Year: 2025

The Beautiful Insanity of Activism: How Movements Rot or Blossom

Let’s face it — activism and counter-culture are packed with “insane” people. And thank the gods for that. It’s what makes movements exciting, dynamic, and, most importantly, effective. But like compost, too much of the wrong stuff makes the pile stink. Balance is everything. So, let’s look at this: what causes a movement to stagnate, fail, or bloom into a riotous field of wildflowers?

The Rot (or: Why Your Movement Smells Bad)

  • NGO’ists: These bureaucratic barnacles latch onto everything, molding it into whatever’s fundable and fashionably bland. They hoard resources, fill minds with paperwork, and slowly suffocate radical energy. They’re like termites with business cards.
  • Encryptionists: Paranoid fuckists who turn usability into a sin and sell fantasies of invulnerability. They preach security like a cult, but the reality is half-baked systems no one can use and a movement too scared to talk to itself.
  • Traditional Media Panderers: Useful in small doses, but quickly start reshaping the movement to fit mainstream narratives. Before you know it, your radical campaign against fossil fuels is being sold as a quirky “green lifestyle choice.”
  • Horizontal Dotcom’ists: Desperate to ride the movement into start-up glory. If they build with the , great. If not, they’re a distraction at best and a flaming wreck at worst when people actually try to use their half-built platforms.
  • Insecure and Nasty Lifestylists: Attracted to successful grassroots projects like flies to rot. They thrive on internal drama and are fed by the media panderers. Enough of them and your movement eats itself alive.
  • Hidden Careerists: Often competent and useful — until they start networking with the NGO’ists and media grifters to build personal brands instead of movements.
  • Paranoid Fuckwits: The paranoid glue of grassroots campaigns. In small doses, they help keep things tight. But let them accumulate in leadership, and the infighting becomes an art form.
  • Dogmatic Liberals: Lovely people, but the human equivalent of wet blankets. They block anything genuinely disruptive because it makes them uncomfortable, ensuring nothing truly radical gets off the ground.

The Bloom (or: Why the Garden Still Grows)

  • Hands-off NGO’s: The quiet good ones. They funnel resources without sucking the life out of movements. A rare species, but precious.
  • User-Focused KISS Peer2Peer’ists: The heroes fighting uphill to (re)boot the #openweb with simple, human-centered tools. They understand that people need tech they can actually use, not just theorize about.
  • Traditional Media Outreaches: The rare media people who amplify grassroots work without distorting it to fit mainstream appetites. They build bridges, not cages.
  • Horizontal Dotcoms (Done Right): Working on open, federated sustainability instead of chasing VC cash. They build tools for the movement, not to sell the movement.
  • Healthy Lifestylists: Learning to balance intense campaigning with actual human joy. Letting go of burnout culture and building connected, grounded lives.
  • Open Careerists: Using the movement to bootstrap themselves — but carrying open values like a Trojan horse into the belly of institutions. Someone has to infiltrate the beast.
  • Secure Organising Crews: Understanding that collective security is a shared responsibility. Keeping things calm, focused, and handling offline realities without spiraling into paranoia.
  • Liberal Liberals: The ones who bring just enough common sense to stop things from exploding, but not so much that they kill the spark.

The Chaotic Harmony

Activism is inherently messy, and that’s its strength. The magic happens in the balancing act. A movement with too many paranoid fuckwits or NGO’ists collapses under its own weight. But a movement with a little bit of everything — the wild-eyed dreamers, the practical builders, the media-savvy storytellers, and the steady hands keeping it all together — can actually change the world.

Because, at the end of the day, movements grow like compost. You need some rot. You need some shit. But you also need people willing to shovel through it, plant seeds, and tend the garden. And maybe, just maybe, you need to be a little bit mad to stick around long enough to see it bloom.

Open Media Network (#OMN) is a Tool for Change and Challenge, Composting the Mess

In activism and grassroots media, you inevitably face an ongoing, unpleasant truth: when pushing against #mainstreaming and the inertia of the #deathcult, bad faith comes at you like a storm. Your best, and often only, defence is to hold onto your good faith. But good faith alone isn’t enough, we need shared tools to compost the rot, turn the muck of broken movements and failed tech utopias into fertile soil where new paths can grow.

That’s where the Open Media Network comes in. The #OMN isn’t just another pointless tech project, it’s a living, breathing attempt to bridge the gap between technology and society, providing a trust-path, decentralized platform built with the . It doesn’t try to solve problems from above but empowers people to build, moderate, and nurture their own grassroots networks, to shape and reshape flows of information. It’s about composting the old, failed models, not replicating them.

The divide we need to bridge is pragmatism vs. social understanding. Too often, conversations around tech and social change get stuck in a loop. On one side, pragmatists push for immediate, concrete solutions, get the app working, ship the code, solve the surface problem. On the other, social thinkers argue that tech is inherently social, that ignoring the human context just perpetuates the mess.

Take #ActivityPub, a powerful protocol, but without a grounding in human trust networks, it risks recreating the problems of centralized social media. Or the rise of decentralized platforms flooded with reactionary and far-right content, a direct result of ignoring the need for human, community-driven democratic moderation and governance paths.

The #OMN is outside this loop. It acknowledges the pragmatism of building functional tools while insisting that those tools be shaped by, and in service of, grassroots communities. The five core functions shape simple tools, complex outcomes. The OMN is built on five core functions, deliberately minimal to avoid tech bloat and keep the focus on human networks:

  • Publish: Share objects (text, images, links) into a stream.
  • Subscribe: Follow streams from people, groups, hashtags, etc.
  • Moderate: Push/pull content, express preferences, and comment.
  • Rollback: Remove untrusted historical content from your flow.
  • Edit: Adjust data and metadata on content you have access to.

These simple actions, combined with human moderation, allow complex ecosystems to grow organically. You can shape your information flow, curate trustworthy content, and build collective knowledge, all while being able to remove what doesn’t serve the communities.

The crew needed is good faith in action, a crew committed to holding good faith, even in the face of bad faith pushback. People willing to pick up shovels, get dirty, and start composting. This isn’t about idealism; it’s about grounded action, learning from past projects like #indymedia and #Fediverse experiments, using what worked, and discarding what didn’t.

What is need:

  • Builders: Coders who understand that tech is just a tool, not a solution.
  • Moderators: People who know the value of careful curation and trust networks.
  • Storytellers: Those who can document, explain, and inspire others to walk the paths.
  • Bridge-builders: Activists who can connect different communities and facilitate cooperation.

This work isn’t glamorous. It won’t get you VC funding or a keynote at a tech conference. But it will lay the groundwork for something real, a decentralized, people-powered network where communities control their own narratives and relationships.

The future is a wild garden, not a walled garden. This path is a chance to build the #DIY, grassroots semantic web we’ve been dreaming of. Not another monoculture tech project, but a resilient forest of interconnected communities, each shaping its space while being part of a larger whole. It’s not about “scaling” in the #mainstreaming capitalist sense, but about growing deep roots and wild branches.

By supporting this we invest in people who reclaim digital experiences, where information is nurtured and composted into new possibilities, and where bad faith can be met not just with good faith, but with networks strong enough to withstand and outgrow the rot.

Join the paths. Let’s build this together. It’s time to start shovelling.

We can support this Open Collective or get involved in the coding https://unite.openworlds.info

#OMN #indymediaback #openweb #ActivityPub #TechCompost #GrassrootsMedia #TrustNetworks

It’s like watching the same old weeds sprout up in the cracks, clinging to the illusion of control. But yeah, every bit of rot turns to soil eventually — as long as we keep digging, the roots of something real can break through. Time to turn the pile!

Composting mess making, activism and #openweb

Most people I interact with are buried deep in the rot they’ve helped create, the path out is hard, but not impossible. The composting metaphor holds — rot can become soil, but only if it’s turned, exposed to air, and given time to break down. The stench lingers, though, and the deeper the decay, the harder it is to face.

Forgiveness can be a catalyst, but only if it’s rooted in understanding, not avoidance. Too often, movements try to “move on” without actually dealing with the decay, which just locks the dysfunction into place. Real forgiveness isn’t about forgetting or excusing — it’s about acknowledging the harm, holding people accountable to growth, and making space for them to rebuild trust through action.

With the #OMN the key is to create intentional processes for airing out the rot. Spaces where people can lay out what went wrong, where the worst of the mess can be named and examined without immediately collapsing into blame. This is a form of collective composting — deliberately breaking things down so they don’t keep contaminating the roots of future growth.

For paths that avoid recreating the mess, we might need, truth-telling circles: Spaces for people to name harms, acknowledge mistakes, and speak honestly about the dynamics that led to failure. Restorative action, not just words: Forgiveness should be paired with tangible action — people need ways to rebuild trust through collective work. Memory gardens: Digital or physical archives that document past failures and successes, so the same mistakes don’t get repeated.
Rhythmic cycles of reflection: Movements need to regularly pause, look back, and compost what’s no longer serving the collective purpose.

Sun, light, and fertile soil come from this messy work of turning over the past and allowing time and care to transform it. The #openweb is a part of this, especially if we build systems and paths that prioritize collective memory and iterative growth over constant reinvention and erasure.

What do you think? Could structured cycles of composting and reflection help our movements breathe again? Or is the rot too deep, and we need to burn things down to clear space for new life?

The #Fluffy #Spiky Debate.

Too often, I find myself in conversations that revolve around the intersection of technology and social issues, with one view emphasizing the importance of practical solutions to real-world problems, while the other highlights the underlying social dynamics that shape the technological landscapes these “solutions” are supposed to be addressing.

The Pragmatists, prioritizes immediate, tangible solutions. For example, when discussing the digital divide, they might advocate for creating cheaper, more accessible devices or building community Wi-Fi networks. They’ll focus on the logistics: what technology stack is best, what protocols to use, and how quickly the network can be deployed.

They see critiques of the capitalist underpinnings of tech as a distraction. For instance, they might argue that worrying about Big Tech’s dominance is less important than simply getting people online, even if it means relying on Google or Facebook infrastructure in the short term. The goal is to solve the immediate problem, even if the long-term implications reinforce existing systems of control.

The Social Critics, contends that technology cannot be meaningfully separated from the social systems it emerges from. They argue that simply handing out cheap devices or relying on corporate infrastructure entrenches dependency and undermines community sovereignty. For example, they might point to the rise of open-source projects that eventually get swallowed by venture capital, losing their grassroots values in the process (#dotcons).

They argue that unless we address the systemic issues, like how profit-driven models shape the design of platforms, any immediate “solution” is likely to reinforce the problem. Take social media moderation: a pragmatist might suggest better algorithms, while a social critic would argue that the underlying problem is the ad-driven engagement path itself.

The #GeekProblem is a barrier, the divide between these groups often solidifies into this mess making. Pragmatists, especially in tech spaces, dismiss social critique as impractical or irrelevant, reinforcing an insular culture that privileges technical expertise over lived experience. This dismissal is a form of #blocking, preventing collective growth and deeper problem-solving.

Breaking the cycle, to move past this, we need to blend the perspectives. For example, community mesh networks can be built with both pragmatic goals (connecting people) and social considerations (using practices to maintain local control). The technology itself can be a tool for social empowerment, but only if the builders acknowledge and address the social dimensions.

Projects like the Open Media Network (#OMN) bridge this gap, grounding tech development in community needs while keeping processes transparent and participatory. This balance helps compost the mess, turning the tension between pragmatism and social critique into fertile ground for true change. We don’t have to choose between immediate action and long-term systemic change, the key is holding both. Let’s stop getting stuck in the mess and start growing something real.

https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

“Compost tending” the fabric of #openweb

Let’s look at what makes sense: it’s about collective dynamics, not individual blame. The focus is on mapping the social landscape, understanding the patterns of dysfunction, and then figuring out how to break through those blockages. The idea of switching between #spiky and #fluffy approaches as needed is powerful, rejecting rigid ideology in favour of practical, responsive action.

Making the #blocking visible is essential. So much of the stagnation in #openweb and activist spaces comes from hidden blockages, unspoken fears, entrenched power dynamics, and the quiet creep of #mainstreaming logic. By pushing these things into the light, we can compost them, rather than letting them fester underground.

The balance, using history as a guide, leaning on what’s worked before, but staying flexible enough to shift tactics, should feel like the only sustainable way forward. If we only do #fluffy, we get captured by the #NGO mindset. If we only do #spiky, we burn out or implode. But if we consciously weave both together, we might actually build the resilience we need to grow new paths through the wreckage.

It’s almost like we need a cultural practice of “tending the compost”, regularly sifting through the mess, pulling out useful bits, and turning it over so new life can emerge. And maybe that practice itself could be a form of governance for grassroots networks, an ongoing, collective process of sense-making and recalibration.

What do you think? Can this idea of “compost tending” as a cyclical, community-driven process be something we intentionally build into the fabric of #openweb projects?

#OMN #OGB #makeinghistory #indymediaback

Is it possible to compost the mess and nurture the people tangled within it?

The new #mainstreaming right-wing crew has become adept at hijacking the language of liberation and twisting it for control. They steal words like “freedom,” “community,” and “resilience,” stripping them of their radical roots and turning them into tools for reactionary agendas. Meanwhile, the left, caught in cycles of internal purity politics and endless critique, fractures itself, leaving a vacuum the right eagerly fills.

It is a mess, but messes can be composted. The key is to strip away the parasitic layers, the influencers, the NGOs, the careerists who feed off this while subverting collective growth. These actors “thrive” on propping up a fragile sense of self, this messy path feeds division and spectacle, not solidarity. And as the mental health crisis worsens under #climatechaos and late-stage capitalism, people grasp for identity and belonging in the most toxic places.

We need radical care as well as radical action. The parasite class is fuelled by a deep void, a lack of purpose, a craving for significance. If we don’t build healthier collectives, people will keep falling into the black holes of conspiracy and #mainstreaming cultish thinking. The #openweb can be a sanctuary, a place to grow shared meaning, but only if we consciously design it to prioritize human connection over endless noise.

I wonder: how do we create spaces where broken people can heal, rather than becoming weapons of the right? Can we build digital commons that feel like home, where people can work through their pain without being consumed by it, collective care and unwinding the knots of individual trauma is a #fluff part of activism. What do you think? Is it possible to compost the mess and nurture the people tangled within it? Or do we need a more fire-and-brimstone approach to burn away the rot, I start to only half joke.

The invisible core of the struggle. The way online spaces, especially in decentralized networks like the #Fediverse, handle conflict is tangled up in this tension between safety and open debate. The #fluffy vs. #spiky debate, between care-driven, consensus-seeking approaches and more confrontational, radical tactics, has always been part of activist culture. Trying to erase that debate in the name of safety is simply sterilizing the very dynamism that fuels real change.

If we strip out the “debate” part, we’re left with a hollow shell, a fragile, performative “safe space” that can’t actually withstand the pressures of the real world. But if we lean too far into spiky confrontation without care, we lose people who could grow into stronger comrades. It’s a balancing act, and yes, the co-option of “safety” by both NGO logic and reactionary forces has made this even more toxic.

The “parasite class” is obviously seen being taken out of context is a perfect example of this mess, people react to language without digging into the underlying idea. The real question is whether we can metabolize within the chaos, compost the mess and care for the people lost in it, instead of just cutting them off. The #openweb needs friction to evolve, but it also needs trust to survive. There is a strong need to resist the impulse to sanitize the #openweb into submission. The #ActivityPub space, growing from the #fluffy side, has an embedded bias toward conflict avoidance, but that can be dangerous, because it leaves the system vulnerable to slow, creeping co-option. Safety shouldn’t mean silencing necessary struggles.

The consensus should be this: safety is built through collective care, not the absence of conflict. The #openweb should be a space where people can disagree loudly without fear of exile, where the friction of ideas sharpens the collective purpose, and where care is an active, ongoing process, not a bureaucratic rule set.

Why are #fashernistas so poisoning?

#Fashionistas chase status and spectacle over substance, co-opting real radical movements for aesthetics. They turn collective struggles into performative gestures, feeding the #mainstreaming cycle. This poisons the roots of change, turning compost into toxic waste, energy that could grow new things instead feeds the system they claim to resist.

Why is the #geekproblem such a strong #blocking force? This is rooted in control, a deterministic mindset that values code over culture. It manifests as gatekeeping, with geeks wielding tech knowledge as a shield rather than a tool for collective liberation. This blocks change because it alienates people who don’t fit the mould, and it stalls projects in endless technical debates instead of action.

How can #mainstreaming be pushed into something positive? Mainstreaming doesn’t have to be a death sentence if it’s grows from radical roots. The problem is the loss of direction when movements get diluted to fit nasty #mainstream tastes. A useful path is that mainstream visibility can amplify voices, but this needs active balancing by autonomous, decentralized structures. Maybe think of it like a Trojan horse, to smuggle radical ideas into the #mainstream under the cover of familiarity.

How do we thread this through the needle of #stupidindividualism that fractures collective power, by reducing everything to personal choice and consumption. The cultural byproduct of the #deathcult, a refusal to see beyond the self, traps people in cycles of isolation and powerlessness. The path out of this mess is through rekindling collectivism trust. People fall into individualism because they don’t trust collective paths. Start small, with local networks and federated communities. Show that collective paths are possible, and that it feels better than isolation. Remind people they are part of something bigger, not as a sacrifice of self, but as an expansion of it.

What path can we take on the #openweb? A path that embraces the compost. Let’s not seek purity or perfection, but instead nurture the rotting, chaotic soil of what we already have. The #OMN and lay the groundwork with radical transparency, federated trust networks. Build with messy activism, celebrate imperfection. Let failure teach and shape the next iteration. Radical inclusion, breaks down tech barriers and actively bring people in. Trust over control, decentralize, federate, and resist the temptation to police.

    The #openweb can be the seedbed of a new culture, if we accept that growth is messy, slow, and unpredictable. The path isn’t linear, it’s a tangle of roots, branching and intertwining. But that’s the beauty of it. What do you think? Do we need more practical tools, or is it more about mindset shifts?

    Balance, Activism, Tension, Reframing, Extremism, To Cultivate Change

    The paths of the challenges we face in activism lies in the dynamic tension between the “fluffy” and “spiky”, two forces that shape the progress and direction of movements. The fluffy path leans into compassion, empathy, and collective care, while the spiky path channels righteous anger and confrontation. Both are essential, like two hands working together to break the soil for new growth. It’s vital to resist the dogmatic tendencies that demand purity in one direction or the other, as that stifles the movement’s ability to adapt and evolve. The real strength of activism comes from this tension, a push and pull that keeps us grounded while still reaching for radical change.

    The need for focus, balancing inner reflection with outer action. For activism to be effective, we need focus, a deliberate balance between introspection (“how do we become better?”) and external action (“how do we change the world?”). Too much introspection leads to inward collapse through endless critique and infighting, while relentless external action without reflection burns movements out.

    The balance between these perspectives builds resilience and adaptability. It helps us avoid the trap of arrogance (believing we already have the answers) and the pit of despair (feeling overwhelmed by the scale of the problem). By living this debate, movements can remain agile, humble, and hopeful.

    Reframing extremism is about flipping the narrative, one of the most powerful narratives we can wield is the reframing of whom the true extremists are. For too long, the right and centre have positioned themselves as the guardians of “reasonable” politics, while labelling the left as “radical” or “dangerous.” This is a con, designed to defend the status quo. The truth is, unregulated capitalism, climate destruction, and hoarding of wealth are the real extremist positions that threaten human survival. Meanwhile, leftist ideas like universal healthcare, living wages, environmental protection, and worker rights are fundamentally moderate and life-affirming.

    By amplifying this #KISS reframing, activism disarms accusations of #blinded radicalism and shows the extremism of both the #neoliberalism of the “centre” and the growing far right. It flips the media narrative and highlights that what the left fights for is simply the bare minimum for a just and sustainable world. Resisting fear and darkness: Building light and trust, fear is the primary weapon of the right and centre-right. They use it to divide, immobilize, and control. The relentless messaging of doom and chaos keeps people clinging to the familiar, even as that familiarity is what’s driving the world to the brink of climate collapse and social disintegration. Activists need to resist being pulled into this framing, rather than playing defence in the fear game, we build light, trust, and tangible hope.

    • Show, don’t just tell: Build real-world examples of the alternatives we talk about — community gardens, worker co-ops, autonomous networks.
    • Celebrate small wins: Demonstrate progress, however incremental, to inspire people and build momentum.
    • Encourage openness and connection: Create spaces for people to share, learn, and build collective trust in the movement itself.

    Fear isolates. Hope connects. And connection is what feeds movements. Tools for the fight are the and the shovel. The provide a basic framework for clarity and accountability. Meanwhile, the shovel metaphor reminds us of the unglamorous, necessary work of composting the mess, breaking down the rot of the #deathcult to create fertile ground for growth. The shovel isn’t flashy, but it’s a tool of transformation, turning waste into the soil of new life.

    The role of the Open Media Network (#OMN) is an amplifier of grassroots narratives, bypassing corporate gatekeepers and platforming diverse voices, the #OMN challenge traditional media distortions and broadcast alternative stories. Connect disparate movements and weave together struggles. Creates networks of trust and collaboration, where voices of lived experience shape the discourse. The #OMN isn’t just about media production, it’s about building infrastructure for collective power. It becomes a living movement, sharing resources, knowledge, and strategies in real time.

    This is how we break the isolation that fear depends on. And this is how we build a media that serves movements rather than undermining them. The Path is cultivating the garden of change, the challenges we face are immense, but so is the potential for transformation. Movements don’t need to choose between fluffy and spiky, they need to hold the tension and let both paths inform each other. It won’t be quick. It won’t be easy. But with shovels in hand, we compost the mess — and grow the revolution.

    🔗 http://hamishcampbell.com

    #Activism #FluffyAndSpiky #OMN #RadicalMedia #Trust #ReclaimTheFuture

    Why?

    People conform to the #deathcult of neoliberalism, capitalism, and its destructive paths because they are conditioned to. The control is media, education, social pressure, economic dependence, shaped to enforce compliance. Even when people recognize the system is dark and broken, they still bow down. Why?

    Fear & survival, meany people are trapped in precarious economic conditions. They fear losing their jobs, homes, and social standing if they resist. When survival is at stake, rebellion feels to dangerous to risk the little they have.

    Comfort & convenience, worshipping the #deathcult provides short-term rewards: consumerism, entertainment and distraction. Even those who hate it find comfort in its predictability. Change is hard, uncertainty is scary.

    Psychological conditioning, our #mainstreaming propaganda is everywhere, it has convinced people there is no alternative (#TINA). They’ve been trained to see resistance as futile, rebellion as chaos, and compliance as “normal.”

    Social pressure & herd mentality, simply few people want to be outsiders. They follow the crowd, even when the crowd is heading off a cliff. Conforming is easier than facing any rejection and isolation.

    Exhaustion & despair, knowing the current path is going to harm them and kill their children, makes them feel powerless. The #deathcult grinds people down, keeps them struggling just to survive, leaving little energy or focus for resistance.

    Lack of vision, the #mainstreaming invests a lot in destroying alternatives before they can take root. Without these clear, viable paths, people fall back into the familiar, no matter how broken it is.

    But why STILL? Five years ago, yes, this wasn’t as obvious to everyone. Now, the mask has fallen, look around you can see people on their knees, the #deathcult is marching us straight into #climatecollapse, endless wars, and digital enslavement. Yet people still conform. Why? Because fear works. Because the system adapts. Because the majority would rather scrabble for comfortable servitude than risk the unknown.

    But cracks are forming. The illusion is fading. The question is, will we build something better before it all collapses? #nothingnew #deathcult #geekproblem #stupidindividualism #OMN

    PS. The current hard shift to the right is simply worshipping a more historical #deathcult, that of #fascism with its dark, very dark history, so the question still stands, WHY?

    We Made This Mess—Time to Clean It Up

    For the last 20 years, most of our crew have played a part in shaping the digital world we see today. What began as a space of radical possibility has been enclosed, exploited, and transformed into a corporate-controlled dystopia of #dotcons. We lived inside this algorithmic trap, and in many ways, we still do—fighting, trolling, and feeding the very system that keeps us addicted.

    Trapped inside the algorithm, these platforms don’t exist to foster community or critical thought; they thrive on division. They keep us locked into emotional reaction loops, rewarding outrage, amplifying conflict, and turning us into performance artists in an endless identity war.

    Take #Failbook and the rise of victim culture. This isn’t an accident, it’s by design. The algorithm doesn’t care about truth or justice; it cares about engagement, and what gets the most clicks? Anger. Fear. Outrage. The result is a world where people react instead of act, trapped in cycles of performative identity rather than building real alternatives.

    We don’t need more “ethical” #dotcons. Repackaging the same centralized control under a new brand of “ethical” capitalism is not the solution. We don’t need another walled garden with a friendlier PR campaign. We need an independent, federated media ecosystem, one that #KISS values community, autonomy, and the public good over profit.

    This is why the #OMN (Open Media Network) path exists. It’s not another platform designed to extract data and profit, it’s a network of trust-based spaces, where people interact as humans, not as data points. The #Fediverse and #ActivityPub offer the foundation for this, but we need to push harder. Right now, these alternatives still carry too much of the #mainstreaming liberal baggage that makes them fragile to capitalist capture.

    We need to build spaces that resist corporate logic from the root, not just replicate centralized control under new branding. To avoid repeating this mess making, we need to remember how the capitalists capture of the #openweb. To understand how we got here, we have to look at capitalism through the lens of the #dotcons. The enclosure of the #openweb was not inevitable, it was a deliberate shift from public good to private profit.

    How capitalism broke the web, commercialization & enclosure. The web was originally built as an open, decentralized space for information sharing. Capitalism transformed it into a marketplace, where value is extracted rather than created. Exploitation of users, platforms like Facebook, Google, and Amazon don’t sell products, they sell you. Your data, your attention, your behaviour, all harvested, manipulated, and monetized.

    This leads to monopolization & centralization, the most ruthless companies buy out competitors, stifle innovation, and consolidate power. What started as an open system is now controlled by a handful of corporations. Surveillance capitalism, the term, popularized by Shoshana Zuboff, describes the commodification of personal data for profit. What was once a tool for communication is now a weapon of manipulation.

    Erasing the public sphere. Corporate algorithms don’t care about truth, knowledge, or democracy. They prioritize profit-driven content, promoting misinformation, sensationalism, and division while destroying any sense of a shared public space. This leaves us in a world of short-term gains for the nasty few over long-term vision for the meany, this stagnates progress and accelerates environmental and social collapse.

    We made this mess—Now let’s fix it. The logic of the #dotcons. We can’t keep being prats about this. We’ve spent 20 years making this mess, now it’s past time to clean it up. Decentralization alone isn’t enough. We need alternative media spaces that reject control from the start. That’s what the #OMN is about. If we’re serious about breaking free, we need to use the as a shovel to compost the #techshit we’ve been drowning in.

    Time to stop only talking—Let’s build. We don’t need another debate. We don’t need another corporate-controlled “alternative.” We do need to step outside the algorithm and start building trust-based networks that work for people, not profit. We do need to reclaim the #openweb before it’s too late. So—what are we waiting for? Let’s get to work.

    #nothingnew #deathcult #geekproblem #OMN #openweb

    Be FOR Something, Not Just Against Everything

    The world is full of noise, outrage, and clickbait designed to keep us reacting rather than acting. But real change doesn’t come from endless doom-scrolling or fighting every battle thrown at us by the right-wing algorithms. It comes from building. If you want a better internet, a better community, a better world—start by helping your neighbours.

    Decentralization is about people, not just tech, use #OpenSource, #FreeSoftware, and #OpenStandards not because you hate Big Tech, but because you love your community. Decentralized solutions are not only about resisting corporate control; they’re about creating local networks where people can connect, collaborate, and build resilience together.

    Big tech’s #dotcons platforms are designed for extraction, of data, metadata, attention, and profit. But a decentralized internet, built on , works for people instead of exploiting them. Focus on solutions, not problems you can’t solve, you’re not going to single-handedly take down Google, Facebook, or Amazon. But you can create a local, trust-based federated network where people control their own platforms, data, and tools. That’s where the come in:

    🔹 Open Data – Information should be accessible and shareable.
    🔹 Open Source – The code should be transparent and modifiable.
    🔹 Open Standards – Systems should be built to work together.
    🔹 Open Process – Decision-making should be clear and inclusive.

    This isn’t just tech philosophy, it’s a shovel to compost the #techshit we’ve been buried under. Let’s build bridges, not walls The internet was supposed to connect us, but centralized platforms have turned it into a battleground of division and polarization. Instead of being trapped in endless debates and outrage cycles, use your energy to build something better. Find your local community, set up decentralized platforms that serve people, not corporations. Share knowledge, create alternatives, and make them easy for others to join.

    The #OMN (Open Media Network) is one path forward, but there are many. The key is to be FOR something instead of just reacting to whatever clickbait outrage is dominating the news cycle. Find your community, you don’t need permission. You don’t need a corporate-backed solution. Start small. Start local. Start with open tools that belong to you and your people, because in the end, the best way to fight the broken system isn’t to fight it at all—it’s to build something better in its place.

    There is a method to Trump’s messy geopolitical madness

    In a significant shift in U.S. foreign policy, President Donald Trump has reoriented America’s geopolitical path, distancing from Ukraine and seeking rapprochement with Russia. This realignment reflects a broader strategic thinking aimed at countering China’s rising influence on the global stage.

    Reassessing Ukraine’s strategic value, historically, the United States has supported Ukraine as a bulwark against Russian expansionism. This has changed, the Trump junta views the ongoing conflict in Ukraine as a European concern, diverting U.S. resources from more pressing business challenges. We see this underscored by recent diplomatic engagements in Riyadh, where U.S. and Russian officials met to discuss the Ukraine conflict without Ukrainian representation. Building mess as the talks granted concessions to Russia without securing meaningful commitments in return, undermining Ukraine’s sovereignty and regional stability.

    This realignment is about the decoupling of Russia from China, the policy shift is highlighting Trump’s focus on China as the primary geopolitical adversary. By improving relations with Russia, the U.S. weakens the burgeoning Sino-Russian alliance, thereby isolating China. The strategy is a part of the nasty realist school of international relations, which advocates for keeping the status que of power among nations to prevent any single entity from challenging dominance. However, “make America great again” carries real risks, as it embolden Russian aggression in Eastern Europe and strain’s U.S. alliances with European partners.

    Economic considerations play a key role in this geopolitical shift. Trump has proposed gaining stakes in Ukraine’s vast natural resources, including rare earth minerals, in exchange for military assistance. Ukrainian officials, however, view these offers as unfavourable, given the ongoing conflict and logistical challenges in resource extraction. This economic angle further complicates the U.S.’s position, as it is perceived as financial interests over steadfast support for an ally under siege.

    This strategic pivot has implications for global power dynamics. By attempting to realign relationships and isolate China, the U.S. is destabilizing existing alliances and emboldening adversaries. The success of this path depends on Russia’s willingness to distance itself from China, a prospect that remains uncertain given their shared strategic interests. Moreover, sidelining Ukraine leads to increased instability in Eastern Europe, challenging the security framework that has underpinned the region since the end of the Cold War.

    In conclusion, while there is a method to Trump’s messy geopolitical madness, the long-term consequences of this remain deeply uncertain. Balancing the immediate goal of countering China’s influence with the potential risks of alienating allies and emboldening adversaries requires a carefully calibrated foreign policy strategy, which we are unlikely to see.

    This is not even touching on onrushing #climtechaos which will need all the globe good will we can get to have any hope of surviving this century. Mess and more mess, we need more real composting, do you have a shovel, do you need a shovel #OMN

    Some comedy to make this sweeter

    Stepping away from #Mainstreaming: Building a Radical #OMN Through Clear, Grounded Communication

    In the world shaped by corporate control, liberal co-option, and empty activism, the language we use is a battleground. The push for this #mainstreaming has dulled radical discourse, replacing it with sanitized, #NGO-friendly language that avoids real social change and challenge. If we are serious about building an alternative, we need to rethink how we communicate—not just what we say, but how we say it.

    An example that I have been developing for the last ten years is the #OMN (Open Media Network) hashtag story—a project rooted in direct action, radical media, and bottom-up organizing. It’s a path away from corporate-controlled narratives and into messy, human, and effective grassroots communication.

    The problem with #mainstreaming language, NGO-driven approach to activism and media has a core flaw, it seeks acceptance rather than transformation.

    This blunts radical movements, it dilutes the message, #mainstreaming turns radical ideas into soft, palatable soundbites. Instead of speaking clearly about power, control, and oppression, it replaces them with vague, feel-good language designed for funding applications and media appearances.

    Example: Instead of saying, “Capitalism is a #deathcult destroying the planet,” we get, “We need sustainable economic growth and green investments.”.

    The result? The core critique is lost. The real causes of oppression are left untouched. It shifts focus to liberal activism that places too much trust in institutions—governments, tech corporations, and NGOs—assuming that change can happen from within. Instead of building our own autonomous networks, we waste time begging for reforms that never come.

    Example: Instead of rebuilding grassroots media, activists push for more regulations on social media companies—keeping power centralized rather than challenging the #dotcons path itself.

    The result? Big tech still controls everything, and alternative voices get pushed to the margins. It avoids direct conflict and struggle, as real social change is messy. It requires taking risks, building new paths, and confronting power. #Mainstreaming, on the other hand, prefers safe conversations and endless dialogue over real action.

    Example: Instead of fighting for community-controlled spaces, NGOs organize panels and workshops on “inclusion”—without actually shifting power.

    The result? We #blindly talk while the same power structures remain intact. The #OMN path for real communication for real change. For this to be real we want to escape the #NGO liberal mess, we need to reclaim radical communication. That means, speaking in clear, direct language:

    Say this: “The internet is controlled by #dotcons—giant corporations profiting from our data and attention. We need to take back control.” or “The #deathcult of neoliberalism is driving us to #climatedisaster.” and “#NothingNew: Stop wasting time chasing tech hype—fix what already works.”

    Language should be sharp, memorable, and rooted in everyday experience. But this is not only about talking, building alternative structures, not just critiquing the system is needed. Talking is not enough. We need to build. The #OMN project is about creating a real alternative to corporate-controlled media through grassroots, federated networks.

    • Instead of: Complaining about Facebook’s censorship… Build: A network of ActivityPub-powered, self-hosted media hubs that can’t be shut down.
    • Instead of: Asking Twitter to fact-check misinformation… Build: A trust-based network of independent journalists and aggregators.

    The Fediverse and #OMN are already moving in this direction. We #KISS need to push harder.

    Recognizing that change comes from conflict and challenge, social movements succeed when they agitate. That means, calling out power structures instead of begging them to change. Defending radical voices instead of silencing them to fit liberal narratives. Using technology as a tool for liberation, not just convenience.

    The biggest lie of #mainstreaming is that change happens by playing nice. History tells a different story: The labour movement won rights through strikes and resistance. The civil rights movement succeeded because of direct action, not just speeches. Open-source software survived because of forks, fights, and refusal to comply. If we want a free and open internet, we need to fight for it.

    The #OMN is a practical vision of a radical media network for the future, decentralization – Breaking free from corporate control. Autonomy – Creating trust-based networks instead of top-down paths. Action over talk – Building real alternatives, not just complaining about problems.

    This is the path forward. If we want to escape the bland, corporate-friendly language of the liberal web, we need to reclaim radical, direct, and effective communication.

    You can get involved by joining the Fediverse (#Mastodon, #PeerTube, #Pixelfed etc).
    If you have resources or skill, then support and develop the #OMN. Then help build #OMN-powered media hubs. Spread the principles. Push back against the #NGO takeover of the #openweb.

    It’s past time to take back control of our narratives, our media, and our future.