[FoRK] User-friendliness and fascism
Ken Ganshirt @ Yahoo
ken_ganshirt at yahoo.ca
Mon Apr 11 16:24:37 PDT 2011
--- On Mon, 4/11/11, Gregory Alan Bolcer <greg at bolcer.org> wrote:
> Maybe. I think it sounds more
> like a structural-systemic-organizational issue.
> Sedimentary organizations typically have less
> freedoms. I'll go back and re-read with my new
> I just think national politics is a blunt tool, kind of
> like shock therapy as a catalyst for changes.
I'm confused how you get from that article to politics. ????
Fascism is about control, not politics. E.g. Corporations are more fascist than most political parties in the western world, both inwardly towards their employees and outwardly towards their customers. Political parties tend towards fascism in their internal operations (restricting the selection of candidates, whipping, etc.) regardless of where they stand, outwardly, on the political spectrum.
Neither of those statements are political statements.
I agree with Damien; I thought the article was an excellent observation about what we consider "freedom", e.g. how [the generic] we can consider a highly controlled environment like Apple's walled garden to give us more "freedom" than Microsoft's relatively open can of worms. The very definition of a nanny state (of being).
That's also not a political statement.
> On 4/11/2011 10:32 AM, Damien Morton wrote:
> > He draws parallels, and they are related problems.
> > What interesting is how he visits the notions of
> freedom vs unfreedom,
> > and the subtleties inherent in defining what freedom
> actually is.
> -- greg at bolcer.org,
> http://bolcer.org, c: +1.714.928.5476
> FoRK mailing list
More information about the FoRK