[ox-en] Re: Nationalism, protectionism and Free software advocacy, was: Re: [ox-en] Manifiesto para Lula (fwd)
- From: Graham Seaman <graham seul.org>
- Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 19:38:39 -0500 (EST)
On Sat, 25 Jan 2003, Chris Croome wrote:
Hi
On Fri 24-Jan-2003 at 05:29:58PM -0500, Graham Seaman wrote:
Diego Saraiva of the National University of Salta, Argentina, and
member of of the NGO *Hipatia* [with some resemblance to Oekonux
(Graham)] went further: 'Brazil can't carrying on draining its
internal resources, around 1 million dollars a year, to pay
royalties to the big corporations from the north. With free
software these stay in the country and can help to fight hunger'
he stated.
It makes me feel rather uncomfortable when Free software advocates
use arguments that make it sound like they support some kind of
nationalist protectionism -- problems, like world poverty, cannot be
solved on a national basis.
Maybe, but this is a VERY widely used argument by supporters of laws on
use of free software by the state (although not the primary argument,
which is one of principle). It's usually combined with another argument -
that by using free software, countries with no proprietary software
industry can create a programming skills base (rather than a set of
microsoft button-pushers) and a services-based computer industry. I don't
see the problem with this - it's certainly not protectionist (which is the
argument MS and the ISC use against it; they're talking about bringing law
suits against Brazil for restraint of trade, but I hope that's just FUD)
since the free software continues to be both free and international, and
the conditions allow companies like IBM prepared to use free software, to
compete. It's only blocking things like the MS 'tax', outgoing money
for forced upgrades caused by use of proprietary software, etc.
Nor is it just nationalist. For example, the Linex distribution developed
for the Extremadura regional government in Spain may be used in Latin
America, and government-specific applications are likely to be pooled
across countries - not just Brazil, but South Africa are now putting
resources into this. And if it helps to reduce poverty in Brasil by
reducing the surplus value being siphoned off to Redmond isn't that part
of reducing world poverty? I'd see it in the same light as Lula deciding
not to buy the military aircraft the previous government has planned, that
is, a positive step that gives him more room to manoeuvre in fighting
poverty.
Could you say more about why you feel it's a bad thing?
Graham
Chris
_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/