#opensociety — Public Fediverse posts

###

As we preserve and share, we might send open birthday greetings to a man who would surely have understood the importance of Menna’s and Bailey’s arguments: Sir Karl Raimund Popper; he was born on this date in 1902. One of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century, Popper is best known for his rejection of the classical inductivist views on the scientific method, in favor of empirical falsification: a theory in the empirical sciences can never be proven, but it can be falsified, meaning that it can and should be scrutinized by decisive experiments. (Or more simply put, whereas classical inductive approaches considered hypotheses false until proven true, Popper reversed the logic: conclusions drawn from an empirical finding are true until proven false.)

Popper was also a powerful critic of historicism in political thought, and (in books like The Open Society and Its Enemies and The Poverty of Historicism) an enemy of authoritarianism and totalitarianism (in which role he was a mentor to George Soros).

#archives #culture #history #InternetArchive #KarlPopper #memory #OpenSociety #philosophy #philosophyOfScience #politics #publishing #society #Technology

#archives #culture #history #internetarchive #karlpopper #memory

(Roughly) Daily @[email protected] · 2026-07-28 · 08:00 UTC

“Historical oblivion is the default, not the exception”*…

Indeed. And that’s especially true of the institutions that guard the archives that are our cultural heritage. The ongoing transition from physical media sales to digital licensing markets has unleashed a new wave of archival ephemerality, which endangers these memory institutions’ core operations and threatens to plunge society into a digital dark age.

The stakes are high. As Haruki Murakami observed: “Robbing people of their actual history is the same as robbing them of part of themselves. It’s a crime… If our collective memory is taken from us – is rewritten – we lose the ability to sustain our true selves.”

Michael Menna (a Stanford Law Fellow who co-authored the “Our Future Memory” manifesto) and Lila Bailey (Senior Policy Counsel at one of the world’s most crucial repositories, The Internet Archive), call for four digital rights that would allow libraries, archives, museums, and other cultural heritage organizations (“memory institutions”) to uphold their shared public service mission of preserving history and providing access to information…

… We are living through a troubling paradox: Digital technologies have enabled the production and distribution of more information than ever, yet access to that information isincreasingly fragmented and fragile. These technologies should permit us to engage and learn from all the digital content at our fingertips. Instead, many of the basic rights we grew accustomed to in the physical world are now being overtaken by aggressive market tactics that do not reflect the public-interest values the law was meant to protect. If copyright, privacy, and other regulatory frameworks were designed to balance the interests of creators and users with the public’s need to access and contribute to the wealth of human knowledge, then our increasingly digital information economy has thrown that balance out of whack.

In this new media environment, publishers and other content providers have unprecedented power to control knowledge and culture with technical restrictions and exclusionary licensing terms. Governments also have an easier time censoring what people can see by scrubbing their websites and pressuring commercial platforms to do the same. These sudden changes will feel familiar to anyone who has logged onto a streaming service or social media app to find a movie or news story suddenly missing. But for libraries, archives, museums, and other cultural heritage organizations (“memory institutions”), it poses an existential risk to
their core public service mission of preserving culture and protecting history. When these organizations can no longer collect and provide access to digital materials, members of the public cannot place their trust in a stable record—which affects their ability to confidently participate in democratic discourse.

We write this paper from our perspective at the Internet Archive, a nonprofit research library that specializes in web archiving, digitization, and the preservation of media in all forms. We feel the harms from these shifts firsthand and hear many of the same complaints from our partner memory institutions around the world. That shared frustration with today’s digital landscape has given rise to an emerging consensus among libraries, archives, museums, and their allies, calling for better legal protections and practical options to continue their services and preserve cultural memory in today’s information age.

This two-part paper (1) presents the looming threat of “vanishing culture” as a first-order political crisis, and (2) discusses the key role that libraries and other memory institutions can play in meeting that crisis.2 In the first part, we examine the underlying causes of vanishing culture and trace its ripple effects along several different facets of modern life: (a) educational resources, (b) journalistic integrity, (c) civic engagement, (d) religious study, and (e) environmental policy. In the second part, we reintroduce a framework of four rights that would ensure memory institutions’ ability to work together to collect, preserve, and provide access to digital materials. This framework rests on the simple proposition that memory institutions should be allowed to do the same things in the digital world that they’ve historically done in the physical world. It originated in the 2024 statement titled Four Digital Rights for Protecting Memory Institutions Online3 before it became a global rallying cry for the Our Future Memory movement and its growing list of library, archive, and museum signatories. Together, these memory institutions are striving to combat the political causes and effects of vanishing culture by speaking with one voice to the importance of memory work in an age of digital ephemerality. That is why we call on all memory institutions, large and small, to sign onto the Statement and join the movement. Individuals and communities need memory institutions to educate themselves and freely participate in civic life, and every time a content provider lets critical information disappear online, it offers further proof that today’s digital markets alone do not constitute a viable alternative. If things do not change soon, we risk sleepwalking into a future where both memory institutions and the public they serve will become passive consumers, rather than active stewards of human knowledge…

Menna and Bailey explain the situation; unpack the four rights they propose: collection, preservation, access, and collaboration; then issue a call to action.

Eminently worth reading in full: “The Political Threats of Vanishing Culture and the Need to Protect Our Future Memory” (PDF here)

See also Vanishing Culture (full PDF here)

And consider joining me in supporting the Internet Archive.

###

As we preserve and share, we might send open birthday greetings to a man who would surely have understood the importance of Menna’s and Bailey’s arguments: Sir Karl Raimund Popper; he was born on this date in 1902. One of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century, Popper is best known for his rejection of the classical inductivist views on the scientific method, in favor of empirical falsification: a theory in the empirical sciences can never be proven, but it can be falsified, meaning that it can and should be scrutinized by decisive experiments. (Or more simply put, whereas classical inductive approaches considered hypotheses false until proven true, Popper reversed the logic: conclusions drawn from an empirical finding are true until proven false.)

Popper was also a powerful critic of historicism in political thought, and (in books like The Open Society and Its Enemies and The Poverty of Historicism) an enemy of authoritarianism and totalitarianism (in which role he was a mentor to George Soros).

#archives #culture #history #InternetArchive #KarlPopper #memory #OpenSociety #philosophy #philosophyOfScience #politics #publishing #society #Technology

#archives #culture #history #internetarchive #karlpopper #memory

(Roughly) Daily @[email protected] · 2026-07-28 · 08:00 UTC

“Historical oblivion is the default, not the exception”*…

Indeed. And that’s especially true of the institutions that guard the archives that are our cultural heritage. The ongoing transition from physical media sales to digital licensing markets has unleashed a new wave of archival ephemerality, which endangers these memory institutions’ core operations and threatens to plunge society into a digital dark age.

The stakes are high. As Haruki Murakami observed: “Robbing people of their actual history is the same as robbing them of part of themselves. It’s a crime… If our collective memory is taken from us – is rewritten – we lose the ability to sustain our true selves.”

Michael Menna (a Stanford Law Fellow who co-authored the “Our Future Memory” manifesto) and Lila Bailey (Senior Policy Counsel at one of the world’s most crucial repositories, The Internet Archive), call for four digital rights that would allow libraries, archives, museums, and other cultural heritage organizations (“memory institutions”) to uphold their shared public service mission of preserving history and providing access to information…

… We are living through a troubling paradox: Digital technologies have enabled the production and distribution of more information than ever, yet access to that information isincreasingly fragmented and fragile. These technologies should permit us to engage and learn from all the digital content at our fingertips. Instead, many of the basic rights we grew accustomed to in the physical world are now being overtaken by aggressive market tactics that do not reflect the public-interest values the law was meant to protect. If copyright, privacy, and other regulatory frameworks were designed to balance the interests of creators and users with the public’s need to access and contribute to the wealth of human knowledge, then our increasingly digital information economy has thrown that balance out of whack.

In this new media environment, publishers and other content providers have unprecedented power to control knowledge and culture with technical restrictions and exclusionary licensing terms. Governments also have an easier time censoring what people can see by scrubbing their websites and pressuring commercial platforms to do the same. These sudden changes will feel familiar to anyone who has logged onto a streaming service or social media app to find a movie or news story suddenly missing. But for libraries, archives, museums, and other cultural heritage organizations (“memory institutions”), it poses an existential risk to
their core public service mission of preserving culture and protecting history. When these organizations can no longer collect and provide access to digital materials, members of the public cannot place their trust in a stable record—which affects their ability to confidently participate in democratic discourse.

We write this paper from our perspective at the Internet Archive, a nonprofit research library that specializes in web archiving, digitization, and the preservation of media in all forms. We feel the harms from these shifts firsthand and hear many of the same complaints from our partner memory institutions around the world. That shared frustration with today’s digital landscape has given rise to an emerging consensus among libraries, archives, museums, and their allies, calling for better legal protections and practical options to continue their services and preserve cultural memory in today’s information age.

This two-part paper (1) presents the looming threat of “vanishing culture” as a first-order political crisis, and (2) discusses the key role that libraries and other memory institutions can play in meeting that crisis.2 In the first part, we examine the underlying causes of vanishing culture and trace its ripple effects along several different facets of modern life: (a) educational resources, (b) journalistic integrity, (c) civic engagement, (d) religious study, and (e) environmental policy. In the second part, we reintroduce a framework of four rights that would ensure memory institutions’ ability to work together to collect, preserve, and provide access to digital materials. This framework rests on the simple proposition that memory institutions should be allowed to do the same things in the digital world that they’ve historically done in the physical world. It originated in the 2024 statement titled Four Digital Rights for Protecting Memory Institutions Online3 before it became a global rallying cry for the Our Future Memory movement and its growing list of library, archive, and museum signatories. Together, these memory institutions are striving to combat the political causes and effects of vanishing culture by speaking with one voice to the importance of memory work in an age of digital ephemerality. That is why we call on all memory institutions, large and small, to sign onto the Statement and join the movement. Individuals and communities need memory institutions to educate themselves and freely participate in civic life, and every time a content provider lets critical information disappear online, it offers further proof that today’s digital markets alone do not constitute a viable alternative. If things do not change soon, we risk sleepwalking into a future where both memory institutions and the public they serve will become passive consumers, rather than active stewards of human knowledge…

Menna and Bailey explain the situation; unpack the four rights they propose: collection, preservation, access, and collaboration; then issue a call to action.

Eminently worth reading in full: “The Political Threats of Vanishing Culture and the Need to Protect Our Future Memory” (PDF here)

See also Vanishing Culture (full PDF here)

And consider joining me in supporting the Internet Archive.

###

As we preserve and share, we might send open birthday greetings to a man who would surely have understood the importance of Menna’s and Bailey’s arguments: Sir Karl Raimund Popper; he was born on this date in 1902. One of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century, Popper is best known for his rejection of the classical inductivist views on the scientific method, in favor of empirical falsification: a theory in the empirical sciences can never be proven, but it can be falsified, meaning that it can and should be scrutinized by decisive experiments. (Or more simply put, whereas classical inductive approaches considered hypotheses false until proven true, Popper reversed the logic: conclusions drawn from an empirical finding are true until proven false.)

Popper was also a powerful critic of historicism in political thought, and (in books like The Open Society and Its Enemies and The Poverty of Historicism) an enemy of authoritarianism and totalitarianism (in which role he was a mentor to George Soros).

#archives #culture #history #InternetArchive #KarlPopper #memory #OpenSociety #philosophy #philosophyOfScience #politics #publishing #society #Technology

#archives #culture #history #internetarchive #karlpopper #memory

(Roughly) Daily @[email protected] · 2026-07-28 · 08:00 UTC

“Historical oblivion is the default, not the exception”*…

Indeed. And that’s especially true of the institutions that guard the archives that are our cultural heritage. The ongoing transition from physical media sales to digital licensing markets has unleashed a new wave of archival ephemerality, which endangers these memory institutions’ core operations and threatens to plunge society into a digital dark age.

The stakes are high. As Haruki Murakami observed: “Robbing people of their actual history is the same as robbing them of part of themselves. It’s a crime… If our collective memory is taken from us – is rewritten – we lose the ability to sustain our true selves.”

Michael Menna (a Stanford Law Fellow who co-authored the “Our Future Memory” manifesto) and Lila Bailey (Senior Policy Counsel at one of the world’s most crucial repositories, The Internet Archive), call for four digital rights that would allow libraries, archives, museums, and other cultural heritage organizations (“memory institutions”) to uphold their shared public service mission of preserving history and providing access to information…

… We are living through a troubling paradox: Digital technologies have enabled the production and distribution of more information than ever, yet access to that information isincreasingly fragmented and fragile. These technologies should permit us to engage and learn from all the digital content at our fingertips. Instead, many of the basic rights we grew accustomed to in the physical world are now being overtaken by aggressive market tactics that do not reflect the public-interest values the law was meant to protect. If copyright, privacy, and other regulatory frameworks were designed to balance the interests of creators and users with the public’s need to access and contribute to the wealth of human knowledge, then our increasingly digital information economy has thrown that balance out of whack.

In this new media environment, publishers and other content providers have unprecedented power to control knowledge and culture with technical restrictions and exclusionary licensing terms. Governments also have an easier time censoring what people can see by scrubbing their websites and pressuring commercial platforms to do the same. These sudden changes will feel familiar to anyone who has logged onto a streaming service or social media app to find a movie or news story suddenly missing. But for libraries, archives, museums, and other cultural heritage organizations (“memory institutions”), it poses an existential risk to
their core public service mission of preserving culture and protecting history. When these organizations can no longer collect and provide access to digital materials, members of the public cannot place their trust in a stable record—which affects their ability to confidently participate in democratic discourse.

We write this paper from our perspective at the Internet Archive, a nonprofit research library that specializes in web archiving, digitization, and the preservation of media in all forms. We feel the harms from these shifts firsthand and hear many of the same complaints from our partner memory institutions around the world. That shared frustration with today’s digital landscape has given rise to an emerging consensus among libraries, archives, museums, and their allies, calling for better legal protections and practical options to continue their services and preserve cultural memory in today’s information age.

This two-part paper (1) presents the looming threat of “vanishing culture” as a first-order political crisis, and (2) discusses the key role that libraries and other memory institutions can play in meeting that crisis.2 In the first part, we examine the underlying causes of vanishing culture and trace its ripple effects along several different facets of modern life: (a) educational resources, (b) journalistic integrity, (c) civic engagement, (d) religious study, and (e) environmental policy. In the second part, we reintroduce a framework of four rights that would ensure memory institutions’ ability to work together to collect, preserve, and provide access to digital materials. This framework rests on the simple proposition that memory institutions should be allowed to do the same things in the digital world that they’ve historically done in the physical world. It originated in the 2024 statement titled Four Digital Rights for Protecting Memory Institutions Online3 before it became a global rallying cry for the Our Future Memory movement and its growing list of library, archive, and museum signatories. Together, these memory institutions are striving to combat the political causes and effects of vanishing culture by speaking with one voice to the importance of memory work in an age of digital ephemerality. That is why we call on all memory institutions, large and small, to sign onto the Statement and join the movement. Individuals and communities need memory institutions to educate themselves and freely participate in civic life, and every time a content provider lets critical information disappear online, it offers further proof that today’s digital markets alone do not constitute a viable alternative. If things do not change soon, we risk sleepwalking into a future where both memory institutions and the public they serve will become passive consumers, rather than active stewards of human knowledge…

Menna and Bailey explain the situation; unpack the four rights they propose: collection, preservation, access, and collaboration; then issue a call to action.

Eminently worth reading in full: “The Political Threats of Vanishing Culture and the Need to Protect Our Future Memory” (PDF here)

See also Vanishing Culture (full PDF here)

And consider joining me in supporting the Internet Archive.

###

As we preserve and share, we might send open birthday greetings to a man who would surely have understood the importance of Menna’s and Bailey’s arguments: Sir Karl Raimund Popper; he was born on this date in 1902. One of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century, Popper is best known for his rejection of the classical inductivist views on the scientific method, in favor of empirical falsification: a theory in the empirical sciences can never be proven, but it can be falsified, meaning that it can and should be scrutinized by decisive experiments. (Or more simply put, whereas classical inductive approaches considered hypotheses false until proven true, Popper reversed the logic: conclusions drawn from an empirical finding are true until proven false.)

Popper was also a powerful critic of historicism in political thought, and (in books like The Open Society and Its Enemies and The Poverty of Historicism) an enemy of authoritarianism and totalitarianism (in which role he was a mentor to George Soros).

#archives #culture #history #InternetArchive #KarlPopper #memory #OpenSociety #philosophy #philosophyOfScience #politics #publishing #society #Technology

#technology #society #publishing #politics #philosophyofscience #philosophy

(Roughly) Daily @[email protected] · 2026-07-28 · 08:00 UTC

“Historical oblivion is the default, not the exception”*…

Indeed. And that’s especially true of the institutions that guard the archives that are our cultural heritage. The ongoing transition from physical media sales to digital licensing markets has unleashed a new wave of archival ephemerality, which endangers these memory institutions’ core operations and threatens to plunge society into a digital dark age.

The stakes are high. As Haruki Murakami observed: “Robbing people of their actual history is the same as robbing them of part of themselves. It’s a crime… If our collective memory is taken from us – is rewritten – we lose the ability to sustain our true selves.”

Michael Menna (a Stanford Law Fellow who co-authored the “Our Future Memory” manifesto) and Lila Bailey (Senior Policy Counsel at one of the world’s most crucial repositories, The Internet Archive), call for four digital rights that would allow libraries, archives, museums, and other cultural heritage organizations (“memory institutions”) to uphold their shared public service mission of preserving history and providing access to information…

… We are living through a troubling paradox: Digital technologies have enabled the production and distribution of more information than ever, yet access to that information isincreasingly fragmented and fragile. These technologies should permit us to engage and learn from all the digital content at our fingertips. Instead, many of the basic rights we grew accustomed to in the physical world are now being overtaken by aggressive market tactics that do not reflect the public-interest values the law was meant to protect. If copyright, privacy, and other regulatory frameworks were designed to balance the interests of creators and users with the public’s need to access and contribute to the wealth of human knowledge, then our increasingly digital information economy has thrown that balance out of whack.

In this new media environment, publishers and other content providers have unprecedented power to control knowledge and culture with technical restrictions and exclusionary licensing terms. Governments also have an easier time censoring what people can see by scrubbing their websites and pressuring commercial platforms to do the same. These sudden changes will feel familiar to anyone who has logged onto a streaming service or social media app to find a movie or news story suddenly missing. But for libraries, archives, museums, and other cultural heritage organizations (“memory institutions”), it poses an existential risk to
their core public service mission of preserving culture and protecting history. When these organizations can no longer collect and provide access to digital materials, members of the public cannot place their trust in a stable record—which affects their ability to confidently participate in democratic discourse.

We write this paper from our perspective at the Internet Archive, a nonprofit research library that specializes in web archiving, digitization, and the preservation of media in all forms. We feel the harms from these shifts firsthand and hear many of the same complaints from our partner memory institutions around the world. That shared frustration with today’s digital landscape has given rise to an emerging consensus among libraries, archives, museums, and their allies, calling for better legal protections and practical options to continue their services and preserve cultural memory in today’s information age.

This two-part paper (1) presents the looming threat of “vanishing culture” as a first-order political crisis, and (2) discusses the key role that libraries and other memory institutions can play in meeting that crisis.2 In the first part, we examine the underlying causes of vanishing culture and trace its ripple effects along several different facets of modern life: (a) educational resources, (b) journalistic integrity, (c) civic engagement, (d) religious study, and (e) environmental policy. In the second part, we reintroduce a framework of four rights that would ensure memory institutions’ ability to work together to collect, preserve, and provide access to digital materials. This framework rests on the simple proposition that memory institutions should be allowed to do the same things in the digital world that they’ve historically done in the physical world. It originated in the 2024 statement titled Four Digital Rights for Protecting Memory Institutions Online3 before it became a global rallying cry for the Our Future Memory movement and its growing list of library, archive, and museum signatories. Together, these memory institutions are striving to combat the political causes and effects of vanishing culture by speaking with one voice to the importance of memory work in an age of digital ephemerality. That is why we call on all memory institutions, large and small, to sign onto the Statement and join the movement. Individuals and communities need memory institutions to educate themselves and freely participate in civic life, and every time a content provider lets critical information disappear online, it offers further proof that today’s digital markets alone do not constitute a viable alternative. If things do not change soon, we risk sleepwalking into a future where both memory institutions and the public they serve will become passive consumers, rather than active stewards of human knowledge…

Menna and Bailey explain the situation; unpack the four rights they propose: collection, preservation, access, and collaboration; then issue a call to action.

Eminently worth reading in full: “The Political Threats of Vanishing Culture and the Need to Protect Our Future Memory” (PDF here)

See also Vanishing Culture (full PDF here)

And consider joining me in supporting the Internet Archive.

###

As we preserve and share, we might send open birthday greetings to a man who would surely have understood the importance of Menna’s and Bailey’s arguments: Sir Karl Raimund Popper; he was born on this date in 1902. One of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century, Popper is best known for his rejection of the classical inductivist views on the scientific method, in favor of empirical falsification: a theory in the empirical sciences can never be proven, but it can be falsified, meaning that it can and should be scrutinized by decisive experiments. (Or more simply put, whereas classical inductive approaches considered hypotheses false until proven true, Popper reversed the logic: conclusions drawn from an empirical finding are true until proven false.)

Popper was also a powerful critic of historicism in political thought, and (in books like The Open Society and Its Enemies and The Poverty of Historicism) an enemy of authoritarianism and totalitarianism (in which role he was a mentor to George Soros).

#archives #culture #history #InternetArchive #KarlPopper #memory #OpenSociety #philosophy #philosophyOfScience #politics #publishing #society #Technology

#archives #culture #history #internetarchive #karlpopper #memory

People @[email protected] · 2026-07-23 · 00:50 UTC

https://www.europesays.com/people/162393/ George Soros never signed the Giving Pledge. He’s given away more of his fortune than the billionaires who did #BillGates #FrenchGates #GeorgeSoros #GivingPledge #MelindaFrenchGates #OpenSociety #OpenSocietyFoundations #Philanthropy #SorosFundManagement #WarrenBuffett

#warrenbuffett #sorosfundmanagement #philanthropy #opensocietyfoundations #opensociety #melindafrenchgates

Independent Researchers @inderesearchers · 2026-03-20 · 09:26 UTC

Το δόλωμα της «αναρχίας» μέσα στα θολά νερά του ακτιβισμού

Η χρήση του δολώματος της «αναρχίας» στην Ελλάδα και αλλού για την προώθηση του αφηγήματος της «συριακής επανάστασης από τα κάτω» από το χρηματοδοτούμενο, ελεγχόμενο και κατευθυνόμενο από το κεφάλαιο, «ακτιβιστικό» κύκλωμα. Μία ανάλυση της τεράστιας διαπλοκής όλων των μελών-πλοκαμιών του κυκλώματος.

#Συρία #Syria #regimechange #LeilaAlShami #Soros @[email protected] @[email protected] #opensociety @[email protected] #EliaAyoub @[email protected]

https://theindependentresearchers.wordpress.com/2025/09/20/behind-the-syrian-activist-gang/

#συρία #syria #regimechange #leilaalshami #soros #opensociety

Independent Researchers @[email protected] · 2026-03-20 · 09:26 UTC

Το δόλωμα της «αναρχίας» μέσα στα θολά νερά του ακτιβισμού

Η χρήση του δολώματος της «αναρχίας» στην Ελλάδα και αλλού για την προώθηση του αφηγήματος της «συριακής επανάστασης από τα κάτω» από το χρηματοδοτούμενο, ελεγχόμενο και κατευθυνόμενο από το κεφάλαιο, «ακτιβιστικό» κύκλωμα. Μία ανάλυση της τεράστιας διαπλοκής όλων των μελών-πλοκαμιών του κυκλώματος.

#Συρία #Syria #regimechange #LeilaAlShami #Soros @[email protected] @[email protected] #opensociety @[email protected] #EliaAyoub @[email protected]

https://theindependentresearchers.wordpress.com/2025/09/20/behind-the-syrian-activist-gang/

#eliaayoub #opensociety #soros #leilaalshami #regimechange #syria

Mr_Chons @[email protected] · 2026-01-31 · 09:50 UTC

to distinguish between oppression and the necessary exercise of lawful authority; between burthens proceeding from a disregard to their convenience and those resulting from the inevitable exigencies of Society; to discriminate the spirit of liberty from that of licentiousness, cherishing the first, avoiding the last, and uniting a speedy, but temperate vigilence against encroachments, with an inviolable respect to the laws.

https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-04-02-0361

#education #science #opensociety #uspol

Mr_Chons @[email protected] · 2026-01-31 · 09:50 UTC

to distinguish between oppression and the necessary exercise of lawful authority; between burthens proceeding from a disregard to their convenience and those resulting from the inevitable exigencies of Society; to discriminate the spirit of liberty from that of licentiousness, cherishing the first, avoiding the last, and uniting a speedy, but temperate vigilence against encroachments, with an inviolable respect to the laws.

https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-04-02-0361

#education #science #opensociety #uspol

#uspol #opensociety #science #education

Mr_Chons @[email protected] · 2026-01-25 · 10:01 UTC

#Education is the might that empowers #democracy.

I should never forget that when people help each other to understand this world, they teach each other how to live freely and peacefully in it.

The truth sets you free.

#education #democracy #opensociety #openeducation

Mr_Chons @[email protected] · 2026-01-25 · 10:01 UTC

#Education is the might that empowers #democracy.

I should never forget that when people help each other to understand this world, they teach each other how to live freely and peacefully in it.

The truth sets you free.

#education #democracy #opensociety #openeducation

Mr_Chons @[email protected] · 2026-01-25 · 10:01 UTC

#Education is the might that empowers #democracy.

I should never forget that when people help each other to understand this world, they teach each other how to live freely and peacefully in it.

The truth sets you free.

#education #democracy #opensociety #openeducation

Mr_Chons @[email protected] · 2026-01-25 · 10:01 UTC

#Education is the might that empowers #democracy.

I should never forget that when people help each other to understand this world, they teach each other how to live freely and peacefully in it.

The truth sets you free.

#openeducation #opensociety #democracy #education

Mr_Chons @[email protected] · 2026-01-25 · 10:01 UTC

#Education is the might that empowers #democracy.

I should never forget that when people help each other to understand this world, they teach each other how to live freely and peacefully in it.

The truth sets you free.

https://kalvin.my/the-hypocrisy-of-moral-superiority-from-jocelyn-chia-2023-to-the-fifa-scandal-2025/

#education #democracy #opensociety #openeducation

Kalvin Carefour Johnny 🇲🇾 @[email protected] · 2025-12-15 · 09:06 UTC

In 2023, Malaysia fiercely defended its 'morality' against a comedian's jokes. In 2025, it stayed silent as its own officials forged documents in a FIFA scandal. The hypocrisy is clear: we police speech but ignore corruption. Real dignity isn't in outrage—it's in honesty and accountability.

#MoralHypocrisy #Malaysia #FIFAScandal #JocelynChia #Corruption #DigitalRightsMY #PublicOutrage #Accountability #Ethics #NationalDignity #SystemicCorruption #FakeMorality #Transparency #MalaysianPolitics #IntegrityMatters #EndHypocrisy #FIFA2025 #SocialJustice #InstitutionalFailure #TruthOverImage #FightCorruption #MalaysianMedia #CivicDuty #JusticeForAll #Whistleblower #OpenSociety #MalaysianCitizen #GoodGovernance #AntiCorruption #NationalShame #MoralSuperiority #DigitalActivism #RealChange #EthicalLeadership #StandForTruth

#moralhypocrisy #malaysia #fifascandal #jocelynchia #corruption #digitalrightsmy

Kalvin Carefour Johnny 🇲🇾 @[email protected] · 2025-12-15 · 09:06 UTC

In 2023, Malaysia fiercely defended its 'morality' against a comedian's jokes. In 2025, it stayed silent as its own officials forged documents in a FIFA scandal. The hypocrisy is clear: we police speech but ignore corruption. Real dignity isn't in outrage—it's in honesty and accountability.

https://kalvin.my/the-hypocrisy-of-moral-superiority-from-jocelyn-chia-2023-to-the-fifa-scandal-2025/

#MoralHypocrisy #Malaysia #FIFAScandal #JocelynChia #Corruption #DigitalRightsMY #PublicOutrage #Accountability #Ethics #NationalDignity #SystemicCorruption #FakeMorality #Transparency #MalaysianPolitics #IntegrityMatters #EndHypocrisy #FIFA2025 #SocialJustice #InstitutionalFailure #TruthOverImage #FightCorruption #MalaysianMedia #CivicDuty #JusticeForAll #Whistleblower #OpenSociety #MalaysianCitizen #GoodGovernance #AntiCorruption #NationalShame #MoralSuperiority #DigitalActivism #RealChange #EthicalLeadership #StandForTruth

#moralhypocrisy #malaysia #fifascandal #jocelynchia #corruption #digitalrightsmy

Kalvin Carefour Johnny 🇲🇾 @[email protected] · 2025-12-15 · 09:06 UTC

In 2023, Malaysia fiercely defended its 'morality' against a comedian's jokes. In 2025, it stayed silent as its own officials forged documents in a FIFA scandal. The hypocrisy is clear: we police speech but ignore corruption. Real dignity isn't in outrage—it's in honesty and accountability.

https://kalvin.my/the-hypocrisy-of-moral-superiority-from-jocelyn-chia-2023-to-the-fifa-scandal-2025/

#MoralHypocrisy #Malaysia #FIFAScandal #JocelynChia #Corruption #DigitalRightsMY #PublicOutrage #Accountability #Ethics #NationalDignity #SystemicCorruption #FakeMorality #Transparency #MalaysianPolitics #IntegrityMatters #EndHypocrisy #FIFA2025 #SocialJustice #InstitutionalFailure #TruthOverImage #FightCorruption #MalaysianMedia #CivicDuty #JusticeForAll #Whistleblower #OpenSociety #MalaysianCitizen #GoodGovernance #AntiCorruption #NationalShame #MoralSuperiority #DigitalActivism #RealChange #EthicalLeadership #StandForTruth

#standfortruth #ethicalleadership #realchange #digitalactivism #moralsuperiority #nationalshame

Kalvin Carefour Johnny 🇲🇾 @[email protected] · 2025-12-15 · 09:06 UTC

In 2023, Malaysia fiercely defended its 'morality' against a comedian's jokes. In 2025, it stayed silent as its own officials forged documents in a FIFA scandal. The hypocrisy is clear: we police speech but ignore corruption. Real dignity isn't in outrage—it's in honesty and accountability.

https://kalvin.my/the-hypocrisy-of-moral-superiority-from-jocelyn-chia-2023-to-the-fifa-scandal-2025/

#MoralHypocrisy #Malaysia #FIFAScandal #JocelynChia #Corruption #DigitalRightsMY #PublicOutrage #Accountability #Ethics #NationalDignity #SystemicCorruption #FakeMorality #Transparency #MalaysianPolitics #IntegrityMatters #EndHypocrisy #FIFA2025 #SocialJustice #InstitutionalFailure #TruthOverImage #FightCorruption #MalaysianMedia #CivicDuty #JusticeForAll #Whistleblower #OpenSociety #MalaysianCitizen #GoodGovernance #AntiCorruption #NationalShame #MoralSuperiority #DigitalActivism #RealChange #EthicalLeadership #StandForTruth

#moralhypocrisy #malaysia #fifascandal #jocelynchia #corruption #digitalrightsmy

diesUndDasMitTassen 🇺🇦 @[email protected] · 2025-11-20 · 07:05 UTC

@tagesschau Das Establishment arbeitet weiltweit weiter daran, solche NGO wie oxfam in ihrer Arbeit zu behindern. Gerade in den USA und Europa werden Mittel und Möglichkeiten gestrichen, rechtliche Einschränkungen erweitert, die Medien dazu instrumentalisiert.

#Öffentlichkeitsarbeit = #PublicRelations = #Propaganda

Diese Werkzeuge sind wirksam wie #Marketing und #Werbung, führen (auch) in die Irre, wie #Wahlkampf, #Populismus, #Lobbyismus.

#offentlichkeitsarbeit #publicrelations #propaganda #marketing #werbung #wahlkampf

diesUndDasMitTassen 🇺🇦 @[email protected] · 2025-11-20 · 07:05 UTC

@tagesschau Das Establishment arbeitet weiltweit weiter daran, solche NGO wie oxfam in ihrer Arbeit zu behindern. Gerade in den USA und Europa werden Mittel und Möglichkeiten gestrichen, rechtliche Einschränkungen erweitert, die Medien dazu instrumentalisiert.

#Öffentlichkeitsarbeit = #PublicRelations = #Propaganda

Diese Werkzeuge sind wirksam wie #Marketing und #Werbung, führen (auch) in die Irre, wie #Wahlkampf, #Populismus, #Lobbyismus.

#offentlichkeitsarbeit #publicrelations #propaganda #marketing #werbung #wahlkampf

diesUndDasMitTassen 🇺🇦 @[email protected] · 2025-11-20 · 07:05 UTC

@tagesschau Das Establishment arbeitet weiltweit weiter daran, solche NGO wie oxfam in ihrer Arbeit zu behindern. Gerade in den USA und Europa werden Mittel und Möglichkeiten gestrichen, rechtliche Einschränkungen erweitert, die Medien dazu instrumentalisiert.

#Öffentlichkeitsarbeit = #PublicRelations = #Propaganda

Diese Werkzeuge sind wirksam wie #Marketing und #Werbung, führen (auch) in die Irre, wie #Wahlkampf, #Populismus, #Lobbyismus.

#opensociety #offentlichkeitsarbeit #publicrelations #propaganda #marketing #werbung

diesUndDasMitTassen 🇺🇦 @[email protected] · 2025-11-20 · 07:05 UTC

@tagesschau Das Establishment arbeitet weiltweit weiter daran, solche NGO wie oxfam in ihrer Arbeit zu behindern. Gerade in den USA und Europa werden Mittel und Möglichkeiten gestrichen, rechtliche Einschränkungen erweitert, die Medien dazu instrumentalisiert.

#Öffentlichkeitsarbeit = #PublicRelations = #Propaganda

Diese Werkzeuge sind wirksam wie #Marketing und #Werbung, führen (auch) in die Irre, wie #Wahlkampf, #Populismus, #Lobbyismus.

#opensociety #fakten #fakenews #medienmanipulation #lobbyismus #populismus

diesUndDasMitTassen 🇺🇦 @[email protected] · 2025-11-20 · 07:05 UTC

@tagesschau Das Establishment arbeitet weiltweit weiter daran, solche NGO wie oxfam in ihrer Arbeit zu behindern. Gerade in den USA und Europa werden Mittel und Möglichkeiten gestrichen, rechtliche Einschränkungen erweitert, die Medien dazu instrumentalisiert.

#Öffentlichkeitsarbeit = #PublicRelations = #Propaganda

Diese Werkzeuge sind wirksam wie #Marketing und #Werbung, führen (auch) in die Irre, wie #Wahlkampf, #Populismus, #Lobbyismus.

#offentlichkeitsarbeit #publicrelations #propaganda #marketing #werbung #wahlkampf

Mike McCaffrey @[email protected] · 2025-10-10 · 19:09 UTC

Unfortunately, conservatives didn't ignore #KarlPopper and attacked #GeorgeSoros and his #OpenSociety foundation before anyone realized what they were up to, preemptively blunting the progressive response to this round of #fascism.

#karlpopper #georgesoros #opensociety #fascism

Mike McCaffrey @[email protected] · 2025-10-10 · 19:09 UTC

Unfortunately, conservatives didn't ignore #KarlPopper and attacked #GeorgeSoros and his #OpenSociety foundation before anyone realized what they were up to, preemptively blunting the progressive response to this round of #fascism.

#karlpopper #georgesoros #opensociety #fascism

Mike McCaffrey @[email protected] · 2025-10-10 · 19:09 UTC

Unfortunately, conservatives didn't ignore #KarlPopper and attacked #GeorgeSoros and his #OpenSociety foundation before anyone realized what they were up to, preemptively blunting the progressive response to this round of #fascism.

#karlpopper #georgesoros #opensociety #fascism

Mike McCaffrey @[email protected] · 2025-10-10 · 19:09 UTC

Unfortunately, conservatives didn't ignore #KarlPopper and attacked #GeorgeSoros and his #OpenSociety foundation before anyone realized what they were up to, preemptively blunting the progressive response to this round of #fascism.

#fascism #opensociety #georgesoros #karlpopper

Mike McCaffrey @[email protected] · 2025-10-10 · 19:09 UTC

Unfortunately, conservatives didn't ignore #KarlPopper and attacked #GeorgeSoros and his #OpenSociety foundation before anyone realized what they were up to, preemptively blunting the progressive response to this round of #fascism.

#karlpopper #georgesoros #opensociety #fascism

Mike McCaffrey @[email protected] · 2025-10-10 · 19:06 UTC

Wow, #KarlPopper went through a lot of trouble to explain why fascism is bad, and we are just ignoring him.

#karlpopper #opensociety

Mike McCaffrey @[email protected] · 2025-10-10 · 19:06 UTC

Wow, #KarlPopper went through a lot of trouble to explain why fascism is bad, and we are just ignoring him.

#karlpopper #opensociety

Mike McCaffrey @[email protected] · 2025-10-10 · 19:06 UTC

Wow, #KarlPopper went through a lot of trouble to explain why fascism is bad, and we are just ignoring him.

#karlpopper #opensociety

Mike McCaffrey @[email protected] · 2025-10-10 · 19:06 UTC

Wow, #KarlPopper went through a lot of trouble to explain why fascism is bad, and we are just ignoring him.

#opensociety #karlpopper

Mike McCaffrey @[email protected] · 2025-10-10 · 19:06 UTC

Wow, #KarlPopper went through a lot of trouble to explain why fascism is bad, and we are just ignoring him.