[ale] Misguided Linux enthusiast makes us all look bad

[John Marasco]

If it fits sensibilities I'll say the French Resistance.  The point was 
that if the leaders of a loosely organized movement "unleash the dogs" 
they are likely to find that the dogs won't come back if called.  
Analogies to the French Resistance may make some happy, but I would 
wager that has more to do with how they want to view themselves than the 
reality of the situation.  Realistically we should be able to agree that 
the actions of Hitler bear little resemblance to the actions of SCO.  We 
should also be able to agree that there are a lot more similarities 
between the actions of the French Resistance and terrorists than between 
the OS community and either group (which flaws either analogy).  SCO 
isn't an uncompromisingly moral entity but that doesn't mean they are 
out slaughtering millions and enslaving tens of millions more (just as 
the OS community is a long way from blowing things up and killing 
people).  A decent analogy (but by no means perfect) is between SCO's 
rather self serving and self preserving tactics and the arguably self 
serving and self preserving tactics of the US.  (I say arguably not 
because I fail to see a bigger picture but because there are deceptively 
coherent arguments in favor of the latter world view.)  The fact that 
some Islamic clerics, the Free French Government and Eric all cast the 
struggle as a great battle between good and evil doesn't mean that the 
analogies are the same.  What SCO is doing is wrong but it is not a 
"great evil" as Eric wrongly says it is.  There really are great evils 
in the world but just because you believe you are the good guy doesn't 
mean that every morally repugnant entity you fight is a "great evil".

Most "terrorist groups" supply a lot of social services and general 
organization to their communities just as the mafia did here in the US.  
These are unarguably "good" things these organizations do.  You could 
say members of these organizations do bad things too.  Rational people 
would not say that these acts are committed by some "misguided soul who 
thinks that doing a 'bad' thing is the right thing".  Do you feel it's 
appropriate to moderate moral outrage at individual excess based on the 
cause supported?  Especially when the actions of the misguided souls can 
be traced back to the words, actions and/or interests of the leaders.  
In our case, one could argue a causal relationship between leaders 
spouting misguided words and followers taking misguided actions.  If so 
it could be argued that if Eric wants to stop the misguided actions he 
should scale back the rhetoric.  You can't announce to a vast following 
that we are "at war" and that the enemy is the "evil empire" and expect 
that no one will take those words literally.  First off, the words are 
wrong in the OS/SCO conflict and second of all the belief that not one 
follower will take them seriously is silly.

If we don't restrain our verbal AND physical excess then others will.  
Eric is 100% right when he says that we should restrain our physical 
excess.  What Eric doesn't acknowledge is that one man's physical excess 
is another man's "honest" or "rational" view of the situation and views 
are shaped by leaders.  I think Eric's words convey an excessive view of 
the situation.  I think this incident was a result of that fact and that 
Eric should acknowledge that if he wants the incidents to stop.  But 
hey, I'm just an idiot giving the evil guys more ammunition for FUD so 
what do I know. ;)

_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale at ale.org
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale