14 ms·
Perhaps we've got it the wrong way round, and rather than asking how Open Source contributors can be paid more, what about asking how everything can be cheaper?
by tlocke 5y ago
Perhaps we've got it the wrong way round, and rather than asking how Open Source contributors can be paid more, what about asking how everything can be cheaper? This is in fact what's happening as Open Source is deflationary. It's the reason that various central banks round the world can print so much money without the inflation rate getting as high as one would expect. I contribute to a few Open Source projects, and that's the approach I favour.
- pydry 5y agoOk so how?
- southerntofu 5y agoAbolish private property and patents. Let work be self-organized by the workers themselves in cooperatives, without control by a State or shareholders. Then every body can live "for free", work in the public interest (not for the profits of a vampire) and have an actual say in governance of society. That's in essence, the ideas of anarcho-syndicalism. The economic aspects of such have been widely studied by Proudhon who is a father of the cooperative movement (please don't read his view on women and jews). It's been practiced on a wide scale during the spanish revolution of 1936 with self-organized production across Catalonia. It's still practiced today, though not so "profoundly" as a form of public policy in Chiapas (autonomous indegenous communities of Mexico) and Rojava (the autonomous, multicultural and secular revolutionary administration of north-east Syria).
- mark_l_watson 5y agoThanks, an interesting comment. The word "anarchy" has bad connotations, but anarchy sometimes works well. For example here in the USA, the relationships between states seems like a well functioning form of anarchy to me. Obviously our system is rigged, and has been for centuries. I accept this and don't spend much time worrying about US Congress people being able to do insider training, accept more contributions than I am comfortable with, etc. That is the way the world is: corrupt. That does not mean that we can't push back when we can by not accepting corporate news media (MSNBC and Fox News seem like the very worse, but they are all bad) and focus on our own productivity and on treating other people with kindness. I am very socially liberal but I would like to see a much smaller government - a weird combination that is probably impossible to achieve.
- southerntofu 5y ago> The word "anarchy" has bad connotations It depends who you ask. For us anarchists it's the most beautiful thing there is, and millions of us have died through the century for these ideas of unlimited freedom and equality. > in the USA, the relationships between states seems like a well functioning form of anarchy to me not really? I mean there's a federal government ruling from above, no? You couldn't just have a State abolishing wage slavery and private property and declaring food and housing for all, could you? I'm betting other States would send the federal army to crush this rebellion, but admittedly my understanding of US politics is limited. I'm basing it on how the federal government has dealt with indigenous nations (crushing and betraying them at every turn) and the war of secession, during which both sides were happy to exploit black people but many soldiers killed about how to do it precisely. > I am very socially liberal but I would like to see a much smaller government - a weird combination that is probably impossible to achieve. You may be interested to read some anarchist literature, because it's not a weird combination at all. Maybe Emma Goldman or Murray Bookchin could be of interest to you to get started?
- zozbot234 5y agoAnarchy does not ensure freedom, equal justice or equal political rights. Only minimal government can provide for that, but most people understand anarchy to mean the absence of even a minimal government.
- rawbot 5y ago> It's still practiced today, though not so "profoundly" as a form of public policy in Chiapas That is one of, if not THE poorest region in Mexico. It also receives a LOT of federal aid. Not sure how it serves an example of anything desirable.
- southerntofu 5y agoSorry when i said "a form of public policy" i did not mean from the State. The mexican government has very little intervention in the region of Chiapas, especially outside of big cities in the indigenous communities. I was talking about the roles, cultures and politics of those organized indegenous communities as part of the zapatist movement. You will be thrilled to learn that these folks built their own hospitals and schools because despite theoretical "federal aid" the government does nothing for the people, except sending the military to fend off any popular uprising and/or arming and financing fascist paramilitaries. It's more visible over there than over here (France), but the same logic applies. No ruler will ever do something useful for the people. We have to do it by ourselves and for ourselves, such is the logic of democracy, and any parliament ruling from above is fundamentally incompatible with the basic principles of democracy (or anarchy if you'd rather call it that).
- hawkeye424 5y agoOr so: packed with money like a scarecrow but still not part of the solution. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoYlTviRbKs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoYlTviRbKs