Let me blunt: your views sound to me from your posts like authoritarian (e.g.
fascist or authoritarian socialist) views. I get this impression mostly
because you say you don't like democracy (!), but you also say that privacy
is not very important and that having a "Big Brother" (a totalitarian
figurehead) or limitation of freedom in general are acceptable if it's in the
"interest of society". This kind of view is entirely the opposite of free
software; either there is a massive mistranslation of your thoughts into
English, or you are absolutely in the wrong place and must be having some
severe cognitive dissonance.
Or, if you're an authoritarian socialist, maybe you're under the false
impression that free software is a socialist idea. It sure is compatible with
anarchist and libertarian socialism (I most closely identify as a left
libertarian, perhaps a social anarchist), but the type of software that would
be compatible with authoritarian socialist ideas is gratis proprietary
software, despite what the Cuban government claims. The only reason most
proprietary software is not compatible with an authoritarian state is because
it means that someone else (e.g. Microsoft) is competing with the state for
power, so the only way for software to be compatible with an authoritarian
state is for the authoritarian state to take free software and make it
nonfree itself, by withholding the source code which may or may not have been
modified by the state, e.g. to spy on the users.
Anyway, you are the one who knows your views.
