just escape
Dec. 20th, 2005 11:17 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
burnunitI think in some ways this interview with Richard Stallman represents my views on a number of things. If we could just build escapes, parallel realms where thought is free, well... what's to stop us?
Also, I like how he responded to the criticism like why isn't he fighting for other 'real' freedoms or against injustice or whatever. And he basically says that software freedom is very real and well, his skills are in software so that's where he can do the most good. You can still be for justice and against facism while focusing your efforts in those areas that you have the highest chance to make an impact.
What also interests me is that there's lots of parallels to other freedom and justice movements. Like my company. We work in diversity training for business. This is an incremental, business-driven way to change the world. It's aligned with equality, affirmative action, equal opportunity, etc. But it's incremental and uses business drivers with a backing of law. It's very effective. But that's not the only way that works.
I have been learning about and am working with a group to start an anti-racism initiative at the seminary. Anti-racism is not incremental, it's tranformative (see MCARI for what I'm talking about. I'll be taking one of their anti-racism seminars this spring). Both are worthwhile processes and both succeed. But they're not identical and they befit different organizations differently. Ultimately they have the same goal. I think too, the open source movement and free software movements have similar goals, but with different drivers. The FSF is much more about transformative experience: build software to escape into freedom.
Then I think there's another story, those movements who foundered or were co-opted or corrupted by evil. Surely in the idealized words of a WTO, there is or was once this vision of uplifting everyone. I mean consider their statement: "A system based on rules rather than power makes life easier for all." That sure sounds good. But on the other hand, the WTO appears to be corrupted by eeevil. (Probably because they choose to believe that "easier = better", but that's another rant for another day).
It's like, we need people to hold up these transformative lights, or we're only ever going to be incremental. And if we're always incremental, evil, which in my experience moves very quickly, might triumph.
Also, I like how he responded to the criticism like why isn't he fighting for other 'real' freedoms or against injustice or whatever. And he basically says that software freedom is very real and well, his skills are in software so that's where he can do the most good. You can still be for justice and against facism while focusing your efforts in those areas that you have the highest chance to make an impact.
What also interests me is that there's lots of parallels to other freedom and justice movements. Like my company. We work in diversity training for business. This is an incremental, business-driven way to change the world. It's aligned with equality, affirmative action, equal opportunity, etc. But it's incremental and uses business drivers with a backing of law. It's very effective. But that's not the only way that works.
I have been learning about and am working with a group to start an anti-racism initiative at the seminary. Anti-racism is not incremental, it's tranformative (see MCARI for what I'm talking about. I'll be taking one of their anti-racism seminars this spring). Both are worthwhile processes and both succeed. But they're not identical and they befit different organizations differently. Ultimately they have the same goal. I think too, the open source movement and free software movements have similar goals, but with different drivers. The FSF is much more about transformative experience: build software to escape into freedom.
Then I think there's another story, those movements who foundered or were co-opted or corrupted by evil. Surely in the idealized words of a WTO, there is or was once this vision of uplifting everyone. I mean consider their statement: "A system based on rules rather than power makes life easier for all." That sure sounds good. But on the other hand, the WTO appears to be corrupted by eeevil. (Probably because they choose to believe that "easier = better", but that's another rant for another day).
It's like, we need people to hold up these transformative lights, or we're only ever going to be incremental. And if we're always incremental, evil, which in my experience moves very quickly, might triumph.