I'm curious, what's history behind AntiX? What motivated its creation and how is it associated with political issues?

Hi umang. I'm here only for about a year or so but I believe antiX was born as a MEPIS remix for old machines by anticapitalista. That's what one can get from googling it. anti himself could give you more details.
As for politics, since we live in society everything is politics. Some places will tell you you shouldn't talk about politics; that usually means that you shouldn't talk about what the 'boss' or, more frequently, his cronies don't like.

As secipolla stated, antiX started out as a MEPIS respin for older computers or for those that prefer a 'mean and lean' desktop system. The first remaster of MEPIS I did was not long after MEPIS 3.4.3 was released, but I only made it available to a few testers and it was called flepis (fluxbox Mepis, no icewm)

Quite a few people over at MEPISlovers forum encouraged me to get in touch with Warren of MEPIS and to produce an officially sanctioned MEPIS respin aimed at older boxes. By then, MEPIS had shifted to a Ubuntu base (MEPIS 6 and 6.5) and the first antiX released was antiX-M6.5"Spartacus". Although I didn't really agree with the move to Ubuntu base, and partly as a result of MEPIS doing so, I started to experiment with other distros and used Kanotix and then sidux. (as well as Debian).

I had thought of basing antiX of a sidux base, but MEPIS went back to Debian and so there was no real need. antiX has been progressively moving further from its MEPIS roots to be more Debian compliant in the sense that removing the antiX/MEPIS stuff and only using Debian repos will not break antiX.

antiX has been influenced by sidux, TinyMe, Puppy, Absolute and slitaz. You can see all those influences in the latest antiX.

About the politics.
I am a political activist (the name gives it away __{{emoticon}}__ ) and a teacher and I thought it would be a good idea to try and raise issues to people that may or may not even have thought of them from an anticapitalist Left perspective. The anticapitalists don't have anywhere near the same access to the media as the pro-system propagandists, so in my very small way I am hoping that people will think that maybe everything they have been taught/read/watch on tv may not really be what is happening and question the whole capitalist system and not just its 'bad' parts.
And just as important, I can learn from people as well, how they see things, how they think it can be changed etc.

Wow! Great to know. __{{emoticon}}__

From the name, it sounded like you were inspired to start AntiX by your political viewpoints. It is still great to have such a good OS backing a cause like this.

A slightly off-topic question: Does you're joining this forum (so I presume your creating this forum also) on 11 Sept have anything to do with anti-capitalism or it is just co-incidence?

just co-incidence

i'm sorry for the late post and for posting off topic but i was looking around at the forum,found this and became curious...
anticapitalista you are anti-capitalist,so you would want something else right? what would that be? i'm curious because i can't imagine something else and there are a lot of good things that are here thanks to capitalism so it can't be that bad can it?
i would really like to know your opinion.

lot of good things that are here thanks to capitalism so it can't be that bad can it?

Depends on where you were born or live I guess.
The news lately is showing that all capitalism is good for is the rich. Takes a lot of Money to create poverty.

I subscribe or dream of a society like



^---- embedded YouTube-hosted video: https://www.youtube.com/4Z9WVZddH9w



but will probably be dead before people/sheeple wake up. __{{emoticon}}__

The something else I would call genuine socialism/communism. Now the problem is that these terms mean different things in different parts of the world for various reasons. For me genuine socialism/communism has nothing to do with those regimes that call themselves by that name eg China, North Korea, Cuba and the former USSR and its satellite states in the old Eastern Europe such as Poland, Czechoslovakia, Albania etc. IMO those aforementioned countries were/are not genuinely socialist/communist for the simple reason that the ownership and control of the means of production (factories, land, banks, capital) is not in the hands of those that produce the wealth in society, but in the hands of a state bureaucracy. The 'open' capitalist states (rich or poor, democratic or not) have the same feature ie those that produce the wealth do not own nor control it.

Capitalism may have been dynamic relative to previous economic systems, but it is no longer the case. In fact capitalism as a socio-economic system is holding society back. The gap between the rich and poor across the globe and within nation states is widening. The number of wars are increasing. Social services are being destroyed in the name of 'individual choice'. Racism is on the rise. All this, and much more when we have the means to eradicate poverty, want, many diseases, expand education provision to all tomorrow if the people genuinely made the decisions about their lives for the benefit of all and not a tiny number of wealthy families/individuals.
To put it simply. People before profit. That means overthrowing a capitalist system that does the opposite.

So, you're a Marxist?

the convert wrote:I'm curious because i can't imagine something else and there are a lot of good things that are here thanks to capitalism so it can't be that bad can it?

Think of Star Trek: TNG, i believe that's supposed to depict a socialist utopia on Earth.

buttcoffee wrote:So, you're a Marxist?

Yes, I am, but not the academic type - I'm an activist as well.

wow, you really convinced me, now i feel ashamed i posted that it can't be that bad... __{{emoticon}}__
there are some things i would like to say however
first to buttcoffee: i have never seen star trek since that is before my time so i can't think of that sorry.

then to rokytnji: that was quite the eye-opening video for me, it really made me think again about how i looked at the world and yes a complete mentality change is not likely to take place any time soon but maybe, who knows?

and then to anticapitalista: genuine socialism/communism could indeed be a better way but you would have to make sure you don't make the same mistake as capitalism that put profit before people and then forgets the people, you would put the people before the profit which is indeed better but you shouldn't forget the profit. i say this because i've seen a guy on tv who wanted to help the poor and he gave money and food to them but the poor people would keep coming for more and now he's living as a poor guy too so you would have to find a solution so that that wouldn't happen to us all.
i think that this is realistic because it's unlikely that the world is gonna change completely at the same time (when the communism became capitalism some countries stayed communistic like china), some poorer countries may stay behind and people from those countries will then come to the richer countries (this is already happening now and i don't have anything against these people i am just trying to give an example) those countries could then have your system so you would help these people but they will keep coming and keep asking for help and there will also be normal people getting poor in the country itself, will you be able to keep helping them without a vast supply of richness? i mean if we stop focusing on making profit then socialism will have less money to use won't it?

sorry that my post is so cluttered i just can't explain it well, what i'm trying to say is that socialism/communism that wants to help people depends on money so we need to make money to be able to give it to the poor but you would stop focusing on making money so we would all be making less money won't that eventually give problems?

(this post is really too cluttered if you don't understand anything just ask and i will try to say it better)

In pure communism, no one person or group would be in power. Everyone would be equal, in general. Communism/Marxism is kind of like Anarchism. There would be no money or personal wealth in communism. Socialism is a little different from Communism, but I forgot the differences.

China is moving towards capitalism and I don't believe they ever achieved pure communism, nor did the USSR. Both had people in power over the rest of the people.

I read this pamphlet many years ago. Although it was written over 30 years ago, the main message is still relevant today, if not more so.


========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://www.marxists.org/archive/foot-paul/1977/wysbas/index.htm"
linktext was:"http://www.marxists.org/archive/foot-pa ... /index.htm"
====================================

i see because you take the idea of personal wealth and money away everybody's needs could be satisfied and you could get the basic human needs for free because money isn't important.
and this would be possible because you would no longer need to be rich to be able to benefit from the system because like i said before money isn't important, it's contributing to the society for the better of everybody that's important.
thanks for all the info and for showing me that things can be done different and better. i really appreciate that.

and buttcoffee i found that the difference between socialism and communism is that socialism is a more economic system and communism a more economic and political system is where socialism seeks to manage the economy through deliberate and collective social control. Communism, however, seeks to manage both the economy and the society by ensuring that property is owned collectively, and that control over the distribution of property is centralized in order to achieve both classlessness and statelessness.

anticapitalista wrote:As secipolla stated, antiX started out as a MEPIS respin for older computers or for those that prefer a 'mean and lean' desktop system. The first remaster of MEPIS I did was not long after MEPIS 3.4.3 was released, but I only made it available to a few testers and it was called flepis (fluxbox Mepis, no icewm)

I am a political activist (the name gives it away __{{emoticon}}__ )

I've never held any political activism against you, and I believe in freedom of choice, and I've never felt that you have ever rammed your viewpoints down anyone's throat, you have simply made a few opinions available in relatively subtle ways, and I am fine with that.

As far as flexpis is concerned, I must have missed that one, but I am pretty sure that I saw one of the other early releases, possibly before antiX M6.5, but by 6.5, I was definitely using it on a regular basis and have ever since then. I've enjoyed all f the releases, and I have also enjoyed, at times, reading about political alternatives different than the ones that I have grown up with.

In any case, I have always found everyone in the forums here to be very helpful and hospitable, and I never hesitate to recommend anyone to try out antiX, and I even have a few people who are uncomfortable going far from the status quo who have tried out antiX based on my descriptions of it, testing, and enthusiastic reviews of it.

I am really happy that Warren Woodford was open to your alternative, and I also hope that Jason Hsu will get a fair opportunity to do more with Swift Linux as he gains more and more experience remastering his relatively young work.

Keep it up! I believe that alternatives and choices are always worth exploring. Some alternatives work out, others don't, but you don't create something new and valuable by being afraid to make mistakes or to experiment, and I find the creativity here to be excellent, and the cooperation that matches that same excellence.