We have a lost generation, this is at the heart of the contradictions and confusion in the political landscape today. The liberal and left muddle, where elements of economic populism are shared across ideological divides, is something we’ve seen before, especially in the 1930s, when fascist movements co-opted working-class grievances to push reactionary nationalism.
Let’s look at some of this history, #Bannon, like the Nazi Röhm long before him, played a dangerous game by mobilizing working-class anger against liberal “elitists” but steering it toward nationalism rather than genuine class struggle. The difference is that Bannon, unlike the decedent Röhm, seems aware of how these power games play out, he’s studied history and applies these lessons to manipulate movements in favour of the #nastyfew pushing into power. The shared economic critique overlaps with parts of the left, but his solutions (corporate nationalism, authoritarianism) are the real danger. The question is: how do we make these distinctions clear to people trapped in the populist right-wing narratives? We need a strategy to cut through the confusion:
Recentre on Class Struggle (#KISS#classwar) by striping away the nationalist framing and refocus on economic realities: who actually benefits from policies? Who holds power? Expose how right-wing populists co-opt class anger but always serve capital in the end.
Expose the fake anti-establishment, Bannon claims to fight “globalists,” but his solution is just another form of “elitist” rule, corporate fascism, not worker control. The “anti-tech bro” stance is surface-level; fascists historically seek state-corporate fusion, not any real accountability.
Build a networked radical alternative, left populism needs to be clearer, bolder, and independent of liberal #NGO-driven paths and politics. We need historical grassroots movements like the #OMN to build this out.
Break through the media fog, #Mainstreaming and #dotcons push right-wing populism by treating it as an acceptable part of discourse rather than a threat. Use independent media (like #indymediaback) to reframe the conversation on more clear class terms.
The 21st Century Struggle is about climate, class, and collapse. This isn’t just about fighting fascism, it’s about surviving #climatechaos and social collapse. The solutions that emerge now will shape the next century. If we allow the hard right to set the terms, we end up in corporate #feudalism. If we organize and push a real alternative, there’s still a chance to shift to something better.
How do we sharpen this message so it cuts through the noise? What channels do you see as effective? We need working change and challenge #KISS
We do need strong metaphors, gardens, compost, pollination, is all about creating ecosystems of hope, rather than rigid, industrialized movements that always collapse under their own weight. Instead of chasing the big factory model of change, we need 100s of small, interconnected projects, cross-pollinating, sharing what works and what doesn’t.
The straitjacket of fear is real, and the left has been caught in it too, chasing purity, reacting rather than acting, and often forgetting to build. Memory holes swallow past successes, leaving us to reinvent the wheel over and over.
We need librarians, historians, and grassroots media makers, not just to archive, but to crystallize past wins into living, usable knowledge. This is how we compost failure into growth, instead of repeating mistakes.
Right-wing ideologies are based on fear.
Left-wing ideologies hope.
This is why grassroots media matters. The #OMN, #indymediaback, and radical digital commons aren’t just about publishing, they’re about seeding, nurturing, and spreading a counter-narrative of hope and action.
Let’s get the bees buzzing, and not just in isolated hives, but across a network of thriving gardens.
For the ones who can’t follow metaphors – let’s try lots of small left projects and document what dose and does not work.
#mainstreaming#liberalism has lost its way. For the past 20 years, many self-described liberals have spewed out bilge water disguised as “common sense.” But when pressure mounts, they reveal themselves as dogmatic and intolerant, almost as if they aren’t truly liberal at all.
How did we end up in this mess? The #deathcult, #stupidindividualism, and the rise of #dotcons shaped the dominant version of “common sense,” warping it away from collective care and into something narrow and self-destructive. It’s worth reflecting on this if we want to reclaim a liberal liberalism, rooted in genuine openness and social good.
In practice, we can compost this mess by focusing on #nothingnew paths. Two longstanding cultural projects already embody this, working in non-federated ways for over a century. Now, we can add technical federation to the mix, building on 5+ years of #ActivityPub rollout.
This gives us two powerful, #openweb-native paths forward:
Grassroots #DIY culture — Local, self-organized, and messy, but thriving outside corporate control.
Technical federation — Interconnected systems designed to distribute power and ownership.
Both of these paths lead somewhere meaningful:
#indymediaback (part of the #OMN project) to rebuild radical grassroots media.
#OGB (based on #EU outreach on #socialhub) to create open, federated governance.
These aren’t pointless projects, they’re a chance to break free from the suffocating grip of the #deathcult and build something resilient, human, and actually free.
Shall we pick up the shovels and start composting? 🌱
One of the tensions in the fight to build an alternative, sustainable future is the relationship between mainstream resources and seeding grassroots projects. The reality is STARK that grassroots movements need resources to survive and thrive, yet the act of receiving funding, if they can access it at all, drags them into the suffocating grip of #mainstreaming culture, where the radical edges are dulled and destroyed. So, how can conscious mainstream actors support grassroots movements without killing the radical energy that creates the value in the first place?
The answer to this mess making, lies in sharing resources in non-mainstreaming ways, a difficult leap for many, but an essential one. The only people who can truly be useful in sustaining #openweb paths are those willing to break free from the entrenched habits of top-down control, endless bureaucracy, and the need to polish everything into marketable, bite-sized pieces. So what does this non-mainstreaming support look like?
Unconditional funding: grassroots projects need funding without strings attached. Too often, funding comes with requirements that reshape the project itself, turning radical experimentation into pointless palatable, measurable outputs. True, useable support means trusting grassroots communities to know what they need and allowing them to allocate resources nimbly. #TRUST#opencollective
Trust-based relationships: A “native” healthier approach is to build long-term relationships with grassroots groups, listening to their needs and responding in an organic, flexible way. #TRUST#OMN
Decentralized decision-making: Bottom-up governance models, when funding flows to collectives, not charismatic individuals and figureheads building careers #KISS#OGB
Infrastructure, not ownership: A path that might work, rather than buying influence, mainstream actors can provide infrastructure, hosting, bandwidth, servers, physical spaces, without attempting to control the projects using them. Think of it as building bridges, not fences. #Fediverse instances
Amplify, don’t Absorb: Mainstream platforms and institutions need to amplify grassroots voices without assimilating them. This means using their reach to highlight native radical projects while at the same time stepping back to let those projects speak for themselves. No need to repackage the message, people can handle raw, messy reality. #indymediaback
This bridge building matters as the current mainstream is crumbling under the weight of its contradictions. As #climatechaos accelerates, as #neoliberalism fails to deliver anything but more suffering, people will look for alternatives. But if those alternatives are already swallowed and sanitized by the current mainstream, hope dims. Grassroots movements are the seedbeds of any real change, at best they hold the living knowledge of how to build differently.
Keeping the bridge in place isn’t an act of charity; it’s a basic #KISS survival strategy. The future will grow from the compost of the old world, and those willing to step off the conveyor belt of #mainstreaming and into the rich, chaotic soil of grassroots experimentation will be the ones who help plant the seeds.
In the era of #climatechaos, people #blocking social change are not just slowing things down – they are helping maintain systems that are driving social and ecological breakdown. The question is – what do we build instead? Different paths already exist. #4opens#openweb#OGB#indymediaback#OMN are examples of social tech trying to move away from the failures of #mainstreaming and towards more open, collective ways of organising.
But the path we are on, climate change, mainstream politics, and fear reveals a troubling pattern: in times of crisis, like #climatechaos, mainstream politics instinctively shifts to the right. It’s essential to understand the underlying role of fear in pushing this drift.
Fear is a powerful political motivator. Right-wing ideologies thrive on it, whether the fear stems from economic instability, cultural change, or national security threats. In the current path of accelerating climate breakdown, fears of environmental collapse, mass migration, and resource scarcity intensify are creating fertile ground for reactionary politics to grow.
Yet, an intriguing shift to a counter path is underway: the fading fear of socialism among the western bourgeoisie. For decades, socialism was the boogeyman used to justify capitalism’s worst excesses. But as socialist ideas gain legitimacy, especially among younger generations, that fear diminishes. This shift cracks open space to challenge and thus change the right’s dominance and revive radical real alternatives.
This opening offers a brief flowering of hope. By balancing collective, community-driven projects and advocating for systemic change, we can push back against the politics of fear. Movements like #OMN, #OGB, and #indymediaback are seeds of this potential, growing resilience, equity, and sustainability outside the #mainstreaming mess driving spectacle.
However, hope can be a dwindling resource. Every moment lost to inaction feeds the cycle of despair, reinforcing the right’s grip on public imagination. The urgency of #climatechaos means we can’t afford to waste time or the pointless distractions that #mainstreaming common sense pushes over us.
This struggle is a balance between fear and hope. Fear is the tool of the #deathcult, but hope lives in grassroots action. The future depends on whether we push fear to suffocate change or seize this fleeting opening to build something real — from the compost of what’s been lost all ready.
Best not to one of the prats, who #block this path, thanks.
This has been going on for more than ten years, I have been at the heart of this movement, at many of the steps, I meet defeatism and negativity. It’s frustrating, especially now, when the mainstream is visibly stepping away from the #dotcons and looking for a place to land. We should be building that landing space, but instead, we’re tangled in the wreckage of failed ideas and cynical inertia.
Yes, stupid fashionable ideas have failed again and again, but that doesn’t mean the basics no longer work. The #openweb grew from simple, powerful principles: decentralization, collaboration, and a belief that media should be in the hands of the people, not locked behind corporate walls. It worked then, and it can work now.
The #blocking wall, the #dotcons built to dam this flow, just might be crumbling, but I don’t think people realize just how much defeatist noise we had and still have to break through:
“Old tech. Nobody uses torrents anymore.”
“That’s been tried — it failed.”
“This is better, nobody’s interested in that.”
“You should be using XYZ instead. I have a better idea...”
It’s an endless cycle of negativity, driven by a #geekproblem that values novelty over function, and a #fashernista culture that chases trends rather than tending to the messy, necessary work of composting old ideas to grow something real. The #openweb tools still work, If we use them. The core tools of the #openweb are still powerful:
#RSS feeds for simple, open distribution.
#Torrents for decentralized, resilient file sharing.
#Fedivers networks like #Peertube, #Mastodon, and #Wordpress for publishing and connection.
Mesh networks and local-first tech to break dependence on centralized infrastructure.
None of these are new, that’s the point, they work. The failure wasn’t in the tech, it was in our inability to hold space against the relentless creep of the #deathcult. Reclaiming the compost heap is a first step, we need to stop chasing the next shiny thing and start digging through the muck. The #OMN, #indymediaback, and #4opens are all rooted in the idea that we can rebuild from what we already know works, not by reinventing the wheel but by getting our hands dirty and composting the failures into fertile ground for the future.
The defeatism is loud, but it’s not unbeatable. We’ve been here before. We know the way out.
Decentralize.
Publish.
Connect.
Trust the process.
We (re)build the #openweb one small, stubborn step at a time.
This post is about controlling the narrative, not letting the #nastyfew dictate the terms of engagement. Too often, we let them set the agenda, reacting to their every word instead of actively building the alternatives we need.
Their power isn’t just in what they do, it’s in how much space they take up in our minds and movements. We amplify their mess making when we obsess over their rhetoric rather than dismantling their actions. This is why we need composting, not fixating.
The #Fashionistas in Activism problem is real, when people latch onto whatever gets them attention instead of doing the hard, messy work of creating change. Chasing buzzwords, getting caught in endless reaction cycles, this is what keeps us stuck. We need to be the ones setting the agenda, not just replying to theirs.
Focus. Build. Compost the mess. That’s how we win.
In activism, the term “#fashionistas” captures individuals and groups, especially within #NGOs and advocacy organizations, who latch onto trendy causes or ideologies, not out of any commitment, but more to appear relevant and to align with the latest social currents. This is corrosive to meaningful change, reducing activism to performative gestures rather than a sustained struggle for justice.
Superficial engagement comes from, when they rush to adopt the language of trending movements (like #BLM, #MeToo, or #ClimateJustice) without committing to their radical roots. For example, after George Floyd’s murder, many corporations and NGOs posted black squares on #Instaspam as a symbolic gesture. But what followed? Few made concrete policy changes or redistributed resources to Black-led grassroots organizations. It was activism as aesthetics, empty gestures, rather than the systemic action that was called for.
Lack of authenticity, when organizations prioritize optics over substance, this breeds distrust. Consider the influx of NGOs claiming to champion digital rights but quietly partnering with Big Tech for funding. The grassroots developers working on genuinely decentralized platforms are left unsupported, while the NGO pointless/parasite class absorbs attention and resources, all while pushing and reinforcing the #deathcult paths they claim to oppose.
Mainstreaming, activism, loses its teeth when it’s tailored for palatability. Take the way climate #NGOs soften their language to avoid alienating corporate funders, pushing “net zero” narratives instead of demanding degrowth and direct action. By sanitizing radical demands, they reinforce the status quo rather than confronting the power structures driving #climatechaos.
Misaligned priorities, chasing trends, means resources get funnelled away from sustained struggles. For example, the fleeting attention on #Palestine waxes and wanes with media cycles, while groups doing year-round solidarity work scrape by with minimal support. #Fashionistas flock to hashtags when they’re hot, then move on, abandoning communities who still face oppression once the spotlight fades.
Reactive rather than proactive, when #fashionistas are caught chasing the next big thing rather than strategizing long-term solutions. Think of the explosion of interest in #openweb media during political unrest, a real issue, yes, but one that reveals the broader failure to build #4opens, community-run digital infrastructure proactively. The #OMN project exists precisely to address this, but it’s hard to gain traction when attention constantly flits to the crisis of the moment.
Rectonery, the most toxic aspect of fashionista activism is its tendency to reinforce the systems it claims to oppose. When #NGOs adopt radical language but stay within #mainstreaming paradigms, they create an illusion of progress. For instance, diversity initiatives in tech are often superficial, leading to token hires rather than dismantling structural racism or addressing the #geekproblem that keeps tech culture hostile to outsiders.
How do we compost the #fashionistas mess? The answer lies in prioritizing authenticity, long-term commitment, and meaningful engagement. This means, centring grassroots voices by funding and amplify people working on the ground, not just polished, and mostly pointless #NGO campaigns.
Rejecting mainstreaming, by being willing to alienate power on radical paths. This changing of path needs us to building infrastructure, like #OMN and #indymediaback to grow autonomous spaces outside corporate control. Historical awareness, matters, to remember our past struggles, rights and freedoms were won by collective action, not #PR campaigns.
What, we don’t need, is more buzzword-chasing #nonprofits. We need shovels, compost, and a commitment to grow something real from the ruins of the #deathcult. It’s not glamorous, but it’s the only path to lasting change. Let’s start digging.
In the bigger picture. The best revenge against the #nastyfew is simple: don’t talk about them at all. What fuels them is attention — the endless cycle of fixating on their every move. Unless it’s absolutely necessary, keep the focus on the ideas and the collective struggles, not the individuals causing the mess.
Talk about the systems, the structures, in the US the republicans, not the disruptive few seeking to derail the conversation.
Ignoring the #nastyfew is the most powerful revenge you can take. Stay grounded, stay collective, and keep it #KISS.
My experience of tech over the last 20 years has been like watching the same old weeds sprout up in the cracks, because the #eekprobem keep clinging to the illusion of control. But yeah, every bit of rot turns to soil eventually – as long as we keep digging, the roots of something real can break through. Time to turn the pile!
In activism and grassroots media, you inevitably face an ongoing, unpleasant truth: when pushing against #mainstreaming and the inertia of the #deathcult, bad faith comes at you like a storm. Your best, and often only, defence is to hold onto your good faith. But good faith alone isn’t enough, we need shared tools to compost the rot, turn the muck of broken movements and failed tech utopias into fertile soil where new paths can grow.
That’s where the Open Media Network comes in. The #OMN isn’t just another pointless tech project, it’s a living, breathing attempt to bridge the gap between technology and society, providing a trust-path, decentralized platform built with the #4opens. It doesn’t try to solve problems from above but empowers people to build, moderate, and nurture their own grassroots networks from below, to shape and reshape flows of information. It’s about composting the old, failed models, not simple #techchurn replicating them.
The divide we need to bridge is #blinded pragmatism vs. social understanding. Too often, conversations around tech and social change get stuck in a loop. On one side, pragmatists push for immediate, concrete solutions, get the app working, ship the code, solve the surface problem. On the other, social thinkers argue that tech is inherently social, that ignoring the human context just perpetuates the mess.
Take #ActivityPub, a powerful protocol, but without a grounding in human trust networks, it risks recreating the problems of centralized social media. Or the rise of decentralized platforms flooded with reactionary and far-right content, a direct result of ignoring the need for human, community-driven democratic moderation and governance paths.
The #OMN is outside this loop. It acknowledges the pragmatism of building functional tools while insisting that those tools be shaped by, and in service of, grassroots communities. The five core functions shape the growth of simple tools with complex outcomes. The OMN is built on five core functions, deliberately minimal to avoid tech bloat and keep the focus on human networks:
Publish: Share objects (text, images, links) into a stream.
Subscribe: Follow streams from people, groups, hashtags, etc.
Moderate: Push/pull content, express preferences, and comment.
Rollback: Remove untrusted historical content from your flow.
Edit: Adjust data and metadata on content you have access to.
These simple actions, combined with human moderation, allow complex ecosystems to grow organically. You can shape your information flow, curate trustworthy content, and build collective knowledge, all while being able to remove what doesn’t serve the communities.
The crew needed is good faith in action, a crew committed to holding good faith, even in the face of bad faith pushback. People willing to pick up shovels, get dirty, and start composting. This isn’t about idealism; it’s about grounded action, learning from past projects like #indymedia and #Fediverse experiments, using what worked, and discarding what didn’t.
What is need:
Builders: Coders who understand that tech is just a tool, not a solution.
Moderators: People who know the value of careful curation and trust networks.
Storytellers: Those who can document, explain, and inspire others to walk the paths.
Bridge-builders: Activists who can connect different communities and facilitate cooperation.
This work isn’t glamorous. It won’t get you VC funding or a keynote at a tech conference. But it will lay the groundwork for something real, a decentralized, people-powered network where communities control their own narratives and relationships.
The future is a wild garden, not a walled garden. This path is a chance to build the #DIY, grassroots semantic web we’ve been dreaming of. Not another monoculture tech project, but a resilient forest of interconnected communities, each shaping its space while being part of a larger whole. It’s not about “scaling” in the #mainstreaming capitalist sense, but about growing deep roots and wild branches.
By supporting this we invest in people who reclaim digital experiences, where information is nurtured and composted into new possibilities, and where bad faith can be met not just with good faith, but with networks strong enough to withstand and outgrow the rot.
Join the paths. Let’s build this together. It’s time to start shovelling.
In the current #openweb reboot, let’s look at what makes sense, and let’s look at this from the prospective of collective dynamics, not individual blame. The focus is on mapping the social landscape, understanding the patterns of dysfunction, and then figuring out how to break through those blockages. The idea of switching between #spiky and #fluffy approaches as needed is powerful, rejecting rigid ideology in favour of practical, responsive action.
Making the #blocking visible is essential. So much of the stagnation in #openweb and activist spaces comes from hidden blockages, unspoken fears, entrenched power dynamics, and the quiet creep of #mainstreaming logic. By pushing these things into the light, we can compost them, rather than letting them fester underground.
Using history as a guide, leaning on what’s worked before, but staying flexible enough to shift tactics, should feel like the only sustainable way forward. If we only do #fluffy, we get captured by the #NGO mindset. If we only do #spiky, we burn out or implode. But if we consciously weave both together, we might actually build the resilience we need to grow new paths through the wreckage.
It’s almost like we need a cultural practice of “tending the compost”, regularly sifting through the mess, pulling out useful bits, and turning it over so new life can emerge. And maybe that practice itself could be a form of governance for grassroots networks, an ongoing, collective process of sense-making and recalibration.
What do you think? Can this idea of “compost tending” as a cyclical, community-driven process be something we intentionally build into the fabric of #openweb projects?
Funding structures are built for #NGO nonsense, not grassroots projects where actual value is created. The #OMN, #indymediaback, and #OGB challenge this, but funders can’t grasp it because they don’t understand value outside institutional framing.
Fixing the funding #blocking – funders need to THINK, not just UNDERSTAND. Right now, they “understand” in the framework of existing institutions, which means they miss the metaphor-driven, emergent nature of projects like the #OMN. Our #Hashtag story is for THINKING, not passive understanding, its purpures is a useful tool to push the conversation forward, not dogma to be accepted or rejected. Treating the hashtags as fixed truths leads to #blocking the needed real change.
We need to break out of this cycle – 20 years of #techshit – which is still strengthening the gatekeepers, we can’t keep playing by these rules. The biggest realization here is that common sense truth and metaphor are not the same. Funders, #NGOs, and the #mainstreaming crew think in terms of common sense fixed truths, while real change comes from dynamic thinking. That’s why they keep failing us.
With the hard shift to the right in US tech, Europe can no longer afford to sit idly by in tech development. The myth of neutrality has always been a convenient lie – if we don’t actively counterbalance this hard right shift – we risk watching the #FOSS and #openweb movements collapse, taking with them a core pillar of our democratic and digital future. These movements aren’t just about code; they are one of the foundations of a fair, open, and just society. So it should be easy to say now is the time to step up, not stand by.
For the past five years, I’ve been applying for funding for the #OMN native #openweb projects -projects rooted in real, grassroots needs rather than the normal hidden common sense corporate gatekeeping and academic abstraction. The problem? #NLnet and the wider #EU funding landscape lack people who can actually judge #FOSS projects in this real space. The results are predictable, at best we end up with:
Bureaucratic checklists
Conservative, incremental funding
Projects chosen based on who fills out forms best, not who builds the tech we actually need.
So the real question is has this changed? Because right now, I am seeing the same mistakes repeating. We have proposals:
#MakingHistory – Restoring a radical, federated approach to storytelling and digital archiving.
#IndymediaBack – Rebooting independent media with the lessons of past failures baked in.
#OGB (Open Governance Body) – A vital step toward decentralised, federated governance -something we desperately need to keep tech in the hands of communities, not corporations.
The #makeinghistory one is in process with #NLnet at the moment. These proposals should not be niche, should not be afterthoughts, they should be a part of the core of NGI funding strategy as the checks and balance on the bigger tech projects. That is if the EU is to be at all affective about counterbalancing the rightward shift in global tech.
So let’s ask again – Has #NLnet and the #EU stepped up this time? Are we funding the future, or are we just shuffling papers while the #deathcult eats our humanistic heritage and the last remains of the #openweb? The risk, as always, is that the funding just shifts to the next well-polished pitch deck, rather than the real, messy work of change. But hey, one can but prod – because without that, nothing moves at all.
UPDATE01: they did not last time
UPDATE02: the #makeinghistory is in at the moment, but not heard anything back, so not looking good for progressive European values in tech?
Power in tech isn’t neutral, and our issue over the last 20 years is that we have allowed the #dotcons to hoarded and weaponised it. The answer to our failer isn’t to retreat or seek more “ethical” enclosures, it’s to reclaim our power through radical, commons-based networks like #indymediaback and the #OMN.
This argument is #nothingnew, we don’t need endless reinvention, we need continuity. The #openweb isn’t about mimicking #dotcons; it’s about breaking their privatisation model and returning power to collective hands. Hashtags, metadata, and federated networks help on this path, but the real strength is social, not just technical.
Examples of this: #Indymediaback isn’t just a project, it’s a continuation of a proven model that worked before the #dotcons stole the narrative. It was a social technological project embedded in radical movements, used real-world trust systems, and functioned outside of state/corporate control. Rebuilding it isn’t nostalgia; it’s a practical step toward rebalancing power.
We need ongoing arguments about power, opting out or running to “better” #dotcons just dodges the issue. Power is always there. The question is who holds it, and for what purpose? Right now, the #dotcons wield it for social control, profit, and policing. The #openweb flips that, if we build it as a “native” path.
The fight isn’t about making people “feel good” about tech choices, it’s about removing power from enclosures and putting it back into the commons. That’s the difference between real struggle and #fashernista ethics. The latter is comfortable. The former matters.
Paranoia is one of the biggest blockers in alt-tech and radical spaces. It breeds mistrust, isolation, and internal sabotage, making collective action impossible. While some caution is necessary, too much just feeds into stasis and control, mirroring the systems activists are trying to break away from.
The #4opens is a direct antidote to this. Transparency counters paranoia, when decisions, processes, and networks are open, there’s less space for suspicion to fester. Trust isn’t built by secrecy but by consistent, open, and accountable action.
The irony is that a lot of these paranoid actors think they’re resisting control, but by shutting everything down, they’re just self-sabotaging. The solution isn’t more walls—it’s more flows. The #4opens provides the framework to move past the paranoia blockade and rebuild trust in practice, not just theory.
The victimhood narrative is often a trap, weaponised by the right and co-opted by the #fashernista left to shut down alternatives. It can be used as a tool of control, not liberation. Composting the mess, in part, by refuse to play their game, victimhood, is in part real and in part is used to create moral authority without real action. If we engage on those terms, we just get dragged into performative battles.
Expose the power dynamics, by asking who benefits from this? In the negative sense, it’s often gatekeepers who want to control the narrative. NGOs do it for funding, #dotcons for engagement, and #mainstreaming activists for status. A path out of this is reclaiming direct action, which sadly meany in the left abandoned, and the right picked up. We need to take it back, not through reactionary purity politics, but by actually doing the work outside their controlled spaces. A healing path is shifting from identity to process, the current model is all about who is speaking, not what is being built. That’s a dead end. We need #4opens process-driven organising, not personality cults or gatekept “safe spaces.” Make failure visible, one of the biggest weapons against alt movements is pointing out their failures, while #mainstreaming projects hide their rot. If we embrace messy openness, we take that power away.
Breaking the cycle:
The right weaponises grievance → to mobilise.
The liberal left weaponises grievance → to control and suppress real challenge.
The alt-left needs to weaponise transparency → to break gatekeeping and rebuild trust.
So the question is: how do we make “openness” an effective tool in this? The #4opens is a step.
