to do some convincing. Or do it yourself. Yep. This is anarchism, baby. Not the nanny state. Or the corporate enclave, where you run about demanding the rights of a customer while those with real power laugh at your delusion that you are anything other than a slave to their will.
But you’ll be happier once you learn how to get along with folk and appreciate the things that are beautiful about those things you at first may see as “counter productive” to your vision, such as multi-directional evolution. Just wait until the bigger picture starts to sink in, and you’ll understand what a blessing it really is.
I don’t mean to be harsh. And I can see how you may take that as me making your points for you about the unwelcoming attitudes out there. But I am not trying to be harsh in order to make a personal affront. I am really trying to turn your presumptions on their head and help you realize that your roles here are different. Not to put too fine a point on it, but know your place. He he. Now isn’t that an authoritarian sort of mentality in that statement there. So I’ll lighten up. Really. I am only being confrontational to help you confront your own misunderstanding, so that you, too can see things from a clearer perspective.
There really are a lot of very helpful people in the Linux and Free Software communities. It is fair to criticize the unhelpful, but not fair to short-shrift those who do by not giving them their due credit when talking about the community as a whole. And I am sure that you may find that if you go in to ask for help with a good attitude, perhaps some humility and gratitude up front, you will find many people ready and willing to go out of their way for you. But come with a demanding attitude and get the cold shoulder you deserve. I am not saying you did one or the other as I can’t speak to events I am not privy. But an open heart and an open mind go a long way when engaging any community.
Modern culture teaches us to want it NOW, what ever “it” may be. But that is not the way of the world. Things take their own time, in the natural world, and it is that way because it is the right way for it to happen. And so it is with software that has the power to evolve independent of any one vision other than it’s own natural progression via the minds of those who take the interest to change it. There is an almost spiritual mystery to the creative power that arises out of freedom to evolve, independent of control. The free software movement has much in common with the anarchist movement in spirit and philosophy. Enough that it is only right that you see anarchy when you look at the community. I hope that now, perhaps, you see this anarchy in a new light. Perhaps you may embrace it. It is “the thing” about free software in the first place, is it not? The freedom? This anarchy?
Fork the community. Create a branch that promotes the social and technical directions you deem most appropriate. Help create the community you want to see. Participate. This is Life, not a spectator sport. But though you may be addicted to the communal adrenaline experience of the home-team’s touchdown, once you experience the thrill of making your own touch down happen you’ll never want to go back to being so vucarious and un-alive again.
Thanks for the article, and inspiring me to write back. It is, after all, about the exchange of ideas, no? Best regards my friend.
Mojo
Anarchy at Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Notice how they stress the notion of rules without rulers. The concept of anarchy being equated to disorder is explicitly addressed as a fallacy.
Anarchy - Everything You Wanted to Know But Were Afraid to Ask is a nice read about anarchism worthy of consideration for a fuller understanding. And Anarchism properly recognizes that there is anarchy inherent in peoples perceptions and practice of what they hold to be anarchism and what they do not. It is no one “thing”, but an ideal that manifests itself through many forms.
PS - I find that with the least computer knowledge take to GNU/Linux easily. It’s GUI apps are still WIMP, after all… Windows, Icons, Mouse, and Pointer operated. And guess what? I get the least follow-up need from those neophytes I have given Linux to, as opposed to all those friends who have Windows constantly needing repair. Firefox on Ubuntu is just like Firefox on Windows, pretty much. Isn’t it? And not that different to operate than IE. Better, in my opinion, by far. Extensions rock. And so does Linux. Once it is working, it tends to stay working. What’s not to like?
2 Mojo // Aug 31, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Oops, sorry about a couple typos there. Funny how you miss your own mistakes even when re-reading. Also, the second link was goofed up. Here it is corrected:
Anarchy - Everything You Wanted to Know But Were Afraid to Ask.
Peace
Mojo
3 Mojo // Aug 31, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Drat… no edit either. Here it is as just plain text then.
http://www.spiralnature.com/phil/anarchy/toknow.html
4 Schizo // Sep 1, 2008 at 1:48 pm
will respond, soon
ciao
schizo
Leave a Comment