[OS:N:] re:Open Source as a form of Anarcho-Communism?

[<charles macdonald hrdc-drhc gc ca>]

<<The main idea is that the Open source community is actually a mini
anarch-communist community existing within the Internet >>

Within the Social Science community, the term communism has a far different 
meaning that it does to the average resident of the Good Olde USA.  (they 
tend to associate the term with Stalinism, poverty and one party rule) To a 
social scientist, it is more a modelling tool.

My observation is that the Open source movement is very similar to the maxist 
end-state where there are few formal control mechanisms, and those that exist 
are based on Merit (those with ability) and with the means of production 
controlled by the producers..  (witness the trend to use WiFi as a bridge to 
allow "free" local networks to bypass the control of the telecom industry). 

<<Anarcho-communism disregards Lockean concepts of private property, which
Open source does (to an extent) by opposing intellectual copyright -
copyleft instead of copyright.>>

As others have said, the concept of copy-left is a mechanism to ensure common 
ownership of software, with the goal of not having any "private" ownership of 
"intellectual property"  Private Ownership which artificially restricts the 
supply of what would otherwise be an unlimited resource.  (both Libertarians, 
and communists would see this as meeting their ideals- even though the two 
groups may not otherwise see eye-to-eye.)

<<Open sourcers reject capitalist ideology of supply-demand economics>>  
Stalman would point out that supply and demand only applies to states of 
shortage, and since the same software can be reused by everyone, supply is no 
longer an issue.  Now the competition is on merit.  (is P better than Q - can 
we create R with the best of both)

Means of Production - yes, the FLOSS community does own the means of running 
the Internet (except for the wires and fibre and hardware) In fact the 
Internet was built on Open source/free software principles.  "Rough consensus 
and working code"  A feature did not get put into the 'net if their was not a 
freely examinable implementation available. So the Internet is a "free 
software" creation helped by university and military funding in the  
beginning to pay for the actual "raw" connectivity at first.  (that 
connectivity is now paid for by those that use the network)

Read Richard stallman and Eric Raymond. and Bruce perrins.  They have all 
done insiders analysis of the Movement.  Perins is the one who has bridged 
the gap between those that insist on everything being totally not subject to 
restrictions (i.e. GPL) and those that accept the possibility of allowing the 
code to be closed up..... (gee my bias is showing)  

One of the folks around Ottawa  here has taken to using the term FLOSS 
(free-libre and Open source software) as an all inclusive term.


Charles MacDonald - Labour Information Management
< My own Opinion unless Otherwise Credited >