Message 02266 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT02222 Message: 27/31 L6 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [ox-en] [Half off-topic] Walther



All,

I was growing a bit dismayed with what I was reading - but I feel Niall has captured the essence of my feelings on this subject. I strongly feel that any removal of a person from this list on ideological grounds is contrary to the environment and philosophy required for self-unfolding.

I am further interested in the social differences referenced regarding the concept of free speech as innate right. I am not sure if my interest is in direct context of the list - but as free software is often compared (I think rightly so) to free speech I think the issue may find relevance with others as well. Is there this major difference in the understanding of the word "free". Is this an ideological understanding for some and a more practical one for others? My immediate answer would be that there are both - but I am curious if the delineation is national in nature. I am also curious what this difference in intent might mean to the development of free software and surrounding structures.

There was a "major" correction to Niall's comment on the use of Qt but I have to disagree with the corrector. The library was encumbered for much time and this was not perceived as a large issue - which does seem interesting if much of the effort is being put forth on ideological grounds.

-sándor

Niall Douglas wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 25 Feb 2004 at 1:42, Jonathan Walther wrote:

There's some Oekonux relevent stuff after. BTW I vote Walther stays on the list until he proves unrespectful on-list or to a member of the list. I view his membership as valuable because (a) if he is a racist we can convince him he's wrong and (b) he sounds like for whatever reason, he can bring a unique and useful point of view to the discussions here.

3. Explain this: http://reactor-core.org/secret/
It is my private mental training gym.
[snip]
The only way to win is to know your enemy.  That requires going
straight to the source.  So I spent time gathering the creme de la
creme of right wing thought, those pieces of propaganda that truly
inspire, move, and motivate them.  Not the propaganda they give to
others, but the propaganda they write for themselves.

I've spent some time with a neo-nazi group, even handled their prized real third reich bone china plates (with special gloves). I've spent a lot of time in argument with them and my conclusions may be of use to you - their perceptual world-view results from misinterpretation of certain values ie; their value system is different to mainstream society, which leads semi-logically to their ideology. It cannot be dismissed out-of-hand because really an awful lot of people have some of the same similarities in value systems (which is why racists always say "everyone's really a racist, they just won't admit it"). Look at the widespread irrational dislike of immigrants within native European populations for example. And how many white people will be friends with blacks but wouldn't marry one or vice versa?

Why is this value system "wrong"? I think it's an artifact of two innate human forces - the tendency to dislike and prevent change (fear of the unknown) and the especial tendency of European & catholic derived populations to believe that they are racially superior to other almost identical populations (which has caused more than anything else the European war-creating colonising character, making us the most barbaric human population which has ever existed).

At WW2 in *Europe* we came face to face with the reality that if unchecked it means our own self-destruction. The Americans never quite got that because their country wasn't utterly destroyed and it's why Europe and America recently fell out over Iraq. Nevertheless we Europeans can't hide our cultural legacy, we're still coming to terms with having to control it. The Americans I fear are going the other way and only the coming collapse of the world economy has any chance of saving them.

But back to the point - you cannot teach something to someone who is not ready to learn it. Study the surrounds all you like, but it's like arguing "why is god a christian god and not some other god?" with a faith-based christianity-derivative believer. Consider that the best means of convincing in this situation is to help the person grow to change their own mind rather than logical or point-by-point argument refutals.

In such a long term struggle, I need to know the odds for myself.  I
can't trust another persons word, especially when I've caught that
person lying to me.  I believe there are other intellectuals who have
the same viewpoint, and so I have made my researches available in a
form that they can quickly and easily reference.

A word of advice from someone you don't know - if you believe or are researching something contraversial, either make it very very public or make it very very secret. The way you've approached it is to create the worst possible reaction.

I haven't even looked at your site and I don't know anything about you, but if it's really for research purposes consider interpolating sections on the same page listing papers advocating the complete opposite position. Again, it's all perception here - if they see your far right list of links interspersed with far left or some other kind of links, you won't get misinterpreted.

I'm in this for the long term survival of the tribe.  Paul Bowman
appears to be in it to have fun beating people up.  What are you in it
for?

I understand Paul's motivations. I have known many like him. He feels he has a duty to stop racism by any means possible and if you have ever visited Leeds or other northern English towns where they regularly have race riots, you'd understand why too.

I don't live with my wife as a result of a long running feud with the
social workers, who took a disliking to my anti-government,
anti-capitalist politics at the birth of my daughter three years ago.

I'm surprised that Canada, especially British Columbia is that bad. BC is vastly freer than most regions of the US nowadays.

Okay onto the Oekonux stuff. Although I think most of the posts about this subject are off-topic, I found myself noting something of relevence to Oekonux theory - how culture affects software development:

The Americans feel there is a right to free speech and even if you totally disagree with someone, you support their right to say anything.

The Europeans know that that policy is daft, and as evidenced by European law there is no right to say what you like. In particular Europe has strong anti-racist-speech law which singles out any form of racist or Nazi speech as illegal. Walther's site would be illegal in Europe in any form.

Now remember Paul Bowman is from Leeds in the UK and from my conversation with him, he thinks like a European. As do most of us on this list. Hence, we (though not quite to the extent of Paul) fundamentally see things differently to the average American.

Relating to software, the Americans treat software like speech and tend to think it should be free. Europeans tend though to think it should be mostly free but with restrictions where those are a good idea. Legislation in both regions supports the prevailing cultural view.

This I think is partially why FSF Europe is quite a distinct entity from FSF USA but interestingly, I can see no practical difference in how software is developed under either culture. Free software is free software in both regions.

But is how it's developed because of the similar (crappy) legal framework (copyright) in both regions or is it because it's how software is ideally developed by a set of geographically disparate volunteers?

Also interestingly, while the modes of production are the same, the software itself is not. Thus you have KDE (a mostly European production) and GNOME (a mostly US production). KDE is reliant on Qt, a European proprietary library - thus evidencing that Europeans are happy to accept impurity of mission for practical considerations (ie; like free speech shouldn't be unrestricted). The Americans mostly can't handle that and demand absolute freedom.

Thus I posit that the modes of production are more created by legal/physical constraint issues, whereas what is actually produced and its nature is more a function of culture & society of the workers. Thoughts?

Cheers,
Niall





-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: idw's PGP-Frontend 4.9.6.1 / 9-2003 + PGP 8.0.2

iQA/AwUBQD0KfcEcvDLFGKbPEQJgNACgzfHVHMxY62NlWFg0IhX5JkiM+fcAoKGx
3QhpIlZRkp9sXM26g1L7uoUj
=5pA0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: projekt oekonux.de


_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: projekt oekonux.de



Thread: oxenT02222 Message: 27/31 L6 [In index]
Message 02266 [Homepage] [Navigation]