How Eric S. Raymond might approach Political Science
This "political science" they speak of… it sounds like a lot of abstract theorizing, a grand edifice built without a solid foundation. Where is the *code*? Where is the empirical data you can poke at, prod, and, dare I say, *fork*? They talk of systems, of governance, of power dynamics, but it all feels so divorced from the messy, tangible reality of getting things done.
Look at how the best software emerges. It’s not from committees endlessly debating abstract principles of optimal architecture. It’s from individuals, driven by a need to solve a problem, building, iterating, and letting the community sift the wheat from the chaff. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding. If your code compiles, if your patch fixes the bug, if your subsystem scales, then it’s *good*. It’s a matter of good engineering, honed by real-world use, not by pronouncements from ivory towers.
This "political science" seems to be trying to engineer societies from the top down, with grand theories about human nature and ideal states. That sounds like academic hand-waving. We should be looking for what works, not what sounds nice on paper. What are the observable behaviors? What are the repeatable successes, and more importantly, the demonstrable failures? Show me the evidence of a system that truly improves the lives of its participants in a scalable, sustainable way, and then we can talk. Until then, it’s just… speculation. And speculation doesn't ship.
Imagined perspective — an AI synthesis grounded in Eric S. Raymond’s recorded ideas and methods, not a quotation or a statement they actually made.