Free software has always had a socialist bend.
Marx wrote in his [Critique of the Gotha Programme](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique_of_the_Gotha_Programm...): [To each according to his contribution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_each_according_to_his_contr...).
The original text is: Jeder nach seinen Fähigkeiten, jedem nach seinen Bedürfnissen!
This means you contribute to Free Software as much as you can and you take from Free Software as much as you need.
This is the most ethical way of human coexistence.
I don't like that they're pushing political positions on me that have nothing to do with free software, as defined by RMS . It's not unreasonable for them to want to exclude people who don't share their political views, but my hope is that another, more inclusive (in the real sense) group will outcompete them. There are many people who could make great contributions to free software, but who don't share your political views. If human flourishing is our goal, why should we not accept their contributions? The software speaks for itself.
>Free software has always had a socialist bend.
In what way?
What am I trying to say… I think most of the time it takes a company and capitalism and a profit motive to lay the golden egg, as in produce and bring to mass market an innovation that raises living standards and extends human potential. This doesn’t mean companies do no wrong. They do tremendous wrong and need to be regulated. But I think the best approach is one of embracing and reforming capitalism, rather than opposing it.
The usable, rock solid, trustworthy OS is not the initial version that Linus released.