RMS' personal choices are important. I could not live with the same ethical purity myself when it comes to software choices (or for that matter, much of anything else). But I have been personally influenced by reading his essays on ethical topics. If he did not live consistent with his personal ethics, not only would he be much less persuasive, but also he would be at conflict with himself.
the critic is right that software freedom does not exist in a vacuum. However, it does not follow that living in an ethical manner is pointless.
I have too been influenced by Stallman but I don't see why anyone should be above critique. I've developed as a person, politically, and think that my criticism may be useful to well-intentioned peopled, that's why I wrote this.
> However, it does not follow that living in an ethical manner is pointless.
I fully disagree. Personal ethics is only important with interpersonal relationships. Anything political transcends the individual and his actions and requires systemic analysis and action. That is the point of the article.
Stallman is not above critique, but I don't think you have hit on the more interesting parts of his philosophy to question. If I could eat Chinese with RMS, I would want to ask him about when free hardware will become relevant, and what he thinks about user subjugation that doesn't involve privacy invasion or software restrictions -- like, why isn't it mandatory to boycott every monopoly business? Perhaps at some point he would throw up his hands and say, we're only human!
I take comfort from the Biblical parable, Render Unto Caesar.
the critic is right that software freedom does not exist in a vacuum. However, it does not follow that living in an ethical manner is pointless.