I definitely agree about your point and disagree that the logical conclusion of FOSS is communism, whatever even that means, but I think there is something to be said about the connection between radical leftism (anarchism, socialism, communism, etc...) and free software.

A way of understanding free software, IMO, is that working with software for which freedoms are socially limited (so-called proprietary software) towards someone else, the proprietor, robs the user of the software of freedom and creates some kind of social hierarchy that is undesirable.

Meanwhile, the basic idea of radical leftism is that working using capital for which freedoms are socially limited to the benefit of someone else robs the worker (really, if you think about it, user-of-capital) of freedom and creates an undesirable social hierarchy.

I think that there is some kind of parallel between both, and it's pretty interesting. That isn't to say that companies should use free software or develop free software from their self-interested point of view - as a company using free software you're almost in the same case as a worker, and as a company developing software it can align incentives to lead to better outcomes.

Mostly off-topic :) but socialism cannot be "radical leftism" - because you're left like that without any "non-radical leftism" options. Is it left? Sure. But I'd use the labels "radical" for anarchism or marxism.

Well, it depends on your definition of left and radical. For me, "left" doesn't mean much and is mostly a mirage anyways, but radical has a meaning - and socialism in general, by my definition anyways - seeks to change the basic social relationships in our society to go at the root of the issues, and I think that fits the radical definition.

That being said, I'd say social democracy is an example of non-radical leftism.

/delted/

Then I'm very curious to hear some examples of non-radical left.

Uh-oh. Looks like you logiced me.