It is also annoying that all these three countries think they can bully other countries too. That is basically them saying they can kill other people in other countries at all times no matter the real "reason" (just make up a fake reason, such as Russia with regard to Ukraine) - annoying to no ends.
Having said that, and I just pointed out I disagree with mainland China bullying the Taiwanese, I think it would actually be better to have software itself be completely apolitical. I never understood why people felt a need to tie political goals into software. That is a valid statement even if I happen to agree with the political goals here.
If anything, we need much more politics in software, ideally exercised by those who write that software instead of "apolitical" software writers who end up executing the political software of those who pay them.
If you meant to scope your statement only to FOSS, then this still applies (in fact, FOSS is inherently political), plus I suppose some people who invest their time to write software want to also use the same effort for political activism and there is nothing wrong with that. This can be expressing their political views via that software (e.g., vim and the support to children in Uganda) or can be using a license that only allows co-ops to run their software, or many other ways.
The idea that software even could be apolitical stems from the idea that technology can be neutral, which again, in 2026 is really a tough idea to support.
Where's the bar where you shut down discussion? I mean, even politics is contextual, right?
You entering a campaign about the plight of Myanmar and getting annoyed at people who don't want to hear your message about Gaza puts the blame for any conflict arising on that purely on ... YOU!
IOW, Even within political discussion, you can still be off-topic!
> If you meant to scope your statement only to FOSS, then this still applies (in fact, FOSS is inherently political)
Entering a GNU project (which has the political context of Copyleft and IP reform), and attempting to use it to spread a message about ICE behaviour still makes that asshole behaviour.
Only the most extremist true-believers feel that every platform is for their benefit. Trust me, it's not.
Being political for software means for example making some specific choices while designing it and advertising them as such. Means choosing a license over another. Means announcing political positions and possibly aligning the software to them (depending on what it is).
It doesn't mean going in forums related to that software to discuss random political topics.
Okay, lets assume you are correct[1]; is that a counterargument to my main argument:
>> IOW, Even within political discussion, you can still be off-topic!
------------------------------------
[1] I don't think I am confused about the difference, TBH - I explicitly called out political preference of a project and political discussion within the project.