Prodding a #dotcons flow

Let’s try a spiky reply to this tweet on the #mainstreaming #dotcons platform, keep in mind these spaces often reek of superficial analysis and throwing around half-baked ideas without engaging with the deeper structural issues.

On the subject: “the culture of spontaneity, and mass horizontalism.” Yes, these approaches have their flaws, particularly when they lack clear strategy or organisation, but the #mainstreaming dismissing of them as ineffective wholesale shows a lack of understanding of their historical context and value. Spontaneity and horizontalism emerged as responses to the failures of top-down bureaucratic models of the left, which stagnated under Cold War pressures and co-optation. To be claiming they “can’t really compete” without acknowledging why they arose or their ongoing relevance in decentralised movements is lazy analysis.

And then there’s the smug messaging that “that’s something almost everyone now agrees on.” Really? Who is “everyone”? This nothing more than an appeal to a nebulous consensus that doesn’t actually exist. Plenty of activists, organisers, and theorists still see value in horizontalism, just not in isolation or as an end in itself. Pretending the debate is over is the kind of rhetoric that shuts down critical thinking rather than advancing it.

Moving on to the second tweet, “Agree on need for organisation (…that are trade unions or trade union focused).” While trade unions are a valid path, especially in reclaiming workers’ rights in the face of rampant exploitation, reducing “organisation” to trade unions is a narrow view. Trade unions, while necessary, aren’t sufficient to address the wider cultural, ecological, and social crises we face. There’s a world of organising happening outside of unions, mutual aid networks, co-operatives, tenant unions, and the growing need for grassroots digital activism, to name a few, that is every bit as crucial. This is a kind of blinkered nostalgia for “the union, and nothing but the union” which is a poor fit for the of struggles we’re dealing with.

Then there’s the call for “a systematic approach to cultural work.” Absolutely, but what does this mean? As so often, these statements don’t explain or offer a path. Instead, we get the vague assertion that it should focus on “actually doing culture that is popular, not moralising and nostalgia.” While it’s true, moralising and nostalgia can cripple cultural efforts on the left, this critique feels like it’s slapping at a strawman. What is this “popular” culture we’re supposed to aim for? Affective work is not about chasing popularity for its own sake but creating counter-narratives that resonate with people’s lived experiences and inspire action. Popularity without substance is meaningless, just another form of hollow spectacle and #deathcult worship

Lastly, the tone throughout this thread is performative critique, pointing out issues without contributing to paths. If anything, this “chatter” mirrors the liberal commentary class it seeks to critique: smug, self-assured, and ultimately irrelevant to those who are actually deep in the trenches building alternatives.

If we’re serious about confronting the failures of the left, we need less posturing and more meaningful engagement with the grassroots challenges at hand. We need to embrace complexity, grapple with historical lessons, while building cultural, technological paths that balance appeal with radical substance. It’s sad to say, dismissing ideas with “memes” half-hearted quips and lazy assumptions gets us nowhere.

Now what would a #fluffy reply look like 🙂

#OMN demonstrates the values that dead ideologies refuse to acknowledge

The #fashernista common sense path—driven by trends, appearances, and surface-level thinking—is always a reflection of the dominant ideology. In today’s world, this means it perpetuates the neo-liberal #deathcult, which pushes profit over people and the environment. This ideology a motivation of #stupidindividualism, where the focus is on personal gain, consumerism, and competition rather than solidarity, cooperation, and collective well-being.

This same mentality is mirrored in the #geekproblem, where technologists to often design and promote tools and systems that replicate and reinforce neo-liberal values, rather than challenge them. By framing technology as “neutral” or purely functional, they ignore the broader social impact of their work, allowing it to serve as an uncritical extension of the #deathcult’s values. This is why so much of modern technology amplifies isolation, surveillance, and exploitation instead of fostering connection, community, and empowerment.

Challenging these people and their ideas is crucial if we want to break free from the current cycles of destruction. However, ignoring them and focusing our energy elsewhere may be the more practical and effective path. Engaging with them to often leads to frustration and burnout as their ideological framework is deeply ingrained, and their reflexive defensiveness derails productive efforts.

As with composting, when there’s too much “shit” to shoval, the resulting stink can make the change we need feel unpleasant and off-putting. The sheer negativity and hostility of challenging entrenched ideologies creates a barrier to engagement for those who might otherwise join or support transformative movements. If the alternative to the #deathcult seems unappealing or toxic, it risks alienating the very people and communertys we need to build a better path away from the current mess.

Instead of wasting time trying to convince the entrenched or defending against their reactionary attacks, we could focus on building practical, grounded alternatives? By creating spaces, tools, and communities that embody the “native” #openweb values, we can offer a tangible, appealing contrast to the hollow shadow of the #deathcult worshipping. The goal is to show—not just tell—that another world is possible, and that it is not only necessary but desirable.

By doing this, the stink of the current dead ideology will become irrelevant. When people experience the benefits of living and working in paths that lead to commons, mutual aid, and flourishing, the death spiral of #stupidindividualism and the #geekproblem will lose its appeal. In the end, it’s not about fighting their ideas directly—it’s about making those ideas obsolete by building something far better.

To dive deeper into this , we need to look at the underlying mechanisms of how the #fashernista mindset, the neo-liberal #deathcult, #stupidindividualism, and the #geekproblem perpetuate themselves—and, more importantly, look at how this interlocking mess hinder progress while pretending to advance it.

The #Fashernista mindset is a reflection of dominance, as it operates as a mirror to dominant ideologies. By nature, it does not challenge power structures but absorbs and reflects their values, often in a more palatable or “trendy” form.

Aesthetic over substance, the prioritisation of appearances—what looks progressive, innovative, or ethical—over what actually is. For example, this neo-liberal “common sense” can be dressed up in “sustainable” or “inclusive” branding, while the underlying paths remain exploitative.
Tokenistic activism leads to shallow forms of activism, where symbolic gestures (#dotcons posting, slogans, memes and corporate-sponsored campaigns) replace meaningful systemic action. It gives the illusion of progress while leaving the core issues untouched.
Gatekeeping change is more about chasing trends rather than structural transformation, the #fashernista mindset creates a kind of cultural gatekeeping. True progress, which often appears “messy” and challenges comfort zones, is sidelined in favour of ideas that are easier to sell to the mainstream.

A Devotion to self-destruction, at the core of the neo-liberal mess, is the worship of market forces as the ultimate solution to all human problems. This drives society toward environmental collapse, social disintegration, and increasing inequality, all while proclaiming itself as the only rational way to organise the world.

Market “common sense” holds that markets are inherently efficient, fair, and inevitable, even as they consistently fail to address systemic crises like climate change, economic inequality, and resource depletion.
Individualism as control, framing individuals as isolated, rational actors responsible for their own success or failure, the #deathcult deflects attention from structural oppression. This isolates people, making collective action more difficult and reinforcing the system’s power.
Growth at all costs is an obsession with endless economic growth, even on a finite planet. This suicidal drive underpins its “deathcult” nature: it sacrifices long-term survival for short-term profits.

#StupidIndividualism is isolation masquerading as freedom

Alienation is growing with the idea that people should rely solely on themselves, #stupidindividualism leaves people disconnected from community support systems. This alienation feeds despair and reinforces compliance with the status quo.
Consumerism is identity, with people being encouraged to define themselves by what they consume rather than what they contribute to society. This distracts from collective struggles and entrenches a culture of passivity.
Weaponised identity politics, while this postmodern movment started as a way to empower marginalised groups, in the hands of #stupidindividualism, it becomes a tool of division. Individuals focus on personal grievances rather than uniting across identities to address systemic oppression.

The #geekproblem is often technology without politics, which emerges from a belief that technology is inherently neutral and that its development can exist separately from politics, ethics, or social power structures. This naivety—or wilful blindness—results in tools that perpetuate the very problems they claim to solve.

Apolitical engineering, where technologists focus on building “innovative” tools without considering their social impacts. For instance, surveillance technologies are marketed as safety solutions while eroding privacy and empowering authoritarianism.
Centralisation in disguise when #FOSS, open-source and decentralised projects replicate centralised power dynamics as their creators fail to address underlying social issues. A decentralised system run by a different few is still elitist.
Failure to address root causes as the #geekproblem thrives on quick fixes and clever hacks rather than systemic paths leading to solutions. It too often assumes that technology alone can solve problems like poverty or climate change, ignoring the need for social, political and economic transformation.

We do need balence, why ignoring these messy forces may be the smarter path as confronting the #fashernista mindset, neo-liberal #deathcult, #stupidindividualism, and the #geekproblem head-on often feels like trying to swim against a tidal wave. These ideologies are deeply ingrained, and challenging them directly can result in burnout, frustration, and thus further entrenchment of the status quo.

The “shit-to-compost ratio” is a thing when engaging with these entrenched paths we end up uncovering a lot of “shit”—toxic debates, defensive reactions, and wasted energy. If this overwhelms the capacity to turn these challenges into productive change, the effort can become self-defeating. Sometimes instead of fighting these paths on their terms, it may be more effective to focus on building alternatives like the #OMN. By creating functioning, appealing models of community, solidarity, and sustainability, we can then push to make the current systems obsolete, this is “our” path not theres

Building alternatives is a #KISS path to counter the destructive ideologies and to demonstrate the viability of better paths. This means focusing on practical, community-driven tools and solutions that embody the values we want to see in the world.

An important question is why people can’t see this? The inability to recognise these dynamics stems from decades of cultural conditioning and structural manipulation.

Simple propaganda, The priest’s of neo-liberalism has spent decades shaping public perception, presenting it as the only viable path. Its dominance is so pervasive that many cannot imagine alternatives.
Cultural individualism, when people are taught to see themselves as isolated individuals rather than interconnected members of a society. This blinds them to the power of collective action.
Distractions built into consumer culture, social media, and the 24-hour news cycle keep people distracted and disengaged from any real systemic issues and paths.
Fear of change with the unknown being scary, and the idea of steping away from entrenched paths can feel overwhelming or even impossible.

To shine light we need to compost the stink of the dominant ideologies — reflected in the everyday #fashernista mindset, neo-liberal #deathcult, #stupidindividualism, and the #geekproblem. But yes this needs to be balenced as directly fighting these entrenched paths can often feel futile and counterproductive. Instead, we need to also focus on building the alternatives we want to see, like the #OMN, cooperative, community-driven, and grounded in solidarity.

By creating working paths of a diffrent future, we make the failures of the current path self-evident and offer a clear, appealing alternative path. The change won’t come from confrontation alone—it will come from living and demonstrating the values that these dead ideolgys refuse to acknowledge.

The obstacle is people cannot see change and challenge

The failures of the liberal class, should now be obvious, and are rooted in their worship of neo-liberal “common sense,” that eroded our collective capacity for thought and solidarity. For 40 years, the #mainstreaming “left” abandoned the principles of class struggle, leaving the majority of people isolated and alienated. This complacency, steeped in postmodernist detachment, has created a vacuum that allows fear and hate to flourish. Over the past two decades, left identity politics, though well-meaning in its inception, has fragmented movements, prioritising narrow individualism over collective power.

The right wing has seized this opportunity to co-opt and distort progressive narratives, using them to fuel division and weaponise fear. This has paved the way for a shift towards authoritarianism and fascism, deepening the crisis of inequality, climate collapse, and social disintegration.

Yet, amidst this ongoing bleak reality, there is hope. The growing failures of the mainstream can be a turning point. They create the conditions for a return to #KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) class-based left-wing movements, movements grounded in shared struggle, solidarity, and common purpose. This shift needs to sweep away the current #mainstreaming crew, who refuse to lift their heads from #deathcult worshipping dogma, and consign these long dead ideologies to the compost heap of history where they belong.

As a community, we face immense challenges: The hard shift to the far right, surviving the next generation of #climatechaos, enduring social breakdown, and creating systemic change in the face of these crises. But the solutions lie in coming together, rediscovering the power of collective action, and rejecting the #stupidindividualism that isolates us.

The biggest obstacle is that many people cannot see this. Years of cultural conditioning, relentless propaganda, and the atomisation of society have blinded people to the possibilities of collective power. They are trapped in a path that convinces them that there is no alternative—that the only option is to keep their heads down, live inside the status quo, and hope for survival.

But history tells us a different story: when communities organise, they can and do change the world. This is not a time for despair—it is a time for action. The current economic paths are failing, but this failure opens the door to something new, something better. The time for change is now, and it’s up to us to make the challenge happen.

So lift your heads to see clearly, and take action, not as isolated individuals but as a community. Together, we can not only survive, but create a future of growth, humanistic and ecological flourishing.

The #OMN is a social tech step on the path we need to take.

The madness is everywhere—online, offline, doesn’t really make much difference anymore. After four decades of being spoon-fed #neoliberal garbage, individualism has rotted collective sense-making. The tech we use? Built by a geek class lost in its own deterministic tunnel vision.

Sanity, then, is about stepping outside that churn. The #OMN approach—grassroots, #DIY, non-corporate, and actually human-focused—has to be a path forward. The question is, who else sees this? Who’s willing to do something genuinely different, not just repackage the same #techshit and call it innovation?

Where do you think those people are hiding?

A social tech path out of the current mess

A look at the paths we need to take to balance the current #mainstreaming. Mess begets more mess, embrace It, but strategically is the starting point of the #OGB project, recognising that solving crises will inevitably create new complications. This isn’t defeatist but pragmatic. Understanding that “messy consensus” is a natural state of grassroots activism both online and offline allows us to embrace imperfection while striving for progress. How can we build tools to work with this balance, we need paths that don’t eliminate mess but help us navigate it constructively.

Messy consensus vs. formal consensus, is basic, that “almost nothing that works, works with formal consensus” is both an indictment of rigidity and a call to trust human intuition and collective messiness. Formal consensus processes prioritise idealised decision-making frameworks over functional, timely action. Messy consensus in practice, decisions that evolve through ongoing dialogue, negotiation, and iterative adjustments. A focus on getting things done rather than endlessly perfecting processes.

The #OGB Project approach is based on #KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) by documenting messy consensus in action rather than try to force-fit solutions into rigid structures. The wider #OMN is about building software tools that reflect this dynamic, fluid, adaptive, and capable of handling the inherent unpredictability of real world grassroots organising.

Grassroots movements need patience and realism, activism is hard work, rife with delays, frustrations, and the risk of spiralling into unproductive behaviours. The example of delays being full of “shittiness all round” is all too common. The solution is to focus, implement basic accountability and communication tools to reduce friction (e.g., clear timelines, transparent updates). Design paths where delays can’t derail core progress (e.g., smaller, autonomous working groups with clear boundaries).

The #geekproblem and governance failures, technologists operate under the illusion that technology is apolitical, seeing themselves as neutral actors. This leads to tools and systems that perpetuate power imbalances rather than address them, then governance struggles inside this #techshit. On the more #NGO paths, governments and corporations alike fail because they attempt to apply dated paradigms (territorial governance, Soviet-style technocracy, and unchecked market competition) to globally networked paths.

#OGB and the #openweb native paths are about building politically aware technologies that understand their social impact and are actively shaped by the communities they serve. This is about moving beyond individualistic thinking to balance paths where decisions are made collectively and equitably, guided by progressive shared values and principles.

Metadata isn’t trivial, it’s often more revealing than the data itself. Governments and corporations weaponise it for control. However, this control relies on perpetuating individual isolation and the illusion that society doesn’t exist. A core path is challenging the #deathcult mentality and this death spiral of isolationism. The idea that individuals are isolated entities, disconnected from society, aligns with the deeply reactionary mindset of the #deathcult. It’s this ideology that drives surveillance capitalism, authoritarian governance, and ecological collapse.

The #OMN is about countering the death spiral by build networks and technologies that grow solidarity, collective agency, and a sense of shared purpose. To make this happen, we need to call out reactionary ideologies wherever they manifest, but with patience and a focus on education. The Internet is a commons, not an empire. The internet’s potential is currently squandered by treating it as a platform for profit-driven empires. With the #OMN instead, we cultivate a shared common, reflecting the principles of the #openweb. With commons-based governance, we move away from corporate models and toward federated, community-led governance. Interoperable ecosystems, prioritise open standards that allow diverse communities to connect without being locked into monopolistic kingdoms.

The #OMN contribution, is about documenting the failures of current systems and demonstrate the viability of federated, grassroots alternative paths. And from this building the cultural and technical infrastructure necessary to support an internet that is truly by and for the people. Practical steps are acknowledging the mess, start with the reality of our messy paths and systems rather than pretending they don’t exist. Then use this understanding as the foundation for solutions. Promote realistic timelines, by accepting that grassroots organising moves slower than we’d like, but ensure delays are constructive rather than paralysing. Focus on education, misunderstandings stem from a lack of digital literacy and political awareness, we need patience and persistence to mediate messy processes through practice.

In conclusion, how can we shape the world without being covered in shit. Yes, the path is messy, imperfect, and filled with hard work, but that’s no reason to despair. The #OMN projects offers a grounded approach that prioritises doing over theorising, embracing messy consensus as a strength rather than a weakness. By rejecting the #deathcult of individualism and building on the principles of the #openweb, we create paths that reflect the reality of grassroots organising: chaotic, collaborative, and, ultimately, transformative.

The wider #OMN project from a more #mainstreaming prospective

Sifting the wheat from the chaff in our technological and social mess is an important challenge. This is why the #OMN approach of leveraging work across communities and utilising multi-tag aggregation is an elegant and powerful solution. It would be useful to look at this from a more #mainstreaming prospective.

Aggregated work across communities of subjects, the first step in the #OMN path involves gathering and organising work created by various communities around specific subjects or interests. Subject-centric hubs, decentralised indexing, curating content based on subjects (e.g., #ClimateChange, #TechEthics). These hubs wouldn’t rely on centralised algorithms, but instead draw from a network of community-curated sources. Community moderation by trusted communities who moderate and curate content within their subject interested. This ensures quality and reduces noise while resisting gatekeeping tendencies of centralised control.
Reputation by contribution by encourage subject-focused communities to reward contributions, promoting collaboration and surfacing valuable work naturally.

Dynamic and live updates, newsfeeds, can be feed by aggregating real-time updates from communities working on the same subjects using open protocols like ActivityPub. This would provide a live pulse of discussions, innovations, and trends across diverse groups and subjects.

Multi-tag aggregation, the next step is to create a system that enables the mash-up of multiple tags to filter and organise the aggregated content dynamically. Advanced multi-tagging allow people to filter aggregated work using combinations of tags, e.g., #ClimateChange + #IndigenousRights + #CommunityProjects.

Visualisation of tag relationships, tag webs, implement visual tools that map relationships between tags, communities, and subjects. People can explore how different concepts connect and navigate the network intuitively. Trend overview, within tag intersections to help people identify emerging areas of focus and overlooked intersections.

Tools for aggregation and mashing, to make this work practically, we need powerful, accessible tools that build on the #OMN ethos. Open aggregators, open-source aggregators that collect data, metadata, and content flows from diverse platforms and formats, such as blogs, Fediverse instances, wikis, and video platforms that can be made compatible with the #openweb, we simply ignore the #dotcons which are to #closedweb to be worth plugging in to these flows, they will wither in the self-sustaining destruction of their own #techshit, sadly taking a part of our communities with them, we do not have the focus to rescue everyone as we push this shift.

Community buy-In and participation, To build the #OMN path in an effective and relevant direction, it must gain support and participation from the communities that create it. This needs: Simple, intuitive interfaces for tagging, curating, and contributing to subject hubs. Guides and incentives to help non-technical people engage with the paths. Decentralised decision-making, with democratic governance paths like the #OGB. Education and outreach, with educational campaigns to teach people how to use multi-tag aggregation and curated subject hubs that work.

Guarding against pitfalls, while the #OMN approach is promising, it’s essential to mitigate potential risks. We need to keep vigilance on balancing noise and redundancy. Centralisation risks, by keeping to decentralised and open paths to avoid reliance on any single platform, database, or organisation. Bias in curation is kept in check by the networks being inherently leaky, people will see other points of view – we do not subscribe to the #blocking inherent in #fashernista safety culture.

What would this look like, the end goal: Collaborative Knowledge Commons. The aim of the #OMN path is to create a living, breathing commons of human knowledge and action. By aggregating community work and enabling meaningful mash-ups through multi-tag aggregation, we create a powerful tool to cut through the noise, enabling better collaboration between communities, richer understanding of complex, intersectional issues, stronger foundations for the native #openweb.

“Solutions” pushed for the #Fediverse are #stupidindividualism which comes from #deathcult worship

The is real frustration with “solutions” for the #Fediverse leaning toward #stupidindividualism and the normal #deathcult path, especially as these approaches undermine the foundational ethos of the “native” #openweb. What different paths do we need to take:

Re-centre on cooperation and interdependence. This should be obverse, instead of treating the #Fediverse as a platform for fragmented individualism, we need to foster a commons-first approach. Mutual Aid Networks are a path by to encourage instances to form federated clusters based on solidarity, shared values, and collaborative governance. Instance Interdependence needs tools that make cooperation between instances smoother and beneficial, such as shared moderation practices, resource sharing, or even federated funding paths.

Reject platformification, one of the Fediverse’s strengths is that it doesn’t need to mimic the dynamics of corporate platforms. To ensure its future path is native, not corporate we need to stick to the alt path of protocols over platforms, to stay on this path and not get distracted by new shiny #techshit For this we need to prioritise the development of open, robust protocols like ActivityPub that support interoperability over creating “Fediverse apps” that compete to centralise users. Standardised tools for moderation and discovery, create federated discovery and moderation tools that don’t funnel people into centralised algorithms or trending feeds but support meaningful and self-determined connections.

Community-driven innovation instead of for profit and status, communities need to be more involved in defining what needs to be built. We need to mediate the power of tech communities and non-technical people. This ensures the solutions reflect diverse realities, not just the #geekproblem technocratic priorities. Public-good funding paths, to build sustainable funding for open-source tools without relying on venture capital or individual donations. Cooperative crowdfunding, grants from public institutions, or taxation-based paths could work.

Reframe individualism as collective empowerment, the problem isn’t individual creativity; it’s when it becomes detached from collective good. Some ideas to balance this is by highlighting and rewarding people who contribution to the wider social enhance of the #Fediverse e.g., not just code contributions, but admins, moderation etc. One path could be to develop ways to celebrate shared milestones across the network, rather than competitive “likes” or algorithmic trends.

Education and advocacy are a core part of the #openweb to building awareness of the stakes and educating people about the principles of the #Fediverse and the #openweb. Some paths might be: Digital literacy campaigns to educate people about how the #Fediverse operates, its native values, and why it must avoid the #dotcons #closedweb’s pitfalls. Highlight success stories by amplify case studies of community-owned and commons-driven Fediverse instances to inspire others.

Design for long-term sustainability, any system that focuses on short-term growth or clout is doomed to fail. To build something durable, we need resilient federation models to address the scaling challenges that come with growing instances without resorting to centralised solutions. Decentralised governance is core, we need to explore and adopt models like the #OGB for instance and network governance.

Resist the #deathcult narratives, which thrives on competition, exploitation, and the idea that scarcity is inevitable. This needs constant push back, with abundance-oriented design to build paths centred on care, trust, and generosity – rejecting the zero-sum thinking of extractive systems. Radical openness is a good native path for, tools like the #4opens are core.

This “native” thinking are based on ideas to anchor the #Fediverse in the principles of mutuality, solidarity, and the commons while resisting the pull of #stupidindividualism and centralisation.

This is about the failed liberal class, with their heads bowed in worship of the #deathcult for the last 40 years, have abandoned critical thought. Their unacknowledged postmodernist complacency has pushed us away from class struggle, leaving us isolated and alone. Meanwhile, the last two decades of left identity politics have allowed the right wing to co-opt and weaponise progressive narratives, filling them with fear and hate.

Yet, amidst this bleak shift towards fascism, there is a potential positive: a return to #KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) class-based left-wing movements. These movements need to reclaim the ground from the current #mainstreaming crew, who continue to blindly worship neo-liberal “common sense,” while #blocking out and refusing to acknowledge its failures. It’s well past time to consign these dead ideologies to the compost heap of history.

What comes next is up to us. As a community, we face the real challenge of surviving the next generation of #climatechaos pushing social breakdown while driving forward the systemic changes these crises demand. It’s not as if we have a choice—change is no longer optional, and action is overdue.

Oscar Wilde was a Radical Socialist

Oscar Wilde wrote uncompromisingly of his radical desire for the complete and total abolition of private property – a precondition, he believed, for the emancipation of all humanity.

But how did Oscar Wilde arrive at such a radical socialist position? Wilde was born in Dublin in 1854 and raised in the affluent Merrion Square area. His family were part of the Anglo-Irish intellectual tradition. His father, William Wilde, was an influential surgeon, and his mother, Jane Wilde, was a well-known poet.

Yes, it might seem surprising that someone from such privilege would come to embrace left politics. Yet, his upbringing planted the seeds of revolutionary thought. Jane Wilde, writing under the pen name “Speranza,” was a radical poet and political agitator. Against the backdrop of the Great Famine in 1848, Jane Wilde explicitly called for revolutionary armed struggle to liberate Ireland from British imperialism. Writing in The Nation, she urged:

"Now is the moment to strike, and by striking save, and the day after the victory it will be time enough to count our dead."

Jane Wilde defended the Fenians, precursors to socialist movements, and aligned with the First International’s principles of workers’ liberation and solidarity. She was deeply committed to the emancipation of Ireland, labour, and women. Her legacy echoes in Irish revolutionary thought. Marxist republican James Connolly referenced her work in Labour in Irish History, tracing Ireland’s socialist tradition. With such a powerful figure as his mother, it becomes clearer how Oscar Wilde came to develop his radical politics.

The Soul of Man Under Socialism, by 1891, Wilde had articulated his vision of a perfect society in this essay, he calls explicitly for the abolition of private property, declaring:

"Socialism, Communism, or whatever one chooses to call it, by converting private property into public wealth, and substituting co-operation for competition, will restore society to its proper condition of a thoroughly healthy organism, and insure the material well-being of each member of the community."

For Wilde, socialism was not merely about collective ownership. He envisioned it as a pathway to true Individualism:

"Private property has crushed true Individualism... With the abolition of private property, then, we shall have true, beautiful, healthy Individualism. Nobody will waste his life in accumulating things... One will live. To live is the rarest thing in the world. Most people exist, that is all."

Unlike collectivist motivations typically associated with socialism, Wilde’s advocacy centred on freeing individuals, particularly artists, from the constraints of capitalist society. Art, for Wilde, was the highest form of Individualism:

"Art is the most intense mode of Individualism that the world has known."

Rather than being driven by material accumulation, Wilde’s socialism sought to liberate humanity’s creative potential.

Wilde rejected authoritarian paths in socialism. He argued that “all modes of government are failures” and envisioned a state with limited functions:

"[But] as the State is not to govern, it may be asked what the State is to do. The State is to be a voluntary association that will organise labour, and be the manufacturer and distributor of necessary commodities. The State is to make what is useful. The individual is to make what is beautiful."

He saw a future where automation and machinery would free humanity from menial labour:

"Were that machinery the property of all, everyone would benefit by it. Humanity will be amusing itself, or enjoying cultivated leisure... Machinery will be doing all the necessary and unpleasant work."

This aligns with Wilde’s ideal of socialism enabling human flourishing – artists creating beauty, thinkers advancing knowledge, and people simply enjoying life. Some might dismiss Wilde’s vision as utopian. He embraces the label, writing:

"A map of the world that does not include Utopia is not worth even glancing at, for it leaves out the one country at which Humanity is always landing... Progress is the realisation of Utopias."

However, Wilde’s utopianism reveals a crucial limitation. He focuses on imagining an ideal society while remaining unconcerned with how to achieve it. Unlike Marxist socialism, which analyses class contradictions to determine the material conditions for revolution, Wilde’s approach reflects a more idealistic notion that great thinkers impose their visions on society.

This is evident in his understanding of historical movements. For instance, Wilde claimed:

"Slavery was put down in America, not in consequence of any action on the part of the slaves... It was put down entirely through the grossly illegal conduct of certain agitators in Boston and elsewhere."

This overlooks the agency of enslaved people, who resisted and rebelled in uprisings like the Stono Rebellion and Nat Turner’s revolt. Wilde’s perspective is rooted in the belief that oppressed classes require external agitators to awaken them to their suffering.

"Misery and poverty... exercise such a paralysing effect over the nature of men, that no class is ever really conscious of its own suffering. They have to be told of it by other people."

This view contrasts sharply with Marx’s materialist conception of history, where the working class is the primary agent of its liberation.

Oscar Wilde died young in 1900 at just 46 years old. His radical ideas remain strikingly relevant today. Many of his critiques of capitalism – its reduction of human life to accumulation and profit – resonate deeply in the face of contemporary crises. Wilde’s utopian socialism challenges us to imagine a better world, but the task before us is far more urgent. With #climatecatastrophe looming, the choices before humanity are stark: socialism or extinction.

The time for dreaming is over. To honour Wilde’s vision, we need to confront the contradictions of capitalism for a progressive future. It is a struggle that, if alive today, Oscar would undoubtedly support this path.

Activating the Open Media Network

The essence of the challenges we face in activism, can be expressed by the tension between the “fluffy” and “spiky” paths, which shape the progress and direction of movements. It’s vital to resist the dogmatic tendencies that stifle this dynamic tension, as both are necessary for a balanced and effective path forward.

We need focus for change, we must balance introspection (“how to make us better”) with external action (“how to change them”). The interplay between these perspectives builds strength and adaptability within movements. Recognising this balance avoids falling into the traps of arrogance or despair.

Reframing extremism, the right and centre as extremists, with the left as the moderates, is a #KISS powerful narrative. It challenges the status quo bias embedded in #traditionalmedia and shifts the perception of who holds reasonable positions. Activism can amplify this narrative to make it more widespread and disarm the usual accusations of left-wing “radicalism.”

Avoiding fear and darkness, fear is the weapon of the right and centre-right. Activists need to resist being drawn into their framing. Instead, they focus on, light, building trust, encouraging openness, and showing tangible progress that can inspire people.

Tools for the fight, the #4opens provide a framework for clarity and accountability, while the shovel metaphor reminds us of the hard, unglamorous work of composting the mess. These tools help create fertile ground for growth, even amid the chaos of conflicting stories.

Activating the Open Media Network (#OMN) can play a crucial role in shifting this narrative. By showcasing grassroots voices and bypassing gatekeepers, it challenges the #traditionalmedia and #dotcons while building a network of trust, openness, and collaboration.

We Need to Live Differently – And This Time, It Needs to Work

On this site I have been reflecting deeply on the way we live – not merely as individuals but as communities and as a species. It is difficult not to feel overwhelmed by the numerous challenges we face: #ClimateChange, #Inequality, and #Loneliness, the last 20 years of #techshit to name a few. Yet, a simple but profound idea continues to resurface: What if we chose to live differently? What if we focused on building paths, like the #OMN project, that works harmoniously for people and the planet, rather than the normal path of attempting to repair what is broken?

This is not a new, humanity has long dreamed of utopias and alternative ways of living. Numerous communities have attempted to bring these visions to life, and admittedly, many have failed or faded away. However, these past efforts have left us with invaluable lessons, which is why, with the current #openweb reboot, I believe this time can be different.

The key lies in the technological and social path we collectively take. We are not striving for perfection because perfection is unattainable. Instead, we aim to create something real and adaptable. This is not about rejecting modernity or pretending the world’s issues will vanish if everyone adopts ethical consumption or #DIY self-sufficiency. It is about establishing spaces where people can collaboratively create, grow and adapt—striking a balance between #Innovation and #Simplicity, as well as between #IndividualFreedom and #CommunityCare.

This path is not simply my own. It is shaped by countless conversations with people from diverse backgrounds: #Developers, #Activists, #Educators, both online and offline. What stands out is the shared sentiment that our current way of life no longer makes sense. There is a collective yearning for something better—not to escape the world, but to build a way of living that reconnects us with each other, with nature, and with ourselves.

The path we can take, what makes this feel achievable, is that it does not require starting from scratch. It involves building on existing foundations—acknowledging both successes and failures—and asking critical questions: “What has worked in the past, what is currently working? What is not? How can we approach this differently?” This willingness to experiment, learn, and grow together is what sets this path apart from the normal #deathcult worshipping mess.

Yes, this might sound idealistic, and in some ways, it is. However, bold ideas are often the catalyst for meaningful change. If this resonates with you, I encourage you to share your thoughts. What changes would you like to see in how we live? What would it take for you to feel like you are contributing to something greater than yourself? These questions hold potential—not necessarily in the answers, but in the act of asking them. If you feel inspired to engage with this path, feel free to add to this thread. #openweb #4opens #collectivechange

Save Radley Woods

Radley Large Wood, a historic and ecologically significant ancient woodland near Oxford, is under threat. Once part of the lands owned by the Abbey of Abingdon, these woods are now owned by St. Hilda’s College, Oxford. However, the college’s recent actions have resulted in the destruction of approximately 20% of this precious ecosystem. These actions have raised serious concerns among local residents and environmentalists, as the damage done is irreversible and undermines the woodland’s ecological and historical value.

Ancient woodlands like Radley Large Wood are ecosystems that have developed over centuries, providing habitats for meany species of plants, animals, and fungi. The oak trees in the woodland are alive with biodiversity, supporting everything from ivy, which creates hibernacula for insects, to woodpecker holes that serve as nesting sites for bats and birds. When an ancient tree is felled, a network of dependent species are destroyed.

The woods have a diversity of different ages and heights, making them resilient and self-sustaining ecosystems. Unlike managed forests or plantations, ancient woodlands are irreplaceable. Once destroyed, they cannot be recreated, no matter how many trees are replanted. This loss is an act of environmental vandalism, stripping away a natural heritage that has thrived for centuries.

The misguided justifications of St. Hilda’s College, who claim that the felling is necessary due to ash dieback disease and for regeneration purposes. However, local observers have found little evidence of widespread ash dieback in the woods. Instead of targeted interventions, large swathes of the forest have been cleared, exposing fragile soils to erosion, flooding streams with mud, and destroying areas of bluebells, wood anemones, and native flora.

Moreover, regeneration felling, as described by the college, should involve careful canopy management to encourage natural regrowth. Yet what has occurred is far more drastic, resembling clear-cutting rather than thoughtful woodland management. Heavy machinery has churned wet soils, crushed habitats, and failed to respect safe zones around badger setts and other sensitive areas.

Biodiversity at risk, the destruction might’ve impacted bats, particularly woodland specialists like the barbastelle bat, which is already under-recorded and poorly understood. These bats rely on hollow trees, woodpecker holes, and other features of ancient woodland for roosting. Surveys and ground-level inspections that could have been conducted to identify potential bat habitats appear to have been inadequate or absent. Without proper ecological assessments, the full extent of the damage to wildlife remains unknown.

What’s really driving this, some critics suggest that the motivations behind the felling may not be as noble as claimed. With rising demand for biofuel and wood fuel, it seems likely that much of the felled timber is being sold for profit. Additionally, the college may be eyeing carbon credits from replanting schemes, which, while superficially appealing, cannot compensate for the loss of centuries-old ecosystems and the embodied carbon they represent.

Radley Large Wood is not just a patch of trees—it is a living area of natural and human history, from its days under the Abbey to its use as a holiday camp after the war. The community is now rallying to protect this irreplaceable woodland. St. Hilda’s College needs to be accountable for its promises to manage the wood according to ancient woodland guidelines.

What you can do: Join the friends of Radley Large Wood Facebook group to connect with people advocating for the woods. Write to St. Hilda’s College to demand transparency and adherence to proper ecological management practices. Support local campaigns to preserve ancient woodlands and bring awareness about the destruction caused by misguided forestry operations.

You can get involved and join the group here https://www.facebook.com/groups/603807741990811

UPDATE the local campaign group knocked back the worst of the mess with the video I made and a large public meeting both convicting the collage that this was a public issue they could not simply ignore, which was their first reaction. The collage will now carry on it project but with much less damage, the does not seam to be the energy to change or challenge this project from the campaign group or local community.

#OMN a practical response to the failures of greed-based paths

The #OMN (Open Media Network) introduces a transformative model that replaces the traditional free-market system driven by greed with an open/gift/use market grounded in cooperation and shared values. This experimental social tech path reimagines the digital commons by prioritizing the free flow of digital “objects,” which can encompass a wide range of resources—media, tools, data, or creative works.

The OMN’s open/gift/use market: Resources and information flow freely, breaking down barriers created by proprietary systems and monetized exchanges. Collaboration thrives on transparency and inclusivity, embodying the values of the #4opens.

Gift economy with digital “objects” shared without the expectation of direct compensation, fostering a culture of generosity and mutual aid. The value lies not in profit, but in the collective benefit derived from shared resources. With the shift to use-oriented distribution, the focus shifts from ownership to utility, emphasizing the practical application and communal use of resources. This aligns with sustainable practices, reducing waste and promoting reusability.

Advantages of the OMN path are decentralized control, grassroots participation and reduces reliance on centralized, profit-driven entities. Community empowerment prioritizes collective decision-making and strengthens local and global networks. Sustainability moves away from extractive economic practices, supporting an equitable and ecological path.

Challenges, transitioning mindsets from profit-driven to cooperative models requires hard and dangurus cultural shifts. Navigating the balance between openness and exploitation in a “native” digital common’s path will be challenging, as most people worship the #deathcult

Opportunities, establishing a resilient digital common, will inspire similar transformations in wider social paths. Leveraging #openweb technology to scale and optimize the flow of digital “objects,” is a new and to an extent “proven” path with the last 5 years of the Fediverse.

The #OMN experiment is more than a theoretical framework; it’s a practical response to the failures of greed-based paths. By growing cooperation through an open/gift/use market, it offers a hopeful and actionable pathway for a real, sustainable future.

Branding keeps coming up as an issue

The #fediverse is a glimpse of a radically kind of society through decentralized and community-driven models of governance and organization. This path can be used to challenge traditional hierarchies and power structures, making it possible to resist the imposing liberal “common sense” solutions which align with existing paradigms of control. On this different path we need tools like #OGB (Open Governance Bodies) to grow native systems that are transparent, participatory, and empowering.

But one of the issues that is used to block the wider project move is branding and its role in the #fediverse, branding, while seen as a unifying force, actually is as often imposes barriers to community ownership and agency. When centralized branding dictates the identity of a project, it stifles participation and creativity. To counteract this negative default path, we can:

Shift to Community Branding, with communities running instances to create their own visual and cultural identities. This empowers localized expressions while fostering ownership and pride.
Standardize for collaboration, develop shared guidelines for a cohesive experience, while maintaining flexibility for local adaptation.
Minimize branding barriers, by avoiding overly strong branding in open-source codebases to make technology easier for people and communities to adopt and customize.

This focus leads to a decentralized and inclusive ecosystem, where control is balanced with the communities rather than only developers and funders. Core to this is the path of challenging #StupidIndividualism, in this context the hashtag critiques the focus on individualistic thinking and self-serving branding in #openweb projects. To challenge this, we need to hold in place open dialogue on the power dynamics of branding and its impact on participation.

To flourish, we need to focus on decentralized trust-based networks like the #fediverse that amplify grassroots voices. Encourage messy, iterative approaches to activism that embrace the complexity of social change. Build #FOSS tools that empower communities to take control of their narratives, reclaiming native paths from centralized systems and corporate algorithms.

We need to counteract the entrenched despair of #mainstreaming paths to compost the mess for real, impactful change.