all 39 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 55 points 3 months ago (13 children)

Free [open source] software, you mean.

It's more about software freedom than mere access to the code.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (11 children)

    If you have access to the code, why is it not free?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    License. The owner of the source can still limit what you can (legally) do with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    For example Unreal Engine is source available. Can't redistribute it, can't fork it and make a new version for the public. Still need to pay Epic when you release a game and make revenue over one million.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 48 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're refering to as Marxism, is in fact, GNU/Marxism, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Marxism. Marxism is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

    Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Marxism, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

    There really is a Marxism, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Marxism is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Marxism is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Marxism added, or GNU/Marxism. All the so-called Marxism distributions are really distributions of GNU/Marxism!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    jokes on you, I also use MUSL/centre-left and BSD/anarchism

    EDIT: The BSDs aren't anarchist since someone de facto decides what gets in and what doesn't. The closest "anarchist" software project I can think of is TCC as of recently, they allow contributions like a wiki.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 44 points 3 months ago* (4 children)

    Marx would likely be appalled by most any authoritarian communist regime.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago

    It’s the basic human tendency to take an unbiased ideology, broadcast an unintended interpretation to generate a following, then build a cult that puts them in power.

    The oldest trick in the book. And it sadly works, nearly every time.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 35 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    If Marx were alive today he'd probably hate modern day "marxists" and they'd hate him.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Given what I know about Marx as a historical figure and what he observe to come to his conclusions but having not read his work (Capital is a literal textbook and the Communist Manifesto is short and dry) I can hazard a guess that Marx would probably be with the punks and what's left of Redneck lefties. Either that or he'd be an autistic online shit poster because I'm pretty damned sure he had the right personality.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)

    Read up on the Hague congress. Although wielding anti-authoritarian rhetoric, Marx de facto was authoritarian in his practice and used bureaucratic maneuvers to exclude the anarchists from the internationale. Punks are generally anarchists and therefore Marx wouldn't be one.

    Also read up on lumpenproletariat. Marx was ironically quite bourgeois in his outlook and values, he admired orderly industrial society and had very harsh words towards the underbelly of society — explicitly listing beggars, prostitutes, vagabonds and the like as degenerate and scum. Punks are very much constituted from these strata and therefore would be despised by Marx.

    Marx would perhaps be appalled by later authoritarian marxists, but their theory and practice are very much extensions of his own. Depicting Marx as anti-authoritarian and counter-cultural is revisionism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Was legit unaware of that, though I've only done a surface level look at him due to my greater interest in pre-marxist American socialism and anarchism which in a lot of cases is folk in nature and thusly rarely interacts with more refined models. Thanks for the info and frankly I'm not too surprised, kinda like what happened with the forerunners of the enlightenment often times being of the very aristocracy it would criticize.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago

    One thing we know for sure is he'd be the biggest shitposter on lemmy.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    If Marx was alive today, maybe he would be a furry femboy in thigh high socks and a hoodie. :3

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    If Marx were alive today, he'd be whacking with Ben'll Frank you on The Hub.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)

    Marx wouldn't be a Maoist?

    Sad Maomao from Aptechary Diaries

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    If USA user base knew English, they wouldn't brake the rules. But hey, fuck of what the rules say.
    I do enjoy reports mate.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment