Linus Benedict Torvalds - A communist?

[Subversive Pessimist]

I've heard Benedict is a communist. If that is correct, when did he get interested in communism? What kind of communist is he?


I know both of his parents were radicals and his father studied in Soviet, but I don't know about his own personal beliefs.

[VukBZ2005]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2004, 11:50 AM
I've heard he is a communist. If that is correct, when did he get interested in communism? What kind of communist is he?


I know both of his parents were radicals and his father studied in Soviet, but I don't know about his own personal beliefs.
His father was a Leninist sure - but Linus himself? i don't know for sure man.
By the way Linus Torvalds Invented Linux.

[Mahir Çayan]

Contact him youself: [email protected]

-- Mahir Çayan
http://www.ernesto-guevara.com

[BOZG]

I think you missed the point of this forum.

[che's long lost daughter]

Maybe you can ask DaCuban about that.

[DaCuBaN]

More than happy to oblige :)

It's an interesting discussion: Open source itself is a very "communist" idea - it removes the prospect of theft by placing everything out in the open and above board, meaning you can steal anything you like, if you wish.

In my personal experience, people don't steal in such a scenario - and linux is a perfect example of this working in the "real world". Anyway, have a look at the following article (http://www.softpanorama.org/People/Torvalds/linus2003.shtml)

Contained within, there is one quote I feel compelled to draw reference to:


People who use economics as a model may see the open source movement as a potential enemy. The open source community could care less, because they are living in a totally different model. Potential communism (there never was a real one) made the mistake of trying to play the game by the enemy's rules. It's time to not play the game. Don't play the religion game. Don't play the science game. We're creating our own rules and fuck all anyone that gets in the way -Linus Torvalds, 2003

So it is self evident that he understands the nature of our society. As to whether he declares himself a communist? It's my opinion that in our current climate, only a fool calls himself a communist - but perhaps there is some truth to it ;)

On this note, I'd like to draw reference to a quote of his in regards to Microsoft:


The thing is, at least to me personally, Microsoft just isn't relevant to what I do. That might sound strange, since they are clearly the dominant player in the market that Linux is in, but the thing is: I'm not in the ''market.'' I'm interested in Linux because of the technology, and Linux wasn't started as any kind of rebellion against the ''evil Microsoft empire.'' Quite the reverse, in fact: from a technology angle, Microsoft really has been one of the least interesting companies. So I've never seen it as a ''Linus versus Bill'' thing. I just can't see myself in the position of the nemesis, since I just don't care enough. To be a nemesis, you have to actively try to destroy something, don't you? Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect.

[DaCuBaN]

I have here another article that may add something to this:


Just before the demise of Commodore, a marketing executive for the company summarized what he thought led to the Amiga's failure to capture significant market share. He minced no words: "The fanatical element among our customer base hasn't done us any favors."

The similarities between the Amiga camp and Linux users are striking. If a journalist writes an article about, say, printers, he or she may get several flaming letters from Amigoids complaining that mention of the Amiga was excluded from the review. Not only is the Amiga the b est desktop publishing system on the market, they'd say, but you'd be an idiot to run anything else. And by the way, I know where you live.

L inux fanatics display similar zeal when they slam MS-DOS (MS-DOG), Windows (Windoze), Windows NT, and the people who use them. Never mind that your PC must be running MS-DOS before you can install Linux. Also, never mind that DOSEMU and Wine, DOS and Windows emulators, are among the most touted achievements of Linux developers. Flames erupt frequently on the Usenet when a heretic suggests there's another OS worth running. Heated respondents pen pages of incendiary prose in reply.

The uncivil behavior of these few loudmouths threatens to hold Linux back from the stature it deserves. As with the Amiga, many people who could benefit from trying Linux are put off enough by these displays to take their interest elsewhere. Some journalists refuse to take Linux seriously because of the regular Usenet rants, letters to editors, and angry calls to computer talk shows. Linux techno-troopers may not realize that their irrational activism plays a significant role in keeping them a minority.

We should see a taming of the rhetoric as commercial players get involved. Red Hat Linux is a publicized commercial release. Considering they cost vendors nothing, we should see Linux releases covered by proper documentation, support, and even licensed additions (e.g., OSF/Motif) while maintaining a consumer-friendly price.

Many "communists" could learn from this ;)