The #openweb and #fediverse is anti-viral?

There is #mainstreaming criticism that the #fediverse has “anti-viral” features, as there is no central algorithm promoting specific content to go viral, but this is not entirely accurate. What this actually points to is a deeper issue within the social path of the #openweb itself. There is a social push in this “native” path, that “anti-viral” isn’t about a lack of features; it’s about how certain structures and behaviours are actively discouraging people with larger reach from thriving in these “native” spaces.

It’s a people to people web, so huge accounts can’t and don’t talk back, so can’t be “native” to this path. It’s not a question of choice, rather a question of path. It might be useful to think about this, as these conversations being #blind to thinking outside their current #dotcons path, and thus unknowingly bring it into the openweb reboot.

The problem with the talk of “Anti-Viral” is pushed up by current outreach. When people say that the Fediverse lacks virality, they are focusing on the absence of centralized algorithms, found on corporate platforms (the #dotcons). On those, algorithms drive engagement by amplifying sensational and emotionally charged content, at the cost of meaningful discourse and ethical considerations. In contrast, the Fediverse is praised for being different, more community focused, more human scale, and more about interaction rather than manipulation by algorithms, however, this is still a perspective missing a crucial point.

What we are actually seeing is that the Fediverse has developed social norms and features that end up pushing away people who “go viral” or have large followings. The problem isn’t just that the platform lacks virality; it’s that it lacks the infrastructure and culture to support people with large followings in a way that feels sustainable and meaningful. Large Accounts don’t thrive, by design.

The #openweb and #fediverse are built on the principles of decentralization and #DIY community, which are fantastic for fostering small, intimate interactions. However, this structure makes it difficult for larger accounts to function. Why? Because the social architecture is inherently hostile to large-scale influence based on one way broadcasting.

Large accounts can’t engage meaningfully with their followers in a people-to-people web. When you have thousands of people interacting with your posts, it becomes impossible to engage in a way that aligns with the native path that is part of the code of the #fediverse.
Without centralized moderation, content moderation is a community effort. This can mean that people who attract controversy, whether deserved or not, increase the instance workload, creating a practical culture that is inhospitable to “big voices” paths and agendas.

The “People-to-People” Web is set up to favour small-scale interactions and communities over larger, more influential voices who are more normally broadcast media focused. This is both good and bad, yes it can be a problem when we think about the kind of impact we want the #openweb to have. In this, It’s not about changing the current path but creating parallel ones, the solution, we need to move beyond the #stupidindividualism of copying the microblogging of the #dotcons and think of balancing with “native” oprochs to media, the #indymediaback project is an example of this path, which we do need to take.

Broadcast media is not social media, we need to build out the Fediverse with this in view.

———————————–

The Myth of “Anti-Viral” Fediverse: A Path Problem, Not a Feature Problem

There is a common #mainstreaming criticism that the #Fediverse has “anti-viral” features—meaning it lacks a central algorithm that promotes content to go viral. While this may seem accurate on the surface, it actually points to a deeper issue within the social path of the #openweb itself.

The notion of “anti-viral” isn’t just about missing features; it’s about how the social structures and behaviors of the Fediverse actively discourage large accounts from thriving in these “native” spaces. It is a people-to-people web, which means that huge accounts—those with thousands or millions of followers—cannot meaningfully engage with people at scale. It’s not a matter of choice but of structural design.

This is important to understand because much of the conversation around “anti-viral” fails to step outside the #dotcons path. People coming from corporate social media unknowingly bring their assumptions with them, expecting the Fediverse to function in the same way.

What “anti-viral” really means, critics, focus on the absence of centralized engagement-driving algorithms—the kind found on corporate platforms (#dotcons). These algorithms prioritize sensational, emotionally charged, and controversial content to maximize user engagement. In contrast, the Fediverse is structured to be more community-focused, human-scale, and interaction-driven rather than manipulated by algorithms.

However, this framing misses a crucial point, the issue isn’t just about missing algorithmic amplification, the Fediverse has developed social norms and features that actively discourage large accounts from thriving. Large accounts don’t fail due to a lack of virality—they fail because the culture and infrastructure aren’t designed to support them.

Why large accounts struggle on the fediverse, the #openweb and #Fediverse are rooted in decentralization and #DIY community-building, which are fantastic for fostering small, intimate interactions. However, this same structure makes it difficult for large accounts to function, because:

The People-to-People Web Doesn’t Scale for One-Way Broadcasts, Large accounts cannot engage meaningfully with followers in a way that aligns with the native interaction path of the Fediverse.
If thousands of people interact with a post, it’s impossible to respond in a way that fits the small-scale, community-driven ethos.
Content Moderation Is a Collective Effort, Not a Centralized One, Without centralized moderation, controversial accounts create workload pressure on individual instance admins. More controversy = more moderation burdens, making the Fediverse structurally inhospitable to high-profile users.
The “People-to-People” Web Prioritizes Small-Scale Interactions, The architecture favours small, engaged communities over mass broadcasting. This is great for community resilience but limits the ability for larger voices to exist organically.

Beyond #StupidIndividualism: Creating Parallel Paths Instead of Copying #Dotcons

If we want the #openweb to have an impact, we can’t just copy the microblogging model of the #dotcons and expect a different outcome. The Fediverse doesn’t need to change its current path, but it does need to parallel paths that allow different media approaches to thrive alongside it.

One solution? #Indymediaback.

The #IndymediaBack project provides an alternative approach to publishing that isn’t locked into the “social media” framing of the #dotcons. Instead of trying to make the Fediverse work like Twitter, we need to build native, federated broadcast media that works within the #openweb values.

Broadcast Media ≠ Social Media. To build a thriving #openweb, we need to stop treating broadcast media and social media as the same thing. Instead, we should:

Develop media models that work at different scales rather than forcing one system to do everything. Support federated, trust-based networks where large voices can operate in ways that fit the architecture. Think beyond the “individual” model of content production—this isn’t about one person going viral, it’s about building resilient, collective media structures.

The Fediverse isn’t broken—it just isn’t designed for the kind of viral engagement that corporate platforms push. If we want large-scale influence on the #openweb, we need to build native alternatives instead of trying to force the wrong models onto it.

Mediating the prat’ish behaviour and #deathcult mentality

When alternatives bridge to #mainstreaming in our #openweb movement and the broader #dotcons landscape, we find ourselves confronting a troubling dynamic—a rise in prat’ish behaviour, characterized by ego-driven conflict, divisiveness, and resistance to meaningful change, this threatens to undermine the real progress we urgently need.

At the heart of this issue is the 40 years of #deathcult mentality—a mindset defined by #neoliberal values, the relentless pursuit of profit, and a shallow adherence to the mess of the current status quo. This mentality permeates not just the big tech giants, but also, unfortunately, seeps into our own #4opens movements, like the #fediverse, when we become entangled in reproducing their “common sense” paths.

The #deathcult is a useful metaphor to use, representing a blind adherence to systems that are actively destroying our planet, eroding our communities, and undermining our humanistic values. When we speak of current #mainstreaming as a killer problem, we are talking about this neoliberalism, and that while this is not a part of our culture, it feeds into it. It’s not only a problem with “them”—the dotcons—but is also reflected within our movements. Even in the openweb and #fediverse, spaces built to resist such values, we see tendencies toward this #mainstreaming creeping in, the huge influxes of liberals, bring the replications of patterns of hierarchy, exclusion, and competition, even as they claim to oppose them.

We need practical steps to mediate this and move to a constructive path:

Embrace radical honesty and reflection, we need to start with radical honesty about our own roles in perpetuating the problems we face. Are we unconsciously replicating the patterns of the #dotcons? Are we engaging in excluding grassroots native paths by that prioritize ego over community? Reflecting on these questions is crucial.
Promote transparent and open dialogue by creating spaces both online and offline for open and honest communication, like the #OMN. We need to move away from secretive, behind-the-scenes decisions and instead encourage a culture of transparency where disagreements are aired constructively. Use the #4opens (Open Data, Open Source, Open Standards, and Open Process) as guiding principles helps us pick better tools for this.
Encourage diversity of thought and approach, let’s challenge the #mainstreaming impulse by embracing a diversity of thought and approaches. Different strategies and solutions flourish, even if they seem unconventional or counter to prevailing norms. On the progressive path, encourage people to experiment, fail, and try again without fear of ridicule or exclusion.
Use shovels and compost as metaphors for action, instead of shovelling dirt on each other’s efforts, we need to shovel it into the compost heap—taking what doesn’t work or what has failed and turning it into fertile ground for new growth. This means consciously choosing to see conflict and disagreement as opportunities for transformation rather than threats.
Reject the #deathcult mentality, that is deeply ingrained but not unchangeable. Reject the idea that we must always be in competition, that progress is a zero-sum game, or that only the fittest deserve to survive. Instead, let’s balance cooperation, mutual aid, and community over profit, power, and exclusion.
Build real alternatives, not only #FOSS copies, many of our attempts to build alternatives have, so far, merely replicated the models of the #dotcons. It’s time to balance this copying of systems we oppose and instead start to create native alternatives, there are meany good histories we can build from, an example #indymediaback is more truly embodied in the principles we value.

Composting this mess, we need a way to mediate the prat’ish behavior and the pervasive #deathcult mentality. We cannot afford to be the ones saying, “Now is not the time.” To those who say this, I say: Get off your knees, lift your head, and look at the mess we have made. It’s time to confront this problem head-on and work hard to compost it.

If we are to get anywhere with the messy #openweb reboot we need to be nice when calling prats, prats, do it a lot, but try and keep this #fluffy

UPDATE: this is a difficult path, will use this space to LINK to the problem resources:

https://fediverse-governance.github.io/images/fediverse-governance.pdf this report is focused on #NGO #fashernista and to a lesser extent #geekproblm, the is useful information from this limited view path.

https://infrastructureinsights.fund the outreach text on this is nice, but look at who makes up the Review Board and you see the funding at best is poured down the drain, and, at worst, will misshape the #openweb native path.

And meany more, to help post links in comment for me to add and comment on, thanks.

Ideas to build communities on this #KISS path please

To shift society away from heads down worshipping the #deathcult to lifting our heads towards simple sustainable, open, and cooperative change and challenge we need. To push this change information alone is insufficient; instead, we need to focus on fundamentally transforming lifestyles, habits, and world-views, the change, requires more than just intellectual understanding—it requires emotional engagement, experience, and sometimes, unfortunately, the pain that comes from learning the hard way.

The challenge, short-term vs. long-term thinking, is a barrier of our collective prioritizing short-term comfort and stability over long-term solutions. This mentality impedes the adoption of generational, sustainable approaches that address the deeper systemic issues we face. With the shrinkage of comfy spaces, the “comfy majority” could, paradoxically, be motivated for serious change. As the pressures mounts, the #mainstreaming can become more receptive to alternative paths.

There is an obverse need for this paradigm shift, beyond patching, fundamental rethinking of how we organize society, economy, and technology. To a focus more on inclusive and open principles like 4opens and #OMN. The #4opens (open data, open source, open standards, and open processes) and the OMN (Open Media Network) represent a path for inclusive, decentralized, and transparent native networks. An easy path to take, as these concepts are already at the core of the open-source movement, which powers much of the digital world.

To take this path, we need to emphasize avoiding exclusionary and rivalrous practices, advocating for a more healthy balance of cooperation over competition. This requires finding common ground and shared interests across the current social mess, to take us on the path for building resilient, cooperative networks. There is a strong role for narrative, exemplified by the hashtags’ story. A shared narrative, organized around common radical hashtags, can be used to build unify diverse groups and drive change. This story needs to be grounded to avoid becoming just another layer of noise in the current “mess.” the path needs to make #mainstreaming uncomfortable, by making these narratives “dirty” and uncomfortable, the aim is to highlight the flaws in current systems and make alternatives more visible and attractive.

This path need to balance the political and practical. An example of this is that while recognizing the importance of the #PGA (People’s Global Action) hallmarks—anti-capitalist, anti-patriarchal, anti-authoritarian principles—these need to be introduced slowly into projects, given their strong anarchist roots and thus political nature. This balance between pushing practical solutions and maintaining a political critique is crucial. With this in mind, we need to keep definitions loose to hold pathways flexible, thus acknowledging that society is inherently messy and that a rigid approach is unlikely to succeed. This flexibility allows for a mix of passion, diversity, and common sense to guide the evolution of new paradigms.

Practical steps and considerations are core to cultivating emotional engagement. Since information alone isn’t enough, we need to focus on creating experiences, stories, and communities that engage people emotionally. This could involve storytelling, art, technology and activism with meany forms of expression that make the new paradigm not just intellectually appealing but also emotionally resonant.

There are meany paths to do this, examples would be working on concrete projects that embody the #4opens principles, like #OGB #OMN #makeinghistory and #indymediaback. By demonstrating that these alternatives are not only viable but also superior paths in aspects, we can build early adopters and gradually build momentum. This will foster trust and cooperation, this trust is a critical ingredient for the kind of decentralized, cooperative systems we need to make happen. This path needs to focus on building networks where trust is cultivated through transparency, accountability, and shared values. Yes, there will be mess, this is normal, but let’s keep our focus on the #KISS path.

Ideas please for how to build communities around this path. The approach is addressing the deep-rooted issues of our current economic and social mess in a thoughtful and multi-faceted way. By pushing for open, cooperative, and emotionally resonant alternatives, we can try to lay the groundwork for a shift to more sustainable and equitable societies. The challenge is immense, practical actions with a compelling narrative, and remaining adaptable and inclusive paths, there is potential to change and challenge for meaningful change.

The #openweb – Escaping the Grip of the Algorithm

A fluffy view of the path, with a touch of spiky

The concept of the “good society” is the most socially profound questions we can ask, especially at this moment of history. When we face the overlapping crises of climate change, political instability, and extreme economic inequality, the question of what constitutes a “good society” becomes urgent and pressing.

There should be an obvious view that there is a need for a real change of path, to address the severe social, political, and environmental mess we have made of our time, we need more than just incremental change—we need a fundamental shift in how we think about and act in society. This involves rethinking our economic, political, and social systems in ways that enhance the freedoms and well-being of the majority, rather than concentrating wealth and power in the hands of a few.

This path leads us to break from the current #stupidindividualism of #deathcult worship to walk a very different “good society”. Not the current #mainstreaming one of the minimalist state advocated by #libertarians, nor the highly constricted state envisioned by #neoliberalism. Instead, we have options, the #fluffy path of rejuvenated European social democracy or a new American progressive capitalism—a twenty-first-century version of the Scandinavian welfare state. Or the more #spiky path of #openweb native anarchism or #4opens metadata driven socialism.

What we cannot do is live in the #neoliberalism that has dominated the political and economic landscape for the past 40 years, with the concentration of wealth and power among the nasty few eroding the lives of the nicer meany, with resulting undermining of democratic institutions and social bindings. Our current path, claims to promote “free markets,” has been lying to us, imposed new rules for the benefit of the wealthy and powerful, and socializing losses to the meany. The 2008 financial crisis, where governments bailed out banks with taxpayer money, while the bankers themselves reaped enormous profits, is a prime example of this. This led to economic inequality, political corruption, and a loss of faith in social democratic paths. It is a road to fascism at worst and ecological and social break down at best, please let’s step away from this mess.

On the fluffy path, there is a role for government, a role to play in creating a “good society.” This involves using the economic system to provide people with the resources needed to open the range of options available to them in life. This, in turn, enhances their freedom to act and live up to their potential, its basic humanism. This path, would address the deprivations faced by those with low incomes, ensuring access to basic needs like healthcare, education, and housing. The assumption that economic rights and political rights are inseparable is core to this path. That freedom can be achieved when people have the economic security to exercise their political rights.

The conception of “freedom” promoted by neoliberal thinkers like Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman led us down a dangerous path. While they argued for “free markets” and minimal government intervention, in practice, this restricts freedom for the many while expanding it for the few. The deregulation of markets and the reduction of taxes on the wealthy leads to a concentration of power that threatens the foundations of the #fluffy social democracy path. If we stay on this path, it will lead us to a twenty-first-century version of authoritarianism, where advances in science and technology are used to surveil and control us. In this Orwellian scenario, truth is sacrificed to power, and the freedoms of the majority are eroded.

What would a path to a “good society” look like, prioritizing the well-being and freedom of the many over the wealth and power of the few? From a #spiky view, this would need fundamentalist change that frees us to take very different paths. There are seeds for this in the #OMN #OGB #makeinghistory and #indymediaback etc. For people who doubt, the two paths, projects, will work fine at the same time, many people push the #fluffy path, with its commitment to social democracy, progressive capitalism. The spiky path will work as a balance to this, and maybe replace it if people can get their act together, it’s up to people and communities to decide which path to take in the end.

We are in a global, intellectual, and political war, the paths we take now will determine whether we move towards a just and equitable society, or whether we continue down the path of inequality and authoritarianism, which will lead to #climatechaos, death and displacement. It’s good to remember that the good society provides for the needs of all its people, enhances their freedoms, and ensures that democracy and justice are more than just “chatting class” noise. Let’s please take a different path https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

Post-Modernism Influence on Social Movements

Leaving the fig leave of dead philosophies covering #liberalism and #neoliberalism, gives cover to continue ideological works, this mess masks and hides insidious agendas. By removing these fig leaves, we can see, understand and dismantle the mechanisms of power they obscure.

I have talked about this, a lot, let’s try one more time. The lingering #zombie of post-modernism and its influence on social movements and #mainstreaming anti-ideological “common sense”, despite being very much dead in most intellectual circles, continues to exert ongoing influence on thought. This lingering specter is not only academic debate but a tangible and invisible force that shapes ideologies, policies, and actions. Understanding the ramifications of post-modernism is a path to addressing the current societal mess and dismantling the layers of deception that obscure the nature of #liberalism and #neoliberalism.

The legacy of post-modernism, emerged in the mid-20th century as a reaction against the certainties and grand narratives of the progressive modernism with the denial of objective truths, embracing relativism, and deconstructing power and knowledge. While this philosophical approach did provide insights and can be used to challenge oppressive systems, with its embrace and twining with the #neoliberalism of the last 40 years it pushed a lot of the current mess, of pervasive skepticism and cynicism that undermined the path of collective action and coherence in social movements.

The Perils of Post-Modernist Relativism. Erosion of Truth: Post-modernism’s insistence on the relativity of truth has eroded the foundation of factual discourse. In a world where all narratives are equally valid, distinguishing between reality and fiction becomes opaque, creating fertile ground for misinformation and manipulation, as any attempt to assert objective truth is met with suspicion and relativistic counterarguments. This is the mess of our use of the #dotcons
Fragmentation of Social Movements: By emphasizing the multiplicity of perspectives and identities, post-modernism pushes the current fragmentation of social movements. While recognizing diverse voices is important, the lack of unifying visions leads to disjointed efforts that fail to achieve any substantial change. This fragmentation makes it possible for entrenched powers to maintain the status quo, as there is no cohesive opposition to challenge and change them. The mess we work in.
Depoliticization and Inaction: The post-modern emphasis on discourse and representation over material conditions and collective action leads to depoliticization. When activism becomes #fashionista shouting primarily about language and symbols rather than tangible change, it loses any efficacy. This shift from praxis to performative results in social movements that are about virtue signalling and status games rather than achieving concrete goals. The mess we are in today.
Liberalism has been a Fig Leaf for Imperialism: Liberalism, with its emphasis on individual freedoms and democratic values, serves as a fig leaf for imperialism. This is evident in foreign policies that justify interventionist actions in the name of spreading democracy and human rights. However, these interventions serve geopolitical and economic interests rather than the purported liberal ideals, leading to the exploitation and destabilization of other nations. The mess our apathy pushes over others.
Neo-Liberalism’s Economic Fig Leaf: Neo-liberalism uses economic theory as a fig leaf to conceal a conservative agenda that prioritizes corporate power and wealth accumulation over social welfare. Policies promoted under the cover of economic efficiency result in austerity measures, deregulation, and privatization, which harms the working class and marginalized communities while enriching the few. The mess we push over ourselves.

To move beyond the mess created by the undead philosophies which hides behind the fig leaves of liberalism and neoliberalism, we need a renewed commitment to social truth, solidarity, and collective action.

Reasserting Objective Truths: While acknowledging the complexity of reality, we must reclaim the importance of objective truths and evidence-based discourse. This involves resisting relativism and combating misinformation through critical thinking and basic media literacy. We need tools, shovels for this composting #OMN
Building Lose Unified Movements: Social movements need some unity without erasing diversity. This requires finding common ground and shared goals that can unite different groups in the pursuit of systemic change. Solidarity should be the cornerstone, enabling coordinated efforts that can actually challenge entrenched powers. We need federated p2p tools for this #OGB
Focusing on Material Conditions: Activism prioritizes material conditions and tangible outcomes over performative gestures. This means addressing economic inequality, environmental degradation, and social injustices through concrete policies and actions rather than symbolic acts. We need media for activism #indymediaback to build meaningful action.
Exposing and Dismantling Fig Leaves: By examining the fig leaves of liberalism and neo-liberalism, we can expose the motivations behind these ideologies and advocate for #grassroots alternatives that prioritize human well-being and ecological sustainability over #mainstreaming corporate profits and imperial ambitions. #makeinghistory is a #KISS tool for this.

The philosophy of post-modernism, despite its intellectual demise, continues to shape our “common sense” contemporary thought and social movements. To navigate this mess, we must compost the relativism and fragmentation it has pushed. By reasserting “objective” truths, building unifying movements, focusing on material conditions, and exposing ideological fig leaves, we can walk the path for a just, equitable, and sustainable future. It’s this simple, please try not to push prat down this path, thanks.

What can you do https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

Control in Tech Culture

The 20th century was marked by significant technological and scientific advancements, alongside violent conflicts. As we move through the 21st century, the nature of these conflicts is shifting. The struggle is increasingly between humanity and nature, with dire consequences if we continue down our current path. Environmental degradation and climate change are no longer side effects, but central challenges that must be addressed. We need to find paths to move off the current paths, there are assumptions that are #blocking this needed move, one is in technology and its assumptions.

This #geekproblem has been inherited from past era’s in our computer architectures and the broader tech culture that has an ingrained concept of control. This control, hardcoded into systems and frameworks, poses an unspoken problem within many geek paths. Addressing this issue is crucial for understanding the broader implications and possibilities of grassroots #openweb tech activism as a path out of the current social and technical mess.

The Control paradigm in tech, from the foundations of computing, control has been a central theme. Systems are designed to operate under strict protocols, ensuring reliability, security, and efficiency. This paradigm, while effective in technological contexts, is inadvertently extend into social dynamics within tech communities. Control in tech is not just about managing systems; it also shapes interactions, hierarchies, and decision-making processes.

Unconscious participation in control structures, in tech communities, is unconsciously embedded in social groups that perpetuate this control paradigm. It’s essential to recognize that this isn’t a personal failing but a reflection of broader cultural trends. The challenge lies in identifying and addressing these unconscious patterns to foster more open, collaborative, and equitable environments.

The Keep It Simple, Stupid (#KISS) principle is a valuable tool for analysing generalist issues within our shared cultures. By simplifying complex problems, we can better understand the dynamics at play and develop more effective solutions. Applying the KISS principle to tech activism helps to demystify the control paradigm and its impact on our communities.

This blog is dedicated to exploring alternative paths that we can take to address these issues. By grassroots #openweb tech activism to mitigate the destructive patterns of control and build more sustainable and equitable paths. To promote decentralized technologies to empower people and communities, reducing reliance on centralized control structures.

#4opens emphasizes the importance of open-source software, to encourages collaboration, transparency, and shared ownership and community building. We need to fostering strong, inclusive communities that prioritize collective well-being over hierarchical control. We need to shift to environmental stewardship and ecological consciousness in our tech development and usage, recognizing the interconnectedness of human and environmental health in the tools we use.

This path requires a fundamental shift in how we approach technology and control. By embracing the #openweb and grassroots activism, we can create resilient, inclusive, and sustainable technological systems. This is not just a technical challenge but a cultural and ethical one.

#OMN #indymediaback #OGB #makeinghistory #visionontv #4opens

The Path Beyond #Neoliberalism

With the onrushing impact of current climate and systemic crises, it becomes realistic to see that #neoliberalism, free-market orthodoxy and the pushing of minimal state intervention, is fundamentally an inadequate path that is ill-equipped to address #climatechaos and social challenges we face. This failure means a radical shift in perspective and approach is going to happen, with this we might need to shift our “common sense” to being something like “Revolutionary Realism.”

The current #mainstreaming of false promises of #Neoliberalism over the last 40 years has pushed the fundamentalist free market path as the engine of prosperity, wealth and efficiency. However, since the 2008 financial crisis, these promises have increasingly rung hollow. The empirical evidence, rising inequality, decreasing life expectancy, and environmental degradation, exposes the limitations and failures of this economic orthodoxy.

From our turn of the century Alt globalization movement, we have Mark Fisher’s concept of “capitalist realism”, which describes the pervasive belief that capitalism is the only viable economic system. This helps us to see that the invisible dogma has fostered a sense of fatalism, particularly on the left, where a resignation to critique and protest has replaced active efforts to envision and construct alternatives. This defeatism perpetuates the status quo, as it undermines belief in the possibility of systemic change.

There is a need for revolutionary paths in the imminent collapse of capitalism, contrary to the notion that capitalism is indestructible, we are witnessing its destabilization under the weight of its inherent contradictions and the accelerating climate mess. This realization should be pushing a shift from capitalist realism to revolutionary realism, to acknowledging the inevitability of capitalism’s decline and the necessity of preparing for what comes next.

The climate crisis is a catalyst, a primary driver of this transformation, from droughts affecting global trade to natural disasters disrupting economies, the environmental impacts of #climatechaos are compounding the systemic vulnerabilities. These disruptions necessitate a move towards a different way of organizing economic systems, this could be a controlled and planned economic system or more a balance of grassroots federated democracy.

State control of the economy is one path, historically, state intervention has proven effective in times of crisis, as seen during World War II and the COVID-19 pandemic. State control of the economy does not inherently mean totalitarianism; it can involve a balanced approach, with both top-down planning and bottom-up participation.

Effective planning is a path we might need to take, for managing resources and ensuring equitable distribution. This could involve simplifying economic processes, such as reducing the variety of consumer goods and localizing production to reduce dependency on international trade. Digital #4opens technology can enhance this planning by providing real-time #opendata and facilitating more responsive governance based on metadata as the signal to guide the economic and social flows.

Democratic Participation is a path to avoid the pitfalls of authoritarianism, any new system must incorporate democratic mechanisms, such as #OGB path of building the power of citizens’ assemblies, to legitimize state actions and ensure accountability. This grassroots participatory approach mitigates the risk of corruption and foster a sense of collective responsibility.

Practical steps for transition are free basics and maybe rationing if it’s needed. A key element of a new system would be the socialization of essential services, healthcare, housing, and food production, to ensure that everyone’s basic needs are met. Rationing of luxuries and non-essential goods can help to push some sustainability and equity on this mediation path.

Encouraging worker participation in decision-making using projects like the #OGB and perhaps supporting small businesses, as a social democratic path out of the current #mainstreaming, can humanize the economy and maintain a degree of market diversity to push the needed transition. This hybrid approach blends state control with “entrepreneurial” social freedom, making the path through the coming mess by balancing efficiency with innovation to shift our dogmatic illiberal common sense.

But fundamentally we need a cultural shift towards valuing sustainability, community, and collective well-being over the #stupidindividualism of hyper consumerism. This can be promoted through, empowering #DIY education, radical media (#indymediaback), and grassroots movements. There is a long history of this (#makinghistory) which we need to remind our selves about.

The transition from current #mainstreaming to a more sustainable and equitable system requires revolutionary realism, a pragmatic recognition of the imminent collapse of the current system and a proactive approach to growing its successor. This might involve embracing state control, and or fostering grassroots democratic participation, to push the cultural shift towards sustainability and collective well-being. Can we navigate the complexities of this transition to take the path to building a more resilient and just society is the most important question for our time?

Indymedia based on the #OMN framework?

How can we spread the understanding, for the need for rebooting #Indymedia. The #Indymedia network, once a vibrant platform for decentralized grassroots media, succumbed to internal and external tensions. Before rebooting the project, we should look at the factors that contributed to its decline so we can take a working path to a successful revival that avoids past pitfalls.

What were the reasons for the decline of #Indymedia and progressive altmedia in general? Internal Conflicts, tribalism and power politics lead to internal strife and power struggles fractured the unity of the network. Diverse views on direction with differing opinions on the project’s goals and methods led to fragmentation. External pressures from political and legal challenges, government surveillance and legal actions against activists and platforms. Technological changes with rapid evolution in technology and social media outpaced the network’s adaptability. Sustainability is a challenge to maintaining operational and financial sustainability. Centralization vs. Decentralization, this tensions was damaging between maintaining decentralized structures and the need for some level of organizational coherence.

The #IndymediaBack project to revitalize the Indymedia network, focusing on the principles that initially made it a powerful force in grassroots media, trust based publishing, doocemocracy, and anti-authoritarianism core paths. By learning from past mistakes and leveraging modern technologies, the project recreates resilient and effective media platforms.

The Role of #OMN (Open Media Network) framework is central to the reboot strategy, it emphasizes openness, collaboration, and decentralization, ensuring that the revived network adheres to its foundational principles while addressing previous shortcomings and #blocking behaviour.

What are the objectives of this reboot? Re-establishing and updating open publishing, to reinforce the commitment to grassroots publishing where anyone can contribute, ensuring diverse voices are heard. Strengthen decentralized structures by focusing on decentralized organization to prevent power concentration and promote local autonomy. Implement modern standards, with technological standards like #activertypub to enhance functionality and user experience. Avoid past mistakes, actively working to prevent tribalism and power politics through clear governance structures and messy consensus decision-making. Promoting sustainability by develop sustainable models for financial and operational support to ensure long-term viability.

Strategies for rebooting #Indymedia. Adopt #NothingNew policy by stick to the original workflows and processes while updating them to meet modern standards, maintaining the core ethos of the original project. Build affinity groups, form working groups to tackle specific issues and develop consensus on the path forward. Emphasize #4opens, with adhere to the principles of open source, open data, open standards, and open processes to ensure transparency and inclusivity.

Expected outcomes, a resilient and Inclusive Network, a decentralized, open platform that is resilient to internal and external pressures. Diverse and vibrant media content to shape a rich tapestry of media content reflecting a wide range of perspectives and voices. Sustainable operations, a model that supports ongoing financial and operational sustainability. Community-driven governance, a network governed by messy consensus, ensuring that it remains true to its grassroots origins.

In conclusion, #Indymediaback using the #OMN framework is a strategic move to revive a vital platform for grassroots media. By understanding the reasons for past failures and leveraging modern technologies and methodologies, the project builds a sustainable, decentralized, #FOSS and inclusive media network. This reboot is not only about restoring what was lost, but about building a resilient network that can adapt to future challenges while staying true to its founding principles.

Bad conversations in #FOSS and tech

A lot of our public discourse has reached the stage where it might be worth thinking about it as a mental health issue, and that after the “common sense” worshipping of the #deathcult for 40 years, this becomes escalating hard to mediate. This post is about a summing up of this thread https://www.reddit.com/r/foss/comments/1e5vhif/crisis_of_governance_in_foss_medieval_politics/ on Reddit where I posted the text of one of a blog posts on #FOSS and the need to move away from medieval governance.

The is very little if any constructive dialogue, instead we have #blocking, simply ignoring, participants selectively address certain points while neglecting others. This creates an incomplete dialogue and fails to engage with the actual scope of the argument. Example: If someone ignores the historical context and current challenges within FOSS governance structures, they miss why the proposed changes are necessary. Belittling involves dismissing or undermining arguments or concerns, which shuts down dialogue and discourage participation. Example: Dismissing the discussion of governance in FOSS as “unreadable” or “spammy” without engaging with the substance or argument. Nitpicking, focusing on minor details and errors rather than engaging with the main points, derails the conversation and prevent meaningful discussion. Example: focusing on correcting typos or minor factual errors without addressing the argument for the need for governance changes in FOSS projects. StrawMan, misrepresenting the argument to make it easier to attack, distorts the discussion and leads to unproductive debate. Example: Suggesting that advocating for more structured governance in FOSS is equivalent to demanding strict corporate-like control, which misrepresents the argument for more democratic and community-driven governance.

Reasons for these messy behaviours: Ideological differences, people have strong beliefs about what is “common sense” and react defensively to suggestions that change/challenge any of this existing, mostly blinded belief. This misunderstanding then feeds the growth of the lack of understanding of the historical context and the specifics of the proposed changes that then feedbacks misinformed critiques, end up building resistance to change. Yes, change is uncomfortable, and people resist it by dismissing or undermining new paths, ideas please? The style of communication can be off-putting and confusing for in and out groups, leading to reactions that focus on form rather than addressing any substance is a small problem.

Why this matters? There is a crisis of governance in #FOSS, Aristocratic hierarchies and monarchical leadership pushes the concentration of power among a few maintainers and leaders, this lowers community building and buy in. Medieval governance structures are medieval political systems, it’s obviously unfit for the modern world, let’s look at why we have this mess – with #neoliberal, individualism and its failures, #stupidindividualism breeds the focus on individualism, which undermines collaboration and community-driven efforts in FOSS. This fixation with market-driven development rather than community needs result on one hand in less innovative and user-friendly software, and on the other in #dotcons control and exploitation. Feeding the #techchurn and #geekproblem insular and exclusionary culture.

Addressing issues like this of ignoring, belittling, nitpicking, and straw man arguments that push back productive dialogue. What are the solutions to this current path, maybe, democratizing decision-making, the path of transparent and inclusive governance models like the #OGB to build community-concentric approaches, like #indymediaback and #makeinghistory. To make this work, let’s try shifting to focus on to community needs to balance the individuals ambition and market demands. Cultivate an inclusive culture that values diverse perspectives and considers different social, cultural, and economic paths.

Communication barriers, lead to a lack of awareness

The #fashernista driven paths, pushing aside grassroots and #openweb movements, is due to misalignment agendas. The #fashernists are driven by #mainstreaming agendas that end up co-opt grassroots initiatives, then systematizing them in ways that dilute their “original native” paths, intent and value. This mess making leads to #techchurn and a continuous cycle of superficial innovation that does nothing to address real issues at all.

This resulting #blocking of communication leads to a lack of awareness of people involved in these movements, understanding of the history and principles underlying the #KISS grassroots and #openweb paths. With the #fediverse, decentralization is a core principle, though it often leads to difficulties in coordination and collective decision-making. This in hand with the “common sense” #mainstreaming people’s resistances to adopting new models of governance and cooperation like the #OGB pushes the current mess and #techcurn mess we live in.

There are proposed solutions to this path, build and support authentic projects, like the #OMN and #OGB etc. To foster collaborative governance and inclusive decision-making, start with small-scale pilot projects to demonstrate the effectiveness of collaborative governance and build “test” decentralized development. Then use these projects (with federation) as models for larger initiatives, rinse and repeat, it’s a #KISS path. This leads to the cultivation of a community of resilience and nurtures infrastructure that is robust and adaptable, capable of withstanding pressures and disruptions.

Part of this path needs to challenge #mainstreaming narratives with alternative progressive media (#indymediaback) providing a counter-story, pushing this feedback loop to highlight successes and innovations within the grassroots and #openweb movements.

Also using the #4opens as a path to encourage critical engagement with #geekproblem and #dotcons projects, questioning their alignment with grassroots values and pushing for accountability and transparency to move people off these paths.

Let’s start embracing the composting of #techshit to turn the current mess into fertile ground for new #openweb growth and innovation. Let’s pick up our shovels and building the change and challenge that is so obviously needed, and please try not to be a prat, thanks.

“The work of the anarchist is above all a work of critique. The anarchist goes, sowing revolt against that which oppresses, obstructs, opposes itself to the free expansion of the individual being.”
— Emile Armand

What works?

What drives the rise of social justice movements and grassroots mobilization is simple: they begin locally. Movements grow from the lived experiences of people and communities directly affected by injustice – those with the motivation and need to bring about real change.

To help these movements expand and connect, technology need to be built to serve people, not control them. That means prioritizing open, decentralized networks like the #openweb and the #fediverse, that grow free, serendipitous communication. These digital commons give activists the tools to organize, share stories, and build collective power without being bound by corporate or state control.

Projects like the #OMN and #indymediaback are built with this ethos, tools for coordination, not domination. But movements also need historical memory. We need to document and preserve the history of activism, its tactics, its victories, its failures, to educate and inspire new generations. Understanding the struggles of the past helps today’s movements avoid repeating old mistakes and build on hard-won gains. That’s the work of the #makeinghistory project.

Yet we face the ever-present threat of co-optation, when activist groups shift their focus to chase funding or institutional legitimacy, losing their roots in the process. Staying independent and mission-driven is hard, especially in today’s hostile environment, but it has been done before, so it can be done again. If you value this work, support us here: https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

Activism thrives when there’s a balance of spiky and fluffy – bold direct action paired with strategic planning and long-term vision. Pragmatism is key: we must address urgent needs now, while laying the groundwork for lasting change.

Let’s be clear: the relationship between grassroots movements and capitalism is fundamentally antagonistic. Capitalism erases history. It ignores the material realities of class struggle, slavery, debt, violence, ecocide, and oppression. It breeds a culture of #stupidIndividualism and fuels the #deathcult we now call “common sense.”

In its place, we should seriously consider other paths like – socialism and anarchism – not as abstract ideals, but as practical socio-economic paths rooted in public ownership and collective decision-making. These models offer a chance to distribute wealth and power more justly.

Capitalism is collapsing under its own weight.

“We all know the system we live under is destroying itself.
So what comes next? Fascism or revolution?”

Radical change isn’t a dream, it’s a necessity. The #openweb, the language of hashtags, and the memory of past movements offer us practical tools to build collective paths, connect communities, and organize resistance. These are our counterforces to the algorithmic mess of #mainstreaming. We already have the tools. Now we need the will.

Serendipity and #Hashtags

Hashtags are ubiquitous online, at best they categorize content to find and join conversations on topics. The problem with current #fashernista hashtag usage is they reinforce individualism over collective action. This is an issue of #neoliberal “common sense” and the domination of #dotcons, prioritizing profit rather than change and challenge.

Serendipity is about the occurrence of events by chance, this provides a beneficially fresh perspective on hashtag use. By implementing hashtags in a way that fosters unexpected connections and discoveries, it transforms how they function as social tools. Yes, misspelled hashtags result in fragmented conversations, making it difficult for people to engage in coherent discussions. However, embracing these variations also leads to a more inclusive and dynamic categorization system. By allowing for misspelled hashtags to be recognized and grouped with their counterparts, we create a more robust and forgiving serendipity path.

In a federated system like the #Fediverse, and what is envisioned for the Open Media Network (#OMN), there is a tension between universal truths and messy, subjective truths. A federated path values diversity and decentralization, allowing for meany perspectives to coexist. This aligns with the concept of serendipity, where the focus is on connections and discoveries rather than rigid categorization.

The OMN address these issues by implementing word grouping flows, where different spellings or variations of hashtags can be grouped together to build cohesive category flows. This approach makes misspelled hashtags functional, thus addressing some of the fragmentation caused by individualistic usage. But the OMN project faces significant challenges in securing funding and overcoming internal and external obstacles. The difficulty in obtaining #FOSS funding highlights the broader issue of support for projects that prioritize open, decentralized, and community-focused approaches.

The use of hashtags is a progressive and critical perspective on technology and society. Think about neoliberalism (#deathcult) and consumer capitalism (#fashernista), promoting the ideals of the open web (#openweb) against the for-profit internet (#closedweb #dotcons). The interlocking hashtags tells a story that advocates, transparency, collaboration, and sharing in open-source development (#4opens).

Example Meanings:

#deathcult: Neoliberalism and its detrimental social and ecological impacts.
#fashernista: The trivialization of serious issues through consumerism and fashion.
#openweb: The original ideals of the World Wide Web.
#closedweb: The pre- and post-open web internet dominated by for-profit motives.
#4opens: Principles of transparency, collaboration, and sharing in open-source development.
#geekproblem: The cultural issues within the tech community, a strong tendency towards control and determinism.
#techshit and #techchurn: The negative consequences of constant new technological projects that fail to address any social issues.
#nothingnew: The question of whether new projects are needed or if existing ones should be improved.
#OMN and #indymediaback: Rebooting the altmedia projects on the open web.
#OGB: Open governance and the power of community decision-making.

For hashtags to be effective tools for social change, we need to shift the balence from individualistic to collectivist. This requires tech systems that accommodate human error and diversity of expression, while maintaining coherence and building community. The #OMN project is a promising approach by grouping variations of hashtags, but it faces significant challenges in implementation and support.

Let’s embrace a serendipitous view of hashtag to enrich conversations in the era of the #deathcult.