Maybe not, but this seems like a terrible way to advocate for something better. Thousands of people get unjustly fired every day for much worse reasons than this. Why is this one the one to fight?
Should point out that we're both forgetting that Stallman actually resigned, though who knows under what pressure. So this entire debate is pretty moot. But for the sake of argument, we'll say he was fired.
So it seems like we agree that this particular aspect (snap firings) of the USA sucks. So why is this _not_ the one to fight? If we both think the core issue is a problem, it doesn't seem intellectually honest for one of us to say that a specific instance of that general concept doesn't count because the dude at the heart of it is scummy.
If you can build a strong and convincing argument that his termination is wrong, it'd be trivial to apply that argument to the case of the fast food worker. And therefore have a better shot at improving their lot.
Right! There's millions of injustices in this world and you're fighting for a misogynist who has pushed women out of tech for decades? What are your priorities?
I suspect it’s because the typical programmer can’t really put themselves in the shoes of a fast food worker who gets fired for refusing to clock out and keep working. But an eccentric techie with uncomfortable and unconventional views on sex hits way too close to home.
