With respect to Anivar's below mail :
"*Free Software movement is a Social Movement. If some states realised*
*the arguments raised by a movement it is the victory of the Movement.*
*You and me are part of that. You can Find various examples of Free*
*Software & Open standards adoption in Central Govt Policies, 11th 5*
*year Plan, Knowledge Commission Report etc. On non-left ruled states,*
*Tamil Nadu did some positive steps on Free Software adoption due to*
*ELCOTs intervention. You can find similar examples from Other states."*
* ** *
*I did a study about Free Software in Public Enterprises of Kerala for*
*SPACE in 2005 October & November (Before Left Govt coming to power) .*
*It clearly shows more than 95% of successful e-governance projects are*
*on Free Software Platform . Most of them were not political decision*
*and silent adoption by the developers (Report is available at*
*http://space-kerala.org/downloads/foss.pdf )*
* *
*And Left's adoption of Free Software Policy in Kerala is also a*
*logical follow up of various actions & discussions initiated by Free*
*Software Activists. Even the decision to adopt Free Software in*
*IT at School http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends was decided in an SCERT meeting (with the support of 85% of*
*teachers) much before 2006 elections. But the govt came after*
*election got the political advantage of this decision. and we are very*
*happy about that because they are also helping FS movement by adopting*
*new policies .*
* *
*But when people are pushing Bush's binary logic of "Either you are*
*with us or You are against us" (only-cpim positions and branding*
*everything else as Anti-CPIM) we have to remind history*."
Free Software has been mentioned here as a Social Movement citing the instances and its effect from Bottom rather than from Top. I am a newbie and don't know much about the history of Freesoftware Movement in India and so have my own indifferences or doubts regarding the above mentioned point, hence kindly correct my doubts or misunderstandings.
As far as my understanding, Social Movement is taking the ideology to different classes of people and involving them too in the movement. Kerala is in the forefront of the promotion of Free Software from among the different states but still most of the students passing out from the Engineering colleges & Diploma schools are unaware about the so called Social Movement or the ideas they are promoting. Obviously they have vague idea about Free Software which many consider is the same as Open source. My question arises here that why the so called Social Movement was not able to create much awareness among the student community in a State which is in the Forefront of promoting Free Software? Why the huge majority of students still unaware of the existence of such a Social Movement? (May be this understanding could be wrong which I made largely from the angle of the students from South Kerala)
I can infer 2 reasons for this. – Either the so called Free Software Movement has never been a Social Movement OR there are some serious flaws in the Free Software Movement. (There could be many other reasons also.)
As a person new to the movement I can't deal with the second reasoning since that should be dealt by those who were part of the so called Social Movement.
Regarding the first point, I would like to provide some thoughts as an engineering student from Kerala who wasn't aware of the Free Software Movement. There was never a technical session or a presentation or a philosophical talk by any of the people associated with the Free Software – Social Movement in my college. Neither did I hear about similar programs in other colleges. There was never any sort of mass campaigning or mobilization efforts I ever saw in my college or heard about in other colleges where I had friends. As I became associated with Free Software Movement I started to understand that the persons who were previously associated with Free Software Movement were mostly those were technically very interested or ideologically very much in synch with Free Software. Such an approach as far as I am concerned could never be called a Social Movement, it could only be called a Group or Forum of similar minded people. Obviously these groups could influence various govt policies due to their efforts but it definitely has its own limitations too. A Govt could not be pressurized to implement the policy unless there is a strong Movement from the bottom or else the Govt should be embodied with the very ideology what the movement from bottom is trying to campaign.
Though there have been various discussions going on around, one thing is obvious how the Left govt headed by CPI(M) supported its cause in Kerala and has been in the forefront of promoting and spreading the ideas of Free Software in India. Due to this support by the Govt, many of the students atleast have a vague idea about the concept and about some of its advantages. But still unaware of the "Social Movement" which made the Govt to implement it! How the various fragmented free software groups were able to exert pressure or were in the fore front of such an initiative from the Top is still not clear to me. Also the mass movements in Kerala mainly led by CPI(M) were also supportive as Anivar itself mentioned "85% of teachers (mainly from KSTA)". Hence a blind mentioning of "*Left's adoption of Free Software Policy as a logical follow up*" is but trying to hide the reality. How "Free Software Concept" becomes just one of those in CPI(M)'s policies can be discussed detailed in a separate thread but certainly needs a mentioning here to show how it was not just an automatic adoption by the CPI(M) led govt. It would be better also to think what could have been the success which now the activists are trying to attribute to themselves, had CPI(M) not supported or promoted Free Software (which again is impossible since Free Software is naturally a part of the entire Left politics).
If you take the different Mass Movements in Kerala such as students movement, youth movement, teachers movement, science movement etc were in the forefront of organizing people and to create awareness and to fight for various rights and issues concerning the people. These mass movements had a great role in creating the so called "Culture" which someone mentioned was the reason for the spread of Free Software in Kerala. Through Free Software Movement, our priority is not to create only "Users" of Free Software but "Creators" too. An example I can provide of AC3 (Slum Computing Centre in Bangalore). The people who took initiative could have just installed linux in the systems and taught the children basic computer skills. Would that have created them any awareness? But the members went above that and talked to them about Free Software, by involving them in campaignings like that against Microsoft-VTU (in which very few from FSUG, the sole representative of Free Software group in Bangalore participated).
Even in this campaign there was very less participation from the members of FSUG whether for the ground level working for the campaigning or atleast their participation for the program. I have seldom seen anyone proposing to conduct classes atleast for those in IT industry and supporting Free Software Movement to make them more capable in the technical part. I have never heard about any such initiatives by anyone even for the employees in Technopark or Info park. Hence both IT employees and Engg/Diploma students are till now not mobilized or atleast reached to create awareness about Free Software. Then how can this be called a Social Movement?
For mentioning it as a Social Movement we have to follow the approach of the other Mass Movements and going to as much as communities and sections of people as possible which is certainly lacking in the existing movement according to me.
I have heard about the various projects undertaken by the Free Software groups but what I understood was that these projects are focusing more on certain specific areas and might make that particular project very successful or highly qualitative. But what about the quantity? How can we call the movement a Social Movement unless many other sections are still not included in the movement?
Coming back to Karnataka, I find the society itself very different from that of Kerala especially on basis of the Social indices. AC3 was just one centre which we were able to know because some of the Free Software activists were also involved. What about numerous other such centres or slum areas? If some NGO is teaching them basic computer skills, those children are growing under restricted freedom in technology. How to reach them without a Social Movement and just through the existing Mail groups? What about the awareness FSUG is able to create among the Engineering/Diploma students & IT workers in Bangalore?
Please correct whether my understanding was wrong or whatever I mentioned were not correct, if so kindly correct me.
Thanks & Regards Nidhin
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Nidhin Sasi nidhin.sasi@gmail.com wrote:
never heard about any such initiatives by anyone even for the employees in Technopark or Info park. Hence both IT employees and Engg/Diploma students are till now not mobilized or atleast reached to create awareness about Free Software. Then how can this be called a Social Movement?
In a boot-strapping process, there is a logical sequence of events. The final events come into existence only after the initial ones are complete. Here the initial part is schooling, which is fast maturing through Free Software initiatives. The dimension of this process may have reached a stage where it cannot be reversed or diluted anymore. It could well be a matter of time that rogue thinking is finally shown the exit door. Since this process is already in motion, it qualifies to be called a "Movement". CK Raju
*<In a boot-strapping process, there is a logical sequence of events. <The final events come into existence only after the initial ones are <complete. Here the initial part is schooling, which is fast maturing <through Free Software initiatives. The dimension of this process may <have reached a stage where it cannot be reversed or diluted anymore. <It could well be a matter of time that rogue thinking is finally shown <the exit door. Since this process is already in motion, it qualifies <to be called a "Movement".*
I have some queries with respect to the above mail.
*1*. It was mentioned in Anivar's mail that "*Even the decision to adopt Free Software in **IT at School* http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends* was decided in an SCERT meeting (with the support of 85% of teachers) much before 2006 elections*." . What efforts did the Free Software Social Movement do to make this process in action thereby qualifying itself to be called a "Movement" ?
*2*. In the above mail it is quoted "*Here the initial part is schooling, which is fast maturing through Free Software initiatives."* Can you mention few such initiatives to get a better picture ?
*3*. How can the rogue thinking be shown the exit door, when even the students who are taught Free Software are also not fully aware of the Freedom values and the humanistic aspect of Free Software above the profit oriented aspect of Proprietary Software? After just learning FreeSoftware mechanically and not translating that to the level of Free Software creators or technical knowledge, they would be again going to the world of Proprietary Software for jobs, and hence needing to learn the Proprietary Software tools burying their Free Software knowledge.? If there is any initiatives by the Free Software Movement in Kerala in the schools regarding creating awareness and campaigning kindly mention.
I do not know whether there is any clear cut definition for Social Movement. And any attempt to fit this commonly used terms in to a sharply defined constraints will be a worthless effort. In general, the term Social Movement represent gathering together of individuals or organizations focused on mutually agreed political or social change.
In that sense free software movements are social movements. Same will be the case of political parties as well. However I have to say, even if the free software movements have global reach, it is very weak when compared to other social movements existed in our milieu. And I feel some of the free software groups in India are not socially matured. That is why an organisation like FSF-India is reluctant to adopt democratic way of functioning. Same is also evident through the hostile mails against CPI(M) appeared in this list.
I feel CPI(M) is also a part of free software movement in India. As some one pointed out here, they are working in a boarder social and political circle when compared to us ( the free software movements), they have done more struggles to empower the people, for which freedom as advocated by us is an essential one. They have realised it even before free software movements takes its shape. We have to appreciate their efforts and should learn things from them.
Tarnish the image of a partner organisation with baseless allegation will no way help our further reach-out to the society. We have to make out strategy to over come our weakness, for which we have to work with other social movements including political parties, who really agrees with the philosophy of software freedom on the basis of a common minimum program.
- Anilkumar KV
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 8:40 PM, Nidhin Sasi nidhin.sasi@gmail.com wrote:
through Free Software initiatives." Can you mention few such initiatives to get a better picture ?
http://support.space-kerala.org/mailinglist.html Pls join the list (and encourage others too) in order to remain posted about current developments.
One can try out Free Software, even without knowing it in its entirety. And one can learn about its philosophy even without being taught formally about it - why should one discount the space available for horizontal discussions within student communities ?
I can't understand your first question - how can something be called a movement even when its initiating the process - pls enlighten us with your views.
CK Raju
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Anilkumar KV anilankv@gmail.com wrote:
Tarnish the image of a partner organisation with baseless allegation will no
(1) If an organisation can be tarnished with baseless allegation, then there could be serious problems with the way in which it is organised or constituted. If a section of constituent followers of the organisation believes so, then there could be serious problems with such followers. Just imagine what would their understanding be, if some base-full omissions are proved - would the organisation cease to exist ? This has never happened, despite occurances of omissions. So the initial understanding is erroneous.
(2) When a people-based organisation makes a section of people whom it believes are behind this act of tarnishing, its enemy or target - then also it ceases to be a people-based organisation anymore - because from that point thereon, it becomes factional - a situation from where it can no longer see *people* in its entirety. This is also a big problem if the organisation claims to be a peoples' organisation standing for ethical causes. I should re-produce the initial words of Ms Firoza Bibi who won the assembly by-elections from Nandigram - that she, now, "..no longer is a representative of Trinamool Congress alone - she represents the entire people of Nandigram which also includes Communists". I think political organisations have a lot to learn from her words.
(3) Lastly, why should you want the organisation which you support to be accepted always by everyone as *Jesus-like* ? If we roll-back a little, be a litlle more tolerant to accusations, allegations etc, blood will continue to flow normally through our veins for better productive purposes !!
CK Raju
*<I can't understand your first question - how can something be called a movement even when its initiating the process - pls enlighten us with your views.*
It was mentioned in Anivar's mail that "*Even the decision to adopt Free Software in IT at School was decided in an SCERT meeting (with the support of 85% of teachers) much before 2006 elections*." . What efforts did the Free Software Social Movement do to make this process in action ?
In your mail it has been mentioned
*"<In a boot-strapping process, there is a logical sequence of events. <The final events come into existence only after the initial ones are <complete. Here the initial part is schooling, which is fast maturing <through Free Software initiatives. The dimension of this process may <have reached a stage where it cannot be reversed or diluted anymore. <It could well be a matter of time that rogue thinking is finally shown <the exit door. Since this process is already in motion, it qualifies <to be called a "Movement"."* The initial part which you mentioned (schooling) has been an initiative by the Govt as per my knowledge till now (from the Top now from the Bottom). The above question I asked what Free Software Movement did to implement it. ? Only if that answer is given what you said above would makes sense to me "*Here the initial part is schooling, which is fast maturing through Free Software initiatives." , "Since this process is already in motion, it qualifies to be called a "Movement". * ** **
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 10:40 AM, ck raju ck.thrissur@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 8:40 PM, Nidhin Sasi nidhin.sasi@gmail.com wrote:
through Free Software initiatives." Can you mention few such initiatives
to
get a better picture ?
http://support.space-kerala.org/mailinglist.html Pls join the list (and encourage others too) in order to remain posted about current developments.
One can try out Free Software, even without knowing it in its entirety. And one can learn about its philosophy even without being taught formally about it - why should one discount the space available for horizontal discussions within student communities ?
I can't understand your first question - how can something be called a movement even when its initiating the process - pls enlighten us with your views.
CK Raju _______________________________________________ Fsf-friends mailing list Fsf-friends@mm.gnu.org.in http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Nidhin Sasi nidhin.sasi@gmail.com wrote:
the Govt as per my knowledge till now (from the Top now from the Bottom).
So you want us to believe that all decisions that *Top* took, was on its own without being influenced by anyone associated with FS ? Or does it extend still further - whereby all such Governments, constituted by elected representatives, comes into existence without any assistance or linkages with *Bottom* ? Or does it convey that *Top* should be taken for granted for taking such ethical stand on its own, and hence should not be criticised anymore, nor should anyone try to snatch credit for decisions that *Top* took on its own ? Or should we accept that even when *Top* is constitutionally obliged to represent *Bottom*, *Bottom* should be seen as something very distinct from *Top*, and that they are not the same ? I fail to see the sharp distinctions in such objects that you portray, for me, they are very blurred. May be problems with my vision. CK Raju
<So you want us to believe that all decisions that *Top* took, was on <its own without being influenced by anyone associated with FS ?"
That is what I asked 2 times in my mail for which nobody replied yet which prompted me to as the initiative taken by Govt as per my knowledge - again asking that question -
*It was mentioned in Anivar's mail that "Even the decision to adopt Free Software in IT at School was decided in an SCERT meeting (with the support of 85% of teachers) much before 2006 elections." . What efforts did the Free Software Social Movement do to make this process in action thereby qualifying itself to be called a "Movement" ?"* ** *<*Or does it extend still further - whereby all such Governments, <constituted by elected representatives, comes into existence without <any assistance or linkages with *Bottom* ?
First of all the Bottom I intended is that of the Free Software Movement.
From my knowledge this bottom is as of now very much restricted and only to
few of those who are techniclaly or ideologically or both ways attracted to Free Software. I want to see this as a Mass Movement to reach the concept and idea to different sections of people. Hence as long as the present Bottom of activists are restricted and mostly from an apolitical or non-voting population without much association with any of the Mass Movements, I think the above question itself is not valid here.
<Or does it convey that *Top* should be taken for granted for taking such ethical stand on its <own, and hence should not be criticised anymore, nor should anyone try <to snatch credit for decisions that *Top* took on its own ?
Which of my posting made you to misinterpret like this? Also why this need of snatching credit for decisions taken by Top ?
<Or should we accept that even when *Top* is constitutionally obliged to <represent *Bottom*, *Bottom* should be seen as something very distinct <from *Top*, and that they are not the same ?
Please avoid devitaing from the topic. It would be good if you can use the same nergy to answer my questions in simple terms rather than throwing questions completely out of context and nowhere related to what I asked. I told you that the Social Movements has made the Bottom to influence teh Top in bringing in policies and implementing those and I would like to see the Free Software Movement also to be a similar Social Movement, which I feel as of now is not so and asked some clarifications which nobody is answering.
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 12:20 PM, ck raju ck.thrissur@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Nidhin Sasi nidhin.sasi@gmail.com wrote:
the Govt as per my knowledge till now (from the Top now from the Bottom).
So you want us to believe that all decisions that *Top* took, was on its own without being influenced by anyone associated with FS ? Or does it extend still further - whereby all such Governments, constituted by elected representatives, comes into existence without any assistance or linkages with *Bottom* ? Or does it convey that *Top* should be taken for granted for taking such ethical stand on its own, and hence should not be criticised anymore, nor should anyone try to snatch credit for decisions that *Top* took on its own ? Or should we accept that even when *Top* is constitutionally obliged to represent *Bottom*, *Bottom* should be seen as something very distinct from *Top*, and that they are not the same ? I fail to see the sharp distinctions in such objects that you portray, for me, they are very blurred. May be problems with my vision. CK Raju _______________________________________________ Fsf-friends mailing list Fsf-friends@mm.gnu.org.in http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends
<So you want us to believe that all decisions that *Top* took, was on <its own without being influenced by anyone associated with FS ?"
That is what I asked 2 times in my mail for which nobody replied yet which prompted me to as the initiative taken by Govt as per my knowledge - again asking that question -
*It was mentioned in Anivar's mail that "Even the decision to adopt Free Software in IT at School was decided in an SCERT meeting (with the support of 85% of teachers) much before 2006 elections." . What efforts did the Free Software Social Movement do to make this process in action thereby qualifying itself to be called a "Movement" ?"* ** *<*Or does it extend still further - whereby all such Governments, <constituted by elected representatives, comes into existence without <any assistance or linkages with *Bottom* ?
First of all the Bottom I intended is that of the Free Software Movement.
From my knowledge this bottom is as of now very much restricted and only to
few of those who are techniclaly or ideologically or both ways attracted to Free Software. I want to see this as a Mass Movement to reach the concept and idea to different sections of people. Hence as long as the present Bottom of activists are restricted and mostly from an apolitical or non-voting population without much association with any of the Mass Movements, I think the above question itself is not valid here.
<Or does it convey that *Top* should be taken for granted for taking such ethical stand on its <own, and hence should not be criticised anymore, nor should anyone try <to snatch credit for decisions that *Top* took on its own ?
Which of my posting made you to misinterpret like this? Also why this need of snatching credit for decisions taken by Top ?
<Or should we accept that even when *Top* is constitutionally obliged to <represent *Bottom*, *Bottom* should be seen as something very distinct <from *Top*, and that they are not the same ?
Please avoid devitaing from the topic. It would be good if you can use the same nergy to answer my questions in simple terms rather than throwing questions completely out of context and nowhere related to what I asked. I told you that the Social Movements has made the Bottom to influence teh Top in bringing in policies and implementing those and I would like to see the Free Software Movement also to be a similar Social Movement, which I feel as of now is not so and asked some clarifications which nobody is answering.
-
Anilkumar KV -
ck raju -
Nidhin Sasi