this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
437 points (97.6% liked)

Linux

48689 readers
1146 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Not at all true. If you're referencing US ideologies of Capitalism, holy shit are you wrong and read the wrong Wikipedia.

In fact, the Democrats since the 60's have run campaigns WAY against the threat of late-stage Capitalism. Republicans are the pro-capitalist party in the sense they want to privatize everything and help their friends, and also "deregulate" anything and everything.

These are anti-capitalist ideas.

Come on back with some more Wiki links, good buddy.

[–] Grapho@lemmy.ml 12 points 2 months ago

In fact, the Democrats since the 60's have run campaigns WAY against the threat of late-stage Capitalism.

Bruh what world are you living in lmao. Obama reached to bankers uncaringly tanking the global economy by giving them money to do with as they wished (and, as always, they wished to give themselves a bonus).

[–] TheOubliette@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago

Not at all true. If you're referencing US ideologies of Capitalism, holy shit are you wrong and read the wrong Wikipedia.

I am quite correct, though I am referring to liberalism in the general internationa sense. This is what liberalism always has been. You must understand it as what it is and has done, not what it tells you it is meant to be. As Stafford Beer said, it makes no sense to think that the purpose of something is what it consistently fails to do. The liberalism of the enlightenment had in its right hand brutal, racist colonial exploitation and in its left a ruthless industrial revolution chaining the people to factories and removing them from all commond and property. It is a product of capitalism itself.

In fact, the Democrats since the 60's have run campaigns WAY against the threat of late-stage Capitalism.

The Democrats are a capitalist party and always have been. They do not work against capitalism at all, they support it and protect it. There is really such thing as late-stage capitalism, it is just capitalism developing over time, retaining most of its qualities but taking on new angles. Buy if it does mean anything, it means neoliberalism wrought by financialization, and that is Democrats' main political base. It's their main thing, especially as an export.

Republicans are the pro-capitalist party in the sense they want to privatize everything and help their friends

Democrats also do this they just tell you it is efficiency and "public-private partnerships" and "a generous endowment to a public institution" (that they can now defund). The charter school movement is largely Democrats, for example. They simply have different factions on their chopping block, different groups to pander to.

These are anti-capitalist ideas.

What ideas are anti-capitalist? I didn't see any.

Come on back with some more Wiki links, good buddy.

No thanks. Read the political philosophers of the enlightenment, colonialism, industrialization and proletarianizatikn, the liberal revolutions in Europe, and who emerged to identify themselves as anti-liberal once those revolutions established their ideologies as mainstream, namely monarchists, fascists, socialists, and anarchists. You cannot gain a political education through Wikipedia, it is a Cliffs Notes approach to social topics often written by often incorrect or heavily propagandized (or propagandist!) People, including literal Nazi apologists.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org -2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Dubliette is referring to the thought-terminating cliché that every major US party doesn't want to abolish capitalism (the economic system centered around capital, private ownership, etc.), ergo we're all liberals.

[–] TheOubliette@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago

I dunno how you can terminate a thought that never began

[–] Aria@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

thought-terminating cliché

There's no argument, it's the definition of the word. Why do you assume there should be argument around the normal usage of a word?

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

because for some reason, torvalds is bad now because he is a capitalist while nearly everyone is a capitalist. that’s the argument made.

[–] Aria@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 2 months ago

A capitalist is someone who owns capital, not someone who supports capitalism. A liberal is someone who supports capitalism. I don't think Linus is a liberal, given that he's the Linux guy. But he's obviously a capitalist, and that's okay, that's something you should strive towards if you live under capitalism, even if ideologically you oppose capitalism.

[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 4 points 2 months ago

A thought-terminating cliché (also known as a semantic stop-sign, a thought-stopper, bumper sticker logic, or cliché thinking) is a form of loaded language, often passing as folk wisdom, intended to end an argument and quell cognitive dissonance.[1][2] Its function is to stop an argument from proceeding further, ending the debate with a cliché rather than a point. Some such clichés are not inherently terminating. They only become so when used to intentionally dismiss dissent or justify fallacious logic.[3]