The tension between different approaches to activism highlights the need for creative synthesis in addressing the broader social and ecological crises we face.
Fluffy vs. #Spiky: A Diversity of Tactics The idea that both working within the system (#fluffy) and challenging it directly (#spiky) are necessary is central to creating a robust and adaptive movement. Building “common ground” is crucial, but the left’s fragmentation under decades of #neoliberalism and #postmodernism has left it standing in a metaphorical swamp. Moving forward requires reclaiming a grounded, shared space—intellectually, socially, and ecologically.
Revisiting #Modernism A return to modernist thinking—despite its flaws—can offer clarity and purpose, emphasizing structure, progress, and shared goals. Balancing this with the experimental potential of socialism and anarchism, especially on a distributed scale (enabled by federation and P2P technologies), creates room for growth outside the mainstream.
Liberal Social Democracy as a Step Back While the ultimate goal may lie in more radical transformations, liberal social democracy can serve as a stepping stone away from the creeping threat of fascism. This pragmatic approach helps to stabilize the ground for further progress.
Deathcult vs. #Lifecult: The Cultural Meta-Narrative The #deathcult metaphor encapsulates a culture driven by greed, materialism, and ecological destruction. The #lifecult offers a messy but hopeful alternative, grounded in values like ecology, social justice, and collective care. The process of “composting”—transforming negative aspects into fertile ground—is a powerful metaphor for this shift.
The Role of Undercurrents True hope lies in the undercurrents of social movements that challenge mainstream culture and provide alternative narratives. These undercurrents, messy as they may be, are where transformative potential resides. A focus on “life-affirming values” helps to communicate with those who may be entrenched in rationality or blinded by the logic of the #deathcult.
Suggestions for Moving Forward: Focus on finding shared values between different activist approaches to grow solidarity while respecting diversity of tactics. Encourage scalable experimentation with alternative economic and social models, with federation and P2P tech to scale these efforts. Storytelling using metaphors like #deathcult and #lifecult to reframe conversations and make complex issues relatable and actionable. Education and agitation to challenge apathy and #stupidindividualism by helping people reconnect with collective action and shared purpose. Ecology of movements, its helpful to recognize the importance of both reformist (#fluffy) and radical (#spiky) approaches as complementary rather than contradictory.
And most importantly please try not to be a #blocking prat.
Honesty is about laying out a stark accurate critique of the current situation, particularly the barriers posed by #mainstreaming progressives, #NGO parasites, and the broader tech churn. We need to build on the vision for mediating this #blocking and advancing real change through the #OMN projects.
First step is to mediate the blocking, to compost the #shitpile by applying the #4opens rigorously as a filter to weed out the 90% of crap. Projects that don’t align with these principles should be sidelined. Then we need more trust networks, like #OGB and OMN to build trust-based paths, reducing noise and focusing on genuine contributions.
Shift focus from #fluffy to #spiky, by calling out #NGO parasites, to challenge and expose organizations that drain focus and energy without contributing to real change. Push for spiky agendas, embrace messy, hard, and meaningful work rather than safe, feel-good approaches that reinforce the status quo.
Simplify to build complexity, by simplicity first, start with clear tools and frameworks like the 4opens and grow complexity organically through collaborative work. Reject digital drugs, the dotcons’ attempts to lull movements into compliance with endless distractions and complexity masquerading as progress.
Breaking the #mainstreaming trap, by creating focused campaigns targeting progressive allies to pull them out of the mainstream and into trust-based grassroots movements. Use storytelling, art, and direct action to expose the limitations of mainstreaming progressivism.
Build bridges to wider communities, start with small, resilient networks that are human-scale. Expand outward from these trusted cores to bring in diverse voices and new ideas. Avoid purity tests—recognize that we’re all smeared with dotcons culture and approach people where they are. The world we’re building with OMN—a future where simplicity leads to complexity—requires a shift in ideology. It’s about moving people from passive consumption under the #dotcons to active participation in building a better, progressive world.
On this path are there any humans out there? If so, the choice is simple but profound, join efforts like the #OMN. Embrace the tools and principles of the #4opens. Compost the shit and grow something real. The question isn’t whether change is needed—it’s whether we have the courage and wisdom to make it happen. For those ready to move past the #blocking, now’s the time to pick up the shovel. 🌱
What went wrong with this is a classic case of the tension between grassroots ideals and the pressure of existing within a larger system that is fundamentally at odds with those ideals. The #fediverse, along with other #openweb movements, succeeds in small, meaningful ways but struggles to scale in a world built on capitalist structures, centralization, and competition. This tension is particularly evident in how projects, despite being technologically sound and #4opens, ideologically aligned with decentralization and openness, gets bogged down in internal messes, conflicts, miscommunication, leading to fragmentation. The messy social side, neglected in tech projects, ends up undermining the success of the broader mission. People focus on code but forget about the human aspects like collaboration, motivation, and building long-term trust, which are equally essential.
As I suggested, the idea to codify some form of “netiquette” or community values, inspired by the #fluffy and #spiky traditions of past projects, is crucial. If we don’t address these human and social issues, the technology alone will not be enough. The problem is that by default these communities don’t prioritize this, and that’s where the breakdown occurs. What we have now is that the fediverse’s very existence is a victory, but that doesn’t mean the battle is over. The grassroots growth, driven by passion rather than profit, shows that alternatives to #dotcons capitalist, centralized tech are possible, but in-till we find a way to address the underlying social fracture, gatekeeping, burnout, #blocking and conflicts, we’ll continue to push the same mess.
The victory is not in “winning” in capitalist terms, but in maintaining spaces where alternatives can thrive and where people can connect based on shared #4opens values, rather than imposed structures. The real challenge is to keep these spaces open, resilient, and focused, for this to balance we need to address not just the tech, but the people behind it. We could, and should reboot #socialhub to be this space, It’s where it started, and did a good job for a while.
The recent #XR event at Windsor received little meaningful media coverage, well not in my filter bubble, it was totally invisible, which is disappointing considering the importance of the action. The video I made of last year’s London event is still relevant and illustrates the same core issues, even though this time they did take the step of staging an occupation. You can watch last year’s video: XR “is this all the is” 2023.
This brings us to an important point: the balance between fluffy (non-confrontational, peaceful protest) and #spiky (more direct, disruptive action) tactics. Both approaches have their place and, when used in tandem, they can be very effective. The key is understanding that they complement each other—#fluffy actions draw in broad support and media attention, while #spiky actions put real pressure on the power structures by creating disruption that cannot be ignored.
It’s crucial to recognize that with increased effectiveness comes a cost: repression. That’s the paradox of impactful activism. The presence of repression is a useful indicator that what you’re doing is working, a sign that you are challenging the status quo in a way that makes those in power uncomfortable. If there is no repression, then it likely means your actions are not having any impact.
So, we must continue to push this balance and accept that some degree of repression is a natural outcome of effective resistance. If we want to see real change, we need to be prepared for the response that comes when you genuinely challenge entrenched power. The goal is not to avoid repression, but to balance it in a way that sustains the movement and keeps up the pressure.
The concept of the “good society” is the most socially profound questions we can ask, especially at this moment of history. When we face the overlapping crises of climate change, political instability, and extreme economic inequality, the question of what constitutes a “good society” becomes urgent and pressing.
There should be an obvious view that there is a need for a real change of path, to address the severe social, political, and environmental mess we have made of our time, we need more than just incremental change—we need a fundamental shift in how we think about and act in society. This involves rethinking our economic, political, and social systems in ways that enhance the freedoms and well-being of the majority, rather than concentrating wealth and power in the hands of a few. This path we need leads us to break from the current #stupidindividualism of #deathcult worship to take a path to build a very different “good society”. Not the current #mainstreaming one of the minimalist state advocated by #libertarians, nor the highly constricted state envisioned by #neoliberalism. Instead, we have options, the #fluffy path of rejuvenated European social democracy or a new American progressive capitalism—a twenty-first-century version of the Scandinavian welfare state. Or the more #spiky path of #openweb native anarchism or #4opens metadata driven socialism.
What we cannot do is live in the #neoliberalism that has dominated the political and economic landscape for the past 40 years, with the concentration of wealth and power among the nasty few eroding the lives of the nicer meany, with resulting undermining of democratic institutions and social bindings. Our current path, claims to promote “free markets,” has been lying to us, imposed new rules for the benefit of the wealthy and powerful, socializing losses and privatized gains at the expense of the broader society. The 2008 financial crisis, where governments bailed out banks with taxpayer money, while the bankers themselves reaped enormous profits, is a prime example of this. This led to economic inequality, political corruption, and a loss of faith in social democratic paths. It is a road to fascism at worst and ecological and social break down at best, please let’s step away from this mess.
On the fluffy path, there is a role for government, a role to play in creating a “good society.” This involves using the economic system to provide people with the resources needed to open the range of options available to them in life. This, in turn, enhances their freedom to act and live up to their potential. Its basic humanism. This path to the good society, would address the deprivations faced by those with low incomes, ensuring access to basic needs like healthcare, education, and housing. The assumption that economic rights and political rights are inseparable is core to this path. That freedom can only be achieved when people have the economic security to exercise their political rights.
The conception of “freedom” promoted by neoliberal thinkers like Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman led us down a dangerous path. While they argued for “free markets” and minimal government intervention, in practice, this restricts freedom for the many while expanding it for the few. The deregulation of markets and the reduction of taxes on the wealthy leads to a concentration of power that threatens the foundations of the #fluffy social democracy path. If we stay on this current path, it will lead us to a twenty-first-century version of authoritarianism, where advances in science and technology are used to surveil and control us. In this Orwellian scenario, truth is sacrificed to power, and the freedoms of the majority are eroded.
What would a path to a “good society” look like, that prioritizes the well-being and freedom of the many over the wealth and power of the few? From a #spiky view, this would need fundamentalist change that frees us to take very different paths. There are seeds for this in the #OMN#OGB#makeinghistory and #indymediaback etc. For people who doubt, the two paths, projects, will work fine at the same time, many people push the #fluffy path, with its commitment to social democracy, progressive capitalism. The spiky path will work as a balance to this, and maybe replace it if people can get their act together, it’s up to people and communities to decide which path to take in the end.
We are in a global, intellectual, and political war, the paths we take now will determine whether we move towards a just and equitable society, or whether we continue down the path of increasing inequality and authoritarianism, leading to #climatechaos and its death and displacement. It’s good to remember that the good society provides for the needs of all its people, enhances their freedoms, and ensures that democracy and justice are more than just “chatting class” noise. Let’s please take a different path https://opencollective.com/open-media-network
We all now know the system we live under is destroying itself. So, what comes next? Fascism or revolution? We all know it’s coming—the revolution. The signs are all around us, and it’s becoming increasingly clear that a significant shift is on the horizon. The question is no longer “if” but “when” and “how.” So, what’s the plan? How do we prepare for this transformation in a way that ensures we come out on the other side stronger, fairer, and more resilient rather than dead. We need to come together and think seriously about this. The time for passive hope is over; the time for active planning has arrived.
Identify Key Issues and Goals: We need to define what we are fighting for, what does the future we envision look like? What are the core issues that need to be addressed to get there?
Develop Strategies and Tactics: It’s not enough to know what we want; we need to figure out how to achieve it, practical strategies and tactics that can be implemented on the ground.
Build Networks and Alliances: The revolution will not be won by isolated groups working in silos. We need to build strong networks and alliances that can support each other and work together towards common goals.
One of the key outcomes we hope to achieve is the rebooting of an international organization like the #PGA. This organization needs to be dedicated to creating and supporting frontline collective efforts. To build a federated network for resources, information, and coordination, helping to unify and amplify our efforts.
The coming revolution is about, from a spiky perspective, destroying the old or a #fluffy perspective dismantling the old; and building new and better in its place. The fluffy crew at #XR are on a mission to do this https://www.r21c.net what more #spiky path do we have?
I have come to think that care for people requires a high degree of resistance to the culture around us, simply because that culture is dedicated to values that have no concern for people. A tension in society: the disconnect between cultural values and genuine care for people. Actually caring for people requires a strong resistance to prevailing cultural norms that prioritize profit, “efficiency”, and superficial success over human well-being. This resistance is needed to overcome the last 40 years of #postmodern, #neoliberalism that undermines basic humanism.
The Mess
Profit Over People: Our current worship of the #deathcult within capitalist societies, prioritizes profit driven consumerism above all else. Companies and institutions exploit labour, cut costs at the expense of safety and well-being, and focus on short-term gains rather than any long-term sustainability, or even basic survival.
Superficial Success Metrics: Societal success is measured by wealth, status, and material possessions, rather than by well-being, happiness, community health or basic ecological function. This leads to widespread neglect of where value actually lie.
Individualism Over Community: Our dominating “common sense” culture emphasize individual achievement and self-reliance, at the expense of communal support and cooperation. This erodes social bonds and leave individuals isolated and unsupported.
Resistance
Ethical Imperative: Caring for people is an ethical obligation that at best makes us challenge and resist cultural norms that dehumanize or exploit people. It involves advocating for fairness, justice, compassion, and prioritizes a living environment.
Mental and Emotional Health: The pressures of conforming to the #deathcult culture which values productivity and success over well-being leads to mental health issues such as anxiety, depression, and burnout. Joining together to resist these pressures is essential for maintaining mental and emotional health.
Social and Environmental Justice: Resistance is necessary to address systemic inequalities and injustices that are pushed by the dominant culture. To stop the degradation of our ecology, both human and inhuman.
Making Resistance Happen
Advocacy and Activism: Engaging in #NGO advocacy and #spiky activism to promote and push policies and practices that build human well-being over profit. This includes strong ecological policies, supporting labour rights, affordable healthcare, sustainability, and education etc.
Community Building: Fostering real, supportive communities of mutual aid, solidarity, and collective well-being. This involves creating open non-commercial spaces where people can come together, share resources, and support one another.
Alternative Value Systems: Promoting and practising alternative systems that emphasize care, empathy, and interdependence. This can be through #spiky#DIY activism culture, like squatting, protest camps or more lifestyle #fluffy choices, such as minimalism or voluntary simplicity, and through supporting businesses and organizations that prioritize ethical practices in the #dotcons.
Personal Practices: This is a harder path to make meaningful of implementing personal practices that resist cultural pressures, such as mindfulness, self-care, and setting boundaries to protect one’s mental and emotional health. This path can be a problem, as it in part feeds the #stupidindividualism that feeds the very problems in the first place. Encouraging others to do the same can, maybe, help create a ripple effect of resistance and care.
What should you do?
Caring for people in a culture that disregards human well-being requires a conscious and active resistance to dominant values. By advocating for social justice, building supportive #DIY communities, promoting alternative value systems like the #OMN, and maybe practising personal care, we can create a more compassionate, sustainable society. This resistance is not only a needed path, but also a moral imperative. What are you doing today?
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.
NGI Zero open source funding
The @sovtechfund is offering grants to people who contribute to a sustainable open source ecosystem. Grants go up to €300,000 per application and cover three main topics:
With this program, the Sovereign Tech Fund seeks to stimulate an open digital infrastructure: fundamental technologies that enable the creation of other software.
https://sovereigntechfund.de/en/challenges/ #opensource
Three Challenges to Contribute Back to Open Source
We are pouring public funding down the drain agen, these criteria are feeding the #geekproblem not actually trying to take the “problem” out of our geek paths. The people who PUSH this agenda are the problem – please POINT at them and talk about this mess, thanks.
Can we get a link to the people making the agenda, thanks, will try polite conversation #4opens
I worked with the guy who used to be behind the #NGIzero account, we did good stuff with the #EU outreach.
The replacement, I have no idea who they are and getting #blocking
In all these toots am talking past “people” to talk about things/social/groups and not directly to individuals, they are second in all these conversations. This is the place where social value lives. The problem is, we don’t have hardly any of this… which is the subject am talking about.
#blocking is not seeing this, addressing this, the is a lot of blocking going on 😉
Am happy to talk to “individuals” as a first step.
Pouring money down the drain, because the majority of the problems in the #Fediverse and the #openweb are social not technical – if they only fund technical parts of this culture they are feeding the “problem” and this problem is going to pour the resources down the drain.
I understand this is a hard conversation to have, we have to try.
First step is #4opens, WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE PUSHING MESS while doing “good”, step into the light please #openprocess
yes, I understand the fear this creates and the desire to #block, but this then makes the #4opens fail more visible if people wont to use this for the needed change and challenge if they don’t yes it’s more noise what are you signal or noise 🙂
Signal vs Nose.
I find #mainstreaming people to be actually mad and increasingly bad. When do we get more #4opens people pushing change challenge in these #openweb spaces, please?
Am increasingly seeing this #blocking as a culture of fear, or more real as a culture of fear pushed as power politics.
Am thinking meany people will be confused and likely mix signal with noise on this subject.
Who are the bad people, the powerless pushing the #4opens on the #openweb or the powerful Burocrats worshipping the #deathcult while protecting these thin careers in the #mainstreaming
If you find yourself agenst the first and defending the second, then you are the problem.
This makes your behaver noise, and what you do very likely to be more #techshit to compost.
I wonder if people understand what activism is on the #openweb any more?
You talk to people to explane why they are doing WRONG, and at the same time you push them as HARD as you can to change their wrong behaver.
This works best with the #fluffy#spiky debate as a core part of this process.
People who keep saying “why can’t we all get along”, and “wouldent it go better if we were nice to each other” and the PROBLEM blocking the activism from having the needed affect…
Title: The Spiky Fluffy Debate: Reflections on the Extinction Rebellion Event
Opening shot of London streets bustling with cars and people.
Narrator: In 2019, the Extinction Rebellion movement took the world by storm with its call for urgent action on climate change. Thousands of people took to the streets, demanding that governments take concrete steps to mitigate the effects of the climate crisis. But did the movement live up to its promise?
Cut to an interview with a protester.
Protester: I went to the #XR event thinking that they might have learned from the history of activism about how not to be pointless.
Narrator: Our protagonist went to the event with high hopes, hoping for a clever and spiky fluffy debate that would challenge the status quo. But what did they find?
Cut to footage of the Extinction Rebellion event.
Narrator: Our protagonist found a diversity of #fluffy “education” spaces being pushed over by cars and tourists. The dominant outreach was all dogmatic and fluffy, with NGOs asking the government to act. There was no consensus for direct action, and the police moved the protesters back into narrow “permitted” penned-in spaces.
Protester: The only feeling of empowerment was when people overflowed onto the roads and blocked the traffic for a time. But there was no consciousness for this.
Narrator: The second day was the same, with a very slow A to B march and middle-class protesters in animal costumes. The demands went into the government, and a few days later, they were ignored.
Protester: Hundreds of millions of people are going to die, and billions will be displaced over the next few decades, and this was it?
Narrator: Our protagonist met with the original core UK Indymedia crew, who gave him some background on how the event was organized. The outcome of the NGO meetings was a diversity of strategies, starting with four days of fluffy asking for action, followed by a week of #spicy traditional non-violent direct action led by the “just stop oil” group. But this plan was nowhere to be seen during the event.
Cut to footage of the tiny “just stop oil” tent at the event.
Narrator: Our protagonist searched everywhere for announcements and people making this good plan happen but found nothing. The diversity of tactics was becoming an obvious fig leaf for the NGO crew to push their pointless agenda.
Protester: If any spicy actions came after the government ignored the fluffy demo, then it was not going to get supported.
Narrator: In the end, the event was a disappointment, with no concrete action or plans for the future.
Closing shot of the London streets.
Narrator: The Extinction Rebellion movement may have brought attention to the climate crisis, but without concrete action and a plan for the future, will it make any difference? The spiky fluffy debate may have sparked hope, but it remains to be seen if it will lead to real change.
My text:
I went to the #XR event thinking that they might have learned from the history of activism how not to be pointless. Our online media is very broken so from the information I received I got the impression the might be a clever spiky fluffy debate at the “bigone demo” I was hearing different views with no “facts” in the weeks up to the event I was wondering if I should bring a tents as the was a vibe (hope) that it might be something more than a A to B march. People had said that the were going to take the space around parliament and then refuse to move in till the government excepted the need to do something real about climatechaos. I tried reaching out and searching online to see if something affective like this was planned, but could not find any “facts” or real information.
The dominant outreach was all dogmatic fluffy #NGO path of asking the “government” to act, which was so obviously not going to work that I kept my belief that people could not be this stupid and self-defeating agen. So I keep looking for information that something useful is being planned, I did not find any. So gave up the idea of joining an occupation and instead of a tent and supply’s I packed a small bag full of camera gear and headed to London.
On all the media I use and subscribe to I could not find any info on the event, turning up on the first day people started to arrive, it was a diversity of #fluffy “education” spaces being pushed over by cars and the tourists, the only feeling of empowerment was when people overflowed onto the roads and blocked the traffic for a time, this provided a blessed moment of peace and brought focus free from the car noise, but the was no conciseness for this and the stewards and police moved the people back into narrow “permitted” penned in spaces and the noise and repression of car culture was back to take away our small sense of empowerment.
This was the first day.
The second day more people came, the same #fluffy “education” spaces and a very slow A to B march. It was nice to see the middle classes in their animal costumes, people had gathered, a good thing. But that was it, we were given a bit more space by the police. Our “demands” went into the government, and a few days latter they were ignored.
The were a few more days, I did not go, but from the little I found on my media it was the same.
Earlier at the event I met 3 or the original core UK indymedia crew, they gave me some background on the process of how we ended up repeating such an obviously pointless event in such a time of need for action. It turns out the had been months of #NGO meetings to move the event away from confrontation to being one of “asking for action”, the outcome from the #NGO side was a diversity of stratageys – there would be 4 days of fluffy – the ask – then if (well obviously when) this was ignored there would be a week of #spicy (a new term for #spiky) traditional non-violent direct action #XR protests led by the “just stop oil group”. This was not a bad plan, I was kinda of impressed, a good working example of the spiky fluffy debate, I thought in a moment of hope.
So during the event, I looked everywhere for announcements and people making this good plan happen. I found nothing, what I did find was a tiny “just stop oil” tent, with some teenagers shadowed between the big pushy NGO tents. Agen I was disappointed this “diversity of tactics” was becoming an obvious a fig leaf for the #NGO crew to push there pointless agenda, if any spicy actions came after the government ignored the fluffy demo then it was not going to get supported.
Agen I looked on my media and could not find anything about these actions on Monday or Tuesdays in till my partner who is on Instagram said they were posting a video of a handful of people slow marching round London, this was it. I looked on my media agen but could not find anything about this, looked on XR website, nothing, looked on “just stop oil”, only a email list, telegram channel no information.
At this point I shrugged and though about making this video…
Hundreds of millions of people are going to die and billions will be displaced over the next few decades and this was it… this was it… really this was it?
#ClimateCamp was a radical grassroots direct action movement to directly challenge #climatechaos and raise awareness about climate change and advocate for solutions to mitigate its effects. The movement was made up of a loosely organized network of activists who used a diversity of tactics to achieve their goals. Climate Camps were established in many countries. The movement reached its peak in the late 2000s and early 2010s and had a significant impact on public debate and government policy.
#Protestcamps are gatherings of activists who set up temporary camps in public spaces in order to bring attention to a cause or issue. The goal of these camps is to create a direct action space where people come together, discuss and demonstrate. The camps may range from #fluffy peaceful gatherings to more #spiky disruptive and confrontational events, depending on the nature of the issue protested and the diversity of tactics of the activists involved. Some well-known examples of protest camps include #Occupy, #ClimateCamp
#CriticalMass a decentralized activism movement started in 1992. The movement is centred around a monthly direct action bike ride where participants gather to raise awareness about car culture.
The idea behind Critical Mass is to reclaim public space for cyclists and to assert the right of cyclists to use the roads. The rides are often a festive and celebratory event. The Critical Mass movement has since spread to cities around the world, with similar events taking place in many cities.
Using #openweb tools like #RSS and #ActivityPub has several benefits in the context of direct action and grassroots politics.
Decentralization: RSS and ActivityPub are decentralized technologies that are not controlled by any single entity, making them resistant to censorship and control.
Interoperability: By using open standards like ActivityPub, organizations and individuals can communicate and share content with each other, regardless of the platform they use.
Transparency: The use of #openweb tools can increase transparency and accountability in the political process, allowing for greater public scrutiny and engagement.
Ownership: By using #opensource tools, individuals and organizations can own and control their data, rather than relying on proprietary services controlled by corporations.
Accessibility: By using open web technologies, information can be more easily accessible to those who are marginalized or excluded from the mainstream, enabling more inclusive and equitable participation in the political process.
Direct action and grassroots politics are important tools for effecting social change. Direct action refers to forms of activism that seeks to achieve a goal directly, without intermediaries, often through disruptive or confrontational means. Direct action can include strikes, sit-ins, blockades, and other forms of resistance.
Grassroots politics refers to a political movement or approach that is bottom-up, rather than top-down, meaning it seeks to empower citizens to take action on political issues, rather than relying on traditional power structures such as political parties or government. Grassroots politics aims to give a voice to marginalized or underrepresented communities, and to create change from the ground up.
Together, direct action and grassroots politics offer a way for people to engage in the political process and to bring about change in a democratic and inclusive way. By taking action outside traditional political channels, activists and communities bring about change on issues that they care about.
#Fediverse is a #openweb decentralized social network ecosystem consisting of independent, user-run servers that are all compatible with each other. This allows for a more open and democratic internet experience, as users can choose to participate in a variety of online communities without relying on any single centralized platform.
The Fediverse is seen as a more privacy-friendly alternative to the #dotcons, this is a working “white lie” based on #4opens thinking.
#XR “Extinction Rebellion,” is a global social movement that uses non-violent civil disobedience to protest against the failure of governments to take action on the climate and ecological crisis. The movement seeks to disrupt the status quo and force political leaders to take immediate action to address the crisis. The movement was founded in the UK in 2018 and has since spread to other countries around the world, with a focus on large-scale protests and acts of civil disobedience.
#XR is a protest movement, some people classify XR as a #spiky radical protest movement due to its tactics and goals, but others consider it more liberal because of its commitment to #fluffy non-violence. Ultimately, the classification of XR as radical or liberal depends on individuals looking at the problem, it’s a debate.
Programming and ideology are different areas that intersect. Ideology refers to a set of beliefs, values, and assumptions that shape an understanding of the world and people’s place in it. In the context of programming, ideology comes into play when a programmer brings their often #mainstreaming values and beliefs to the coding they write and the systems they build. You can see this in the copying of the #dtcons to build the #fediverse and how this is now shaping the #openweb
Discussing #postmodernism and the criticism to “isms”. The idea is that blindly following a particular ideology can make a person a “zombie” to limit the ability to think critically. The phrase #nothingnew is used to suggest that fresh thinking on old issues is needed, rather than blindly following existing dead #mainstreaming ideologies. The use of ad hominem arguments, which is a type of logical fallacy that attacks an individual rather than the argument they are making, is clearly #blocking
The #OMN is a project focused on linking alt/grassroots media. In the context of the need for a rebooted #openweb and avoiding the #blocking of this by #fashernista and #geekproblem agenda.
The #OpenWeb is the internet where information and content is accessible to all, regardless of their location, device or network, and can be shared, linked, and re-used without restrictions or barriers imposed by proprietary platforms, walled gardens, or monopolistic practices. It is based on #4opens and aims to provide a more inclusive, equitable, and participatory world.
The #OpenWeb is often contrasted with the #closedweb or “walled garden web”, where content and data are locked behind proprietary platforms, controlled by corporations or governments, and subject to limitations, restrictions, and surveillance. The #dotcons
The #openweb tools do not have the control that the #Eurocrats need to move onto our tools and be a part of our community. This is going to lead to a “invisible” fight, as they are increasingly funding development we face a crisis in the #fediverse A Sheldon crises talking the language of our crew.
Q. Yes, we should keep things people-to-people and avoid getting involved with large hierarchical organizations who will try to appear friendly but will move the development into a more centralized mode which they can then influence and have control over.
What the EU people want I think is a Silicon Valley in the EU. A digital portfolio from which they can project influence internationally and a vehicle for venture capital and new digital markets. If you read their blurb this is what they say, and I don’t have any reason to disbelieve them.
Obviously something like the fediverse doesn’t really fit with the cunning EU plan (fits like a fish riding a bicycle) and so at some point there will be an ideological parting of lovers (perhaps it has already happened, I am not following the NGI conversations).
A. The #mainstreaming funding of the #fedivers is already completely dominated by the #EU all the big projects are funded by #NGI
This is more #fuckup than conspiracy though am shore conspiracy is growing as people see the levers of power and control which comes with money agenda.
It’s an “invisible” hot war, standing aside is not an option.
Q. Maybe there should be a plan for whenever the EU launches some venture capital fediverse product. I expect it would be like what Trump is doing, but under some EU branded “incubator” and maybe with centralized moderation.
Something like that would create a tug-of-love between the revenue of projects and a centralizing agenda. I’ve been around the bloc enough times to know it’s bound to happen. These things are so formulaic.
A. I think that’s jumping ahead of were we are for the next year or two. Most of the People at #NGI pushing this agenda simple do not see the damage they do. Only a tiny number are actively “evil” currently.
We have a opening http://hamishcampbell.com the last few posts are a way to step away from this “crisis”.
Q. It’s like you can see the truck driving towards the cliff edge.
“If you go in that direction, you’ll fall off the edge”.
The driver says “Nah mate, it’s different this time”.
And you watch the truck as it reaches the precipice, and then falls off.
A. yep but need to look in the back of tuck as it’s filled with much of the #fedivers infrastructure that’s going to go over the cliff.
Actavisam is to sit down in front of the truck and refuse to move, while talking to the “press” about the issues #fluffy
Or pour sugar into the truck fual tank in the night #spiky
Standing and watching while shrugging shoulders is kinda #mainstreaming 🙂
