I have really never felt that Open Source was Marxist.  Though many
Marxist people seem to really like the concept, it does not have the
aspect of control that Marxist governments exhibit.  I've always thought
Open Source was more like anarchy.

The analogy I like to use is that it's like a good-old-fashioned barn
raising.  A bunch of people in a farming community would get together
and build a barn for one of the farmers.  And then that farmer would
help someone else build a barn.  It's mutually benificial, and totally
voluntary.

I have a theory that all political systems seek the same thing, but none
of them actually know what it is or how to attain it.  :-)

-BVG

Nathan Saper wrote:
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> By "freedom," I mean "the freedom to do whatever the hell you want to
> do with the software."  No matter how you look at it, the GPL puts
> more restrictions on the developer than BSD does.  This isn't to say
> that BSD is better.  I happen to prefer the GPL, largely due to the
> reasons you stated above.  But I think it would be hard to argue that
> the developer has more freedom with GPL than he/she does with BSD.  In
> a way, it's like Marxism vs. capitalism (GPL being Marxism, BSD being
> capitalism): BSD allows for more individual freedom in the short term,
> but the GPL allows for collective advancement, in the end making everyone free.
> 
> Kinda makes you wonder why we have a capitalistic economy and a
> Marxist software development system. . . .