Slashdot Mirror
Political Leaning and Free Software
00_NOP writes "HateMyTory is the world's first political rating site and occasionally gets blasted or promoted by British bloggers on either side of the political spectrum. But here's something even more intriguing: when the right come visiting they hate the site but they are disproportionately likely to be users of free software, whether that is just Firefox on top of their Windows box, or all the way with some Linux distro. But when the left rally to the cause they are more likely than not to be proprietary software users, albeit with a big bias towards Apple. If Microsoft's defenders think free software is the road to socialism, why don't the left seem to agree? As a leftie, and a free software advocate, I find this pretty puzzling."
Most conservatives (particularly in America) are either too poor or uneducated to use a computer on the Internet (and hence stick to the the TV/radio), or they are too "pure" to surf the "Pornternet." Hence most "conservatives" online are the libertarian types which tend to support and use FOSS.
Case in point, my aunt stopped visiting foxnews.com after she saw a Sprint Break ad banner with a barechested guy holding a bikini-clad girl: "I don't need this filth"
It's really simple (generalizations coming - yes, there are exceptions):
Leftists/Socialists tend to:
a) follow the herd
b) not rock the boat
c) not have enough independent thought to try something new.
d) be unwilling to work on something that's "too hard"; that's why they want the gov't to do everything for them.
Moderate rightists/Republicans tend to:
a) be more independent, but still follow the herd to a large extend.
b) don't care what anyone thinks but other "conservatives"
c) be market-minded; cost would be one reason they might switch to linux.
"far-right" people/Constitutionalists and Libertarians tend to:
a) value privacy
b) appreciate fiscal value
c) distrust the republicans and the socialists and government in general.
d) like control of themselves and their environment.
When you put all of this together you can see why "right" people would be more likely to use Linux. I know that on the whole more conservative types that I know are open to alternative computing than liberals.
This space for rent.
Left / Right leanings are utterly irrelevant to Free software
Politics is relevant to everything, but ill assume your not a troll and that your just being ignorant. Take a look at political compass, personal and financial freedom are big factors in politic leaning. To suggest Free software isnt political... your strange.
Left wing people are more likely to be altruists, right wing people are more likely to be egoists.
Free software is compatible with an altruist views because they appreciate the community aspect of it, they see the bigger picture.
Free Software is compatible with an egoist views because they get stuff without having to pay for it (usually).
Developers are more likely to be left wing, users can be a mixed bag.
pro-choice...anti-war
You'd be completely and utterly thrown out and insulted by the right, period, for either of those two positions.
Being an anarchist would render you subject to jokes by everyone.
Being anti-welfare would not endear you to the left, but, frankly, the left knows how locked in that is and doesn't really consider being against it that much of a threat.
And Randian Objectivist would result in everyone on the left thinking you were fairly stupid. Ayn Rand philosophy is gibberish...she doesn't ever support her claims with any sort of facts or logic, just asserting that certain things are true therefore certain other things are true. Granted, all philosophy does this to some extent, but her claims are especially unsupported. And her followers like to twist her claims to even sillier positions, like their support for copyright law. Seriously. Ayn Rand is for people who've read no other philosophy. :)
But, anyway, you'd rather obviously be a Libertarian, but as they have no chance in hell of being elected, you should work with the Democrats to kick out the Republicans, and then join up wherever the actual small-government faction of the Republicans go when it collapses. They could end up with the Libertarians, they could stage a coup of their own party and end up in control, whatever. As they are the only intelligent faction of the Republicans, it's almost certain they'll end up in some sort of rebuilt opposition party to the Democrats, although it might take a decade or so.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
However, your scenario was interesting and there are a few conflicts there in that such a person can't really exist. Being a Randian Objectivist is sort of like being a Catholic in that there are people who 'own' that line of thinking, so you can't really disagee with them about what it means to be a Catholic/Objectivist like you can argue about what it means to be an idiot, I mean a liberal (US).
Anyway, the Randian Objectivists are fiercely pro-war. Off the charts. If they had their way the US would invade Brazil right now for nationalizing US property (and so would the US if this was 100 years ago. The USMC did this about 130 times around that period).
Also, while they are typically considered 'pro-choice', Rand did not support it beyond the first trimester and could well have changed her position based on where science is today as viability marches back to conception.