Re: [ProgSoc] GPL

[alister air <baitoven@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au>]

After trying to stay out of this... I get pulled in by the most gratuitous
flame-bait for 2001 (so far...).  Damn trolls.

On Tue, 8 May 2001, James Wan wrote:

> On Tue, 8 May 2001, Telford wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 09:35:16AM +1000, James Wan wrote:
> > 
> > Marx was a pot-head?
> 
> You've missed the point.  His views are indicative of Marxism.

No.  They are not.  You do not understand what Marxism is.  Marx (and
Engels) critiqued capitalism.  They put out what was for the time the most
complex and detailed critique of the capitalist system.  Marx rarely
stepped into social systems, barring writing the Manifesto for the
Communist Party of Great Britain (commonly known as the Communist
Manifesto) and if you'd read it, it primarily provides a short and simple
outline on why capitalism is the enemy of society and gives *very scarce*
details on the mechanics of a socialist system.
 
> > But they do, they want to prevent the use of any non-MS products.
> > In a word, they are anti-competitve.
> 
> Yeh so does your local shopkeeper if you're using that base logic. Cos
> they only want you to shop from them. Social change is different from
> anti-competitiveness.

That's a damn stupid argument.  You can cross the road to your other local
shopkeeper.  You can't cross the road to your other local OS vendor.
 
> We are concerned with recent history between capitalism and socialism.
> When did monarchy or going back to prehistoric years become relevant.

Were you even reading this thread?  That probably would have answered this
question.
 
> Competition is available, there are laws in place for that purpose and
> also your civil liberties entitle you to many freedoms. Stop whining about
> large corporations being anti-competitive and impacting on your life as a
> human being. If it wasn't for the large pharmaceutical companies, you
> would be dead or severely incapacitated. If it wasn't for Microsoft or
> Cisco, alot of IT workers would not be getting paid what they are
> receiving now, because common society at large would not have adopted IT
> in the way that they have.

And this is the most obvious flame-bait.  It's so factually incorrect I
barely know where to start.  Here's a few things to think over.  If
capitalist and "free markets" are so great, why do we need so many laws
regulating "competition"?  Why do we have an ACCC?  Why do we regulate
emissions from cars?  Why does the price of privatised utilities always
rise?

Pharaceutical companies - like all companies - exist to make a
profit.  Anything else is secondary at best.  Linking new medical
technology to capitalism is as stupid as linking space travel to
post-Stalinism.

> If you're a Stallman advocate and pro Marxist then just admit it instead
> of putting down capitalism. It's doing wonders for the US, but if Cuba is
> your cup of tea, then why not, I hear the weather is nice there.

I'm a Stallman advocate and pro-Marxist.  If I wanted to engage in
name-calling it's damned easy, but I prefer to address issues.  Cuba's
hardly a worker's paradise (although I know you don't understand why) but
they train doctors from other Latin-American countries free.  The US just
bombs hospitals.

Alister

-
You are subscribed to the progsoc mailing list. To unsubscribe, send a
message containing "unsubscribe" to progsoc-request@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au.
If you are having trouble, ask owner-progsoc@nospam.progsoc.uts.edu.au for help.