Re: The Free Software Definition - Free Software Foundation

[Alex Freed <alex_news@mirrow.com>]

mdj wrote:
> With all due respect, it's been pointed out to you by two people that
> one of the examples you gave, Hitler, was a fascist. 

I know that tradition puts Nazis/Fascists at the "ultra-right".
My only argument is that their *economic* agenda is very close to
that of the far-left. We can compare the state controlled 
semi-capitalism under Hitler with what Chavez does these days, but
probably not in this forum :)


> You'll find that often the labels that political parties use are a
> part of their propaganda and bear only superficial resemblance to
> their behaviour. See Hitler, Hussein. You might want to consider the
> term "Libertarian Socialist"

I have never heard this term. In my book Libertarian and Socialist are
the opposites in most ways. Please give a reference. I accept there are
lots of things I don't know.

I have also asked for an example of a libertarian dictator. So far I 
didn't get one.

> I think you'll find that the
> totalitarianism tends along the "National" axis, and that the tying of
> the "left" to totalitarianism is nothing more than obsolete cold-war
> propaganda.

OK. Let's leave Hitler and Mussolini alone. All the other dictators on 
my list are clearly ultra-left.

>Personally, I use the
> terms 'left-wing' and 'right-wing' to mean respectively "looking after
> the interests of the working class" and "looking after the interests
> of the establishment/aristocracy/investment class" or alternatively,
> conservative. This is what they've meant since they were first used in
> the French Revolution.

Thanks for educating me a bit. I didn't know the terms go back to the 
French revolution. I thought that was the British parliament originally.

> In the Australian parliament just like in
> France, the left/progressive party sit on the left, and the
> conservative/right sit on the right. How does it work in the US?

Not too well :)


Tradition puts the Democrats at the "left" and the Republicans at the 
"right" but apparently  the working class/establishment interests only 
apply to the economic issues. It's a package deal. Along with (IMHO) 
more reasonable economic policy you get the idiotic "war on drugs", 
ultra conservative Supreme Court, etc. if Republicans are in power.
Now this particular administration is the worst of both worlds: socially 
ultra conservative but without any reasonable economic policy.

BTW I guess the "investment class" covers most of the population now 
that the pension plans, etc. all invest heavily.

-Alex.