September 2025
Python is an extraordinary programming language. It's readable, expressive, and built on the principle that code should be written for humans first, machines second. The Zen of Python remains one of the most thoughtful design philosophies in software development."Beautiful is better than ugly. Explicit is better than implicit." The Zen of Python reads like poetry about programming values that can apply to all aspects of life. "There should be one obvious way to do it" isn't just about syntax - it's about respecting programmer cognition.
But you can love a language without loving its community, I've learned. And increasingly, many Python developers find themselves in exactly that position. Let's talk about that.
I'm writing this because I still care, despite everything. Despite the frustrations and the patterns I've observed, I believe in the potential for technical excellence and great design. The goal isn't to abandon community entirely, but to find healthier ways to participate. This starts with awareness of the dynamics at play.
As someone who often feels like an outsider in these spaces, I've learned that my relationship with Python the tool can remain strong even when the community dynamics feel alienating.
Defining the Boundaries
What exactly do we mean by "the tool" versus "the community"? The distinction matters because it determines where you can opt out and where you can't.
The tool includes:
- The language syntax and semantics
- The standard library and its design philosophy
- The interpreter implementation
- Core documentation and tutorials
- Package distribution infrastructure (PyPI)
- The technical decision-making process (PEPs)
The community includes:
- Conference culture and social events
- Mailing lists and forums
- Social media discourse
- Diversity and inclusion initiatives
- Code of conduct enforcement
- Social hierarchies and influence networks
- The mythology around "Pythonic" culture
The boundary isn't always clear. PEP discussions happen in community spaces but result in tool changes. Core developers are technical contributors but also community leaders. PyPI is infrastructure but it's operated by the PSF and governed by community processes.
But there's a crucial difference: you can engage with the tool without engaging with the community. You can write Python code, use libraries, contribute patches, and benefit from the ecosystem without participating in the social dynamics. You cannot, however, participate in the community without accepting its social norms, power structures, and communication patterns.
The Separation of Tool and Tribe
Communities form around tools, but they inevitably develop their own dynamics that become separate from the original purpose. A programming language community might start focused on solving technical problems, but over time it develops social hierarchies, political dynamics, and cultural norms that can diverge significantly from the tool's core values.
Python-the-language embodies clarity, simplicity, and human-centered design. Python-the-community has evolved into something more complex: institutional politics, social gatekeeping, and the same interpersonal dynamics that plague any large organization.
This creates a strange dissonance for developers who are drawn to Python precisely because of its emphasis on readability and human-friendliness, only to find the community itself less welcoming than the language philosophy would suggest.
When Niceness Becomes Control
Python has always prided itself on being the "friendly" programming language with the "welcoming" community. I find the stated values of the Python community to be very admirable, but enforced niceness can become its own form of exclusion.Tone policing often silences the very voices that most need to be heard. When legitimate technical criticism gets reframed as "not being constructive," when substantive disagreements get dismissed as "drama," when systemic issues get buried under expectations of perpetual politeness, the niceness becomes a mechanism for avoiding difficult conversations.
Communities that prioritize harmony over truth-telling often end up protecting the status quo more than they protect vulnerable members. The requirement to be "nice" can make it impossible to address problems that require uncomfortable honesty to solve. This is how values eat their young - institutions betraying the very people they claim to protect.
The Neurodiversity Challenge
Programming attracts many neurodivergent people, partly because code itself is often more predictable and logical than human social interaction.Code doesn't require small talk, reading facial expressions, or navigating unspoken social rules. But programming communities are still human social environments, with all the complexity that entails.
Community participation often requires skills that have nothing to do with programming: reading social cues, networking at conferences, navigating group dynamics, understanding implicit cultural rules. For some people, these social requirements create barriers that have nothing to do with their ability to write excellent Python code.
The result is communities that may inadvertently exclude some of their most talented technical contributors simply because those contributors struggle with social aspects that the community takes for granted. This connects to broader patterns of how transparency becomes liability in institutional settings.
Alternative Ways to Participate
The good news is that you don't need community approval to benefit from or contribute to Python. The language itself is open source. You can write Python code, build useful libraries, solve real problems, and share your work without engaging with community politics or social dynamics.
Some of the most valuable contributions to the Python ecosystem come from people who work quietly on specific problems, document their solutions clearly, and make their code available without fanfare. GitHub is full of Python libraries that solve real problems, created by developers who may never attend a conference or join a mailing list discussion.
You can mentor individuals without joining mentorship programs. You can write educational content without going through official channels. You can contribute to open source projects without participating in their governance structures.
The Algorithm's Impact on Communities
Modern community discourse happens on platforms designed for engagement rather than understanding. Twitter threads about Python governance generate more heat than light. Reddit discussions about technical decisions get hijacked by personality conflicts. Slack channels fragment conversations across dozens of simultaneous threads.
These platforms reward controversy over nuance, quick reactions over thoughtful analysis.Twitter's character limit is fundamentally hostile to technical nuance. They turn technical disagreements into personal conflicts. The same dynamics that eat language and consume democratic discourse also fragment technical communities. They make it nearly impossible to have the kind of sustained, focused discussions that lead to good technical decisions.
Many of the dynamics people blame on "community toxicity" are actually symptoms of trying to have complex technical and social conversations on platforms that are fundamentally hostile to complexity and nuance.
What Endures
Programming languages outlast their communities.C is still thriving decades after its creators moved on to other things. The principles that make Python valuable (readability, explicitness, simplicity, human-centered design) exist independently of whatever social dynamics currently surround the language.
These principles will continue to influence how we think about programming long after current community leaders have moved on to other things. The code itself carries the philosophy forward, regardless of who's speaking at which conference or winning which awards.
For developers who love Python but struggle with its community, this is liberating. Your relationship with the language doesn't need to be mediated by social structures that don't work for you.
A Different Model
Consider this: you can contribute to the Python ecosystem by writing clear, useful code that solves real problems. You can make that code available to others. You can document it well. You can respond to bug reports and feature requests. You can collaborate with people who want to work on interesting technical challenges.
None of this requires attending conferences, joining committees, participating in governance discussions, or navigating the social dynamics of large community spaces. It just requires caring about the craft of programming and wanting to share useful work with others.
This isn't antisocial behavior; it's focused contribution.Some of history's most important code was written by people working alone. Some people thrive in large social environments. Others do their best work in smaller, more focused contexts. Both modes of participation are valuable.
The Language Remains
Python will endure because its core design philosophy serves real human needs. Readable code matters. Simplicity matters. The idea that programming languages should accommodate human cognition rather than force humans to think like machines - this matters.
These principles don't depend on any particular community structure or social dynamic. They're embedded in the language itself, reinforced every time someone reads Python code and understands what it does without decoding cryptic syntax or puzzling through unnecessary complexity.
For developers who love these principles but struggle with community participation, the solution isn't to abandon Python; it's to engage with it directly, as individual practitioners solving real problems with an excellent tool.
A Call to Builders
If you're reading this and recognizing yourself in these patterns, consider this: the Python ecosystem needs more builders and fewer talkers. It needs people who care more about solving problems than about social positioning. It needs developers who judge code by its clarity and effectiveness, not by the social status of who wrote it.
The most valuable contributions often come from people working quietly on specific problems. The developer who creates a library that elegantly solves a common pain point contributes more than someone who gives keynote talks about the importance of contribution. The programmer who writes clear documentation that helps beginners understand complex concepts matters more than committee members debating governance structures.
Build the tools you wish existed. Document them clearly. Share them without fanfare or raising venture capital. Collaborate with people who want to solve interesting technical challenges. Judge ideas by their merit, not by their social acceptability or the popularity of their advocates.
The Python language itself emerged from this kind of focused, problem-solving mindset. Guido van Rossum wasn't trying to build a community; he was trying to build a better programming language. The community formed around the tool because the tool was genuinely useful.
If you're spending more time thinking about community dynamics than about code, you might be optimizing for the wrong thing. The world has enough social platforms and governance discussions. It needs more thoughtful code that solves real problems. This is part of what kids taught me about creativity - focusing on what actually matters rather than what seems important.
Change Is Coming
The rise of generative AI is quietly reshaping who writes Python code and why. AI systems already write substantial amounts of Python - debugging scripts, data analysis pipelines, automation tools, even complete applications. They don't attend conferences or participate in governance discussions. They just solve problems using the most readable, effective syntax available.
This shift makes Python's technical merits more important than its social dynamics. AI systems gravitate toward Python not because of community culture but because the language itself is well-designed for human understanding - which makes it excellent for AI-human collaboration. Clear syntax, explicit behavior, and logical structure matter more than ever when code generation becomes common.
The developers who will thrive in this environment are those who focus on problem-solving, clear communication with AI systems, and understanding when human judgment is essential. The ability to read and modify AI-generated code, to spot where it succeeds and where it fails, to guide it toward better solutions - these skills matter more than social positioning or committee membership.
Community gatekeeping becomes irrelevant when anyone can generate working Python code to solve their specific problems. What remains relevant is the quality of the solutions, the clarity of the documentation, and the elegance of the approach. The tools that matter are the ones that actually work, regardless of their social provenance.
This isn't about replacing human programmers - it's about amplifying the ones who understand that programming is fundamentally about solving problems, not about belonging to the right social groups. The future belongs to builders who can work effectively with both human and artificial intelligence to create genuinely useful tools.
Focus on What Matters
Python will endure not because of its community structures but because of its technical excellence and philosophical coherence. Every time you write clear, readable Python code, you're contributing to that endurance. Every time you solve a problem elegantly, you're advancing the art of programming.
The community dynamics will shift and change. Social platforms will rise and fall. Governance structures will evolve. Conference speakers will come and go. But good code, clearly written and thoughtfully documented, will continue to be useful regardless of who's currently popular or which social norms are currently fashionable.
If you love Python but struggle with its community, you're not alone, and you're not wrong. Trust your instincts about what matters. Build cool things. Share them generously. Work with people who appreciate quality over politics.
The language speaks for itself. Everything else is optional.