3 ms·
It's not a straw man. MLK realized after the fact, that if he had started with a smaller, more specific political goal in mind, he might have succeeded. That do
by phaus 14y ago
It's not a straw man. MLK realized after the fact, that if he had started with a smaller, more specific political goal in mind, he might have succeeded. That doesn't mean that he abandoned his values.
No one should suggest that Stallman should have to change his beliefs. Instead, he should realize that his goal is pretty much impossible to accomplish in the current political climate. Because it is impossible, he should seek to achieve the smaller goal of successfully reforming patent law, because a small win is better than a big loss. It doesn't mean that you have given up, it just means that you realize that you aren't going to win the war in a single day.
I think the point that they were trying to make was that accepting reality and compromising ones beliefs are two different things. It's unrealistic to act as if you can enter a conflict with a party that thinks you are 100 percent wrong, and successfully negotiate an agreement that gets you 100 percent of what you wanted. But minds can be changed over time. If we can place limits on software patents, and the changes prove themselves to be conducive to a healthy economy, then we will have an easier time convincing people that the copyright system is causing more harm than good.
- tankbot 14y ago> That doesn't mean that he abandoned his values. This was exactly my point. The parent was suggesting that MLK compromised on his stance but presented only evidence of a change in tactics. I agree completely with your other assertions. I think it would help to distinguish that there are really 2 arguments happening here, muddying the waters: Unwavering belief and unwavering actions. I personally think that unwavering belief in something is commendable and this is where my comments have come from. I think this is necessary in order to effect any real change as the process is usually long and arduous. Unwavering commitment to a losing tactic, as danso points out, is stubborn and foolish. A person who is unable to adapt when facing challenges does no favors for their cause.
- phaus 14y ago> There are really 2 arguments...Unwavering belief and unwavering actions. This is what I was trying to get across, but you expressed it much more concisely than I.
- rjbond3rd 14y ago> But minds can be changed over time. This would seem to require -some- people to be unwavering.