4 ms·

Strictly speaking, for a pure right to repair, it doesn't even need to be OSS licensed. Germany's Left Party (inspired name, I know…) is lobbying for that cons

Strictly speaking, for a pure right to repair, it doesn't even need to be OSS licensed. Germany's Left Party (inspired name, I know…) is lobbying for that constellation e.g.: License can be restrictive, as long as users are given source access and permission to fix bugs themselves.

cfn 5y ago
This is a very simplistic view as the source code alone may not be enough to build/fix most complex closed source application. You have IDEs that may be costly and expensive components that you cannot release the development builds, etc.
southerntofu 5y ago
I find it funny that a Left Party would not promote/defend copyleft tooth and nail. Sounds more like a "pro-social Right" party :)
- forty 5y ago
  Political left and right have very very different meaning depending on where you live in the world :) As a French person, anything which defends environment and customer rights (vs corporate interests) sounds lefty enough.
  - southerntofu 5y ago
    > Political left and right have very very different meaning depending on where you live in the world :) I'm curious if you have resources on that topic. It was my understanding that the left/right division used to designate the French national assembly, where royalists and other reactionaries would sit on the "right" and various stripes of progressives on the "left", that this model was imported to other newly-founded so-called "democracies", and that the words took new meaning when communism (whether authoritarian marxism or libertarian anarchism) began spreading in the mid-19th century. > anything which defends environment and customer rights (vs corporate interests) sounds lefty enough As a french person myself, i don't agree with this interpretation. Not so long ago, a "fair capitalism" system was a selling point of the centrist movement, and was advertised by a considerable segment of the "droite sociale". The left was defined by promoting the abolition of the capitalist system with further sub-classifications: socialists promoted reforms as a means of achieving communism (which arguably fails every time), communists promoted dictatorship of the proletariat to build communism (which arguably fails every time, and produces results very similar to industrial capitalism), anarchists and libertarian communists promoted decentralization of power and workers/citizens self-organization to build communism (which arguably succeeded every time, but was shortly crushed by authoritarian reaction [0]). In the 80s, the Socialist party rose to power and abandoned all socialist ideals, until it adopted market economy as official policy some time in the 90s if i remember well. Likewise, the Communist party seems to have abandoned most campaigning around expropriation, instead focusing on the much diluted/vague "workers/citizens rights" concepts. Today, apart from the NPA (Nouveau Parti Anticapitaliste), i don't see any mainstream (>1% votes) leftist party in the public discourse. I don't see an abundance of further-left initiatives from the bottom-up (not political parties) though, in the forms of ZADs, self-organized workers coops and unions, squats, and other collectives for social struggles against racism, patriarchy, etc.. Of course they're not the ones the media would tell you about, or as the old 68 saying goes, "the revolution will not be televized" :-) [0] 1917 revolution in Russia started as a libertarian communist movement organized around local "soviets", before Lenin Trostky and other power-hungry tyrants moved in and killed everyone (see "Constadt" or "Makhnovtchina"). Likewise, 1936 revolution in Spain was mostly led by anarchist discourse and practice, until USSR-backed communist party (which had considerably more weapons despite having much less popular support) massacred everyone.
    - forty 5y ago
      Yes the definition depends on where you are and when too indeed :) I think the mainstream opinion is that the PS, LFI and EELV are left parties. Everyone is free to define left and right as they prefer (or any other word actually) but it's easier to use the same meaning as most other people to communicate ;) I do agree though that this is a bit subjective, and for example whether LREM is left, center or right if probably a matter of your political opinion :) One important thing I realized a while ago with something called the "political compass" [1] is that there is actually 2 main axis. Depending on when/where you are, left and right can be associated to different side of the axis. [1] https://www.politicalcompass.org https://www.politicalcompass.org
      - southerntofu 5y ago
        > I think the mainstream opinion is that the PS, LFI and EELV are left parties. I think that's what the propaganda apparatus is trying to build for a picture, yes. But compare their programs to those of the PS, PCF, and Greens (ancestors of those modern parties) from 40 years ago and you may have a few surprises in how the entire political apparatus has moved to the right over the years. > LREM is left, center or right if probably a matter of your political opinion LREM is definitely right-wing. They have regularly attacked the poor and the oppressed, while removing taxes on the rich . It could be considered a centrist policy ("all taxes should be equal") if it were accompanied by a traditional centrist "civil rights" program for political freedom and dismantling of monopolies (separation of investment/savings banks, break up of media from other industry interests, defending the right to protest, etc). Which is was not. In the political compass, LREM/Macron policy is no doubt categorized in the top-right corner, in the authoritarian capitalist quadrant. > Depending on when/where you are, left and right can be associated to different side of the axis. Agreed, but there is a common understanding that left means redistribution of wealth while right means private property. Moreover, i would personally argue that the political compass is good for evaluating political speeches/opinions, but fails to grasp the complexity of facts in practice. For example, the USSR is usually painted as "authoritarian left", while in practice many critiques have pointed out that "There is no communism in Russia" [0]. [0] https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-there-is-no-communism-in-russia https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-there-i... (1935)

cfn 5y ago

This is a very simplistic view as the source code alone may not be enough to build/fix most complex closed source application. You have IDEs that may be costly and expensive components that you cannot release the development builds, etc.

southerntofu 5y ago

I find it funny that a Left Party would not promote/defend copyleft tooth and nail. Sounds more like a "pro-social Right" party :)

forty 5y ago
Political left and right have very very different meaning depending on where you live in the world :) As a French person, anything which defends environment and customer rights (vs corporate interests) sounds lefty enough.
- southerntofu 5y ago
  > Political left and right have very very different meaning depending on where you live in the world :) I'm curious if you have resources on that topic. It was my understanding that the left/right division used to designate the French national assembly, where royalists and other reactionaries would sit on the "right" and various stripes of progressives on the "left", that this model was imported to other newly-founded so-called "democracies", and that the words took new meaning when communism (whether authoritarian marxism or libertarian anarchism) began spreading in the mid-19th century. > anything which defends environment and customer rights (vs corporate interests) sounds lefty enough As a french person myself, i don't agree with this interpretation. Not so long ago, a "fair capitalism" system was a selling point of the centrist movement, and was advertised by a considerable segment of the "droite sociale". The left was defined by promoting the abolition of the capitalist system with further sub-classifications: socialists promoted reforms as a means of achieving communism (which arguably fails every time), communists promoted dictatorship of the proletariat to build communism (which arguably fails every time, and produces results very similar to industrial capitalism), anarchists and libertarian communists promoted decentralization of power and workers/citizens self-organization to build communism (which arguably succeeded every time, but was shortly crushed by authoritarian reaction [0]). In the 80s, the Socialist party rose to power and abandoned all socialist ideals, until it adopted market economy as official policy some time in the 90s if i remember well. Likewise, the Communist party seems to have abandoned most campaigning around expropriation, instead focusing on the much diluted/vague "workers/citizens rights" concepts. Today, apart from the NPA (Nouveau Parti Anticapitaliste), i don't see any mainstream (>1% votes) leftist party in the public discourse. I don't see an abundance of further-left initiatives from the bottom-up (not political parties) though, in the forms of ZADs, self-organized workers coops and unions, squats, and other collectives for social struggles against racism, patriarchy, etc.. Of course they're not the ones the media would tell you about, or as the old 68 saying goes, "the revolution will not be televized" :-) [0] 1917 revolution in Russia started as a libertarian communist movement organized around local "soviets", before Lenin Trostky and other power-hungry tyrants moved in and killed everyone (see "Constadt" or "Makhnovtchina"). Likewise, 1936 revolution in Spain was mostly led by anarchist discourse and practice, until USSR-backed communist party (which had considerably more weapons despite having much less popular support) massacred everyone.
  - forty 5y ago
    Yes the definition depends on where you are and when too indeed :) I think the mainstream opinion is that the PS, LFI and EELV are left parties. Everyone is free to define left and right as they prefer (or any other word actually) but it's easier to use the same meaning as most other people to communicate ;) I do agree though that this is a bit subjective, and for example whether LREM is left, center or right if probably a matter of your political opinion :) One important thing I realized a while ago with something called the "political compass" [1] is that there is actually 2 main axis. Depending on when/where you are, left and right can be associated to different side of the axis. [1] https://www.politicalcompass.org https://www.politicalcompass.org
    - southerntofu 5y ago
      > I think the mainstream opinion is that the PS, LFI and EELV are left parties. I think that's what the propaganda apparatus is trying to build for a picture, yes. But compare their programs to those of the PS, PCF, and Greens (ancestors of those modern parties) from 40 years ago and you may have a few surprises in how the entire political apparatus has moved to the right over the years. > LREM is left, center or right if probably a matter of your political opinion LREM is definitely right-wing. They have regularly attacked the poor and the oppressed, while removing taxes on the rich . It could be considered a centrist policy ("all taxes should be equal") if it were accompanied by a traditional centrist "civil rights" program for political freedom and dismantling of monopolies (separation of investment/savings banks, break up of media from other industry interests, defending the right to protest, etc). Which is was not. In the political compass, LREM/Macron policy is no doubt categorized in the top-right corner, in the authoritarian capitalist quadrant. > Depending on when/where you are, left and right can be associated to different side of the axis. Agreed, but there is a common understanding that left means redistribution of wealth while right means private property. Moreover, i would personally argue that the political compass is good for evaluating political speeches/opinions, but fails to grasp the complexity of facts in practice. For example, the USSR is usually painted as "authoritarian left", while in practice many critiques have pointed out that "There is no communism in Russia" [0]. [0] https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-there-is-no-communism-in-russia https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-there-i... (1935)