“the crew gathered around #SocialHub worked remarkably well for a while, organising good gathering, conferences and very useful outreach of #ActivityPub to the #EU that seeded much of the current #mainstreaming. But yes, it was always small and under utilised due to the strong forces of #stupidindividalisam that we need to balance. Ideas?“
From grassroots origins, #SocialHub emerged as a community-driven platform, rooted in the #openweb principles, focusing on the interplay of technology and “native” social paths. Its initial success lay in its collaborative ethos, free from mainstream interference. This promising start has since failed, due to lack of core consensuses and the active #blocking of any process to mediate this mess making.
Current challenges are from the influx of non-native perspectives, The twitter migrants and rapid #Fediverse expansion has diluted what was left of the original focus. Then in reaction to this the has been a retreat to tech paths over the social paths. This shift toward technical priorities has marginalized the social aspects that initially defined the community, this is a mirroring broader #geekproblem struggles that are core to the original failing.
What actually works is always grassroots messiness and constructive processes, that is messy in a good way, authentic, grassroots movements are inherently untidy, this ordered/chaos is where real social value is born. Attempts to overly structure or mainstream these paths risks losing their soul. Lifestyleism, and fragmented tribalism, distract from meaningful change. These behaviours breed from #stupidindividualism, a core product of the #deathcult culture that undermines collective action. There is a role for activism, based on learning from history to avoid repeating mistakes. This can lead to wider social engagement, and an embrace of messiness to counteract the stifling tendencies of rigid mainstreaming and isolated tech focus.
The metaphor of “shovels” is useful to turn the current pile of social and technical “shit” into compost is apt. Grassroots communities nurture a healthier ecosystem that balances tech and social. The imbalance favouring tech over social must be addressed. Reinvigorating the core social crew with a focus on community-oriented discussions and actions can restore equilibrium.
For this, it can be useful to challenge neoliberal narratives, use the #openweb/#closedweb framework to critique and dismantle neoliberal “common sense”. Highlight how these ideologies breed the individualistic and exploitative tendencies that undermine collective progress. The need for vigilance against co-option and the importance of nurturing the messy authenticity of grassroots movements. The path forward requires not just shovelling but planting seeds of collaboration, transparency, and collective action. By embracing the chaos and keeping the focus on social value, the #openweb can flourish as a genuine alternative to the #closedweb.
Book Launch Reflection: Homo Curator: Towards the Ethics of Consumption
The launch of Homo Curator: Towards the Ethics of Consumption, edited by Peter Rona, Laszlo Zsolnai, and Agnieszka Wincewicz-Price, brings fresh Dominican thinking into the pressing issues of consumerism and environmental collapse. This book is a product of the Las Casas Institute’s symposium on “The Ethics of Consumption” at Blackfriars Hall, University of Oxford. It engages deeply with the moral dimensions of consumption, critiquing the failures of modern economic theory and calling for ethical renewal.
The book explores two critical questions: the inherent human capacity for excess and wrongdoing, and the inability of mainstream economics to factor morality into its frameworks. The central critique is aimed at the language of maximization—an ethos that defines success as unending growth and consumption. Instead, the authors ask a fundamental question: what is enough?
Consumption and justice in today’s world, justice is intrinsically tied to the limits of our planet. The authors argue that economics is not a science in the analytic sense, but a descriptive tool that has strayed far from its moral purpose. As we face ecological collapse, the question of “enough” demands responsibility, judgment, and moral courage. This requires resisting the “iron cage of consumption” that defines modernity and rethinking our relationship with resources.
Temperance and the commons, the Dominican perspective shines here: take what you need, no more. Temperance, once a core virtue, is now subsumed by a culture of excess. The monetization of the commons—the transformation of shared resources into exchangeable commodities—has stripped nature of its intrinsic value. The result? A world where growth relentlessly encroaches upon the commons, leaving us with privatized, degraded ecosystems.
This critique of monetization calls for a radical reevaluation of the way we assign value. Economic systems built on perpetual growth cannot sustain a world of finite resources. Justice and sustainability require that we mediate compassion with responsibility, tempering individual desires for the sake of collective well-being.
Time, prudence, and addiction to the present, the book also delves into the mutilation of prudence by unbalanced rationality. Traditionally encompassing past, present, and future, prudence has been reduced to a myopic focus on immediate gratification. This short-term thinking fuels addiction to consumption, where future benefits are discounted, and irrational preferences dominate decision-making.
The addiction metaphor is powerful here. Like addicts, societies rationalize their destructive behaviours under the guise of “rational” self-interest, even when the long-term costs are catastrophic. The authors challenge this paradigm of irrationality, advocating for a return to prudence that considers the well-being of future generations.
Here the Christian thinking kicks in with moral renewal over structural reform, a criticism that while structural reforms are touted as solutions, the book argues they cannot succeed without a moral foundation. Real change requires a reawakening of ethical principles—justice, temperance, and responsibility. For this path without these, even the most revolutionary economic policies will fail to address the root causes of ecological and social crises.
Shovelling the mess, the themes of Homo Curator align with the challenges we face in building a sustainable and just future. The critique of consumption, monetization, and short-term thinking reflects the broader struggle to escape the “#deathcult” of #neoliberalism.
As I often say, our world is smeared in social and ecological “shit,” but shit makes good compost. By wielding these tools of justice, temperance, and prudence, we could maybe shovel this mess into something fertile. This Dominican vision dose offers not just critique but hope: a call to embrace moral responsibility as we plant the seeds of a new economy rooted in shared humanity and care for the planet.
It’s a reminder that we need more than technical fixes—we need ethical renewal. The work ahead is messy, but necessary. Grab a shovel.
Book launch for Homo Curator: Towards the Ethics of Consumption edited by Peter Rona, Laszlo Zsolnai, and Agnieszka Wincewicz-Price.
This book explores the under-researched sources of the consumerist culture and the environmental damage it has brought about. The book is an outcome of the symposium on “The Ethics of Consumption” organised and hosted by the Las Casas Institute at the Blackfriars Hall, University of Oxford as part of its Economics as a Moral Science Programme. It takes on two contemporary problems: the human weakness and capacity for wrong-doing, and the failure of modern economic theory to account for the moral character of human behaviour and its implicit encouragement of gluttonous life-styles. In a time when grand political schemes are proposed to revive sustainability of global economy, the authors of the papers collected in this book highlight the need for moral renewal without which the most revolutionary structural reforms are bound to fail at producing the desired outcome. Topics of the book include the meaning and sources of avarice, the attempt to define what is enough, exploration of philosophical and theological perspectives which can serve as building blocks for the ethics of consumption. This makes the book of great interest to a broad readership of economists, social scientists and philosophers.
————
That economics is not a science, rather it is descriptive rather than analytic. They are quite progressive, Franciscans in Oxford.
Criticism of the language of maximization, enough is the question.
Temperature, taking what you need, not more. Now the is the question of justice, due to the limits we now understand.
We have to take the responsibility for making judgments. To mediate the compation, in our money society, it’s hard work to counter this.
The iron cage of consumption, we need radical change in our economics to escape this.
Produce, the 3 ages of men, past, present future, its feald is time. Modern rationality, gives us mutilated “produnce” only the present.
Addiction, as rationale, they discount future benefits. A paradine of irrationality. Some preferences are irrational?
Monetisation is a core problem, commons are closed, growth is more and more inclosing the”commons” the environment becomes property. All nature is turned into exchange values.
The metaphor of “shit” as both the cause of decay and a potential source of renewal is provocative and insightful. It captures the essence of the challenge we face in addressing #mainstreaming culture, where conversations to often get stuck in defensive and rigid negative thinking.
Why social change online fails, is in part that terms are barriers, people cling to #mainstreaming “common sense” because it feels safe and familiar. Talking outside these norms triggers defensiveness, making constructive dialogue nearly impossible. This is amplified by post-modern relativism (on the left) and authoritarian rigidity (on the right), which block ideas and meaningful conversations.
The role of #BLOCKING, dismissing or shutting down alternative perspectives perpetuates the #techshit mess and reinforces #deathcult values. It stifles creativity and solutions by keeping discussions within narrow boundaries. Social shit as the status quo, both left, and right ideological contribute to the decay, creating a world smeared in “shit” where truth is either denied or imposed. This leads to stagnation, not growth.
The plan and the #4opens, focus on action, “just keep working” is pragmatic. By creating and demonstrating the value of #openweb tech like #OMN, we can sidestep unproductive arguments and focus on planting seeds of change. Turning shit into compost, the metaphor of composting is powerful. Social decay (shit) can be transformed into fertile ground for growth, but it requires tools (shovels) and effort. This aligns with need for grassroots action and collective responsibility.
Reframing conversations is core, to break through defensive and angry reactions. For this to work, maybe we need to start with shared values, frame discussions about universal concerns like community, fairness, and sustainability this could build common ground. To balance relatable language alongside the “truth” metaphors, which are both vivid and compelling, sometimes it’s good to simplify for audiences to draw people in. Focus on demonstration, not debate, showcasing working examples of #4opens tech and grassroots projects to inspire people to engage.
Planting flowers, the imagery of strong women and sensible men wielding shovels to compost the mess and plant flowers, is an optimistic vision. It emphasizes collective action and the potential for beauty to emerge from decay. The open invitation for collaboration is key, maintaining this openness, we can hold open space for those ready to step away from the pile and start helping with the shovelling.
The “social shit” story is raw, real, and relatable. It smells like the mess we’re in, but also hints at the possibility of transformation. The challenge lies in inspiring people to pick up the shovel and join in the composting work. Maybe with persistence, transparency, and focus on action, this work will catalyse meaningful change.
Keep planting seeds—some will bloom in unexpected ways. 🌱
There is a deep frustration with #mainstreaming culture, with its strong tendency to elevate the wrong people and prioritize misguided actions. How can we “think better” beyond the traps of the current socio-political mess.
The scum rises, in #mainstreaming culture, those who conform to the system, rather than challenge it, often rise to the top. This creates a cycle where meaningful change is stifled by mediocrity and opportunism.
Grassroots value, social progress has historically emerged from the #grassroots. By stepping away from the toxic mainstream, we can refocus on nurturing these sources of real value.
The wrong thing gets done, funders and institutional forces often push agendas that diverge from grassroots needs, resulting in projects that perpetuate the status quo.
Paralysis of choice, the perceived lack of viable options (e.g., “you have no choice but to do the wrong thing”) leads to a sense of helplessness and frustration.
Thinking better, we need frameworks that reject the flawed foundations of #mainstreaming while building collective action. Let’s look at some broad outlines:
Anarchist paths focus on horizontal organization, mutual aid, and direct action. Strengths: Empowers communities, resists hierarchy, and builds autonomy. Weaknesses: Often struggles with long-term scalability and coordination.
Trotskyist/Stalinist paths centralized control with a focus on revolutionary goals and structural transformation. Strengths: Can mobilize large-scale change and challenge systemic power structures. Weaknesses: builds authoritarianism, co-option, and detachment from grassroots needs.
Liberal paths lead to incremental reforms within existing systems. Strengths: Pragmatic and accessible, with a focus on policy and advocacy. Weaknesses: Co-opted by #mainstreaming agendas, leading to superficial solutions.
The #4opens approach, is a permissionless path to sidestep these systemic failures. This approach aligns with anarchist values of autonomy while addressing their scalability challenges through structured openness and federation. Some practical steps to nurture grassroots power:
Step away from toxicity, recognize when systems and individuals perpetuate harm, and refocus energy on constructive grassroots work.
Muddle through together, embrace imperfection and collective experimentation. Mistakes are inevitable, but progress emerges from the process.
Push back against funders’ agendas, build alternative funding models (e.g., community support, cooperative economies) to reduce reliance on top-down directives.
Focus on trust networks, invest in relationships and trust-building at the grassroots level. Trust is the antidote to the cynicism of #mainstreaming.
Hold space for uncomfortable conversations, lean into the discomfort of challenging entrenched norms and assumptions within movements.
The challenge is a very real mess, we’re stuck in a cycle where “the wrong thing” gets done under pressure from flawed paths. Breaking free requires stepping away, nurturing #grassroots alternatives, and committing to frameworks like the #4opens that push more collective empowerment over individual gain and #mainstreaming institutional control.
The #OGB (Open Governance Body) represents a radically different approach to power and governance compared to the traditional top-down models we see in the #mainstreaming.
Grassroots empowerment, the OGB is built on the idea of sharing power. It aligns with the ethos of 20th-century social movements that emphasized collective action and mutual aid. In this, it is a seed for change, which can grow into a robust model for grassroots governance. A pathway for movements and communities to reclaim agency and create sustainable alternatives to the normal centralized power paths. This project matters because it is a response to #mainstreaming co-opten of radical ideas,than watering down paths to fit the status quo. Were the focus is empowering of local action, it bridges the gap between global movements and local actions, ensuring that decisions are made by those most affected by them.
The first challenge is affinity group building for the tech, after this we face more challenges and opportunities:
Scaling the seed: How can the OGB grow while maintaining its grassroots integrity?
Bridging divides: How can it bring together diverse communities and interests without falling into the traps of personality politics and fragmentation?
Overcoming #deathcult influence: How does the #OGB challenge and outlast the entrenched neoliberalism (#deathcult) that dominates today’s socio-political landscape?
As a seed, it needs nurturing, collaboration, and commitment from those willing to embrace discomfort and change. The path is simple, people need to growing this seed within their own contexts. What steps can we take to make this more widely understood, to become the real alternative we need?
#NGO-driven approach to activism are a part of the challenges of #mainstreaming agendas in tech and social movements. NGOs at best aim to “make the mess work a bit better” without addressing root causes. This band-aid path aligns with the mainstreaming agenda rather than fostering systemic change. This need for maintaining “relevance” leads to shallow solutions rather than transformative action.
With activist projects struggling to build shared objectives, collaboration becomes fragmented, and efforts fail to scale and sustain impact. We have historical paths to mediate this, like the #PGA (Peoples’ Global Action) that aligning around clear hallmarks galvanizes collective action. With grassroots tech and user engagement, projects fail without users. If people remain tethered to #dotcons, our work on grassroot projects die before they take off. Activists criticize dotcons but often fail to leave them, perpetuating the systems they oppose—a symptom of the #deathcult.
Many radical/progressive tech initiatives focus on aesthetics (#fashernista) or isolated goals without contributing to broader movements like rebooting grassroots media, these efforts become distractions and dead ends. Provide compelling alternatives to the dotcons that people can genuinely use and build upon. Stepping away as activism can play a role. Leaving the #dotcons and embracing decentralized, ethical platforms is itself a form of activism. This act undermines the #deathcult and creates space for alternatives to thrive.
Composting pointless projects, we need to identify and “compost” projects that fail to contribute meaningfully to broader goals. This isn’t about cynicism, but about redirecting energy toward initiatives that matter. Use the energy of critique to inspire better efforts rather than dismiss entirely. Key question, how do we bridge the gap between critique and action to avoid losing people and momentum in the current mess? To challenges activists to step back, think critically, and act boldly. It’s a reminder that inaction—or misguided action—is a victory for the #deathcult. How do you envision the #4opens and #OMN evolving? What can you do to make this happen?
The critical paths between governance, activism, and the ideological underpinnings of #FOSS, #opensource, and the #openweb. The problem, governance without “politics” which FOSS and opensource often ignore and block the politics, leading to governance models resembling feudalism where “better kings” may emerge, but the underlying structure remains inequitable. Without addressing systemic issues, projects replicate the very power imbalances they aim to escape.
Decentralization is a post-capitalist concept, as decentralization eliminates middlemen, undermining the foundations of capitalism. However, capitalism co-opts decentralization, selling illusions while embedding scarcity (e.g., #encryptionist projects). Recognizing and resisting this is vital to preserving the openweb. Composting the shit, current activism often worsens the “shit pile” by pouring misaligned efforts and unclear priorities into an already broken paths. Instead, we need shovels for composting—tools and frameworks like #OMN and the #4opens to transform waste into fertile ground for radical change.
A solution can be found in 4opens and #OGB, this creates a permissionless path, framework for decentralized, equitable governance. The Open Governance Body (OGB) fosters participatory decision-making, breaking away from feudal hierarchies and cultivating more of a balance of collective ownership. The path is building together, the Open Media Network (OMN) embodies this ethos by emphasizing “you and me” over “just me.” A core part of this path is that activist media must embrace discomfort as a catalyst for change, balancing inspiration, information, and critique to challenge the status quo.
A world in flux, old paths are gone, there’s no going back, reboots are imminent—social upheavals (#Trump, #Brexit) and environmental crises signal the need for systemic transformation. The 4opens promote transparency, participation, and shared ownership. By contrast, the #4closed represent secrecy, exclusivity, control, and commodification—aligning with the #dotcons and the #deathcult’s vision of the future. Words as power, the spell of repetition, the 4opens is more than a mantra, it’s a way of embedding ethical, decentralized values into public consciousness. This “spell” counters the pervasive narratives of the 4closed and offers a tangible path for the needed transformation.
The challenge of personality politics disrupting progressive projects is a recurring issue, especially in tech and social activism paths. This often derails efforts by prioritizing individual egos and interpersonal conflicts over collective goals. The path to mediating this needs resilient, open, and structured processes that minimize the impact of this messy dynamics.
Strategies to Counter Personality Politics
Shared Principles: Define the project’s mission and values early on, ensuring that these shared to act as a guide for decisions and actions. Frameworks like the #4opens provide an excellent starting point.
Transparent Governance: Establish open and participatory governance models where decision-making is visible and accessible to all. This reduces opportunities for power grabs and fosters trust within the group.
Focus on Objectives: Anchor the project around achievable, practical goals. This keeps efforts aligned with outcomes rather than personalities, avoiding distractions from the work at hand.
Conflict Mediation: Build in mechanisms to address conflicts early and constructively. Mediation processes should prioritize the collective good over individual grievances, ensuring disputes don’t derail the wider projects.
By emphasizing these, grassroots progressive projects can build communities that remain focused on their paths, navigating personality politics, without losing momentum and motivation #KISS
One of the strong #blocking forces is #mainstreaming objectives being imposed on non-mainstream projects. This is a strong recurring issue in alternative tech spaces like the #openweb and #Fediverse. This happens because people perceive mainstreaming as “common sense,” mistaking it for adding value. Over time, this mess erodes the radical, decentralizing paths, feeding people back into the centralization of #dotcons and perpetuating the #stupidindividualism we are trying to overcome.
Define and defend non-mainstream objectives with strong clarity of purpose. Clearly articulating the goals and principles of #openweb projects, emphasizing the value of non-mainstreaming paths. This needs to be anchored in frameworks like the #4opens and ethical guidelines such as the #PGA Hallmarks. Build the community agreements to hold these in place to ensure contributors understand and commit to these principles. Actively use documents, onboarding materials, and collective discussions to signpost these paths.
Strengthen “native” culture against #stupidIndividualism by balancing the push for collective governance, we need federated and decentralized governance structures like #OGB (Open Governance Body). These prevent individuals from overriding group objectives with personal agendas. Emphasize trust by fostering a culture that prioritizes relationships and trust over competition and self-interest.
Build post-scarcity #FOSS tools that focus on simplicity and functionality, avoid overloading projects with unnecessary features (#techshit) that complicate usability and dilute the #KISS vision. Prioritize accessibility, with tools that empower communities without requiring heavy technical expertise, making them usable and scalable without compromising their radical foundations. Use the #4opens to anchor technology in open processes, data, licences, and standards to ensure transparency and prevent co-optation.
Compost the stinking pile of #techshit. Shovels are a metaphor for composting, to open spaces for critique and push back #mainstreaming attempts constructively. Use feedback loops to identify and counteract behaviours that undermine these paths. Use real-world examples to illustrate the long-term harm. To combat the “common sense” myths, highlight how #mainstreaming benefits centralized systems and reinforces the #deathcult that meany people worship.
Resilience in the #fediverse and beyond is grown by practical limiting node scalability, in federated flows, understand scalability limits based on moderation and quality. This prevents overgrowth and maintains trust within smaller, more accountable communities. Encourage decentralization, by supporting the diversity of smaller instances rather than a few dominant ones. This ensures resilience and reduces the risk of centralization.
We need to be building tools for flourishing, in a large part to counteract #stupidindividualism and mainstreaming, for this we need affinity groups that focus on post-scarcity tech and tools that foster trust, collaboration, and grassroots empowerment. To make this happen, we need these affinity groups to use the #4opens as a guiding framework and the #OGB to organize collective governance. By prioritizing these non-mainstreaming flows, we expand the #openweb sustainably while preserving its radical, human-centered roots. Let’s build tools that reflect human flourishing, not corporate consolidation. It’s hard work, but it’s the only path forward that can work.
The Thatcher era in the UK was led by #deathcult privatisations, which are now ripe for contemporary criticism. And this criticism could be a useful push for the change and challenge we need.
Water Companies, privatized in 1989 with promises of efficiency and investment, have since faced continuous scandals over sewage spills, underinvestment, and skyrocketing bills. The outcome, profits have been pushed over public service, leading to environmental and infrastructure mess which will coat billions to compost.
Railways, privatized in the 1990s under Major, have led to fragmented operations, high ticket prices, and crap service. Public subsidies have increased dramatically, effectively making it a publicly funded but privately profiting system. The failures of companies like Railtrack highlighted systemic issues. This urgently needs to change, but this is a mess that leads to huge public costs.
The Steel Industry, British Steel, was privatized in 1988 but continued to struggle to compete globally. Subsequent closures and job losses have been crippling to industrial regions. Today, the UK steel industry remains a declining mess, requiring government intervention and subsidies to survive. We don’t have a path out of this mess, in the era of international instability we need a solution.
Energy, the privatisation of electricity and gas led to reduced competition over time, with prices soaring for consumers. Companies have been price gouging and underinvesting in sustainable energy. A mess, to manage the shift to renewables, that we now need to compost.
Telecom, while privatisation of BT (British Telecom) did modernize telecommunications, it created an uneven playing field, with BT retaining dominance and smaller competitors struggling to compete meaningfully. What is the path with this?
The promise of our worshipping of the #deathcult was to reduce costs through privatisation unsurprisingly, this hasn’t materialized; instead, public funds have been used and continue to be used to subsidize failing privatized nasty fuckwits.
The broader impact has been widening social inequality. Essential “commons” services were turned into profit centers at the expense of affordability and quality. With privatization, transferred wealth from the public to a small group of greedy and nasty people.
The scale of these failures and public dissatisfaction might be a force for the change and challenge we so urgently need. If we can make the more horizontal path actually work for us #OMN
The future of grassroots and decentralized media lies in federated trust networks, not merely replicating the centralized, broadcast-focused models of the #dotcons. There are problems with simply copying #dotcons as #FOSS that is replication without change, simply mimicking the #dotcons replicates their flaws, including centralized control and scalability issues that lead to degradation in quality and trust.
Broadcasting models focus on individual reach rather than collective, community-driven engagement. For example, #bluesky and #mastodon scale without accountability, over-scaling singular nodes results in reduced moderation quality, fostering misinformation and people’s dissatisfaction.
There is a strong case for human scale federated trust networks, with human moderation for quality. In the #OMN, every instance is moderated by a competent crew responsible for maintaining content standards. Expanding requires growing the moderation team to sustain quality. This path ensures people and communities gravitate toward smaller, well-moderated instances, balancing scale and trust.
Tag flows for better categorization, we need to create distinct admin tools for personal and news flows, so networks can handle content more effectively and avoid mixing purposes.
Decentralization with purpose, federated networks with #ActivityPub, allow instances to share content while maintaining autonomy. This prevents over-centralization and supports diverse community voices.
The #4opens—open process, open data, open licenses, and open standards—are baked into the #OMN to maintain transparency and community ownership.
An example of this is the #OMN is key to rebooting #Indymedia The #OMN project provides a framework to reboot alternative media, like #indymediaback, in a way that prioritizes the “native” quality, trust, and community moderation. The first steps toward a reboot will be integrating federated systems and trust-based governance to revitalize the platform. This is key, learning from the past, avoiding a rehash of dead indymedia, the #OMN emphasizes creating new structures based on lessons learned, particularly the importance of human-centered workflows. With the ultimate goal is to restore indymedia domains to active use while avoiding past pitfalls.
For those wanting an #indymedia reboot, supporting #OMN projects is crucial, as it is directly aligned with this vision. The #OMN and federated trust networks offer a roadmap for reclaiming decentralized media spaces. By focusing on trust, moderation, and the #4opens, we move beyond the failures of centralized #dotcons and create sustainable, community-driven alternatives. This isn’t just a revival of the old; it’s a necessary evolution to meet the challenges of today’s digital paths.
Grassroots Open Source Software (#FOSS) is a powerful example of anarchist organization in action, even if unintentionally. It’s a decentralized, cooperative model where people work together, driven by shared goals, not bosses or hierarchies. #FOSS has proven faster and more responsive than proprietary systems, cutting through bureaucracy to solve problems.
While not perfect (projects can fail due to poor organization or lack of interest), this path outpaces the traditional alternatives bogged down by debt, delay, or rigid management structures. It thrives because skilled teams self-manage, focusing on tasks that matter without over-management, a principle that resonates far beyond software.
Even in construction, this approach shows promise. Imagine crews self-managing their work, coordinating through elected foremen, and collaborating in federated councils with architects and community representatives. This isn’t just theoretical—it’s a practical path to efficiency, replacing the delays and over-budget failures of state-run or capitalist systems. The #OGB is a tool to push this out as a social tech path native to this.
Anarchist solutions don’t need to be perfect; they just need to be better than the deeply flawed paths we walk now. And #FOSS proves that they can be #KISS
The #NGO and #dotcons use of #FOSS is a whole another subject we do need to talk about.
