1) One of the main ones is co-option by #NGO agender, both, by organizations who push for “common sense” #dotcons paths and individuals who strive to build their careers by trampling over the grassroots horizontality.
2) Second, I know a lot of people who would fuck over the future for petty personal grudges and narrow self subsistence. It’s a problem with rolling out positive grassroots projects like #indymediaback that we need to actively mediate for a good outcome.It’s interesting to think about this at a small personal scale and the wider social issue of #stupidindividualism and the #deathcult that breeds this.
3) Third, let me say something unfashionable, am a fan of liberals, they created meany of the good social things in the world. BUT Intolerant and dogmatic liberals are a constant drain, pushing of “common sense” agender over every issue they touch. This shit smeared problem needs constant mediation.
4) Fourth, the #geekproblem which is looked at in other posts on this blog – click on the hashtag to find them.
5) There are more please comment so i can add them.
The fallow flower beds/farm that is #indymedia needs to be bought back to life slowly with as little change to the structure as possible. In our current social tech state just about ANY change will start ripping and when this starts it escalates quickly to do real damage. The original 2000-2008’ish structures cover 90% of issues in a good way, let’s live with that for a while.
The are a host of outstanding big issues in the remaining 10% that are undefined – lets concentrate our energies on these missing bits and roll out solutions respecting “diversity of tactics”. The ansears to the missing 10% generally cannot be found pre-defined, we should be very weary of people coming in with fixed agender. Diversity and good process in hand with on the ground #4opens working overtime as a part of the real network is the ONLY valued test.
Slow/diversity/nurture vs fast/dogmatic/tearing. To highlight now before we roll out bigger, there will be lots of the second and little of the first much of the time. It is just how it is…
* #4opens is not dogma, it’s simply the last 30 years of open source development codified as social structure.
* PGA is not dogma, it’s the embodied wishes/dreams and planning of thousands of peoples over meany country’s and years of time.
* Indymedia is not dogma, it’s the expirence of meany radical media groups coming together to build an open network to fight neo-liberalism (#deathcult) on the ground, in the streets, in the fields and online.
The difference between indymedia and the hundreds of failed “radical” media projects over the last 20 years is that indymedia flourished for a good time before it succumbed to the “forgetting” of the #PGA and #4opens foundation it was built on and was thus helpless against the internal forces that ripped it apart. Leaving no malubilerty to shift to the heavy blows from the forces attacking from the outside.
We core crew need to learn how to become benign older folks who answer every “better” solution put forward by the thrusting young with “how does that work with the #4opens” then fallow up with “lets look to see if that furthers the PGA hallmarks” to all their enthusiastic “youth” energy for “change”. Keep it gentle and most importantly, keep the focus…
At meany stages there will be howling mobs soured by hatred and through wing shit to create a stinking mess… our job is to keep focus and calm… a hard thing to do in a messy/disaster world #Brexit and #climatechoas pushes, but it’s the simple job we are taking on.
With the current #openweb reboot going on there’s a lot of default thinking that is bad, and we do need to learn to judge between the good and bad paths if it’s to live up to its potential. Let’s start to give examples:
* Promoting silos vs promoting networks – as our current thinking is based on closed/silo thinking then when we promote #openweb projects we continue to use this thinking and promote silo/closed thinking rather than harder to understand open/network thinking.
– Protocols rather than platforms, balance talk about fedivers/activertypub and mastodon or branded projects. Our brand thinking is a failure of networking and contains strong unseen #deathcult thinking.
– Always outreach a wide selection of instances rather than a single one, the strength is in the network and not in the silo. Networks scale downwards, more/balanced, with stability is better than one “solution”. Be weary of sites that push themselves as the “place”.
– Networks are based on trust, in this look for groups/families of projects to support. Lose is always good, do not support “we are THE solution” closed siloed thinking. Write articles about a spread of views is better outreach as this is actually the project.
– be weary of projects that promise digital security/privacy first – these projects are always lying and thus dangerous and unhealthy for trust based networks. This is a hard-to-understand open/closed issue, we all need to have real conversations about this.
So we live in a #deathcult that we all have worshipped at for the last 40 years of neoliberalism. This is #XR now a normal understanding that we all have to face. What do you think of this mess?
My initial thought on most academia is wank, most is poisoned by the last 40 years of the #deathcult It’s better to go back to radical basics and reboot something from outside the poisoned mainstream, we are doing this with #indymedia reboot.
Most “activism” from this source is little more than a funding drain 99.999% of progressive funding goes straight down the #fashionista drain in academia and #NGO land.
Lets look at trust/community building as this is what the OMN is about after 20 years of failed tech “solutions”.
* Link – am interested in there content flow for my community.
* Trust – i have a relationship with them, no questions.
* Moderate – we are building a relationship.
* Whoops – rollback
* Unlink – am annoyed, this is shit, waist of time.
* Bolyon logic hashtag flows – a conversation on what is important between the two groups to fine tune flows.
So for flows from a single source that dominate the instance flow. First stage moderation, more work for site crew. Second agree on a hashtag group based flow with the fast source and put them back on trust. Rinse and repeat
If it messes up rollback, if communication bracks down unlink.
An example of this would be the canary news site. Lots of low quality clickbate with acational good posts. Talk to them and get them to use a hashtag for quality post and subjects and only bring that in as flow. If they abuse this talk to them if you can’t come to an agreement then unlink or moderate. The is advantages for everyone to get an agreement and this will not affect the SEO games they play with the #dotcons
The outcome is the up quality of there SEO games getting grassroots content into the #dotcons And our communities we don’t have to see there SPAM. Grassroots news is spread wider, the communities that produce it are empowered. (And sadly likely co-opted, but that another problem for a different step)
Were is security?
Yes to security, people have to be who they say they are and content has to come from a place and its path has to be recorded.
Am going to joke and say we need a blockchain 😉
Trust has to have a foundation.
Stuff can’t just be made up at any level, this would brake trust.
Down the road the is a place for strong p2p identities and personal/group data stores. But not in the ” balancing” roll out of the OMN its good to plug in this stuff as the network grows. The growth stage is as #KISS as possible.
We are strongly refocusing on groups and flows and away from individuals and silos. We are not fundementism on this instead are balancing if that dose not sound to hippy… The #deathcult world is all #stupidindividualism and controlling #dotcons our mission is to rebalance this. Were the balence ends is up to the groups involved. I like the DIY anachronism of party and protest, some people like gardening, other are content with other things.. what ever rocks your boat the is space for meany paths – but the current #deathcult is not a nice one at all.
The is no securaty in tech, ecology or just about anywhere. Its very inhuman world we live in says the man sailing away in a lifeboat – as i keep saying that’s not a metaphor.
On the subject of people being who they say they are – this can be sudo anonymous if they feel like it but that “anonymous” person still has to fit into the trust web
Thus the sudo bit.
End thought
If data is the new currency, then opendata is the new communism, jumps to mind, lets see were #4opens leads.
Q. I’ve read a lot of your stuff but I’m hoping you’ll clarify something. What’s a “fashernista”?
A. A large part of society who do what’s fashionable. Not what’s right/wrong/best. In the era of the #deathcult of neo-liberalism this has always been the wrong path to take. It’s a simple idea.
The hashtags are designed to make the mainstream as dirty as possible so people see the need to pick up #openweb#4opens tools “spades” to clear the stinking shit and pools of piss #climatechaos is increasingly going to show we live in (consumerism/alienating work/greed is good) Make compost (decay of death) to plant seeds (fertile life) to grow flowers (lifecult). It’s a convoluted metaphor 😉
Its a hard to understand, simple thing. In the era of the #deathcult the fashernisas are almost always wrong and a part of the problem. In the era of the #lifecult fahernistas are mostly right and a part of the solution, does that make it more simple?
40 years of hard indoctrination has to be dug up and composted if we have any hope of moving away from this mess that’s going to kill billions of people and make life short and nasty to quate Hobbs #XR
The idea is to make mainstream thinking feel dirty as everything we touch and most things we think are “contaminated” by the #deathcult (neo-liberal)
Spades (hardwork) compost (ecological) outcome sustainable life.
You rarely get anywhere by simply renaming things. All you do is lose the historical thried and then recreate the same mess. #stupidindividualism is often the motivation for this and its a big sin in the liberals and “post politics” crew.
A metaphor that individualism makes us stupid and that to live outside a balence of individualistic vs communerty is stupid. Yes its an aspect of liberalism and capitalism and at an extream with neo-liberalism.
#deathcult worshippers is another metaphor for (invisible) neo-liberalism.
All the metaphors (used as hashtags) are aspects on liberalism and very critical of neo-liberalism. The idea is to make mainstream thinking dirty.
The hashtags work if a community/affinity group of people use them with out falling into the sin of #stupidindividualism of course 😉
If you miss my point, please go back and reread, don’t drop back into sin 😉
To counter the squirming of the #brightgreen pushback to the MM documentary. A #deepgreen view of the way out of the #deathcult mess.
And yes the documentary is full of bad journalism. So read and reply to the thinking. Please take care to not be a “liberal” troll.
here’s an essay written by suzanna jones about planet of the humans, and the response to it.
What Planet of the Humans Reveals About Us
The recently released documentary Planet of the Humans takes direct aim at the major threat to the Earth: us. It does this by asking fundamental questions: can Nature withstand continued industrial extraction; can humans – particularly those in the dominant West – persist in taxing the natural world to fulfill our own ‘needs’ and desires; is ‘green’ energy the savior for our climatic and environmental problems or is it a false prophet distracting us from confronting the gargantuan elephant in the room, what writer Wendell Berry calls “history’s most destructive economy”? Filmmakers Jeff Gibbs, Ozzie Zehner and Michael Moore don’t just ask questions, they highlight the hypocrisies of big shots like Al Gore and the national Sierra Club. Even Vermont comes in for less than flattering commentary. Planet of the Humans depicts Green Mountain Power’s ridge-destroying Lowell Mountain industrial wind project, Burlington’s McNeil wood burning electric generating plant and Middlebury College’s biomass gasification facility as examples of the renewable energy delusion. And Bill McKibben, Middlebury’s Scholar-in-Residence, is cast as a string that connects all three. The film has struck a nerve. Those depicted unfavorably have reacted. Some who admit to having enjoyed Michael Moore’s filmmaking strategy in the past don’t find him so funny this time. The criticisms reveal how much power and money lie behind the renewables-as-savior myth. With so much at stake, the industry and big environmental organizations have little appetite for discussing or even acknowledging the unsavory side of the technologies. And ultimately, the core issues remain unaddressed; the most important things remain unspoken. Frankly, the green energy ‘movement’ is really about sustaining our way of life and the economic system that it depends upon, not the health of the biosphere. Capitalism is brilliant at co-opting anything that resists it. Green energy – like much of the broader environmental movement – is no exception. It’s business-as-usual in camouflage. Back when Green Mountain Power’s bulldozing and blasting began at Lowell Mountain, a group of locals organized ‘open-house’ walks up the mountain to view the devastation. Hundreds attended these fall/winter treks. Shock and heartbreak were the response. Bill McKibben was personally invited to attend. Though his response was polite, he would not be coming. He dismissed our concern for the mountain as “ephemeral.” Ephemeral? That word underscored what has gone so terribly wrong with green energy “environmentalism.” Something is absent. That something? Love. Love of the places and living beings that are suffering or being destroyed so that we can live our electronic, nature-less existence. Affection for the natural, non- human world is missing in the discussions about climate, carbon and techno-fixes. Nothing seems to matter now but humans and their desires. “Although it’s morally wrong to destroy the land community, people are going to sustain it, not because it’s morally right, but because they want to; affection is going to be the determining motive”, Wendell Berry has explained in the past. “Economic constraints might cancel out affection, but genuine affection is going to be the motivating cause.” Without affection, we’re more likely to thoughtlessly sacrifice living beings on the altar of economics. When the film reveals who is paying the ultimate price for our ‘green’ energy consumption, we recognize affection for the casualty it has become. We are half-asleep, anesthetized by the barrage of meaningless marketing, with its hollow premise that we can continue to consume our way to happiness. As I was planting in the garden this warm, spring day, the returning swallows joyfully zipping overhead made me stop. Usually this ritual is accompanied by the background droning of distant car traffic, but due to the pandemic, the infernal engines were silent. It made me wonder. Can we live in healthy reciprocity with the natural world? Can we make the shared economic sacrifices that are necessary or will we continue to sacrifice Nature? Can we make drastic reductions in consumption and live more local, less materially prosperous, more fulfilling lives? Can we replace modernity’s painful alienation from Nature with a genuine sense of intimacy, affection, meaning and responsibility? Will those in power let us? Will we allow them to decide for us? Our way of life is inherently unsustainable. We can’t buy or build our way out of this one. Yes, the climate crisis is both undeniable and existential, but it is not the only way the Earth is being destroyed. Simply changing the fuel that powers our destructive, planet-killing system is not a solution. Planet of the Humans challenges our assumptions and our arrogance. It asks us to face what we have done, experience the grief, and then allow our hearts to consider an entirely new path into the future.
