Is Stallman communist?!

Posted Dec 5, 2002 18:03 UTC (Thu) by Medievalist (guest, #8395) [Link]

P.S. Hitler was very, very bright - you don't get to be dictator if you're not very, very bright!

Don't be so sure! You can get to be the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth even if you are an incoherent moron, as our current administration amply demonstrates. They are also demonstrating how capitalists can destroy an economy every bit as effectively as communists, but that's another rant entirely....

But no, Stallman isn't a communist. I'd say he's a socialist if anything. And most definitely not a (lassez-faire) capitalist!

--Charlie

Posted Dec 5, 2002 22:53 UTC (Thu) by evgeny (guest, #774) [Link]

> A communist state never existed.

Thanks God, not. But many came very close to it, unfortunately.

> Those states claiming to be communist, have nothing to do with communism
> as such - communism in itself does not involve supressing common citizen
> (that is actually straight against the original idea)

Really? And how are the common citizens supposed to be forced to go to the "industrial armies"? It is _exactly_ what communism is about. I repeat - read the original works by Marx. Don't rely upon mild interpretations your professors did.

> What you're thinking of when saying communism, is Leninism and/or Stalinism.

Leninism (and especially Stalinism) is an extremely soft version of the Marx's communism. During the years of Stalin's ruling, only ~ 10% of the state population were in the camps. Marx wanted _everyone_ to be in the "industrial armies". Marx wanted wives and children in common. Stalin didn't go that far. Etc.

> So, GNU and free software in general has a lot in common with the
> communist idea - that everyone is equal

?! GNU is about _freedom_, not about equality.

> (in all "communist" states until now, some have been more equal than others...)

Only an idiot may believe that everyone are (or can be) equal. As in any other army, in the Marx's "industrial" armies, there must be sergants, officers, generals,... and since everyone wants to be a general (instead of working the whole day for no money at all), the generals would have to invent some ways to keep the positions for themselves. Of course, Marx understood it. You'll find in his works all the theoretical base of terror against the civil population.

> Communism does not fight democracy - just the opposite, actually.

I truly hope you'll understand one day how wrong you are... Or did you mean that democracy fights communism? Unfortunately, it doesn't; or does it badly...

> I don't know if it's because you're all American capitalists (the
> biggest smiley you've ever seen),

The smiley not accepted. As a matter of the fact, I spent 24 years of my life in the USSR.

> but communism as such is not bad, but I'm afraid it's an utopia (not sure
> of the spelling), since everyone has failed to build a real communist
> state yet...

Why don't you ask yourself - why?! Great, so there is a man who invented a theory, and everyone (and there have been a lot of efforts) trying to prove it experimentally ended up with millions of murdered innocent people who weren't asked whether they allowed the damned experimentalists to arrange the experiments on them. So how would you call this theoretist? A bright individual? Yes, he's as bright as devil is.

> P.S. Hitler was very, very bright - you don't get to be dictator if
> you're not very, very bright!

Again, it depends on definition of "bright". If you wish to call _this_ "bright" - fine with me. So it's the same kind of brightness as Marx posessed. As to be _smart_ - 6 years were enough for Hitler to set the entire world against him; another 6 years - and he commited suicide. Decide for yourself...

Regards,

Evgeny

PS. Sorry about off-topic; couldn't resist...