> the group originated as “Computer Professionals for Peace”; in October 1970 “Professionals” was replaced with “People” because members “felt that the ‘Professional’ label limited the potential scope of the group and smacked of elitism.”
What?
What?
There are places where egalitarianism is most appropriate, e.g. in tallying political interests, and where elitism is most appropriate, e.g. no one wants an amateur surgeon.
Even if they want to open the group to hobbyists, as a professional I have more in common with a hobbyist who actively maintains a software project than one who doesn't actively contribute; specifically, if you're having a discussion about software you're largely on the same page with the former. That's ultimately the point of association, it's to improve conversation by gathering people who have a shared understanding.
The argument in issue #5 seems to be against ACM's position which they say is that professionalism implies professional detachment. In other words being agnostic to the use to which computers are put.
because, judging by the left-fist logo and focus on control of the means of production / classes / etc. this organization probably has a left/populist ideological basis
Shockingly few of #2 actually fit #1, in my experience, so it's important to distinguish.