[cl-faq] Q: why doesn't Lisp have a Benevolent Dictator like Perl/Python/what-have-you

[Tayssir John Gabbour]

Larry Clapp wrote:
> Q: Why doesn't Lisp have a Benevolent Dictator like Perl or Python or
> whatever other language some sniveling whiner wants the entire
> Lisp-using world to transform itself into for his or her benefit?
>
> A: comp.lang.lisp gets this with some regularity.  After you've heard
> it enough times, it all starts to sound like this (warning:
> Caricatures ahead.  You have been warned.):
>
>   "Life is sooooo much better when your language has only one
>   implementation!  Everything Just Works!  No fragmentation!  I don't
>   have to make any choices, it's all Just There!  I hate the thought
>   of having to figure out which implementation best suits my needs; I
>   want an Authority Figure to tell me what to do!  And I want it now,
>   and I don't wanna pay for it, and I want the source, too!  Just like
>   all my other Favorite Languages!"
>
> In _Zen in the Martial Arts_, by Joe Hyams, Joe relates the following
> story, from when he first began training with martial arts master
> Bruce Lee:

Whenever I read the actual justifications of why there's no benevolent
dictator, it seems like they're describing Burkean conservatism:
organic, time-tested tradition is a sounder foundation than some
rational planner laying down the law (with whatever biases he has).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative#Burkean_conservatism

(I haven't actually read Burke, just what others say about him.)

Also, those asking probably want you to Cross the Chasm: they "function
with a 'herd mentality'.  They are followers.  They only buy when they
see somebody else doing it." They probably have different cultural
characteristics -- they may actually be serious about wanting to follow
a dictator they can empathize with, for feelings of safety.
http://software.ericsink.com/Act_Your_Age.html


Tayssir