When I acturly call #mainstreaming people insane, I genuinely mean it. Common sense has become an illness born from 40 years of worshipping the #deathcult, leaving little actual “sense” in society. This is a critical issue we urgently need to address to combat #climatechaos and the pervasive #geekproblem.
Living in the #deathcult, limits our power to effect change. Our media is created and distributed within #dotcons, which are products of our own #stupidindividualism. This cycle of self-destructive behaviour is repeated endlessly, perpetuating the status quo and hindering any hope of a different progress path.
Constructive Truth: Your individualism makes you stupid.
Destructive Truth: Feeling personally insulted by being called stupid.
Both interpretations are valid, but the first one is the constructive truth I’m conveying. The second, feeling insulted, is a reaction rooted in #stupidindividualism itself. This reaction proves the point that our blinded individualism keeps us from the collective action and shared responsibility needed to take different paths.
Breaking the Cycle, it’s crucial to understand that your individualism makes you stupid. This isn’t an insult but a wake-up call. We must recognize that prioritizing individual desires over collective good leads to detrimental outcomes. By embracing this constructive truth, we can begin to dismantle the #deathcult mindset and move towards a sustainable, community-driven approach to solving our pressing issues.
In conclusion, the insanity perpetuated by #dotcons and our current “common sense” is a barrier to meaningful change. We need to shift our perspective to address the environmental and societal crises we face. Only by acknowledging and overcoming our blinded individualistic tendencies can we hope to create a more balanced and sustainable path and any future.
Trust and parodied fuckwittery is a hard bridged to build and keep in place. The #mainstreaming is poison on this path, it why we need to change and challenge the current mess.
In today’s #mainstreaming political mess, the issue of #climatechange is sometimes seen as a matter of differing opinions. However, we need to be honest to recognize that climate denial, particularly among #mainstreaming people, is not a simple case of holding an alternative viewpoint; it’s a deliberate spread of misinformation.
The Reality of Climate Change we can see every day, it is a fact, supported by a consensus within the scientific community: rising global temperatures, melting ice caps, increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, and shifting ecosystems all show the severe impact of human activities on our planet. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (#IPCC) have repeatedly confirmed these findings.
The motives behind climate denial, despite the scientific consensus, is to push falsehoods. Why? Financial Interests: Climate deniers are financially tied to industries that would be negatively impacted by stringent environmental regulations, such as the fossil fuel industry. These industries stand to lose billions if policies are enacted to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Political Gain: Politicians deny climate change to align with their party’s stance, which is influenced by powerful lobbies. By doing so, they secure campaign contributions and political support. Ideological Reasons: Denying climate change is part of an ideological battle pushed by our blinded worship of the #deathcult that this “common sense” is blocking the needed intervention and regulation. Yes, the reality of climate change would require some of us to endorse policies we fundamentally oppose, it would bring into question the last 40 years of our worship, we might have to wait for some people to die out, for their blocking to end.
The consequences of denial, labelling climate denial as just another opinion trivializes the consequences it has on public policy and global well-being. The spread of misinformation leads to: Delayed Action where policy measures to combat climate change are postponed, worsening the impact and increasing the cost of mitigation efforts. Public Confusion, where people are misled about the severity of the issue, which undermines efforts to build the consensus for collective action. Global Harm of climate change are not confined by borders. Decisions made by deniers in the rich countries, have ramifications for ecosystems and communities worldwide.
Calling out the liars, is a first step, to make visible, what is a deliberate and harmful lie. The stakes are too high to treat it as a difference of opinion. Effective climate mediation requires a foundation built on truth and scientific integrity. We need to strongly push back and make accountable people and organizations who spread these lies, particularly those in positions of power. This involves, demanding #4opens transparency of politicians and public figures, a simple step is disclosing financial ties to industries that influence their stance on climate issues.
Climate change is the defining issue of our era, and addressing it requires a commitment to truth and action, both grassroots and mainstreaming. Climate deniers are not holding a different opinion; they are actively obstructing progress, by lying. We need to walk a truthful path, act on this, by starting to implement the actions and policies needed to protect, our society, environment and our planet.
In the mess of today’s #dotcons news media, social media platforms have become the primary arenas for public discourse and political engagement. However, the political leanings of these platforms significantly influence the nature of the discussions that takes place. Here’s an overview of the political ground on which some of the major social media platforms stand:
X (Twitter): Far-right Threads (Facebook/Instagram): Corporate right Nostor: Libertarian right Mastodon: Center-liberal
Despite the variety of platforms available, there is an absence of genuinely left-wing social media. This lack needs to be acknowledged, especially when trying to find support for projects like the #OMN (Open Media Network). The prevailing political inclinations of these platforms are influenced by our worshiping the #deathcult, a hashtag describing the pervasive and invisible influence of #neoliberalism in our society. This influence leads most people to act in counterproductive ways without conscious thought, as part of the common sense path of maintaining the status quo and resisting change or challenge.
This unspoken political problem is a part of the issue, what is more important is basically we also need to understand the data paradigm, to navigate out of this entrenched system. We need to recognize the underlying structure of our socio-economic systems are fundamentally driven by data. Consider the following, please:
Capitalism: Essentially data. Money: A form of data. Society: Comprised of stories, which are data. Your Device: A data conduit. This Text: Data.
Without any left wing media, we give “them” and the data and metadata. We don’t have much access to data and, more importantly, metadata? Scenarios:
Open Data: Accessible to everyone, Metadata: Fully available to the public.
Closed Data: Restricted to the individual, Metadata: Controlled predominantly by corporations and governments.
Hybrid Data: Available to hosting corporations, governments, and paying companies. Limited to friends for personal data sharing. Metadata: Owned by corporations and utilized by governments.
The flow of these scenarios helps to mediate the sustainability of computer networks during the ongoing #climatechaos disaster. The path we take will shape the next 50 years of social and political change, it is important to think and act on this to find a path of more equitable distribution of data access.
Moving forward, given the political biases of existing social media platforms and the overarching influence of data control, there is an urgent need for developing genuinely left-wing social media spaces. These platforms need to prioritize #4opens data access and metadata transparency to foster a more democratic and inclusive path through the next years of mess.
Supporting projects like the #OMN, which adhere to principles of openness and community-driven governance, pave the way for such change. By challenging the #mainstreaming narratives and advocating for grassroots solutions, we work towards a future where data and metadata are democratized, ensuring that technology serves the public good rather than reinforcing existing #deathcult power structures.
In conclusion, we need to use the #4opens as a tool to evaluate the platforms we use and advocate for alternatives that align with values of openness, equity, and sustainability. By doing so, we can begin to dismantle the #deathcult and build a digital ecosystem that supports #KISS social justice and collective progress.
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.
In our conversations on #AI there is a copyright trap, pushed in the #mainstreaming, the #fashionista conversation around protecting producers and cultural industries are growing hysterical. Some policymakers and activists are pushing for shielding creators from the very real threats posed by these new technologies. However, in their haste to act, leftist and progressive crew are advocating for the use of copyright law as a defensive path. This approach is a mess and fraught with contradictions and risks, a real “Copyright Trap”.
The Copyright Trap is the “common sense” belief that copyright law can be used as a tool to support and protect producers of our culture. This path is problematic:
Feudal Nature of Copyright: Copyright, along with patents and trademarks, is a form of intellectual property that comes from feudal rights. It grants semi-eternal rents to those who did not contribute to the production of the work, much like the way land was historically controlled by a few powerful lords.
Restriction of the Commons: Copyright takes works out of the public domain and locks them into walled gardens, thus restricting the commons. These runs counter to the principles of #4opens access and communal sharing that activists and progressives champion.
Injustice to Future Creators: By extending and expanding copyright protections, we make it harder for future producers to build upon the shoulders of giants. This stifles creativity, trapping future generations in a cycle of restricted access and limited freedom.
The mess underpin the current debates around AI and copyright:
“If Value, Then (Property) Right” Fallacy: This is the ideological belief that if something has value, it must be protected as property. This ignores the complex ways in which value is created and shared, particularly through communal and collaborative efforts, that do not fit into property rights dogma.
Unauthorized Copying as Inherently Wrongful: The idea that copying is wrong ignores the realities of how culture and knowledge developed through imitation, adaptation, and remixing. This perspective is particularly ill-suited to the #openweb era, where information is shared and transformed.
The Starving Artist Trope: This trope is resurrected to justify the expansion of copyright protections, suggesting that without such protections, artists will starve. This story fails to address the systemic issues that actually lead to the impoverishment of producers, such as inequitable distribution of wealth and the monopolistic practices in the #dotcons.
Using copyright as a weapon against AI companies is counterproductive and hypocritical for those who advocate for the rights of authors, creators, and intellectual workers:
Counter to Progressive Values: Copyright as it stands is a tool of capital that entrenches inequality and restricts access to knowledge and culture. Using it to protect producers from #AI companies simply reinforces a system that many leftists and progressives have long criticized.
Locking Up the Commons: Stronger copyright protections, risk enclosing the cultural commons, making it difficult for producers to share content freely to be built upon.
Hindering change and challenge: Stricter copyright laws stifle social activism, as new producers find it harder to access and build on existing works. This is detrimental in an era where collaborative and iterative creation is key to technological and cultural progress.
Alternative Approaches, to effectively address the risks and harms posed by generative AI, we need to move past the “copyright trap” and look towards more appropriate “native” paths:
Promote #4opens Open Access and Open Source: Encourage the use of open access and open source licenses and traditions that allow for the free sharing and modification of works. This helps knowledge and culture remain accessible for social use.
Equitable Funding Models: Develop new models for supporting creators that do not rely on restrictive copyright laws. This could include systems of public funding, grants, and cooperative ownership that ensure people are fairly compensated for their work without repressively restricting access.
Regulation of #AI Companies: Rather than using copyright as a blunt instrument, on the vertical path, we can regulate AI companies directly. This includes measures to ensure transparency, accountability, and fair compensation for the use of creative works.
The call to use copyright law to protect producers from the threats of #AI is not a useful path for leftist and progressive movements. Instead of reinforcing a flawed and restrictive system, we need to seek “native” #4opens paths that align with our values. By doing so, we build a future where both humane creativity and resulting technology can thrive in balance, and not just #techchun the current mess.
Centrism is the #mainstreaming path meany people take, as it is seen as a rational and moderate stance, that presents itself as a balance of reasonableness in the mess of the polarized world. A closer examination reveals that this “moderate” ideology has extremist implications, particularly in its support of economic inequality and environmental degradation. In the era of #climatechaos and social break down, we need to see the extremist position it is.
The economic extremism of #centrism, at its core supports the status quo, includes the worship of the #deathcult, “common sense” #neoliberalism, with the widespread existence of billionaires and super billionaires. This extreme concentration of wealth among a tiny fraction of the population has far-reaching consequences for economic inequality. The wealth is not only a passive accumulation; it actively siphons resources from the broader populace. The immense financial power translates into influence over political processes, economic policies, and social norms, that creates the current cycle where the rich get richer, and the rest struggle to keep up.
Centrism’s reluctance to challenge this dynamic effectively endorses it. By advocating for incremental change and compromise, and actively opposing more radical reforms. The centrism stance is, not neutral, it is complicit in the current mess that “benefits” the nasty few, wealthy at the expense of the majority. This passive acceptance of economic inequality is easy to see as the extremism it is, as defacto supports of structures that are fundamentally unjust and unsustainable.
Environmental inaction and the climate crisis: centrism’s approach to environmental issues is deeply problematic. In the face of a rapidly escalating #climatechaos, centrists advocate for moderate, incremental measures. While these steps may seem reasonable, they are woefully inadequate given the scale and urgency of the problem. The scientific consensus is clear: drastic and immediate action is necessary to mitigate the worst effects of climate change.
By endorsing minimal and gradual responses, centrism effectively delays meaningful action. This not only fails to address the environmental crisis but also exacerbates it. The longer significant action is postponed, the more severe the consequences will be for the planet and future generations. In this, centrism’s support for the status quo is not a neutral position but a deeply destructive one. It aligns with a form of nihilism, where the impending environmental catastrophe is met with complacency and inaction.
The nihilistic push of centrism, with the failed path of addressing pressing economic and environmental issues, reflects a broader nihilistic path. Nihilism, the belief that life lacks meaning or purpose, is characterized by apathy and inaction. When centrism advocates for minimal changes in the face of profound challenges, it embraces this nihilistic outlook, a resignation to the current state of affairs, despite its clear inadequacies. This nihilism is particularly evident in centrism’s response to social issues. While centrists acknowledge problems such as poverty, inequality, and climate change, their proposed solutions lack the urgency and scope needed to effect real change. By prioritizing stability and gradualism over justice and sustainability, centrism contributes to a sense of hopelessness and futility.
With the need for radical change, it is clear that centrism is not the moderate or rational stance it purports to be. Its support for the status quo, in both economic and environmental terms, reveals a deeply flawed ideology. To address the urgent challenges facing society, we must move beyond centrism and embrace more radical approaches that prioritize a different “common sense”. What we call this is up in the air but, economic reforms such as wealth redistribution, progressive taxation, and corporate regulation are necessary to tackle inequality. Similarly, bold environmental policies, including a rapid transition to renewable energy, stringent emissions targets, and conservation efforts, are essential to combat the #climatecrisis. These measures may seem radical, but they are proportionate responses to the severity of the problems we face.
The extremist ideology of #centrism, with its innate reluctance to challenge the status quo, pushes injustice and exacerbates the #climatecrisis. We are far down this deeply destructive path, that is increasingly simple nihilism. Ideas please to try to mediate this all to common crap and prat’ish behaver please.
It should be obvious to most of us that we’re moving through an era of mass delusion, unbridled folly, and unrestrained hysteria, with the old facts and reason’s forgotten amidst the building #climatechaos of social and ecological breakdown. We are in this mess due to the embrace of the #dotcons, the spread of misinformation and the decline of rational discourse that has now reached alarming levels. Social media platforms, echo chambers, and the proliferation of fake news have created a fertile ground for delusion to thrive. Conspiracy theories abound, gaining traction despite being thoroughly debunked. From anti-vaccine movements to flat Earth theories, unscientific beliefs flourish in the absence of #KISS skepticism.
“We’re living in an age of mass delusion, unbridled folly, unrestrained hysteria. Facts & reason have slipped down the back of the sofa and been forgotten. Our descendants (should there be any) will look back on this time the way we look back on our ergot-infected ancestors who arrested chickens on suspicion of using dark magic and believed wombs could wander around women’s bodies.” https://kolektiva.social/deck/@Richard_Littler@mastodon.social
The rise of these delusions is not only a result of ignorance, rather the outcome of our embracing of #postmodern and #neoliberalism that has been pushed over us for the last 40 years. This has lead to distrust in institutions, polarization, and the commodification of attention, all contributing to an environment where sensationalism overshadows substance. The erosion of shared reality undermines the foundation of democratic society, making it difficult to address catastrophic challenges such as #climatechaos or basic things like public health crises, and social inequality.
History offers examples of mass hysteria and folly that parallel our current predicament. The ergot-induced hallucinations of the Middle Ages, led to bizarre and irrational behaviour, are strikingly similar to the modern phenomenon of mass delusion. During the Salem witch trials, fear and superstition overpowered reason, leading to the persecution of innocent people. Similarly, the belief in “wandering wombs” reflects how unscientific ideas can dominate medical understanding and treatment.
These historical episodes remind us that human societies are vulnerable to waves of irrationality. They illustrate how fear, ignorance, and social dynamics create paths where absurd beliefs take hold. Importantly, they also highlight paths that exacerbating or mitigating these delusions. In the past, religious and political leaders fueled hysteria for their gain, much like our #mainstreaming crew that exploit misinformation for power and profit.
The role of technology in amplifying delusion, our embraces of the #dotcons age has magnified the impact of mass delusion. Algorithms designed to maximize engagement prioritize sensational and polarizing content, creating echo chambers that reinforce #mainstreaming mess, to amplify misinformation. The speed and reach of social media allow falsehoods to spread rapidly, outpacing efforts to debunk them. This environment fosters a culture where emotional appeals and confirmation bias trump evidence and any attempt at rationality.
The consequences of mass delusion are far-reaching and catastrophic. In the realm of public health, vaccine misinformation has led to the resurgence of preventable diseases. Climate change denial hampers efforts to address one of the most pressing existential threats facing humanity. Political polarization, fueled by misinformation, erodes trust in basic democracy and undermines our hard won social stability.
On a more personal level, individuals caught in the web of delusion suffer from cognitive dissonance, living in a reality disconnected from the social facts. This not only affects their decision-making, but also strains relationships and fosters an environment of suspicion and hostility. The cumulative effect is a mess where fear and mistrust easily push over cooperation and mutual understanding.
Addressing the age of mass delusion requires a multifaceted approach. Education systems must prioritize critical thinking and media literacy, equipping people with the tools to discern facts from fictions. We need to build institutions and networks like the #OMN, particularly in media and technology, to take some responsibility for curbing the spread of misinformation and promoting more reliable and truthful sources of information. Encouraging open dialogue can help bridge divides and rebuild trust in shared reality. The #4opens are a path to this to not only challenging falsehoods but also providing compelling narratives that resonate with people’s values and emotions. By creating a social environment that rewards paths of truth and reasonableness, we can push back at the tide of delusion and hysteria.
Our age of delusion, folly, and hysteria mirrors historical periods of irrationality and superstition. The erosion of shared social norms and reasonableness poses obverse risks to public health, democracy, and social cohesion. The path forward is clear, use the #4opens and tools like the #OMN to reclaim our commitment to truth and foster meany societies that value evidence and critical thinking #KISS
How can we get people not to be prats about this path, ideas, please?
The path through technology, society, and environmental crises is a challenge that most people find difficult to find, let alone walk. This is why I have been building “sign posts” in a #hashtag story for the last 20 years, hashtags such as #geekproblem, #KISS, #4opens, and #deathcult etc. These are metaphors that highlight our technological thinking and represent issues and philosophies that make visible the paths of technological advancements and social cohesion. By using these “signs” and path, people can better understand the need to move from individualistic and technocentric working to collective and sustainable social practices.
The #geekproblem has the tendency of technologists and enthusiasts to focus excessively on technical solutions, neglecting the social and human aspects of these paths. Technologists struggle to comprehend the simplicity of #KISS path to overcome the tunnel vision where technical fixes are panaceas, side lining the importance of social dynamics and community engagement. The #4opens framework—open data, open source, open standards, and open process—offers a counterbalance by providing a structure that promotes transparency and collaboration. However, this does not inherently solve issues; it simply creates a space for people to engage and address problems collectively.
A significant barrier to overcoming the #geekproblem and embracing more holistic approaches is the pervasive culture of #deathcult worship. This is a metaphorical for the last 40 years of #neoliberalism, a term that describes the idolization of technological progress and capitalist efficiency at the expense of environmental sustainability and social well-being. Many people and groups, consciously or unconsciously, worship this path, prioritizing short-term gains and #fashionista “marvels” over sustainability and human connections.
The worship of this #deathcult is destructive because it undermines broader societal issues, it pushes the culture of #stupidindividualism with blinded competition, making it challenging to discuss and address anything outside the #mainstreaming agenda. This focus diverts attention from the collective action needed for #KISS tackling complex problems like #climatechaos and resulting social break down.
In this metaphor, composting represents the process of breaking down and re-evaluating our technological and social practices. It requires a willingness to let go of dysfunctional and harmful paradigms and to create fertile ground for new seeds or sustainable and humane approaches. This fertile soil, enriched by lessons learned and experiences gained, can nurture the sprigs of humanity through the on rushing era of #climatechaos.
To move beyond this destructive worship and technocentric mindset, we need to recognize and reject the blinded pushing of technology and efficiency as easy goals. This involves a critical examination of our values and the systems we support, using the #4opens to composting the piles of #techshit accumulated over the past decade’s symbolizes a necessary shift from merely accumulating technological advancements to reflecting on their impact and repurposing them for good.
Balance Individualism: Embrace collective action and community engagement. Recognize that social problems cannot be solved by technical solutions alone.
Promote the #4opens: Encourage transparency, collaboration, and openness in all endeavours. Use these principles to create spaces where people can engage and address issues together.
Critique the #Deathcult: Actively challenge the idolization of blinded technological progress and capitalist efficiency. Advocate for sustainable and socially responsible practices.
Compost and Rebuild: Reflect on past practices, learn from mistakes, and repurpose technology to support long-term sustainability and human well-being.
Nurture Humanity: Focus on building strong, resilient communities that can withstand and adapt to the challenges of the #climatechaos era.
The journey to overcoming the #geekproblem and moving away from #deathcult worship is needed, it’s past the time to pick up your shovels and make compost on this.
On the path of the current climate and systemic crises, it becomes realistic to see that #neoliberalism, with its 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 “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 model.
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 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.
The need for revolutionary path 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 prompts a shift from capitalist realism to revolutionary realism, 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 impending 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, being crucial 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.
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, free basics and rationing. 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 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 common sense.
But fundamentally we need a cultural shift towards valuing sustainability, community, and collective well-being over the #stupidindividualism of individual 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 today?
The questioning over state funding of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) and open-source initiatives revolves around invisible ideological debates about benefits and drawbacks. Let’s look at this from a few specific examples: #NLnet, #NGI, and the European Union (#EU), to understanding the implications and effectiveness of this funding path.
The #NLnet Foundation is a notable example of an organization that provides funding to open-source projects. Supported by private and public funds, including significant contributions from the #EU, NLnet focuses on promoting a free, open, and secure internet.
The #NGI initiative, funded by the #EU, aims to shape the development of the internet of tomorrow. By supporting a range of open-source projects, NGI tries to foster innovation, privacy, and security. It emphasizes human-concentric technology, ensuring that the future internet respects humanistic values and needs.
The #EU has been a significant proponent of FOSS, providing funding through programs such as Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe. The EU’s supports digital sovereignty, reduce dependency on non-European technologies through promoting open standards.
The is some democratization as these state-funded FOSS projects ensure software is accessible to wider groups, thus reducing the digital divide. For instance, NGI-funded projects are supposed to focus on inclusivity and user empowerment. At best, this transparency brings public overview to these processes.
There are some economic benefits and cost savings in using and supporting FOSS instead of expensive proprietary software. Funding initiatives like NGI stimulate innovation by allowing developers to build upon existing open-source projects, fostering a collaborative environment. Though, there are unspoken issues of sustainability in a pure capitalist path, thus the question of balance in state funding.
Open-source software allows for independent security audits, reducing the risk of vulnerabilities. The EU’s investment in secure communication tools underlines this advantage. Reducing reliance on a few large proprietaries #dotcons software vendors enhances national security and control. The EU’s support for open-source projects aims to bolster humanistic digital sovereignty.
For example, #NLnet’s diverse (though #geekproblem) funding portfolio highlights this limited community-driven development. The collaboration between public institutions, the private sector, and community contributors helps #NGI projects bring together diverse stakeholders to work on common goals. #FOSS projects thrive on community contributions, leading to continuous improvement and support and thus in theory community needs, though due to the dogmatic #geekproblem this is currently failing.
Funding Continuity: Projects become dependent on government funding, which currently is not stable or continuous. For example, sudden policy shifts in the EU affect long-term project sustainability. Without a sustainable funding, FOSS projects struggle with long-term maintenance and support.
Most #FOSS projects are too idiosyncratic to meet quality #UX standards. Thus, the current #geekproblem dominated process means that state funding inadvertently support meany unusable and thus pointless, subpar projects. Effective diversity and oversight of these mechanisms are crucial to mitigate this failing path.
Government involvement leads to bureaucracy, slowing down and ossifying development cycles, currently we do not work though this path well, The balance between oversight, diversity and agility is critical. With the #EU path this is a huge problem leading to almost all the current funding bring poured down the drain.
For #mainstreaming capitalism the issue of “Market Distortion”, the idea of competition raises the issue of state funding distorting “market” dogmas to disadvantage private companies and startups that don’t receive government support. For instance, EU funding can overshadow smaller #dotcons, capitalist thinking sees this as a risk that government-backed projects might stifle innovation by shaping the market landscape.
Political and ideological biases influence which projects receive funding, this is currently pushing a #blocking of the needed “native” #openweb path. How to move past this to ensuring diversity and “impartiality” in funding decisions need real work. How can we shift this “common sense” focus that government priorities do not align with the wider needs of the #openweb community and end-users. Aligning funding priorities with community needs is needed to address this concern, how can we make this happen with funding like #NLnet and #NGI?
To sum up, #NLnet are doing some good work, but this is focused on feeding the #geekproblem and building #fashionista careers, evern then on balance they do a better job than most. Then the wider #NGI funding is going into the #dotcons and #NGO mess, thus being poured directly down the drain. Over all, it’s fantastic that the #EU is funding the #openweb even if it is doing it very badly by funding very little that is native or useful.
Conclusion, state funding for FOSS and open-source initiatives, in our examples #NLnet, #NGI, and the #EU, has potential for creating real change and challenge, but this path presents both opportunities and challenges. When implemented thoughtfully, it can foster “native” paths, innovation, reduce costs, and enhance community and security to challenge the current worshipping of the #deathcults by our widespread use of the #dotcons. The question is the will and understanding to balancing this path to ensures that state funding positively contributes to the #4opens FOSS ecosystem, driving forward a free, open digital future or just leads to the capitalistic criticism of waste and distortion? At best and at worst, we see some real change and a lot of poring funding down the drain to feed some #geekproblem and build the careers of a few #fashernistas
The is much to compost in the current mess, can we get funding for shovels please #OMN
A river that needs crossing political and tech – On the political side, there is arrogance and ignorance, on the geek side there is naivety and over complexity. All code is ideology solidified into action – most contemporary code is capitalism, this is hardly a surprise if you think about this for a moment. Yes you can try and act on any ideology on top of this code, but the outcome and assumptions are preprogramed… cant find any good links on this…
As a useful path, we need to look at technology from the social prospective to have any hope of the needed change and challenge. With this view, on one hand, it’s interesting to look at how data and metadata serve as the social glue binding society together. And on the other, how our contemporary #deathcult worship—championing separation and anonymization through privacy and security efforts coded by the #geekproblem—undermines this needed social cohesion.
If you are a part of this #geekproblem then it is worth taking a step back to consider how our current coding practices shaped by society and liberalism affect both society and ecology in this blind worship. This “common sense” dogmatic path leads us toward corporate “socialism”, which is the path to fascism, where the laws and norms are tailored to benefit a select few at the top of the shit pile we live in. Consequently, this data and metadata privatization, pushes us down the path to a disturbing shift towards “National Socialism” that then becomes the #mainstreaming.
The #KISS path to address this #geekproblem is to #stepaway from this cycle and code outside the confines of #mainstreaming liberalism without going down the fascism path.
To achieve meaningful change, we must examine technology from a social perspective. On one hand, data and metadata act as the social glue binding society. On the other, our obsession with privacy and security—driven by the #geekproblem—undermines this cohesion.
If you’re part of the #geekproblem, consider how our coding practices, influenced by liberalism, affect society and ecology. This “common sense” liberalism leads to corporate “socialism,” benefiting a select few and paving the way to fascism, with laws favouring the rich. Privatizing data and metadata pushes us towards a disturbing shift to “National Socialism” #mainstreaming.
The #KISS approach to this issue is to step away from this cycle, coding outside mainstream liberalism without veering towards fascism.
The CEO of a large oil company made a statement about climate change, suggesting that consumers are to blame for the slow progress in addressing the issue. According to him, the companies have the technology to produce lower-carbon fuels, but consumers are unwilling to pay the premium for these greener alternatives. He argued that consumer choices, driven by price sensitivity, are hindering the adoption of cleaner energy solutions. Criticizing activists and society at large, claiming that their exclusion of the fossil fuel industry from the climate change dialogue is counterproductive. He believes that the industry has the potential to contribute significantly to climate solutions, but is being sidelined by activist-driven narratives.
In this market logic perspective, in the principles of the free market, corporations innovate and consumers drive demand, it’s up to consumers to “vote with their dollars” and choose sustainable products, thereby incentivizing companies to invest in and produce greener options.
However, this viewpoint has sparked a backlash and if you think about it as the problem of our current “common sense”, it is useful to look at this logic as akin to a drug lord blaming society for drug problems, highlighting the evil in the shifting responsibility from producers to consumers. The argument assumes that consumer choices alone is the driving force for systemic change, ignoring the influence and responsibility of corporations (capitalism) in driving fossil fuel dependency. Remember that a significant portion of global greenhouse gas emissions can be traced to a handful of companies. A 2017 study revealed that just 100 companies are responsible for 71% of global emissions since 1988. This highlights the disproportionate impact that corporations have on the environment, underscoring the need for systemic change rather than the #fashernista pushed ideas of individual consumer “choice”.
Shifting the blame onto consumers, is diverting responsibility for climate change and the disasters’ role that fossil fuel companies play in this mess. This #mainstreaming narrative misleads by pushing that meaningful climate action is unattainable without consumer-driven solutions, a dangerous assertion in the social and environmental mess we face.
The #traditionalmedia portrays oil companies as rational actors operating within the bounds of market logic, while the activists are depicted as radical outliers. This agenda reinforces the status quo and diminishes the urgency of the need for change and challenge. In the political arena, climate change takes a backseat to concerns like the economy and healthcare. Even as climate awareness grows, it remains challenging to prioritize it in main streaming political discourse and policymaking.
This on the surface is simply “common sense” but lifting the lid, and you find a darker and conspiratorial story about the ascent of #neoliberalism and its pervasive influence. Neoliberalism, that this #CEO is speaking, is about advocating for the primacy of free markets, deregulation, and globalization, is deeply ingrained in modern political and economic thought. Originating from the ideas of thinkers such as Friedrich Hayek, this neoliberalism path has undergone a transformation and expansion, and now profoundly shaping policies and ideologies across the globe.
The term “neoliberal” was coined in 1938 and gained prominence with the publication of Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom in 1944. Hayek’s argument that individual self-interest is the only safeguard against tyranny found a receptive audience among the ultra-rich, who were portrayed as heroic figures resisting governmental overreach. The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) influence extended to the US, where he established the Atlas Network, an umbrella organization that encompasses over 450 think tanks, including groups like the Cato Institute and the Heritage Foundation. These organizations, many of which operate as charities, do not disclose their donors, allowing them to exert opaque influence on shaping policy and public opinion.
Over the next three decades, a network of academics, journalists, and business people emerged, refining and promoting the ideology. Wealthy individuals and corporations funded lobby groups that presented themselves as impartial research institutes, further embedding neoliberal principles into the political mainstream. While initially having little impact on the social democratic postwar consensus, these ideas later inspired conservative political leaders like Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, who lead, neoliberalism’s major breakthrough in the 1970s, during the economic turmoil caused by the oil crisis and the decline of Keynesianism. Governments, seeking new economic models, turned to neoliberal solutions. As Milton Friedman, a prominent neoliberal economist, noted, “when the time came, we were ready … and we could step right in.” The resulting policies of tax cuts, weakening of trade unions, privatization and outsourcing of public services, and widespread market deregulation lead directly to the mess we are in today.
We are feeling the consequences of 40 years of the neoliberal era in the growing extreme economic disparities. In the United States, the wealthiest 1% own a third of the nation’s wealth. This shift to neoliberalism failed to deliver on its promise of robust economic growth, over the past 40 years, global growth has been slower compared to the postwar period. Instead, we have seen the rise of oligarchs who have reshaped capitalism to serve their interests, through mechanisms like offshore tax havens and political influence. Despite failure, the ideology remains a dominant force in shaping contemporary political and economic paths.
Over the next 20 years, the oil and gas push the impact of #climatechaos that will kill millions of people and displace billions. The rise of this #deathcult illustrates the profound impact that a coordinated network of ideologically driven institutions and individuals can have on global policy and economic systems. We should learn from this, activists and grassroots movements are needed to push for more aggressive climate action, aspesherly when their efforts are met with resistance and dismissal. This resistance balances the fossil fuel industry’s substantial influence on politics and media. Fossil fuel, alongside most major corporations, spend millions on lobbying and advertising to protect their interests. The climate crisis demands urgent and radical action, to balance this pushing of mess, while individual choices play a small role, placing the burden solely on this as the oil CEO does is adding to the mess and a distraction from the path we need to take.
