
I read something in one of the comments for an OSNews posting a couple weeks ago that sent me thinking. It wasn't an original or profound thought. In fact, it's a rather commonly-held opinion that happens to be quite misguided. It's an opinion summed up by the "open source = communist" meme that gets thrown around in thousands of flamewars all over the internet. In this essay, I will explore why this idea is wrong and demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of economics.
If you really know what communism is, you won't be so scared of it, because there is nothing to be afraid of, communism is simply concerned with improving the well being of the whole society, which is a good thing.
I don't think the fear is, "Oh, no! What if we end up in an ideal utopia?! That's sooooo scary!" The problem isn't what will happen if people succeed in making a perfect communistic society. The what has people scared are two basic problems with the "communist revolution":
A) Any "revolution" is going to scare people. People fear change, and often with good reason. Revolutions an civil wars are among the bloodiest and most brutal conflicts people get into. Likewise with economic revolutions; even when the end result of the revolution is a transition into a better situation, the transition itself is always messy.
B) When the revolution is done, you're most likely going to end up with a tyrannical government, or, at the very least, a terribly inefficient bureaucracy. That's pretty much just the way things work. Like you said, "it won't work anyways any the the shadow of human nature". "Ideals" which ignore human nature aren' harmless. The most monsterous of human actions are committed in persuit of such "ideals".
Both questions apply to the OSS debate. If the whole of software development were to go open source, the questions to be faced are A) How can we make the transition, and B) In what state does that leave the software industry?
Personally, I think the best solution is to maintain a world with both open source and closed source software. Both have strengths and weaknesses, and neither are, in themselves, a problem. What I really want to see is A) Open standards and B) a thoughtful review of the concept of "intellectual property" (perhaps a concept that doesn't fine 12 year olds millions for downloading a couple CD's or throw college kids in jail for downloading photoshop to learn how to use it)