The Republic (was Re: [CS-FSLUG] TD: (Im)morality of (non)free software)

[Jukka]

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:03:07 -0600, Timothy R. Butler <tbutler at ofb.biz> wrote:
>         Basically this is an issue of a republic versus anarchy or even
> democracy. Any functional "democratic" government in existence is
> really a republic, as I'm sure everyone knows. Now, the founders could
> have crafted a "BSD-style" government that allowed anything and
> everything. That would be called anarchy. And you can bet it wouldn't
> have lasted. Just like a BSD licensed software, soon someone would come
> in and make the country proprietary (a dictatorship) or different parts
> of the country would split up with incompatible restrictions (perhaps I
> couldn't move from my city to the suburb 30 miles away because they
> have a restriction that requires one to sell everything and buy new
> stuff from them).
> 
>         A democracy is also a problem since it leads to mob rule. The rule of
> law goes out the window because the majority will always oppress the
> minority given the chance, carving out exceptions for themselves.
> 
>         A republican form of government works best for preserving freedom not
> because it is the "freest" system but because it will provide the most
> freedom. If the United States lasted ten years in anarchy or two and a
> quarter centuries in a republic, which system provided the most
> freedom? I think it is fair to say, far more people were free under a
> republic because it can last. A BSD licensed program, if useful, will
> almost certainly start heading toward becoming proprietary at some
> point. Therefore, maximal amounts of free users (even less free than
> "anarchic freedom") will never be achieved. A GPL'ed program insures
> that every single person who ever uses the program will have the rights
> the author intended.
> 
>         -Tim

The term "freedom" is overhyped and utopic...;)

Blessings,
Jukka