Hmm it seems to me that posts amplifying fascist propaganda and talking points (framed as how horrible or stupid they are, but still) do just as well here as on Bluesky -- and "“posting about what people in power are saying and doing" (as Rose says) is certainly common here. And they're both as destructive here as on corporate media or Bluesky. And at least on Bluesky there are a lot of posts from abolitionist organizers with useful suggestions about what people can be doing, and posts from Black Americans highlighting the Jim Crow analogy -- which most white Mastodonians don't seem to have a lot of understanding of.

So while I certainly agree that in principle alternative social media has a lot to offer in this moment -- organizing on social media can help in the fight against fascism, and it's valuable to center or your organizing on platforms where the means of production aren't controlled by fascists -- the reality falls short in a lot of ways.

So I also disagree with the idea that running, moderating, and participating in federated social media is inherently in opposition to fascism. No, to the contrary, the admins and moderators who are tolerating -- and often contributing to -- anti-Blackness and anti-BIIPOC norms here are *reinforcing* fascism. So are developers and organizations that who don't prioritize safety functionality, and people who are supporting those projects at the expense of ones that do -- or people who only (or almost exclusively) supp[ort cis-led projects. The hard, unsexy work of organizing requires foregrounding racial and gender equity.

That's a good thing to change, and I think it is changeable. My thread at infosec.exchange/@thenexusofpr… is a step in that direction , as is the organizing work @waprivacy is doing on privacy. But it won't just chage itself so this perspective really needs to be foregrounded.

@rwg @inquiline

The Nexus of Privacy

2025-02-16 02:59:44

Organizing on decentralized social networks (1 / N)

The Nexus of Privacy is planning a series of online discussions and video/phone calls focusing on organizing on decentralized social networks. There's a range of topics to cover, including looking at the tradeoffs between the different platforms for different use cases, brainstorming how organizers can leverage these platforms, easy ways to start exploring, and ways for groups to move as a whole.

privacy.thenexus.today/organiz… has a CryptPad survey (as well as a link to a version using Google Forms if you prefer that)

Or if you prefer, here are a couple of polls along with open questions, that cover some of the key information

#organizing #fediverse #bluesky

Organizing on decentralized social networks

A survey!

^{Jon (The Nexus Of Privacy)}

Yeah. How often do you see admins of larger instances back Black people here challenging the anti-Blackness in fedi? How often do you see them intervene? Do moderation teams have the necessary cultural competency (and if so are people getting paid for their expertiese or is it relying on free labor from marginalized communities)?

And @emma you're right that there's an overall question about how people know what instances have enough of a problem of problematic behavior to defederate. But also even when track records are known opinions differ. looking up fosstodon on The Bad Space for example, there are some blocks, some silences, some unrestricted federation.

It's complicated. Defederation is powerful but blunt, it works for the worst-of-the-worst but when you've got an instance where most of the people are fine but a handful say casually-but-not-blatantly anti-Black, anti-Indigenous, etc things and mods don't take action ... maybe better to block individuals? But that's got it's own complications as well -- how do you get information on which individuals to block preemptively?

@inquiline @rwg

It's all related -- quote boosts, Mastodon's refusal to support local-only posts (and hosting company's refusal to support forks like Glitch and Hometown that *do* have that support) or reply controls, the opposition to allow-list federation ... the culture affects what functionality gets prioritized and funded.

That said, I don't want to paint with too broad a brush, there *are* lots of admins and moderators and individuals here who really are participating in ways that are in opposition to fascism and big tech -- DAIR's combination of a microblogging instance and PeerTube is a great example. Some of fedi's (intermittent) values are very opposed to fascist norms -- for example the emphasis (by some, not others) on consent.

And I do think things are changing here. GoTo Social's getting a lot of momentum and and *is* prioriting safety functionality and consent. Website League and island networks are very interesting directions.

So I'm not pushing back on the possibilities, just objecting to the framing that it activity here is *inherently* anti-fascist (etc) or "for Rose to write this article, the only way the argument works is to forget the existence of the fediverse."

To me it's more that she's focusing on the activities that aren't helpful (on any platform) and ignoring the ones that are organizing and building power on social networks, complementing real-world organizing. But it's not a fedi-specific oversight; she also doesn't mention Blacksky, or the role that social networks can play in complementing locally-based mutual aid efforts), but that's not tied to a particular network -- several local organizing projects countering Moms for Liberty in Washington have leveraged Facebook effectively.

@rwg @emma @inquiline