A short critique of Stallmanism
jancorazza.com
jancorazza.com
It seems like this critique rests on one central premise: Stallman is too ideologically pure. He's a zealot. And this is true, no doubt.
But I do wonder, hasn't every successful movement been spearheaded by a zealot, by someone who refuses to compromise? The work of outreach generally falls on these people's followers.
Jesus, Ayn Rand, Lenin, etc...
No, Stallman is not ideologically pure enough! He's very principled, however he simply has some mistaken principles.
I define ideological purity not by the level of zealotry, which Stallman certainly doesn't lack, but by the level of consistency with a wider social analysis and general correctness (now the relativists will get me but this is possible to define by linking principles and conclusions, I just don't want to get into that).
And in this respect, Ayn Rand is pure, Lenin fucking invented it, and so on.