The internet: Open vs. Closed

This is as much a social issue as it is a technical one, it matters for how we think about online culture and more importantly haw our “common sense” misinterprets the paths we need to take. Since its creation, the internet and World Wide Web have been shaped by two competing and overlapping paths:

The #OpenWeb

It is based on trust, and progressive left paths. Rooted in the DNA of internet code and culture, we see the web as a platform for collaboration, sharing, and the free exchange of information. Built for use in a world where information is abundant and free, embodying the ethos of “free as in free beer.”

The #OpenWeb emphasizes the #4opens: open source, open data, open standards, and open process. It walks the path of creativity and collective creation, and is closely associated with “native geek culture” alongside radical/anarchist libertarian thinking. Social interactions are visible, promoting accountability and collective decision-making. Examples include public forums, open-source projects, and community assemblies.

The #ClosedWeb

This is the dark side of our encryptionist culture. On the other side, we have the approach of companies like Microsoft under Bill Gates and late-stage Google, that focus on the monetization and commercial viability of the internet. This vision is fixated on control for profitability, and the economics of running online platforms in a world based on artificial scarcity

The #ClosedWeb pushes interactions to private, monetized paths with the illusion of privacy and confidentiality are necessary. This approach seeks to lock down information and interactions, creating walled gardens that can be controlled and monetized.

The Internet’s “native” Potential

The inherent democratization and egalitarianism of the internet allow people to create and share content. However, this ideal clashes with commercial interests that push for control to monetize user data and interactions.

From the #OpenWeb perspective:

Interconnectedness: Technology reflects human values and structures.
Empowerment: The internet empowers people to distribute their work, share ideas, and bypass traditional power politics gatekeepers.
Education and Information: The web transforms education and information access, linking vast resources to walking the path to a different society.

From the #ClosedWeb perspective, the dominant emotion is fear:

Fear of sustainability: Concerns about how to maintain and profit from online platforms.
Fear of losing control: Worries about people having too much freedom, undermining business models and #mainstreaming dogmas.

The Battleground for Openness

The #OpenWeb remains a battleground between the paths of openness and the pushing of fear. While it has democratized content creation and access, the economic models sustaining this ecosystem are often a toxic mess. This tension shapes society both online and offline, creating a complex and messy landscape to find a sustainable path.

The #GeekProblem

One barrier to addressing these issues is the #GeekProblem. On the web, those with technical expertise and control over resources bypass democratic processes and accountability, leading to a kind of “feudalism.” This problem is equally present in grassroots #FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) communities and corporate #dotcons (dot-com companies), as both share the same #geekproblem mindsets regarding control and authority.

A part of the #openweb path involves re-evaluating the relationship between control, wealth, power, and social change in both technology and wider society. Currently, we lack clear ways to discuss the “problem” in geek culture, making it difficult to mediate the #closedweb problem. This is a growing issue, as groups who succeed in a capitalism are the worst equipped to solve the problems that the system creates.

The struggle between these visions is ongoing. For the #openweb to thrive, there must be a concerted effort to address the underlying hard-coded paths of control and power within both the open and closed paths. By acknowledging and working on these problems, we maintain the internet’s potential as a force for democratization, creativity, and the needed social change.

Please “don’t be a prat” about this, thanks.

#mainstreaming counter-cultures

Why does this matter? The #mainstreaming of counter-cultures, like the #openweb, #Fediverse, and #Mastodon, touch on web culture (#Netiquette) and needed community sustainability. It should come as no surprise that we need both action and community to hold together the culture, values and integrity of these deaminising digital spaces.

Normalization and Dilution of Values: As counter-cultures like the openweb and Fediverse gain #mainstreaming acceptance, the values and ethos that created these spaces and technology they are based on get diluted, this is the normal. The needed/sustaining, community-driven, decentralized, and open-source principles are pushed over by commercial interests and current mainstream norms.

Sustaining Cultural Integrity: The challenge lies in maintaining the native culture of these spaces while expanding their reach. The inclusion of diverse voices and broader participation is essential for growth, but it needs to be balanced with the preservation of #4opens foundational path for the value to have the maximum impact that we need.

Different Perspectives: The interpretation of #mainstreaming as good, bad, or indifferent varies depending on political and ideological perspectives. For some, mainstream acceptance represents success and broader impact. For others, it signals a loss of autonomy and a clear steeping away from the original needed path.

Critical Stance: it should be obvious that #mainstreaming without holding the original #4opens and #DIY ethos in place is a bad path to push. There is growing need for vigilance and action to safeguard these spaces from being co-opted and over “common sense” commercialized.

Participation: Engaging “natively” in discussions on platforms like SocialHub used to be a path. This participation helped in shaping the future of these open’ish spaces and ensuring they remained relevant and on mission.

DIY : The #DIY (Do It Yourself) is fundamental to the #openweb and #Fediverse. Emphasizing community control, self-reliance, and collaborative development. Promoting and practising this ethos to resist “common sense” #mainstreaming pressures is important and needed.

Mobilization: Encouraging wide community involvement is essential. Whether it’s through developing new features, creating content, or moderating discussions, contributions sustain the “native” ecosystem, it is its best a “gift economy” path.

We should not shy away from the #mainstreaming of counter-cultures of the #openweb, #Fediverse, and #Mastodon as it is filled with challenges as well as opportunities. With native participation, a strong commitment to #DIY principles, and a collective effort to preserve this native culture, it is as to possible to sustain and grow these spaces without losing their original path of cultural integrity.

You can find out much more thinking on this http://hamishcampbell.com, and please try “not to be a prat” thanks.

Tension, Open and Closed Web

From its very minority creation, the spreading internet and World Wide Web has been shaped by two competing, often overlapping visions:

The collaborative, #openweb: Rooted in #DNA of post apocalyptical internet code and culture, this vision is of a network for collaboration, sharing, and free exchange of information. Built for use in a world of abundance of information, free as in free beer. Emphasizes #4opens, creativity, and collective creation, associated with “native geek culture” and what can be understood as radical/anarchist libertarian thinking.

The commercial, #closedweb: The approach of companies like Microsoft under Bill Gates, and late stage google, focuses on monetization and commercial viability of the internet. Fixated on fear of sustainability, profitability, and the economics of running online platforms in a scarcity based world.

The Internet inherent democratization and egalitarianism allows everyone to create and share content. However, this ideal clashes with the pushing of commercial control, to monetize user data and interactions. This #open path empowers people to distribute their work, share ideas, and bypass traditional gatekeepers. The web transforms education and information access to synthesizing vast resources needed for a different view of society. From the #closedweb prospective, you have fear, simply fear.

The #openweb remains a battleground between these feelings, of openness and the pushing of fear. While it has worked to democratized content creation and access, the existing economic models to sustain this ecosystem are a toxic mess. The ongoing tension shapes society both online and offline, yes it’s a mess.

Why we so often can’t see or do much about this mess is that our #geekproblem have disproportionate control over resources and decisions. This leads to blinded “#feudalism” that bypass democratic processes and accountability. This is equally a “problem” in grassroots #FOSS and corporate #dotcons, as they share the same mindset.

A part of the #openweb is a move to re-evaluate the relationship between “control”, wealth, power, and social change. But currently we have no clear way to talk about this issue from the limited, narrow “problem” in geek culture. So have little way to mediate the #closedweb of the groups who “succeed” in capitalist #mainstreaming, who are actually the worst equipped to solve the problems that the system creates.

UPDATE https://www.theregister.com/2024/10/25/opinion_open_washing/ this is playing out here.

We need to compost the current culture of lying

Toxic Positivity

Toxic Positivity is a strong #blocking force in most #mainstreaming this is true in both the context of career and life choices, about following “common sense” established paths deemed acceptable or successful by social norms. Where an anti-corporate stance emerges from the frustration with rigid corporate structures and the hollow promises of career advancement, with the fantasy of sheer dedication and hard work. That traditional jobs prioritize profit over people, should lead to a desire to break free from these confines is the criticism. we talk about here.

The Myth of the Temporarily Embarrassed Billionaire

Yes, this myth is stronger in the USA as an ideology that everyone has the potential to achieve immense wealth if they work hard enough. It is pushed as the belief that economic success is a result of individual effort, ignoring systemic inequalities and the role of luck, and that only a tiny minority will make it to this exploiting class. This mindset leads to frustration and disillusionment when success remains elusive despite the years of hard work.

The Commodification of Purpose

In the era of the #deathcult, capitalist societies, purpose and meaning are commodified, equating personal success with material wealth and career achievements. This leads to the dismissal of non-profitable passions and pursuits as hobbies, undermining the truer source of fulfilment in building more #DIY focused alternatives to the current mess. The pressure to conform to profitable career paths stifles humanism, leading to a deep malaise of dissatisfaction and unfulfilled potential.

The Rejection of Toxic Positivity

In every part of life, toxic positivity is the relentless promotion of a positive outlook regardless of circumstances, a path that in the end is detrimental to personal and social health. It masks the social realities, preventing people from addressing any real issues and making the needed, meaningful changes. Simple fulfilment comes from creating one’s own social meaning and purpose, rather than blindly pursuing happiness or success defined by these “common sense” social norms.

The American Dream and Meritocracy

The belief in upward economic mobility is ingrained in American culture, with the dogma that hard work and intelligence guarantee success. This meritocratic path leads to the stigmatization of those who do not achieve financial success, attributing their lack of wealth to personal failings rather than more systemic issues. This creates a culture of blame and shame, over alternative paths, further entrenching people in deadened careers and lives.

The Realities of the Corporate Grind

The narrative of endless hard work leading to success is simply a lie. The corporate grind is monotonous and unfulfilling, in that people, sacrificing their dreams and passions for the promise of future rewards. Recognizing this, people can critically assess their career paths and seek fulfilment through means that align with their more humanistic aspirations.

Conclusion

The rejection of toxic positivity and the myth of the temporarily embarrassed billionaire is crucial for personal and social growth and meaning. By challenging these narratives, people can take paths that align with a more humanistic way, rather than conforming to #mainstreaming expectations. Embracing the philosophy of creating one’s own social meaning, leads to a more fulfilling and authentic life. Be human not a slave as the hippies say

Get Out of the Money Economy – Rediscover the Gift Economy

Utopia

Let’s try and reclaim some words, in the current mess of #mainstreaming, #Utopia is a dirty word #Dystopia is not. The story that imagines a future of continual decline feels more reasonable, even inevitable. It’s easy and kinda enjoyable to picture #apocalyptic paths, given the current state of the world.

With the growth of #deathcult worshipping, the end of history was declared 40 years ago, equating our current social and economic organization as the pinnacle of human achievement. The prevailing #neoliberal system – markets, competition, a gladiatorial struggle for personal betterment – was seen as the only viable one. The myth that individual success trickles down to benefit everyone persists, despite now widespread disbelief and distrust in this what should be obvious to any thinking person – #deathcult

However, we’re so deeply in to everyday “common sense” worship that imagining alternatives feels impossible now, Utopia has become a dirty word, while dystopia is accepted. Reflecting on our childhood wonder at human progress – pilotless planes, robots, space exploration, flying cars—we now see these advancements as threats. Military drones, job-stealing automation, space as a private escape, and flying cars are all tinged with dread.

It’s the system. Whether you support or oppose it, the is a consensus, that the future under this system is rarely viewed with optimism. The promises of market-driven utopia have led to repeated crises like 2008, not the envisioned social prosperity. Even so, we cling to this system, its power inescapable, much like the divine right of kings once was.

Individualization of Collective Imagination

Capitalism’s sells us as a personalized, isolated package. Unlike divine rights or blood-bound royalty, it promotes the idea of control over one’s destiny. This creates a stark divide in experiences, making collective betterment less achievable. Pursuing a better life individually, rather than collectively, becomes the normal path. This social “blindness” stops us from seeing ourselves as we are, as a part of a larger human social experiment.

Even those aware of the system’s flaws live by its tenets, striving for personal success. The fear of revolution or change is partly because of the effort already invested in this individual progress. The idea that there’s an alternative to struggle is overshadowed by the pursuit of these personal goals, leading to a narrowed view of possibilities. We all still blindly worship this #deathcult in our everyday lives.

Capitalism is internalized as the natural way of life. Imagining beyond it is seen as insanity. The greatest progress arises from dire circumstances, where the alternative to suffering is non-existence. Today, comfort smothers the drive for change. Yet, dystopian media normalizes bleak futures, projecting what #climatechaos and social break down will eventually make happen.

Fictional literature and media have always been vital in exploring human futures. The contrast between grim dystopias and hopeful utopias illustrates our capacity for imagining different worlds. Yet, creating believable, relatable utopias is challenging in a world where the status quo dominates. Characters proposing radical change are cast as antagonists, reinforcing the idea that reform, not revolution, is the only path.

The Room for Optimism

Despite this, the fact we’re discussing these issues means there’s hope. Remembering that this current system is a tiny step in human history, that human social organization is dynamic and changeable. Reflecting on past norms—such as ancient philosophers, fascist regimes, or the lack of modern conveniences—shows how transient and idiotic we can be in the belief in a single “static” path.

Rejecting the idea that our pinnacle achievement is building bigger shopping malls is basic. Utopia isn’t a dirty word; it’s an aspiration made dirty by those who fear its potential. Utopias aren’t meant to be achieved, but to serve as light guiding us forward. Embracing utopian thinking means daring to imagine better futures, challenging the status quo, and recognizing our capacity for taking different paths to profound social evolution.

So, let’s reclaim utopia, not as an endpoint, but as a direction, an ideal to strive towards, illuminating our path through the darkness of the present mess. Be part of this path https://opencollective.com/open-media-network you can hold the light, the #OMN is building real world #openweb native alternatives, together we can be this step.

Why We Can’t Enjoy life

There is a #mainstreaming story that progressives are incapable of enjoying anything and are easily offended, wildly over-analytical, snobby, pretentious, and injecting politics into everything. There is some truth to this, many left-leaning people would admit, reluctantly, that we can be pretty crap and insufferable at times. But it’s important to see the difference between the self-critical view leftists have of themselves not being able to enjoy anything and the propagandist one coming from the right or centre of politics.

Rage Against the System

The right-wing shouts at us that left #fahernistas can’t enjoy anything because they are soft, overthink things and are easily offended, “woke”. They forget that it’s not only a weakness, but more often inarticulate rage and anger, a rage towards an insufferable world people just can’t swallow and accept. Anger that builds up with every minute people have to spend pretending everything’s all right.

Anger, in reality, comes bursting out at the worst or most absurd of times. But think for a moment, it’s not the anger that is the problem. The anger is fine; it’s more that it is often misplaced. Many young, progressive learning, anti-status quo people are just that: angry, confused, and thus lost. Rightfully angry, confused, and lost, but with a social created, unfortunate, lack of vision on when and where to channel this anger.

The Curse of Awareness

So why do leftists find it so hard to enjoy things?

The News: The way #mainstreaming news works is you pick a tribe and only watch what the people from your tribe show on the #dotcons and TV. You foam at the mouth with a pitchfork in hand, go online with a burning touch to shout and complain about either the illiterate rednecks or the college graduate cross-dressing paedophiles. From the grassroots activist sidelines, this seems equally weird and entertaining because we don’t currently have a news cycle backing anyone like us. Our understanding of how privately owned media works makes most news indigestible. No matter how “objective” this tries to be, when news is a business, it will never cross certain boundaries. Boundaries like questioning the system or pitching an alternative to the status quo.
National Identity: We might be proud of our heritage and culture, but #class consciousness makes us understand that we have far more in common with workers of all nations than we do with the #rulingclass of our own country. Patriotism without class consciousness feels wrong and is wrong. We cringe at hyper-patriotic empty gestures because we understand that 9 out of 10 times, if we get sent to the front line in the next war, we’ll be shooting other working-class comrades while the sons of our presidents sit comfortably on a far away beach.
Self-Help and New Age Philosophy: These are the two deep fake philosophies out there. The self-help military-industrial complex implies that everything can be solved if you figure out the puzzle which is the world economy and use a special cheat code to get yourself out of any mess. The latter idea, quasi-spiritual enlightenment, pitches internalizing the world and creating a world of your “own” as a coping mechanism. We can’t enjoy either of these because they are commodified beyond recognition and based on an unrealistic #stupidindividualism that we can and should handle everything on our own.
Our Jobs: We struggle to enjoy our jobs because we understand that at the end of the day, we’re being exploited. No matter what industry or position, your boss does not pay you even close to how much you make them. This fact makes all the talk of purpose, family, and a cause sound like pathetic, childish gesturing.
Mindless Consumption: We can’t fully enjoy consumerism because we know that the high of a purchase is followed by the hangover realization that we’re still as lost as we were before. The lie that we can find purpose in mindless consumption is the greatest epidemic of our time.

The Price of Seeing Clearly

The main takeaway of all these examples is simple: the progressive activist understands that in the current system, whether it’s mindless shopping, new chauvinism, job unfulfillment, or quasi-philosophy, there is a struggle between our wants to see the world and constant manipulation steering us away from this. This awareness is why life feels so miserable. Yes, we see the Zombies behind the masks of the puppets, and it’s hard to enjoy the show when you know it’s death dancing behind the #mainstreaming illusion.

Q. “WHAT ABOUT HUMAN NATURE?” That simple question posits an even simpler view of human consciousness and decision-making. It says man is flawed—through his greed, jealousy, and selfishness—and that as such, he would destroy and corrupt any system which doesn’t utilize those very flaws. The way capitalism, for example, does with greed, by throwing us in the gladiatorial arena, or to be more realistic, a children’s sandbox, of the free market—where the greediest win. Yes, it’s a mess.

We worshipped a #deathcult for 40 years

We need to understand that our shared #mainstreaming for the last 40 years has been built on the path of #neoliberalism a political and economic ideology that advocates for minimal state intervention in the economy, emphasizing free markets, deregulation, privatization, and a reduction in government spending on social programs. This path emerged as a dominant force in the late 20th century, particularly from the 1980s onwards, under the influence of #MargaretThatcher in the UK and #RonaldReagan in the US.

Historical Context

We can find the seed of this mess, after World War II, many European countries adopted social democratic policies, influenced by the pressure of strong socialist movements and the existence of socialist states like the #USSR, these provided extensive social benefits, full employment, free healthcare, and education. To avoid the very real potential of revolutions and maintain stability, European nations implemented social welfare programs internally while still externally engaging in exploitative economic practices in their former colonies.

Emergence of Neoliberalism

By the 1980s, the capitalist system faced renewed crises, including economic recessions, a decline in profitability. In response, the old fundamentalism of #classicliberalism renamed as #neoliberal pushed for a drastic reduction in government intervention and social spending. This shift was driven by the #nastyfew belief that previous social democratic concessions (the social safety net put in place due to the threat of communism) were no longer sustainable or needed and were now ONLY hindering economic growth and profit margins.

Definition and Principles

Neoliberalism is a set of policies and ideas focused on:

Deregulation: Removing government regulations to allow businesses total freedom in how they exploit people and the environment.
Privatization: Transferring public services, commons, and assets to the private sector.
Reduced Public Spending: Cutting redistributive government expenditures on social programs like welfare, healthcare, and education.
Tax Cuts: Lowering taxes for corporations and the wealthy to encourage renewed “investment” and extractive economic growth.
Free Markets: Promoting the idea that the #nastyfew defined markets are the most “efficient” way to allocate resources and solve social “problems”.

Ideological Dogma

Neoliberalism “common sense” asserts that the “free” market, left alone, will “naturally” regulate itself and provide the best outcomes for society. This belief extends to all areas of life, including education, healthcare, and social services, which they push should be subjected to market forces rather than people driven democratic, community or working people’s control.

Consequences

Social and Economic Impact

Increased Inequality: Neoliberal policies lead to growing income and wealth disparities as the rich benefit from tax cuts and deregulation while social safety nets are dismantled for the poor.
Reduced Worker Protections: Labour unions and pro-labour legislation are weakened, leading to lower wages and worse working conditions.
Privatization of Public Services: Essential services like healthcare and education become more expensive and less accessible to the poor.
Environmental Degradation: Deregulation leads to pollution and environmental harm as companies prioritize profit over sustainability. A urgent current example: We have pushed #climatechaos hard with this mess.

Global Impact

IMF and World Bank Policies: Developing countries are subjected to structural adjustment programs by international financial institutions, which require them to implement neoliberal policies in exchange for loans. This leads to severe social and economic hardship in the developing world.
Exploitation of Developing Countries: This leads to global inequalities by maintaining exploitative relationships between wealthy and poorer nations.

Criticism and Opposition

Critics show that neoliberalism prioritizes the interests of the wealthy and corporations at the expense of the environment, working class and the poor. Undermining democracy by concentrating economic and political power in the hands of a few, leading to increased social unrest and current right-wing shift and resulting political and environmental instability.

https://youtu.be/cIYfiRyPi3o?si=OMniobLE_rgCsOAg This video was removed from the #dotcons

Conclusion

It’s very simple, the people pushing #neoliberalism, lied about economic efficiency and growth and the associated significant social costs, including increased inequality, reduced public welfare, and environmental degradation. Their focus on market solutions for all problems disregards the realities of social and economic life, leading to widespread criticism and calls for alternative approaches that prioritize real change and challenge.

In the era of #climatechaos, this shift to Neoliberalism has obviously been a #deathcult that sadly continues to shape our “common sense” and has been central to our lives for the last 40 years.

We can’t keep going down the path, you can find different paths here https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

The West’s Climate-Catastrophe is “native” to the mess we are in

We need pathways to sustainable, equitable and just societies

The idea of mixing capitalism and socialism in a “fluffy” path is proposed as a solution to the shortcomings of both systems. This notion is especially popular among well-meaning liberals who point to European social democracies as examples of successful mixed economies. However, any deeper examination reveals contradictions and challenges inherent in attempting to merge these fundamentally opposing systems.

Capitalism vs. Socialism: The Fundamental Contradiction

Capitalism is characterized by private property, markets, and the private ownership of capital. It operates on exploitative wage labour, where workers sell their labour power to capitalists, who, in turn, use this labour to create commodities sold in capitalist markets. The primary goal is profit maximization, this leads to class divisions: the capitalist class (a small, wealthy minority) and the working class (the huge majority who sell their labour).

Socialism, on the other hand, advocates for the communal ownership of the means of production, such as land, resources, and factories. It emphasizes worker control and management of enterprises, aiming for a society where economic decisions are made democratically to serve the needs of the majority. Socialism seeks to abolish wage labour and private property in favour of collective ownership and cooperative management.

The Mixed Economy Myth

Proponents of a mixed economy argue that integrating elements of both systems can harness the benefits of capitalism (such as innovation and efficiency) while mitigating its downsides (like inequality and exploitation) through socialist policies (like social safety nets and public services). However, this view is blind to the deeper ideological and practical conflicts between capitalism and socialism.

Incompatibility of Goals: Capitalism thrives on competition, profit, and private ownership, which inherently leads to inequality and exploitation. Socialism eliminates these foundations by promoting equality, collective ownership, and cooperation. Trying to mix these systems results in a compromised form of capitalism rather than any genuine blend.
Social Democracy: Often cited as successful examples of mixed economies, European social democracies (e.g., Scandinavian countries) actually represent capitalism with extensive welfare states rather than hybrids of capitalism and socialism. These countries maintain capitalist structures of private ownership and markets while providing comprehensive social services funded through taxation. Historically, the rise of social democracy was influenced by the threat of socialism, leading capitalist states to adopt welfare measures to appease the working class and avoid revolutionary upheaval.
Sustainability Issues: The concessions of social democracy are unsustainable in the long run within a capitalist framework. As capitalism requires constant growth and profit maximization, social programs are frequently under threat of cuts, especially during economic downturns. The capitalist class has a vested interest in reducing welfare spending to increase profits, leading to a erosion of social benefits over time.

The Role of Imperialism

An often overlooked aspect of social democracies is their reliance on imperialist exploitation. Wealthy nations frequently sustain their high living standards and social programs through economic relationships that exploit poorer countries. This global inequality allows rich nations to enjoy the benefits of capitalism and socialism-like welfare simultaneously, but it perpetuates global injustice and dependency.

Moving Beyond the Mixed Economy

For those who seek to address the issues of capitalism, the solution lies not in a superficial mix but in a fundamental restructuring towards socialism. This involves:

Democratizing the Economy: Shifting control of enterprises from private owners to workers and communities.
Abolishing Wage Labour: Ensuring that all workers benefit directly from the fruits of their labour, rather than enriching a small capitalist class.
Prioritizing Human Needs: Redirecting economic activity to meet the needs of the majority rather than the profit motives of a few.

Conclusion

While the idea of mixing capitalism and socialism might seem appealing to our more progressive #mainstreaming crew, it ultimately fails to address the root contradictions between these systems. Socialism involves a profound transformation of economic and social relations, to build a path to a society based on equality, cooperation, and democratic control.

They are different projects, we need pathways towards this equitable and just society https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

#spiky #fluffy # socialdemocracy #MixedEconomy

Why We Need the Open Media Network (#OMN)

The Challenge of Mainstream Media

#Mainstreaming media is dominated by establishment interests that have perfected the art of propaganda. This media landscape is highly effective at brainwashing the public, making it difficult to foster a social and political change and challenge. Without altering this media ecology, progressive movements stand little chance against the overwhelming influence of #traditionalmedia.

#openweb “native” progressive media plays a crucial role in countering this propaganda. It empowers people by amplifying their voices and holding those in power accountable.

The Necessity of Alternative Media

Independent Reporting: Progressive media platforms operate without the influence of corporate forces, advertisements, or outside money. This independence allows them to challenge the prevailing narratives and offer alternative perspectives and paths.
Amplifying Voices: These #openweb platforms provide a space for voices that are ignored or suppressed by mainstream media. This inclusivity is vital for any healthy democratic discourse, liberalism needs this too.
Fighting Misinformation: By breaking the media narrative that fosters fear and conflict, progressive media helps to create a more informed, active and engaged public.
Empowering Movements: For progressive movements to succeed, they need a media infrastructure that supports their goals. Progressive media acts as a crucial pillar in this infrastructure, offering the tools, networking and platforms necessary for advocacy and change.

The Role of the Open Media Network (OMN)

The Open Media Network (#OMN) is essential for building a new media ecosystem that supports progressive change. Here’s why:

Decentralized Control: OMN aims to create a decentralized media network, reducing the control of media oligopolies and increasing the diversity of voices and perspectives.
Community-Driven: OMN empowers communities to produce and share their content, fostering a democratic and participatory media landscape.
Transparency and Accountability: By adhering to #4opens principles like open data, open source, and open processes, OMN ensures transparency and accountability in media production and distribution.
Sustainability: OMN can provide a sustainable model for progressive media by leveraging community support and funding mechanisms. This financial independence is crucial for maintaining editorial integrity.

The current media environment is heavily skewed towards establishment interests, making it difficult for progressive movements to gain any traction. Progressive #openweb media outlets are crucial in challenging this status quo by offering independent, accountable, and inclusive reporting. The Open Media Network (OMN) is pushes to building a decentralized media ecosystem that empowers communities and fosters genuine democratic discourse. Supporting these initiatives is vital for the success of any progressive movements worldwide.

https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

Why Mainstreaming Politics is Crap

Common sense “fake” news and #mainstreaming propaganda fuel division, confusion, and empower reactionary forces, this rise of fascism isn’t a random phenomenon, it’s a direct result of the failures of our crap #mainstreaming politics. Corrupt elitists, indifferent politicians, and sell-out parties abandoned people, creating a vacuum that far-right forces are all too eager to fill.

Yet, most people still cling to the idea that these broken institutions will somehow save us. That’s the oxymoron. The path that created the problem won’t be the one to fix it. We need to step outside this collapsing framework, build grassroots alternatives, and reclaim power through more collective action.

Today’s left-wing politics, represented by figures like Biden, Stammer and Macron, has long ago devolved into centrism that tries to balance market interests with bureaucratic oversight. This blend of mess results in policies that are neither here nor there, failing to inspire or facilitate any genuine change and challenge. The only real appeal of this kind of politics is that it’s “better than the alternative,” often perceived as extreme right-wing or fascist ideologies.

This centrist approach, can now be seen as the “extreme centre” which is fundamentally immoderate. That moderates, and centrist politicians, lack positive arguments and real vision. They focus on pragmatism and compromise, reducing politics to a series of performative acts rather than any democratic outcomes. This lack of compelling vision makes centrism unappealing and devoid of substantive change.

Figures like Obama and Tony Blear were “successful” because they projected an image of visionary leadership, though, in reality, their vision was about maintaining the status quo through right wing pragmatism and compromise. This kind of leadership is a performance of having a vision rather than the actual implementation of transformative ideas we need.

There is a symbiotic relationship between centrist politicians and right-wing populists. Right-wing leaders like Trump, Farage and Johnson adopt a persona of being a “yokel” or an “idiot,” which elicits scorn from the educated classes. This dynamic appeals to those who resent the cultural #mainstreaming, creating an “us vs. them” mentality. Voters feeling marginalized by the #mainstreaming mess and disdain to find solace in supporting these populist figures as a #blinded form of “rebellion”.

Right-wing populists perform a caricature of fascism or idiocy to appeal to their base, while centrist politicians push a veneer of moral superiority. This dynamic creates a dichotomy, where voters feel compelled to choose between two unappealing options. Both sides thrive on this manufactured conflict, ensuring their ongoing mutual dominance in the political paths.

The media plays a significant role in this broken system. The upcoming UK election demonstrates that this mainstream media is not a reliable ally for the public. There is a pressing need for alternative media that amplifies real diverse voices to present genuine political options outside the false dichotomy of centrism and right-wing populism.

Mainstream politics today, dominated by a centrist approach, lacking vision and substance, is inherently flawed. The symbiotic relationship between centrist politicians and right-wing populists creates a political landscape that stifles any progress and any needed change and challenge. To compost this mess, it is crucial to grow alternative media like the #OMN alongside social and political movements that offer real, transformative paths and solutions.

https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

General elections are a travesty of democracy

The need for the #OGB (Open Governance Body) stems from a growing recognition of the limitations of traditional democratic systems, as highlighted in a recent article by The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jun/06/general-elections-democracy-lottery-representation Progressive movements are increasingly advocating for alternatives, and the OGB represents such an initiative within the #openweb community.

The guardian article argues that general elections result in a form of representation that is skewed, and the voices of many are left unheard. In response, progressive voices within the #mainstreaming community are calling for the implementation of projects like the OGB as a native governance model.

The OGB provides a more inclusive and representative form of governance, where decisions are made collectively and transparently. This addresses the shortcomings of existing democratic systems by leveraging digital technologies and community participation. However, the success of the OGB depends on the support of coders and community members who are willing to contribute their skills and efforts to development. This initiative requires both technical expertise and a commitment to the #4opens path.

In summary, the #OGB represents a promising approach to governance within the #openweb paths, offering an alternative to traditional democratic structures and emphasizing transparency, inclusivity, and community-driven decision-making.

We can’t keep making the same mess, please.

Bridget Kendall in conversation

Join Worcester College Provost, David Isaac CBE, as he interviews leading role models about their lives and careers.

Bridget Kendall MBE has spent over 40 years as a BBC journalist, joining as a graduate trainee in 1983. She was BBC Moscow correspondent from 1989 to 1994, covering the final years of the Soviet Union and the first years of post-Soviet Russia. She was BBC Washington correspondent from 1994 to 1998 during the Clinton Presidency. From 1998 to 2016 she held the senior role of BBC Diplomatic correspondent, reporting on major global trends and crises, and analysing their impact on Britain and the world.

Kendall was the first woman elected Master of Peterhouse, Cambridge in 2016. She was appointed a Deputy Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cambridge in 2020, the same year in which she was made an Honorary Fellow of the British Academy. She is also an Honorary Fellow of St Antony’s College, Oxford and Lady Margaret Hall. Her awards include the James Cameron Award for distinguished journalism, a Bronze Sony Reporter of the Year award, a special award for International Reporting from the Political Studies Association and an MBE in the 1994 New Year’s Honours list.

A Cambridge child studies #Oxford to study Russian, she goes onto the BBC

This is the #mainstreaming view of history. How much should we move away from the current mess? What other history’s can we tell, what is a useful and safeish path next, as this current path is ending.

How would you change if the message from the top changes.

Speaking a foreign language bracks down barriers