A small tool to view real-world ActivityPub objects as JSON! Enter a URL
or username from Mastodon or a similar service below, and we'll send a
request with
the right
Accept
header
to the server to view the underlying object.
{
"@context": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
{
"Hashtag": "as:Hashtag",
"sensitive": "as:sensitive"
}
],
"id": "https://tante.cc/?p=5897",
"type": "Note",
"attachment": [
{
"type": "Image",
"url": "https://tante.cc/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/1166624_3b707f3f.jpg",
"mediaType": "image/jpeg",
"name": "Pappert Well Community Woodlands - markers"
}
],
"attributedTo": "https://tante.cc/author/tante_/",
"audience": "https://tante.cc/?author=0",
"content": "<h2>Speaking from somewhere</h2><p>When saying something, anything the context of what you say is at least as important as the literal group of words you are saying or writing.</p><p>Context is a big word. In spans the history of the person speaking as well as the time and place or publication that that person choses to speak. We all know that, it’s why people use very public situations to provoke the powers that be by saying something “out of context” to make a point. Playing with context can be very powerful and allows effective and useful forms of communication to push your agenda. Being able to understand context, adapt to it and knowing when to break it is one of the qualities of a good communicator.</p><p>In the past I have sometimes criticised forms of messaging within communities I interact with or am part of. For example I criticised people on the left selling DEI initiatives by saying “But diverse teams are more effective and have better outcomes” (even if that is objectively true) because fairness in society is not about it being economically beneficial, it’s a human right. I have also criticised many European NGOs for accepting the framing of “digital sovereignty” in order to acquire money to give to open source projects because I think that by submitting to that framing you have opened the door for nationalistic and xenophobic arguments (basically: “digital sovereignty” is a term every fascist will totally accept, even though they mean something radically different than what the NGOs I am referring to mean.) Basically:</p><figure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-large\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https://external-preview.redd.it/m8fWeK-1aFtHL9BFDYpYhNtCrtYMHeIOle6tXUzQLwk.jpg?auto=webp&s=55f37310b4772bdb157dd5fb0930ddcdafe0e7ee\" alt=\"Image of Batman breaking a gun saying: "This is the weapon of the enemy. We do not need it. We will not use it"\"/></figure><p>Whenever I make an argument like that I get similar responses: “You have to be pragmatic” or “Games of intellectual purity don’t get us anywhere” or “The argument needs to work for those we want to convince” or “Shut up” (it still is the Internet after all). And I am not saying that those replies don’t have any value. They are <em>pragmatic</em>. Saying something in a way that people in power like or that supports their world view increases the chances of creating change. Especially when one has facts and studies at one’s disposal (at least that was how it maybe was a bit in the past before the reign of Musk).</p><p>But I think there is a cost. Because I think people mistake <em>tactics</em> for <em>strategy</em>. The basic difference between tactics and strategy is that while tactics focus on smaller, short-term actions, strategy looks at the long-term big picture. And I feel like that is where the costs stack up.</p><p>Say for example people who are into actual justice for everyone (hello, cool person!) get certain DEI initiatives pushed by framing them as economically beneficial. Cool, now we get fewer white dudes hired and maybe some people with skills into relevant jobs. Awesome! But this has shifted the position of the speakers. They lost their ground.</p><p>When I argue for something based on my personal values, based on human rights and fairness for all this is not an argument business leaders care about. It has no monetary value, I am just marking my “position” in a way. I am saying: DEI is necessary because it is <em>right</em> and our <em>political values and the rights our constitutions grant people demand</em> it. That is the position I speak from. The fact if something is economically beneficial is of no concern for that, I explicitly speak from a different angle. Because I don’t want the next human right to be cut because it’s maybe economically not beneficial.</p><p>If I say DEI is great because diverse teams are more effective and a study shows that that is not true when the DEI initiatives concern people with disabilities what is my leg to stand on? Saying “but it would be right”? I’ve given up that position when selling my DEI initiatives with their economic value. I’ve weakened my long term strategic goals for a short-term tactical win. And I think that this is – even more so looking at the USA in the last months – a dangerous mistake. Because a lot of stuff that we need to do or need to build, need to pay for as societies won’t look good on Mr.-Business-Dude’s balance sheets.</p><p>As I said earlier: There is value in those pragmatic arguments. They can speak to other people, other groups than ones based on more abstract political values. But I think it matters deeply <em>who</em> makes those arguments. If I wanted to sell some human rights thing based on an economic argument I would not make that argument myself, I’d look for allies who can make that argument <em>without giving up their position</em>. Maybe some left-leaning economic research group/think tank. Someone who does not need to give up their foundation.</p><p>Because I have seen what that pragmatism does way too much. I live in Germany where many of the supposedly “left-ish” (more like centrist) parties such as the Greens have given up so much ideological foundation for the sake of making pragmatic (usually economic) arguments. And now they have a hard time arguing for necessary changes to our energy sourcing and production because they always need to frame it in narrations of “green growth” and “investments in startups”. They’ve lost their position.</p><p>You might know the statement that you cannot compromise with a right-winger: When you move a step towards them trying to find a compromise they will make a step back and keep dragging you with them. Making “the wrong” arguments <em>isn’t exactly the same</em>. But it also is not all that different.</p><p>It is important to know where you stand – for your political goals as well as your mental health as a human being. And I think one shouldn’t give that up this easily. Even if that makes me not pragmatic enough or “playing games of ideological purity”. At least I know where I stand.</p><div class=\"cb_p6_patreon_button\" style=\"text-align:center !important;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:15px;\"><div class=\"cb_p6_message_over_post_button\" style=\"font-size:24px;margin-top:10px;margin-bottom:10px;\">Liked it? Take a second to support tante on Patreon!</div><p><a rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"https://www.patreon.com/tante?utm_content=post_button&utm_medium=patron_button_and_widgets_plugin&utm_campaign=78367&utm_term=&utm_source=https://tante.cc/2025/02/18/speaking-from-somewhere/\" aria-label=\"Click to become a patron at Patreon!\"><img decoding=\"async\" style=\"margin-top: 10px;margin-bottom: 10px;max-width:200px;width:100%;height:auto;\" src=\"https://tante.cc/wp-content/plugins/patron-button-and-widgets-by-codebard/images/become_a_patron_button.png\" alt=\"Become a patron at Patreon!\"></a></div><p><!-- BEGIN License added by Creative-Commons-Configurator plugin for WordPress --></p><p prefix=\"dct: http://purl.org/dc/terms/ cc: http://creativecommons.org/ns#\" class=\"cc-block\"><a rel=\"license\" href=\"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/\"><img alt=\"CC BY-SA 4.0\" class=\"cc-button\" src=\"https://tante.cc/wp-content/plugins/creative-commons-configurator-1/media/cc/by-sa/4.0/80x15.png\" width=\"80\" height=\"15\" /></a>This work is licensed under a <a rel=\"license\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/\">Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License</a>.</p><p><!-- END License added by Creative-Commons-Configurator plugin for WordPress --></p>",
"context": "https://tante.cc/wp-json/activitypub/1.0/posts/5897/context",
"contentMap": {
"en": "<h2>Speaking from somewhere</h2><p>When saying something, anything the context of what you say is at least as important as the literal group of words you are saying or writing.</p><p>Context is a big word. In spans the history of the person speaking as well as the time and place or publication that that person choses to speak. We all know that, it’s why people use very public situations to provoke the powers that be by saying something “out of context” to make a point. Playing with context can be very powerful and allows effective and useful forms of communication to push your agenda. Being able to understand context, adapt to it and knowing when to break it is one of the qualities of a good communicator.</p><p>In the past I have sometimes criticised forms of messaging within communities I interact with or am part of. For example I criticised people on the left selling DEI initiatives by saying “But diverse teams are more effective and have better outcomes” (even if that is objectively true) because fairness in society is not about it being economically beneficial, it’s a human right. I have also criticised many European NGOs for accepting the framing of “digital sovereignty” in order to acquire money to give to open source projects because I think that by submitting to that framing you have opened the door for nationalistic and xenophobic arguments (basically: “digital sovereignty” is a term every fascist will totally accept, even though they mean something radically different than what the NGOs I am referring to mean.) Basically:</p><figure class=\"wp-block-image aligncenter size-large\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https://external-preview.redd.it/m8fWeK-1aFtHL9BFDYpYhNtCrtYMHeIOle6tXUzQLwk.jpg?auto=webp&s=55f37310b4772bdb157dd5fb0930ddcdafe0e7ee\" alt=\"Image of Batman breaking a gun saying: "This is the weapon of the enemy. We do not need it. We will not use it"\"/></figure><p>Whenever I make an argument like that I get similar responses: “You have to be pragmatic” or “Games of intellectual purity don’t get us anywhere” or “The argument needs to work for those we want to convince” or “Shut up” (it still is the Internet after all). And I am not saying that those replies don’t have any value. They are <em>pragmatic</em>. Saying something in a way that people in power like or that supports their world view increases the chances of creating change. Especially when one has facts and studies at one’s disposal (at least that was how it maybe was a bit in the past before the reign of Musk).</p><p>But I think there is a cost. Because I think people mistake <em>tactics</em> for <em>strategy</em>. The basic difference between tactics and strategy is that while tactics focus on smaller, short-term actions, strategy looks at the long-term big picture. And I feel like that is where the costs stack up.</p><p>Say for example people who are into actual justice for everyone (hello, cool person!) get certain DEI initiatives pushed by framing them as economically beneficial. Cool, now we get fewer white dudes hired and maybe some people with skills into relevant jobs. Awesome! But this has shifted the position of the speakers. They lost their ground.</p><p>When I argue for something based on my personal values, based on human rights and fairness for all this is not an argument business leaders care about. It has no monetary value, I am just marking my “position” in a way. I am saying: DEI is necessary because it is <em>right</em> and our <em>political values and the rights our constitutions grant people demand</em> it. That is the position I speak from. The fact if something is economically beneficial is of no concern for that, I explicitly speak from a different angle. Because I don’t want the next human right to be cut because it’s maybe economically not beneficial.</p><p>If I say DEI is great because diverse teams are more effective and a study shows that that is not true when the DEI initiatives concern people with disabilities what is my leg to stand on? Saying “but it would be right”? I’ve given up that position when selling my DEI initiatives with their economic value. I’ve weakened my long term strategic goals for a short-term tactical win. And I think that this is – even more so looking at the USA in the last months – a dangerous mistake. Because a lot of stuff that we need to do or need to build, need to pay for as societies won’t look good on Mr.-Business-Dude’s balance sheets.</p><p>As I said earlier: There is value in those pragmatic arguments. They can speak to other people, other groups than ones based on more abstract political values. But I think it matters deeply <em>who</em> makes those arguments. If I wanted to sell some human rights thing based on an economic argument I would not make that argument myself, I’d look for allies who can make that argument <em>without giving up their position</em>. Maybe some left-leaning economic research group/think tank. Someone who does not need to give up their foundation.</p><p>Because I have seen what that pragmatism does way too much. I live in Germany where many of the supposedly “left-ish” (more like centrist) parties such as the Greens have given up so much ideological foundation for the sake of making pragmatic (usually economic) arguments. And now they have a hard time arguing for necessary changes to our energy sourcing and production because they always need to frame it in narrations of “green growth” and “investments in startups”. They’ve lost their position.</p><p>You might know the statement that you cannot compromise with a right-winger: When you move a step towards them trying to find a compromise they will make a step back and keep dragging you with them. Making “the wrong” arguments <em>isn’t exactly the same</em>. But it also is not all that different.</p><p>It is important to know where you stand – for your political goals as well as your mental health as a human being. And I think one shouldn’t give that up this easily. Even if that makes me not pragmatic enough or “playing games of ideological purity”. At least I know where I stand.</p><div class=\"cb_p6_patreon_button\" style=\"text-align:center !important;margin-top:15px;margin-bottom:15px;\"><div class=\"cb_p6_message_over_post_button\" style=\"font-size:24px;margin-top:10px;margin-bottom:10px;\">Liked it? Take a second to support tante on Patreon!</div><p><a rel=\"nofollow\" href=\"https://www.patreon.com/tante?utm_content=post_button&utm_medium=patron_button_and_widgets_plugin&utm_campaign=78367&utm_term=&utm_source=https://tante.cc/2025/02/18/speaking-from-somewhere/\" aria-label=\"Click to become a patron at Patreon!\"><img decoding=\"async\" style=\"margin-top: 10px;margin-bottom: 10px;max-width:200px;width:100%;height:auto;\" src=\"https://tante.cc/wp-content/plugins/patron-button-and-widgets-by-codebard/images/become_a_patron_button.png\" alt=\"Become a patron at Patreon!\"></a></div><p><!-- BEGIN License added by Creative-Commons-Configurator plugin for WordPress --></p><p prefix=\"dct: http://purl.org/dc/terms/ cc: http://creativecommons.org/ns#\" class=\"cc-block\"><a rel=\"license\" href=\"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/\"><img alt=\"CC BY-SA 4.0\" class=\"cc-button\" src=\"https://tante.cc/wp-content/plugins/creative-commons-configurator-1/media/cc/by-sa/4.0/80x15.png\" width=\"80\" height=\"15\" /></a>This work is licensed under a <a rel=\"license\" target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/\">Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License</a>.</p><p><!-- END License added by Creative-Commons-Configurator plugin for WordPress --></p>"
},
"icon": {
"type": "Image",
"url": "https://tante.cc/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/1166624_3b707f3f-420x315.jpg",
"mediaType": "image/jpeg",
"name": "Pappert Well Community Woodlands - markers"
},
"image": {
"type": "Image",
"url": "https://tante.cc/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/1166624_3b707f3f.jpg",
"mediaType": "image/jpeg",
"name": "Pappert Well Community Woodlands - markers"
},
"published": "2025-02-18T20:45:34Z",
"updated": "2025-02-25T14:46:57Z",
"url": "https://tante.cc/2025/02/18/speaking-from-somewhere/",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://tante.cc/wp-json/activitypub/1.0/actors/2/followers"
],
"mediaType": "text/html",
"replies": {
"id": "https://tante.cc/wp-json/activitypub/1.0/posts/5897/replies",
"type": "Collection",
"first": {
"id": "https://tante.cc/wp-json/activitypub/1.0/posts/5897/replies?page=1",
"type": "CollectionPage",
"partOf": "https://tante.cc/wp-json/activitypub/1.0/posts/5897/replies",
"items": [
"https://chaos.social/users/ChuckMcManis/statuses/114026905684922075",
"https://ohai.social/users/fnohe/statuses/114036945640313308"
]
}
},
"likes": {
"id": "https://tante.cc/wp-json/activitypub/1.0/posts/5897/likes",
"type": "Collection",
"totalItems": 0
},
"shares": {
"id": "https://tante.cc/wp-json/activitypub/1.0/posts/5897/shares",
"type": "Collection",
"totalItems": 0
}
}