Category: Non classé

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.

Comparing Decentralized #openweb Protocols

The #socialweb is shifting away from corporate-controlled paths like #Twitter and #Facebook toward decentralized, more #DIY alternatives. The idea is simple: instead of a single company having control, decentralized protocols allow different platforms to connect while giving people the power to shape and control their digital paths.

Three major decentralized protocols have emerged:

  • Fediverse (#ActivityPub) – The most established and widely used, forming a “native” backbone of the #openweb.
  • Bluesky (#AtProto) – A Twitter-funded project that claims decentralization but is still highly centralized.
  • Nostr – A relay-based, censorship-resistant protocol with interesting tech but major cultural and usability challenges.

While all three claim to support decentralization, only ActivityPub (the #Fediverse) actually delivers on this promise. An overview:

The Fediverse (ActivityPub) – The Decentralized #openweb

Background & history, the Fediverse is powered by ActivityPub, a W3C-recommended standard, since 2018. Unlike Bluesky and #Nostr, which are still evolving, ActivityPub is already a mature, widely adopted protocol. It was designed from the ground up, through a 20-year unbroken history to enable interoperability between platforms, meaning people on different apps can communicate seamlessly.

This #ActivityPub network exploded in popularity after Twitter’s collapse under Elon Musk, with Mastodon seeing millions of new users in 2022. Popular apps & servers, it not just one platform—it’s a whole ecosystem of independent apps that mostly copy #dotcons:

  • Mastodon – The most well-known microblogging platform, often compared to Twitter.
  • PeerTube – A decentralized YouTube alternative.
  • Pixelfed – A decentralized Instagram-style photo-sharing app.
  • Pleroma / Misskey – Alternative microblogging platforms.

How ActivityPub Works, Federation: Different servers (instances) talk to each other, creating a network of networks. How this works, you create an account on one instance, but interact with people across the entire Fediverse. Each server is independently operated, meaning no single company owns the network. There is an issue of instance Lock-In: If a server shuts down, yes, people must migrate manually—but this is a small tradeoff compared to the massive corporate control seen in more #mainstreaming paths.

Bottom Line: ActivityPub is the most decentralized and established protocol, already powering a thriving ecosystem of apps with real communities.

#Bluesky (AtProto) – Fake Decentralization, A shadow #Dotcons

Background & history, Bluesky started as a Twitter-funded project in 2019, originally backed by Jack Dorsey. It claims to be building a decentralized social network, but in reality, it’s architecture favers centralization, due to it being built to prioritise scaling. The #AtProto, allows for theoretical federation, but in practice, Bluesky is still just a Twitter clone controlled by a single company.

Popular Apps & Servers

  • Bluesky – The only major client, self-hosting is possible, but current federated servers are limited to 100 users, and Bluesky can refuse to federate with them.

How AtProto works: #DID-based identities – Users can theoretically move between services, but only if Bluesky allows it. Centralized moderation – The vast majority of users rely on bsky.social, meaning Bluesky still has the power to block or censor at will. Limited self-hosting, Bluesky restricts who can run a server and limits federated instances.

Bottom Line: Bluesky is currently a trap, a con, It looks decentralized but is a #dotcons, the normal corporate-controlled path.

Nostr – Interesting Tech, but bad culture

Background & history, #Nostr (Notes and Other Stuff Transmitted by Relays) was created by an individual in 2020 as a censorship-resistant social protocol. Where ActivityPub and AtProto, use server-based networks to build community and distribute moderation, Nostr uses a relay-based model where users broadcast messages across multiple relays. It gained popularity in #Bitcoin circles and received funding from Jack Dorsey (again).

Popular Apps & Clients

  • Primal, Nos, Snort – Web-based clients.
  • Damus – iOS client.
  • Amethyst – Android client.

How #Nostr works, It is Relay-based, with no comminute based instances – No centralized servers, messages are published to multiple relays. Cryptographic Identity – people have opaque public/private keys instead of usernames. No true federation – people rely on relays to store and transmit data, but relays don’t communicate with each other like ActivityPub servers do. Difficult for adoption – The reliance on cryptographic keys makes it confusing, and there’s no built-in moderation system, so comminutes remain fragmented, its tech for the native #stupidindividualists paths, in this diversity is good and as it bridges it might become a useful project.

Bottom Line: Nostr is decentralized and censorship-resistant, but it’s not user-friendly or practical, its culture is a bad mix of #techbro and #geekproblem #encryptionist #shitcoiners


Which Decentralized Protocol is the Best?

ActivityPub (Fediverse) is a clear winner, it’s proven, widely adopted, and already functional with true federation across multiple apps, decentralized and people-controlled. Where #Bluesky (#AtProto) is a hidden #Dotcons which claims to be decentralized but is still controlled by Bluesky, Inc. Federation is limited, and self-hosting is discouraged thus is a Trojan horse for another corporate-controlled network. Nostr is interesting but niche, completely decentralized, but difficult to use. No federation between relays and not practical for mass adoption.

Final verdict: If you care about real decentralization, community, and people, ActivityPub (Fediverse) is the clear choice.

What is needed next is to take the step in the Fediverse is moving beyond simply copying the #dotcons. It is time to reboot the #Openweb with a project like the #OMN. The Open Media Network is about taking control of our digital paths and building a future beyond the #dotcons. If we want a truly decentralized internet, one core message is that we need to support ActivityPub-based paths instead of getting fooled by corporate-backed “alternatives” like #Bluesky.

Join the Fediverse today: https://fediverse.observer/ It’s time to reclaim the #openweb to build digital spaces that work for people, and the social change challenge we so urgently need.

One thing is clear, you can and need to walk away from the corporate #dotcons.

The Tools We Use Shape the Activism We Create

For the last ten years, activism has been trapped in a paradox: we speak of grassroots change, yet we reach for #dotcons and #geekproblem tools built for control. The digital infrastructure we rely on is dominated by top-down, vertical structures, reinforcing the very power dynamics we claim to be resisting. Meanwhile, the horizontal tools, the ones that foster collaboration, openness, and true grassroots organizing, sit unused at the bottom of the toolbox.

This isn’t just a tech issue; it reflects how activism itself is structured. Most organizing still happens through #closed, opaque affinity groups, mirroring the exclusivity and hierarchy of the systems we seek to dismantle. The language of activism, whether framed in utopian peace and love or rigid revolutionary rhetoric, too often masks this blunt reality. In truth, much of what passes for activism today reproduces the same centralized power structures, just with different slogans.

Yet, we live in one of the most open and radical times for building real alternatives. The tools for horizontalism exist. The challenge isn’t a lack of technology or platforms, it’s a failure to break free from ingrained habits of control and gatekeeping. The real work isn’t just about using better tools; it’s about shifting how we organize. Transparency, openness, and collective governance must move from the margins to the centre of activism. With the #OMN the seeds of the tool set are there, what’s missing is the will to develop and use it.

The Age of Global Militarism: How Veneration of the Military Spread—and Why it Matters

Militarism is on the rise globally. Arms sales are at all-time highs, and public confidence in the military has surged. Rather than waning in the post-Cold War era, military glorification has intensified, with political and cultural leaders idealizing soldiers, not for their professionalism, but for their heroism and sacrifice.

At a recent event hosted by the #Oxford University International Relations Society, Professor Ron Krebs explored the proliferation of militarism, its cultural underpinnings, and its consequences for democracy, security, and governance. He painted a picture of a world where the military is increasingly romanticized, and political leaders use this veneration to their advantage.

Militarism is a cultural force, where militarism is often framed as a policy issue, whether states use excessive force or employ the military as a tool of national strategy. However, Krebs argues that militarism is, at its core, a set of cultural practices. It is driven by a deep-seated romanticism about the military, which manifests in three ways:

  • Pacifist Militarism – Even among the left, there is a tendency to view the military as a necessary tool of national policy, even in peacetime.
  • Excessive Force – The normalization of military interventions, where using force is seen as a default option rather than a last resort.
  • Idealization of Soldiers – The emphasis on heroism and sacrifice overshadows discussions of military professionalism, effectiveness, or accountability.

This cultural shift is seen in the growing presence of the military in national celebrations, such as Independence Days. Military parades and displays have increased, yet there is little focus on mourning fallen soldiers. Instead, these events serve to reinforce the image of military power and national strength.

Why militarism has grown since the 1980, the decline of trust in government institutions, driven in part by #neoliberalism (the #deathcult), has paradoxically fuelled greater trust in the military. As faith in political leadership eroded, the military, seen as an aspirational and apolitical institution, became a pillar of stability.

This shift has created a dangerous dynamic:

  • Populists thrive on military imagery. They love dressing up in military uniforms, invoking military rhetoric, and surrounding themselves with soldiers.
  • Dead soldiers are useful political tools. They cannot challenge political narratives, making them perfect symbols for populist movements.
  • Public perception of military support influences policy. When the public believes the military supports a political leader, they are more likely to support military action. This feedback loop drives increased militarization across the political spectrum.

The populist-military conflict, despite their public admiration for the military, many populist leaders privately clash with military institutions. Donald Trump, for instance, has reportedly expressed disdain for military leadership behind closed doors. His approach follows a broader pattern. Populists support enlisted soldiers while attacking military officers, particularly those from elite institutions like West Point. This allows them to position themselves as allies of “the people” while undermining traditional hierarchies.

In countries like Poland, Hungary, and India, populist leaders have avoided direct military confrontations, allowing dissenting officers to step aside quietly. In the United States, however, tensions are escalating. If military leaders resist political co-option, they will likely face aggressive purges and public attacks. Brazil under Bolsonaro offers a clear example. Although he had military ties, his alliances were fragile. When officers opposed his leadership, especially during the COVID-19 crisis, he swiftly removed them.

The long-term consequences, militarism is a raw deal. While it leads to increased military engagement, it does not necessarily bring greater benefits for soldiers. Instead, it results in, the erosion of democratic institutions. As militarism rises, civilian governance weakens, and leaders increasingly rely on military authority to consolidate power. Diminished military effectiveness. When the military becomes a political tool, its strategic competence declines.

Personal loyalty to leaders replaces merit, weakening the institution from within. A dangerous feedback loop. If unchecked, militarism becomes self-perpetuating, reinforced by political narratives, public perceptions, and the military’s own internal culture. The military, when it “drinks the Kool-Aid” of its own infallibility, loses its ability to self-correct. The blurring of lines between civilian leadership and military authority erodes trust, making governance more unstable and unpredictable.

Conclusion, we are living in an age of global militarism. The question is not whether it will wane on its own, it shows no signs of doing so. Instead, the challenge is how societies will respond to its continued rise. Will democratic institutions push back, ensuring that the military remains professional and accountable? Or will the glorification of soldiers, the erosion of civilian oversight, and the manipulation of military loyalty accelerate the militarization of politics? As Professor Krebs warns, the veneration of the military is not only about national security, it is about the future of democracy itself.

Way late, but better than never

The chattering classes, eager to ride the wave of #mainstreaming, are finally pushing real rather than fake radical critique. These are the same people who built their careers within the #dotcons and #neoliberal highways, are now embracing narratives that grassroots movements have been fighting for decades. Sure, “better late than never,” but we should remain deeply sceptical of their radical awakenings, especially the #fluffy paths they carve out. After all, they’re still operating within the structures that created this mess in the first place.

There’s an element of performative rage at play here, condemning billionaires while continuing to use, benefit from, and reinforce the systems that empower them. Meanwhile, real alternatives, grassroots, decentralized, and open networks like #OMN, remain sidelined, unfunded, and ignored, still too far outside the “common sense” media narratives that shape any current #mainstreaming paths.

It’s not entirely useless to have media celebrities and polished pundits repackaging anti-billionaire sentiment. It does shift the Overton window. But it’s equally vital that we critique this and, more importantly, walk a different path, one that is messy, grassroots, open, and outside the control of the #fashernistas who are now finding the courage to speak up about what we’ve been saying all along. We are the ones with the lived experience. Now, where are the resources? That’s the question we should be asking our freshly radicalized “allies.”

And if their “solutions” come wrapped in top-down, controlled narratives? Well, piss on them, it helps with the composting. Thanks.

We don’t have time for more mess, the real challenge is ensuring that this moment doesn’t become another media spectacle to be consumed and discarded. How do we push the narrative in a way that resists being co-opted? How do we move beyond talking about change to embodying the real challenge they’re now beginning to acknowledge is needed.

This is a part of the #fluffy vs #spiky debate for the #OMN

The key takeaway of the current #mainstreaming is that we must actively build alternative structures—not just critique the existing mess. That means reclaiming digital and physical commons, supporting participatory democracy, and pushing back against #dotcons billionaire-driven tech oligarchy. The work with and #OMN grassroots media is exactly the kind of response we need to counteract this heist.

Are the spaces trust is built at scale, or do we need to create them from scratch?

The tension between control vs. trust in tech and society is a core issue that defines the success or failure of grassroots, open projects like #OMN and the #fediverse. The problem isn’t just technical, but deeply social: a struggle between hierarchical control (power over) and distributed, democratic trust (power within).

The #geekproblem keeps repeating, open projects fail because devs build control-based systems rather than trust-based ones. This results in endless cycles of #techchurn, producing #techshit instead of durable, humane tools. Metaphors matter, #datasoup or #witchescauldron (with the #goldenladle as the app interface) is a powerful way to frame how we should be thinking about tech, fluid, organic, adaptable rather than rigid, controlled, and top-down.

The approach is the solution, a key to a thriving semantic web is transparency, grassroots processes, and tools that reflect the diversity of people using them—not centralizing power in closed systems. Balance is crucial, the #openweb decays when #mainstreaming pushes over the commons, just as the #dotcons did with the early web. If we don’t actively mediate power, we lose everything to enclosure. Spreading power widely through open democratic governance, combined with a real culture of diversity and autonomy, is the best balance we’ve found so far. The problem we face is that this in our current thinking, this is anti “common sense”.

The #Fediverse is a useful case study, its strength is accidental, not only in standards, code, or power politics, but in good UX and processes. The biggest danger is internal infighting and distractions, often fuelled by ego, control struggles, and lack of process. The chaos of #mainstreaming serves a purpose, but it’s not a good one. It fractures movements, undermines trust, and ultimately hands power back to the gatekeepers.

What’s next, how do we actively resist these cycles rather than just watching them play out again? The #OMN path makes sense, but what’s the next tangible step to anchor it in practice? Are there any spaces left where trust can be built at scale, or do we need to create them from scratch?

The stress of living in the remains of the commons, boaters in the UK

The boater community is in rapid transition, with the pressures from gentrification, corporate control (#CRT), and online group dynamics (#failbook) colliding with a long-established scruffy, self-sufficient, and sometimes chaotic #liveaboard culture.

This can be seen in the #failbook London Boaters group which has shifted away from its activist roots into more of a “management” role, shaped by #NGO-style moderation and back-channel conversations with #CRT. The shift from grassroots resistance to passive mediation is a familiar story in many alternative and radical spaces, where energy gets siphoned away into “keeping the peace” rather than fighting for actual autonomy in what remains of our “commons”.

  • The cultural split is deepening: The divide between “scruffy” boaters and the more middle-class/posh newcomers is not just aesthetic; it’s a direct outcome of policy and economic pressures. And fear is creeping in, often a precursor to authoritarian responses.
  • The activist potential of #failbook is limited, big #dotcons groups rarely function as true organizing spaces, as they tend to get co-opted by NGO logic, mainstream narratives, and self-censorship.
  • The pressure cooker effect, with rising costs, more restrictions, and no real outlet for collective resistance, conflict is building. The lack of a strong, active counterforce means the CRT agenda is rolling forward fundamentally unchallenged.
  • Admin struggles, the LB admin team is focus on firefighting rather than any real direction. Without a broader base of radical, committed people in admin, the group moves to becoming a tool of pacifying #mainstreaming.

What’s Next? The current trajectory points to London’s waterways becoming sterile, managed, semi-privatized space, just like what’s happened in European cities. Unless a new, grassroots, real-world organizing effort is built outside #failbook, the “scruffy” boater culture may not survive in London.

Brainstorming London boater gentrification

Nationally we have the #NBTA which is an old school activist organising group, can we add up-to-date infrastructure and working practices. Would it be possible to restart a parallel #openweb platform (maybe something lightweight like a #fediverse instance) where people committed to actual resistance can organize without interference from NGO-style moderation? The boating community needs a space for counter-narratives and real discussion, rather than just a loop of buy/sell drama and soft social control.

What do you think, what’s the best way to push back while there’s still time?

For more on this LINK