Phoronix: Linus Torvalds Comments On The Russian Linux Maintainers Being Delisted
Phoronix: Linus Torvalds Comments On The Russian Linux Maintainers Being Delisted
You're viewing a single thread.
Scratched liberals abound. It takes very liyyl3 for them to be racist and chauvinist.
Yes. What does "liberals" mean exactly?
Yes. What does "liberals" mean exactly?
I don't think there's any possibility of useful discussion of linux happening here so we may as well discuss that.
The tension between the various meanings of the word "liberal" is complex, and it very much depends on the context. Historically, liberalism referred to political philosophies that featured liberty — individual autonomy and freedom — as their central ideal. It was the idea that the state and other organizing powers should be generously permissive, allowing all to do as they please to the greatest extent deemed possible. Over time the word has sometimes come to instead be more closely associated with narrow kinds of liberty, such as the freedom of the ruling classes to exploit everyone else. In an American context over the course of the 20th century it came to have particular connotations of hypocrisy as reflected for example in the lyrics of that Phil Ochs song you've probably heard. These days it is sometimes even used as shorthand for what was previously called "neoliberalism." Its meanings can range even further into the unorthodox. In this thread for example, its use is more likely to convey a message along the lines of "this affront to Glorious Mother Russia has made me all pissy."
It means supporters of the dominant ideology if capitalism, just like it has always meant.
Not at all true. If you're referencing US ideologies of Capitalism, holy shit are you wrong and read the wrong Wikipedia.
In fact, the Democrats since the 60's have run campaigns WAY against the threat of late-stage Capitalism. Republicans are the pro-capitalist party in the sense they want to privatize everything and help their friends, and also "deregulate" anything and everything.
These are anti-capitalist ideas.
Come on back with some more Wiki links, good buddy.
In fact, the Democrats since the 60's have run campaigns WAY against the threat of late-stage Capitalism.
Bruh what world are you living in lmao. Obama reached to bankers uncaringly tanking the global economy by giving them money to do with as they wished (and, as always, they wished to give themselves a bonus).
Not at all true. If you're referencing US ideologies of Capitalism, holy shit are you wrong and read the wrong Wikipedia.
I am quite correct, though I am referring to liberalism in the general internationa sense. This is what liberalism always has been. You must understand it as what it is and has done, not what it tells you it is meant to be. As Stafford Beer said, it makes no sense to think that the purpose of something is what it consistently fails to do. The liberalism of the enlightenment had in its right hand brutal, racist colonial exploitation and in its left a ruthless industrial revolution chaining the people to factories and removing them from all commond and property. It is a product of capitalism itself.
In fact, the Democrats since the 60's have run campaigns WAY against the threat of late-stage Capitalism.
The Democrats are a capitalist party and always have been. They do not work against capitalism at all, they support it and protect it. There is really such thing as late-stage capitalism, it is just capitalism developing over time, retaining most of its qualities but taking on new angles. Buy if it does mean anything, it means neoliberalism wrought by financialization, and that is Democrats' main political base. It's their main thing, especially as an export.
Republicans are the pro-capitalist party in the sense they want to privatize everything and help their friends
Democrats also do this they just tell you it is efficiency and "public-private partnerships" and "a generous endowment to a public institution" (that they can now defund). The charter school movement is largely Democrats, for example. They simply have different factions on their chopping block, different groups to pander to.
These are anti-capitalist ideas.
What ideas are anti-capitalist? I didn't see any.
Come on back with some more Wiki links, good buddy.
No thanks. Read the political philosophers of the enlightenment, colonialism, industrialization and proletarianizatikn, the liberal revolutions in Europe, and who emerged to identify themselves as anti-liberal once those revolutions established their ideologies as mainstream, namely monarchists, fascists, socialists, and anarchists. You cannot gain a political education through Wikipedia, it is a Cliffs Notes approach to social topics often written by often incorrect or heavily propagandized (or propagandist!) People, including literal Nazi apologists.
Today on c/linux: Guy who thinks the US Democrats are anti-capitalist vs. hardcore tankie lunatic.
Dubliette is referring to the thought-terminating cliché that every major US party doesn't want to abolish capitalism (the economic system centered around capital, private ownership, etc.), ergo we're all liberals.
thought-terminating cliché
There's no argument, it's the definition of the word. Why do you assume there should be argument around the normal usage of a word?
because for some reason, torvalds is bad now because he is a capitalist while nearly everyone is a capitalist. that’s the argument made.
A capitalist is someone who owns capital, not someone who supports capitalism. A liberal is someone who supports capitalism. I don't think Linus is a liberal, given that he's the Linux guy. But he's obviously a capitalist, and that's okay, that's something you should strive towards if you live under capitalism, even if ideologically you oppose capitalism.
I dunno how you can terminate a thought that never began
Lolbye
A thought-terminating cliché (also known as a semantic stop-sign, a thought-stopper, bumper sticker logic, or cliché thinking) is a form of loaded language, often passing as folk wisdom, intended to end an argument and quell cognitive dissonance.[1][2] Its function is to stop an argument from proceeding further, ending the debate with a cliché rather than a point. Some such clichés are not inherently terminating. They only become so when used to intentionally dismiss dissent or justify fallacious logic.[3]