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",
"type": "OrderedCollectionPage",
"orderedItems": [
{
"type": "Announce",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/458092138547122176/entities/urn:activity:1698020674599129092",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/458092138547122176",
"content": "<a href=\"https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1698020674599129092\" target=\"_blank\">https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1698020674599129092</a>",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/458092138547122176/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1698020674599129092",
"published": "2024-10-29T15:27:56+00:00",
"attachment": [
{
"type": "Document",
"url": "https://cdn.minds.com/fs/v1/thumbnail/1698020582357995540/xlarge/",
"mediaType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 526,
"width": 526
}
],
"source": {
"content": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1698020674599129092",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1698420585492647950/activity",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/458092138547122176",
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/followers"
]
},
{
"type": "Announce",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/100000000000000134/entities/urn:activity:1698345443433385996",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/100000000000000134",
"content": "The rich don’t need to own all the media. You can own your own!<br /><a href=\"https://minds.com/networks\" target=\"_blank\">https://minds.com/networks</a><br /><br /><a href=\"https://www.minds.com/search?f=top&t=all&q=mindsnetworks\" title=\"#mindsnetworks\" class=\"u-url hashtag\" target=\"_blank\">#mindsnetworks</a> ",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/100000000000000134/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1698345443433385996",
"published": "2024-10-30T12:58:26+00:00",
"attachment": [
{
"type": "Document",
"url": "https://cdn.minds.com/fs/v1/thumbnail/1698344571492110348/xlarge/",
"mediaType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 1436,
"width": 1170
}
],
"source": {
"content": "The rich don’t need to own all the media. You can own your own!\nhttps://minds.com/networks\n\n#mindsnetworks ",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1698409298360537098/activity",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/100000000000000134",
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/followers"
]
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1678473999312490498",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"content": "For our podcast this week, we are discussing Nietzsche's essay, The Anti-Christ. In it he describes gives a brief description of good and evil, suggesting that Christianity is inherently evil due to its valorization of weakness and pity.<br /><br />This argument feels very close in construction to Hoppe, Rose Wilder Lane, and Rand in their notions of virtue coming form self-directed productivity in place of social systems that naturally promote weakness and reliance on the state.<br /><br />I don't actually know tons about what Hoppe, Lane, or Rand thought of Nietzsche though. What do you think of this parallel?<br /><br />\"What is good?—Whatever augments the feeling of power, the will to power, power itself, in man.<br />What is evil?—Whatever springs from weakness.<br />What is happiness?—The feeling that power increases—that resistance is overcome.<br />Not contentment, but more power; not peace at any price, but war; not virtue, but efficiency (virtue in the Renaissance sense, virtu, virtue free of moral acid). The weak and the botched shall perish: first principle of our charity. And one should help them to it. What is more harmful than any vice?—Practical sympathy for the botched and the weak—Christianity” (Nietzsche - The Anti-Christ)<br /><br />If you are interested, here is a link to the full episode:<br />Youtube - <a href=\"https://youtu.be/BLpnG3F7yTk?si=3QgFfTJUhfTEg0je\" target=\"_blank\">https://youtu.be/BLpnG3F7yTk?si=3QgFfTJUhfTEg0je</a><br /><br />Apple - <a href=\"https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pdamx-28-1-the-democrat-among-gods/id1691736489?i=1000668254714\" target=\"_blank\">https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pdamx-28-1-the-democrat-among-gods/id1691736489?i=1000668254714</a>",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1678473999312490498",
"published": "2024-09-05T16:56:25+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "For our podcast this week, we are discussing Nietzsche's essay, The Anti-Christ. In it he describes gives a brief description of good and evil, suggesting that Christianity is inherently evil due to its valorization of weakness and pity.\n\nThis argument feels very close in construction to Hoppe, Rose Wilder Lane, and Rand in their notions of virtue coming form self-directed productivity in place of social systems that naturally promote weakness and reliance on the state.\n\nI don't actually know tons about what Hoppe, Lane, or Rand thought of Nietzsche though. What do you think of this parallel?\n\n\"What is good?—Whatever augments the feeling of power, the will to power, power itself, in man.\nWhat is evil?—Whatever springs from weakness.\nWhat is happiness?—The feeling that power increases—that resistance is overcome.\nNot contentment, but more power; not peace at any price, but war; not virtue, but efficiency (virtue in the Renaissance sense, virtu, virtue free of moral acid). The weak and the botched shall perish: first principle of our charity. And one should help them to it. What is more harmful than any vice?—Practical sympathy for the botched and the weak—Christianity” (Nietzsche - The Anti-Christ)\n\nIf you are interested, here is a link to the full episode:\nYoutube - https://youtu.be/BLpnG3F7yTk?si=3QgFfTJUhfTEg0je\n\nApple - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pdamx-28-1-the-democrat-among-gods/id1691736489?i=1000668254714",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1678473999312490498/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1678473934770540547",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"content": "For our podcast this week, we are discussing Nietzsche's essay, The Anti-Christ. In it he describes gives a brief description of good and evil, suggesting that Christianity is inherently evil due to its valorization of weakness and pity.<br /><br />This argument feels very close in construction to Hoppe, Rose Wilder Lane, and Rand in their notions of virtue coming form self-directed productivity in place of social systems that naturally promote weakness and reliance on the state.<br /><br />I don't actually know tons about what Hoppe, Lane, or Rand thought of Nietzsche though. What do you think of this parallel?<br /><br />\"What is good?—Whatever augments the feeling of power, the will to power, power itself, in man.<br />What is evil?—Whatever springs from weakness.<br />What is happiness?—The feeling that power increases—that resistance is overcome.<br />Not contentment, but more power; not peace at any price, but war; not virtue, but efficiency (virtue in the Renaissance sense, virtu, virtue free of moral acid). The weak and the botched shall perish: first principle of our charity. And one should help them to it. What is more harmful than any vice?—Practical sympathy for the botched and the weak—Christianity” (Nietzsche - The Anti-Christ)<br /><br />If you are interested, here is a link to the full episode:<br />Youtube - <a href=\"https://youtu.be/BLpnG3F7yTk?si=3QgFfTJUhfTEg0je\" target=\"_blank\">https://youtu.be/BLpnG3F7yTk?si=3QgFfTJUhfTEg0je</a><br /><br />Apple - <a href=\"https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pdamx-28-1-the-democrat-among-gods/id1691736489?i=1000668254714\" target=\"_blank\">https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pdamx-28-1-the-democrat-among-gods/id1691736489?i=1000668254714</a>",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1678473934770540547",
"published": "2024-09-05T16:56:10+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "For our podcast this week, we are discussing Nietzsche's essay, The Anti-Christ. In it he describes gives a brief description of good and evil, suggesting that Christianity is inherently evil due to its valorization of weakness and pity.\n\nThis argument feels very close in construction to Hoppe, Rose Wilder Lane, and Rand in their notions of virtue coming form self-directed productivity in place of social systems that naturally promote weakness and reliance on the state.\n\nI don't actually know tons about what Hoppe, Lane, or Rand thought of Nietzsche though. What do you think of this parallel?\n\n\"What is good?—Whatever augments the feeling of power, the will to power, power itself, in man.\nWhat is evil?—Whatever springs from weakness.\nWhat is happiness?—The feeling that power increases—that resistance is overcome.\nNot contentment, but more power; not peace at any price, but war; not virtue, but efficiency (virtue in the Renaissance sense, virtu, virtue free of moral acid). The weak and the botched shall perish: first principle of our charity. And one should help them to it. What is more harmful than any vice?—Practical sympathy for the botched and the weak—Christianity” (Nietzsche - The Anti-Christ)\n\nIf you are interested, here is a link to the full episode:\nYoutube - https://youtu.be/BLpnG3F7yTk?si=3QgFfTJUhfTEg0je\n\nApple - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pdamx-28-1-the-democrat-among-gods/id1691736489?i=1000668254714",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1678473934770540547/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1678473678578257930",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"content": "For our podcast this week, we are discussing Nietzsche's essay, The Anti-Christ. In it he describes gives a brief description of good and evil, suggesting that Christianity is inherently evil due to its valorization of weakness and pity.<br /><br />This argument feels very close in construction to Hoppe, Rose Wilder Lane, and Rand in their notions of virtue coming form self-directed productivity in place of social systems that naturally promote weakness and reliance on the state.<br /><br />I don't actually know tons about what Hoppe, Lane, or Rand thought of Nietzsche though. What do you think of this parallel?<br /><br />\"What is good?—Whatever augments the feeling of power, the will to power, power itself, in man.<br />What is evil?—Whatever springs from weakness.<br />What is happiness?—The feeling that power increases—that resistance is overcome.<br />Not contentment, but more power; not peace at any price, but war; not virtue, but efficiency (virtue in the Renaissance sense, virtu, virtue free of moral acid). The weak and the botched shall perish: first principle of our charity. And one should help them to it. What is more harmful than any vice?—Practical sympathy for the botched and the weak—Christianity” (Nietzsche - The Anti-Christ)<br /><br />If you are interested, here is a link to the full episode:<br />Youtube - <a href=\"https://youtu.be/BLpnG3F7yTk?si=3QgFfTJUhfTEg0je\" target=\"_blank\">https://youtu.be/BLpnG3F7yTk?si=3QgFfTJUhfTEg0je</a><br /><br />Apple - <a href=\"https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pdamx-28-1-the-democrat-among-gods/id1691736489?i=1000668254714\" target=\"_blank\">https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pdamx-28-1-the-democrat-among-gods/id1691736489?i=1000668254714</a>",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1678473678578257930",
"published": "2024-09-05T16:55:08+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "For our podcast this week, we are discussing Nietzsche's essay, The Anti-Christ. In it he describes gives a brief description of good and evil, suggesting that Christianity is inherently evil due to its valorization of weakness and pity.\n\nThis argument feels very close in construction to Hoppe, Rose Wilder Lane, and Rand in their notions of virtue coming form self-directed productivity in place of social systems that naturally promote weakness and reliance on the state.\n\nI don't actually know tons about what Hoppe, Lane, or Rand thought of Nietzsche though. What do you think of this parallel?\n\n\"What is good?—Whatever augments the feeling of power, the will to power, power itself, in man.\nWhat is evil?—Whatever springs from weakness.\nWhat is happiness?—The feeling that power increases—that resistance is overcome.\nNot contentment, but more power; not peace at any price, but war; not virtue, but efficiency (virtue in the Renaissance sense, virtu, virtue free of moral acid). The weak and the botched shall perish: first principle of our charity. And one should help them to it. What is more harmful than any vice?—Practical sympathy for the botched and the weak—Christianity” (Nietzsche - The Anti-Christ)\n\nIf you are interested, here is a link to the full episode:\nYoutube - https://youtu.be/BLpnG3F7yTk?si=3QgFfTJUhfTEg0je\n\nApple - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pdamx-28-1-the-democrat-among-gods/id1691736489?i=1000668254714",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1678473678578257930/activity"
},
{
"type": "Announce",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/866096774756966405/entities/urn:activity:1669571777338019854",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/866096774756966405",
"content": "Exactly.",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/866096774756966405/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1669571777338019854",
"published": "2024-08-12T03:22:10+00:00",
"attachment": [
{
"type": "Document",
"url": "https://cdn.minds.com/fs/v1/thumbnail/1669571734212186123/xlarge/",
"mediaType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 546,
"width": 719
}
],
"source": {
"content": "Exactly.",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1670662236500135938/activity",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/866096774756966405",
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/followers"
]
},
{
"type": "Announce",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1625815829608140809/entities/urn:activity:1625921383454216201",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1625815829608140809",
"content": "“Listen Marxist!”<br /><a href=\"https://youtu.be/h9GVW_fnOr8?si=SPPJ22xwfeQONUsm\" target=\"_blank\">https://youtu.be/h9GVW_fnOr8?si=SPPJ22xwfeQONUsm</a><br />A blast from the past<br />From an old Anarchist <br /><br />(To bad the ‘60s student “radicals” didn’t give him more of a listen😏)<br /><br /><a href=\"https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-listen-marxist\" target=\"_blank\">https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-listen-marxist</a><br /><br />Murray Bookchin<br />“Listen, Marxist!”<br /><a href=\"https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-listen-marxist\" target=\"_blank\">https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-listen-marxist</a><br />“Murray Bookchin's best-known leaflet, <br />(Now largely forgotten) <br />Listen, Marxist! <br />was aimed predominantly at students influenced by the Maoist Progressive Labor Party which was heavily (and highly destructive) active in the mass Students for a Democratic Society movement in 1960s and 70s America.”<br /><br />“All the old crap of the thirties is coming back again — the shit about the “class line,” the “role of the working class,” the “trained cadres,” the “vanguard party,” and the “proletarian dictatorship.” It’s all back again, and in a more vulgarized form than ever. The Progressive Labor Party is not the only example, it is merely the worst. One smells the same shit in various offshoots of SDS, and in the Marxist and Socialist clubs on campuses, not to speak of the Trotskyist groups, the International Socialist Clubs and the Youth Against War and Fascism.<br /><br />In the thirties, at least it was understandable. The United States was paralyzed by a chronic economic crisis, the deepest and the longest in its history. The only living forces that seemed to be battering at the walls of capitalism were the great organizing drives of the CIO, with their dramatic sitdown strikes, their radical militancy, and their bloody clashes with the police. The political atmosphere through the entire world was charged by the electricity of the Spanish Civil War, the last of the classical worker’s revolutions, when every radical sect in the American left could identify with its own militia columns in Madrid and Barcelona. That was thirty years ago. It was a time when anyone who cried out “Make love, not war” would have been regarded as a freak; the cry then was “Make jobs, not war” — the cry of an age burdened by scarcity, when the achievement of socialism entailed “sacrifices” and a “transition period” to an economy of material abundance. To an eighteen-year old kid in 1937 the very concept of cybernation would have seemed like the wildest science fiction, a fantasy comparable to visions of space travel. That eighteen-year-old kid has now reach fifty years of age, and his roots are planted in an era so remote as to differ qualitatively from the realities of the present period in the United States. Capitalism itself has changed since then, taking on increasingly statified forms that could be anticipated only dimly thirty years ago. And now we are being asked to go back to the “class line,” the “strategies,” the “cadres” and the organizational forms of that distant period in almost blatant disregard of the new issues and possibilities that have emerged.<br /><br />When the hell are we finally going to create a movement that looks to the future instead of the past? When will we begin to learn from what is being born instead of what is dying? Marx, to his lasting credit, tried to do that in his own day; he tried to evoke a futuristic spirit in the revolutionary movement of the 1840’s and 1850’s. “The tradition of all the dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living,” he wrote in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte.<br /><br />“And when they seem to be engaged in revolutionizing themselves and things, in creating something entirely new, precisely in such epochs of revolutionary crisis they anxiously conjure up the spirits of the past to their service and borrow from them names, battle slogans and costumes in order to present the new scene of world history in this time-honored disguise and borrowed language. Thus Luther donned the mask of the Apostle Paul, the revolution of 1789 to 1814 draped itself alternately as the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire, and the revolution of 1848 knew nothing better than to parody, in turn, 1789 and the tradition of 1793 to 1795. … The social revolution of the nineteenth century cannot draw its poetry from the past, but only from the future. It cannot begin with itself before it has stripped off all superstition in regard to the past. … In order to arrive at its content, the revolution of the nineteenth century must let the dead bury their dead. There the phrase went beyond the content, here the content goes beyond the phrase.”<br />Is the problem any different today, as we approach the twenty-first century? Once again the dead are walking in our midst — ironically, draped in the name of Marx, the man who tried to bury the dead of the nineteenth century. So the revolution of our own day can do nothing better than parody, in turn, the October Revolution of 1917 and the civil war of 1918–1920, with its “class line,” its Bolshevik Party, its “proletarian dictatorship,” its puritanical morality, and even its slogan, “soviet power.” The complete, all-sided revolution of our own day that can finally resolve the historic “social question,” born of scarcity, domination and hierarchy, follows the tradition of the partial, the incomplete, the one-sided revolutions of the past, which merely changed the form of the “social question,” replacing one system of domination and hierarchy by another. At a time when bourgeois society itself is in the process of disintegrating all the social classes that once gave it stability, we hear the hollow demands for a “class line.” At a time when all the political institutions of hierarchical society are entering a period of profound decay, we hear the hollow demands for a “political party” and a “worker’s state.” At a time when hierarchy as such is being brought into question, we hear the hollow demands for “cadres,” “vanguards” and “leaders.” At a time when centralization and the state have been brought to the most explosive point of historical negativity, we hear the hollow demands for a “centralized movement” and a “proletarian dictatorship.”<br /><br />This pursuit of security in the past, this attempt to find a haven in a fixed dogma and an organizational hierarchy as substitutes for creative thought and praxis is bitter evidence of how little many revolutionaries are capable of “revolutionizing themselves and things,” much less of revolutionizing society as a whole. The deep-rooted conservatism of the PLP[1] “revolutionaries” is almost painfully evident; the authoritarian leader and hierarchy replace the patriarch and the school bureaucracy; the discipline of the Movement replaces the discipline of bourgeois society; the authoritarian code of political obedience replaces the state; the credo of “proletarian morality” replaces the mores of puritanism and the work ethic. The old substance of exploitative society reappears in new forms, draped in a red flag, decorated by portraits of Mao (or Castro or Che) and adorned with the little “Red Book” and other sacred litanies.<br /><br />The majority of the people who remain in the PLP today deserve it. If they can live with a movement that cynically dubs its own slogans into photographs of DRUM pickets;[2] if they can read a magazine that asks whether Marcuse is a “copout or cop”; if they can accept a “discipline” that reduces them to poker-faced, programmed automata; if they can use the most disgusting techniques (techniques borrowed from the cesspool of bourgeois business operations and parliamentarianism) to manipulate other organizations; if they can parasitize virtually every action and situation merely to promote the growth of their party — even if this means defeat for the action itself — then they are beneath contempt. For these people to call themselves reds and describe attacks upon them as redbaiting is a form of McCarthyism in reverse. To rephrase Trotsky’s juicy description of Stalinism, they are the syphilis of the radical youth movement today. And for syphilis there is only one treatment — an antibiotic, not an argument.<br /><br />Our concern here is with those honest revolutionaries who have turned to Marxism, Leninism or Trotskyism because they earnestly seek a coherent social outlook and an effective strategy of revolution. We are also concerned with those who are awed by the theoretical repertory of Marxist ideology and are disposed to flirt with it in the absence of more systematic alternatives. To these people we address ourselves as brothers and sisters and ask for a serious discussion and a comprehensive re-evaluation. We believe that Marxism has ceased to be applicable to our time not because it is too visionary or revolutionary, but because it is not visionary or revolutionary enough. We believe it was born of an era of scarcity and presented as a brilliant critique of that era, specifically of industrial capitalism, and that a new era is in birth which Marxism does not adequately encompass and whose outlines it only partially and onesidedly anticipated. We argue that the problem is not to “abandon” Marxism, or to “annul” it, but to transcend it dialectically, just as Marx transcended Hegelian philosophy, Ricardian economics, and Blanquist tactics and modes of organization. We shall argue that in a more advanced stage of capitalism than Marx dealt with a century ago, and in a more advanced stage of technological development than Marx could have clearly anticipated, a new critique is necessary, which in turn yields new modes of struggle, or organization, of propaganda and of lifestyle. Call these new modes whatever you wish. We have chosen to call this new approach post-scarcity anarchism, for a number of compelling reasons which will become evident in the pages that follow.<br /><br />The historical limits of marxism<br /><br />The idea that a man whose greatest theoretical contributions were made between 1840 and 1880 could “foresee” the entire dialectic of capitalism is, on the face of it, utterly preposterous. If we can still learn much from Marx’s insights, we can learn even more from the unavoidable errors of a man who was limited by an era of material scarcity and a technology that barely involved the use of electric power. We can learn how different our own era is from that of all past history, how qualitatively new are the potentialities that confront us, how unique are the issues, analyses and praxis that stand before us if we are to make a revolution and not another historical abortion.<br /><br />The problem is not that Marxism is a “method” which must be reapplied to “new situations” or that “neo-Marxism” has to be developed to overcome the limitations of “classical Marxism.” The attempt to rescue the Marxism pedigree by emphasizing the method over the system or by adding “neo” to a sacred word is sheer mystification if all the practical conclusions of the system flatly contradict these efforts.[3] Yet this is precisely the state of affairs in Marxian exegesis today. Marxists lean on the fact that the system provides a brilliant interpretation of the past while willfully ignoring its utterly misleading features in dealing with the present and future. They cite the coherence that historical materialism and the class analysis give to the interpretation of history, the economic insights of Capital provides into the development of industrial capitalism, and the brilliance of Marx’s analysis of earlier revolutions and the tactical conclusions he established, without once recognizing that qualitatively new problems have arisen which never existed in his day. Is it conceivable that historical problems and methods of class analysis based entirely on unavoidable scarcity can be transplanted into a new era of potential abundance? Is it conceivable that an economic analysis focused primarily on a “freely competitive” system of industrial capitalism can be transferred to a managed system of capitalism, where state and monopolies combine to manipulate economic life? Is it conceivable that a strategic and tactical repertory formulated in a period when steel and coal constituted the basis of industrial technology can be transferred to an age based on radically new sources of energy, on electronics, on cybernation?<br /><br />As a result of this transfer, a theoretical corpus which was liberating a century ago is turned into a straitjacket today. We are asked to focus on the working class as the “agent” of revolutionary change at a time when capitalism visibly antagonizes and produces revolutionaries among virtually all strata of society, particularly the young. We are asked to guide our tactical methods by the vision of a “chronic economic crisis” despite the fact that no such crisis has been in the offing for thirty years,[4] We are asked to accept a “proletarian dictatorship” — a long “transitional period” whose function is not merely the suppression of counter-revolutionaries but above all the development of a technology of abundance — at a time when a technology of abundance is at hand. We are asked to orient our “strategies” and “tactics” around poverty and material immiseration at a time when revolutionary sentiment is being generated by the banality of life under conditions of material abundance. We are asked to establish political parties, centralized organizations, “revolutionary” hierarchies and elites, and a new state at a time when political institutions as such are decaying and when centralizing, elitism and the state are being brought into question on a scale that has never occurred before in the history of hierarchical society.<br /><br />We are asked, in short, to return to the past, to diminish instead of grow, to force the throbbing reality of our times, with its hopes and promises, into the deadening preconceptions of an outlived age. We are asked to operate with principles that have been transcended not only theoretically but by the very development of society itself. History has not stood still since Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky died, nor has it followed the simplistic direction which was charted out by thinkers — however brilliant — whose minds were still rooted in the nineteenth century or in the opening years of the twentieth. We have seen capitalism itself perform many of the tasks (including the development of a technology of abundance) which were regarded as socialist; we have seen it “nationalize” property, merging the economy with the state wherever necessary. We have seen the working class neutralized as the “agent of revolutionary change,” albeit still struggling with a bourgeois framework for more wages, shorter hours and “fringe” benefits. The class struggle in the classical sense has not disappeared; it has suffered a more deadening fate by being co-opted into capitalism. The revolutionary struggle within the advanced capitalist countries has shifted into a historically new terrain: it has become a struggle between a generation of youth that has known no chronic economic crisis and the culture, values, and institutions of an older, conservative generation whose perspective on life has been shaped by scarcity, guilt, renunciation, the work ethic and the pursuit of material security. Our enemies are not only the visibly entrenched bourgeoisie and the state apparatus but also an outlook which finds its support among liberals, social democrats, the minions of a corrupt mass media, the “revolutionary” parties of the past, and, painful as it may be to the acolytes of Marxism, the worker dominated by the factory hierarchy, by the industrial routine, and by the work ethic. The point is that the divisions now cut across virtually all the traditional class lines and they raise a spectrum of problems that none of the Marxists, leaning on analogies with scarcity societies, could foresee.<br /><br />The myth of the proletariat<br />.….”<br />More ",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1625815829608140809/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1625921383454216201",
"published": "2024-04-13T16:31:05+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "“Listen Marxist!”\nhttps://youtu.be/h9GVW_fnOr8?si=SPPJ22xwfeQONUsm\nA blast from the past\nFrom an old Anarchist \n\n(To bad the ‘60s student “radicals” didn’t give him more of a listen😏)\n\nhttps://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-listen-marxist\n\nMurray Bookchin\n“Listen, Marxist!”\nhttps://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-listen-marxist\n“Murray Bookchin's best-known leaflet, \n(Now largely forgotten) \nListen, Marxist! \nwas aimed predominantly at students influenced by the Maoist Progressive Labor Party which was heavily (and highly destructive) active in the mass Students for a Democratic Society movement in 1960s and 70s America.”\n\n“All the old crap of the thirties is coming back again — the shit about the “class line,” the “role of the working class,” the “trained cadres,” the “vanguard party,” and the “proletarian dictatorship.” It’s all back again, and in a more vulgarized form than ever. The Progressive Labor Party is not the only example, it is merely the worst. One smells the same shit in various offshoots of SDS, and in the Marxist and Socialist clubs on campuses, not to speak of the Trotskyist groups, the International Socialist Clubs and the Youth Against War and Fascism.\n\nIn the thirties, at least it was understandable. The United States was paralyzed by a chronic economic crisis, the deepest and the longest in its history. The only living forces that seemed to be battering at the walls of capitalism were the great organizing drives of the CIO, with their dramatic sitdown strikes, their radical militancy, and their bloody clashes with the police. The political atmosphere through the entire world was charged by the electricity of the Spanish Civil War, the last of the classical worker’s revolutions, when every radical sect in the American left could identify with its own militia columns in Madrid and Barcelona. That was thirty years ago. It was a time when anyone who cried out “Make love, not war” would have been regarded as a freak; the cry then was “Make jobs, not war” — the cry of an age burdened by scarcity, when the achievement of socialism entailed “sacrifices” and a “transition period” to an economy of material abundance. To an eighteen-year old kid in 1937 the very concept of cybernation would have seemed like the wildest science fiction, a fantasy comparable to visions of space travel. That eighteen-year-old kid has now reach fifty years of age, and his roots are planted in an era so remote as to differ qualitatively from the realities of the present period in the United States. Capitalism itself has changed since then, taking on increasingly statified forms that could be anticipated only dimly thirty years ago. And now we are being asked to go back to the “class line,” the “strategies,” the “cadres” and the organizational forms of that distant period in almost blatant disregard of the new issues and possibilities that have emerged.\n\nWhen the hell are we finally going to create a movement that looks to the future instead of the past? When will we begin to learn from what is being born instead of what is dying? Marx, to his lasting credit, tried to do that in his own day; he tried to evoke a futuristic spirit in the revolutionary movement of the 1840’s and 1850’s. “The tradition of all the dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living,” he wrote in The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte.\n\n“And when they seem to be engaged in revolutionizing themselves and things, in creating something entirely new, precisely in such epochs of revolutionary crisis they anxiously conjure up the spirits of the past to their service and borrow from them names, battle slogans and costumes in order to present the new scene of world history in this time-honored disguise and borrowed language. Thus Luther donned the mask of the Apostle Paul, the revolution of 1789 to 1814 draped itself alternately as the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire, and the revolution of 1848 knew nothing better than to parody, in turn, 1789 and the tradition of 1793 to 1795. … The social revolution of the nineteenth century cannot draw its poetry from the past, but only from the future. It cannot begin with itself before it has stripped off all superstition in regard to the past. … In order to arrive at its content, the revolution of the nineteenth century must let the dead bury their dead. There the phrase went beyond the content, here the content goes beyond the phrase.”\nIs the problem any different today, as we approach the twenty-first century? Once again the dead are walking in our midst — ironically, draped in the name of Marx, the man who tried to bury the dead of the nineteenth century. So the revolution of our own day can do nothing better than parody, in turn, the October Revolution of 1917 and the civil war of 1918–1920, with its “class line,” its Bolshevik Party, its “proletarian dictatorship,” its puritanical morality, and even its slogan, “soviet power.” The complete, all-sided revolution of our own day that can finally resolve the historic “social question,” born of scarcity, domination and hierarchy, follows the tradition of the partial, the incomplete, the one-sided revolutions of the past, which merely changed the form of the “social question,” replacing one system of domination and hierarchy by another. At a time when bourgeois society itself is in the process of disintegrating all the social classes that once gave it stability, we hear the hollow demands for a “class line.” At a time when all the political institutions of hierarchical society are entering a period of profound decay, we hear the hollow demands for a “political party” and a “worker’s state.” At a time when hierarchy as such is being brought into question, we hear the hollow demands for “cadres,” “vanguards” and “leaders.” At a time when centralization and the state have been brought to the most explosive point of historical negativity, we hear the hollow demands for a “centralized movement” and a “proletarian dictatorship.”\n\nThis pursuit of security in the past, this attempt to find a haven in a fixed dogma and an organizational hierarchy as substitutes for creative thought and praxis is bitter evidence of how little many revolutionaries are capable of “revolutionizing themselves and things,” much less of revolutionizing society as a whole. The deep-rooted conservatism of the PLP[1] “revolutionaries” is almost painfully evident; the authoritarian leader and hierarchy replace the patriarch and the school bureaucracy; the discipline of the Movement replaces the discipline of bourgeois society; the authoritarian code of political obedience replaces the state; the credo of “proletarian morality” replaces the mores of puritanism and the work ethic. The old substance of exploitative society reappears in new forms, draped in a red flag, decorated by portraits of Mao (or Castro or Che) and adorned with the little “Red Book” and other sacred litanies.\n\nThe majority of the people who remain in the PLP today deserve it. If they can live with a movement that cynically dubs its own slogans into photographs of DRUM pickets;[2] if they can read a magazine that asks whether Marcuse is a “copout or cop”; if they can accept a “discipline” that reduces them to poker-faced, programmed automata; if they can use the most disgusting techniques (techniques borrowed from the cesspool of bourgeois business operations and parliamentarianism) to manipulate other organizations; if they can parasitize virtually every action and situation merely to promote the growth of their party — even if this means defeat for the action itself — then they are beneath contempt. For these people to call themselves reds and describe attacks upon them as redbaiting is a form of McCarthyism in reverse. To rephrase Trotsky’s juicy description of Stalinism, they are the syphilis of the radical youth movement today. And for syphilis there is only one treatment — an antibiotic, not an argument.\n\nOur concern here is with those honest revolutionaries who have turned to Marxism, Leninism or Trotskyism because they earnestly seek a coherent social outlook and an effective strategy of revolution. We are also concerned with those who are awed by the theoretical repertory of Marxist ideology and are disposed to flirt with it in the absence of more systematic alternatives. To these people we address ourselves as brothers and sisters and ask for a serious discussion and a comprehensive re-evaluation. We believe that Marxism has ceased to be applicable to our time not because it is too visionary or revolutionary, but because it is not visionary or revolutionary enough. We believe it was born of an era of scarcity and presented as a brilliant critique of that era, specifically of industrial capitalism, and that a new era is in birth which Marxism does not adequately encompass and whose outlines it only partially and onesidedly anticipated. We argue that the problem is not to “abandon” Marxism, or to “annul” it, but to transcend it dialectically, just as Marx transcended Hegelian philosophy, Ricardian economics, and Blanquist tactics and modes of organization. We shall argue that in a more advanced stage of capitalism than Marx dealt with a century ago, and in a more advanced stage of technological development than Marx could have clearly anticipated, a new critique is necessary, which in turn yields new modes of struggle, or organization, of propaganda and of lifestyle. Call these new modes whatever you wish. We have chosen to call this new approach post-scarcity anarchism, for a number of compelling reasons which will become evident in the pages that follow.\n\nThe historical limits of marxism\n\nThe idea that a man whose greatest theoretical contributions were made between 1840 and 1880 could “foresee” the entire dialectic of capitalism is, on the face of it, utterly preposterous. If we can still learn much from Marx’s insights, we can learn even more from the unavoidable errors of a man who was limited by an era of material scarcity and a technology that barely involved the use of electric power. We can learn how different our own era is from that of all past history, how qualitatively new are the potentialities that confront us, how unique are the issues, analyses and praxis that stand before us if we are to make a revolution and not another historical abortion.\n\nThe problem is not that Marxism is a “method” which must be reapplied to “new situations” or that “neo-Marxism” has to be developed to overcome the limitations of “classical Marxism.” The attempt to rescue the Marxism pedigree by emphasizing the method over the system or by adding “neo” to a sacred word is sheer mystification if all the practical conclusions of the system flatly contradict these efforts.[3] Yet this is precisely the state of affairs in Marxian exegesis today. Marxists lean on the fact that the system provides a brilliant interpretation of the past while willfully ignoring its utterly misleading features in dealing with the present and future. They cite the coherence that historical materialism and the class analysis give to the interpretation of history, the economic insights of Capital provides into the development of industrial capitalism, and the brilliance of Marx’s analysis of earlier revolutions and the tactical conclusions he established, without once recognizing that qualitatively new problems have arisen which never existed in his day. Is it conceivable that historical problems and methods of class analysis based entirely on unavoidable scarcity can be transplanted into a new era of potential abundance? Is it conceivable that an economic analysis focused primarily on a “freely competitive” system of industrial capitalism can be transferred to a managed system of capitalism, where state and monopolies combine to manipulate economic life? Is it conceivable that a strategic and tactical repertory formulated in a period when steel and coal constituted the basis of industrial technology can be transferred to an age based on radically new sources of energy, on electronics, on cybernation?\n\nAs a result of this transfer, a theoretical corpus which was liberating a century ago is turned into a straitjacket today. We are asked to focus on the working class as the “agent” of revolutionary change at a time when capitalism visibly antagonizes and produces revolutionaries among virtually all strata of society, particularly the young. We are asked to guide our tactical methods by the vision of a “chronic economic crisis” despite the fact that no such crisis has been in the offing for thirty years,[4] We are asked to accept a “proletarian dictatorship” — a long “transitional period” whose function is not merely the suppression of counter-revolutionaries but above all the development of a technology of abundance — at a time when a technology of abundance is at hand. We are asked to orient our “strategies” and “tactics” around poverty and material immiseration at a time when revolutionary sentiment is being generated by the banality of life under conditions of material abundance. We are asked to establish political parties, centralized organizations, “revolutionary” hierarchies and elites, and a new state at a time when political institutions as such are decaying and when centralizing, elitism and the state are being brought into question on a scale that has never occurred before in the history of hierarchical society.\n\nWe are asked, in short, to return to the past, to diminish instead of grow, to force the throbbing reality of our times, with its hopes and promises, into the deadening preconceptions of an outlived age. We are asked to operate with principles that have been transcended not only theoretically but by the very development of society itself. History has not stood still since Marx, Engels, Lenin and Trotsky died, nor has it followed the simplistic direction which was charted out by thinkers — however brilliant — whose minds were still rooted in the nineteenth century or in the opening years of the twentieth. We have seen capitalism itself perform many of the tasks (including the development of a technology of abundance) which were regarded as socialist; we have seen it “nationalize” property, merging the economy with the state wherever necessary. We have seen the working class neutralized as the “agent of revolutionary change,” albeit still struggling with a bourgeois framework for more wages, shorter hours and “fringe” benefits. The class struggle in the classical sense has not disappeared; it has suffered a more deadening fate by being co-opted into capitalism. The revolutionary struggle within the advanced capitalist countries has shifted into a historically new terrain: it has become a struggle between a generation of youth that has known no chronic economic crisis and the culture, values, and institutions of an older, conservative generation whose perspective on life has been shaped by scarcity, guilt, renunciation, the work ethic and the pursuit of material security. Our enemies are not only the visibly entrenched bourgeoisie and the state apparatus but also an outlook which finds its support among liberals, social democrats, the minions of a corrupt mass media, the “revolutionary” parties of the past, and, painful as it may be to the acolytes of Marxism, the worker dominated by the factory hierarchy, by the industrial routine, and by the work ethic. The point is that the divisions now cut across virtually all the traditional class lines and they raise a spectrum of problems that none of the Marxists, leaning on analogies with scarcity societies, could foresee.\n\nThe myth of the proletariat\n.….”\nMore ",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1644934535307071495/activity",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1625815829608140809",
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/followers"
]
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1644381132491329555",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"content": "Another podcast episode form the vault<br /><br />Episode #3.1 - The Pros and Cons of Moral Decay<br /><br />We discuss chapter 4 of <a class=\"u-url mention\" href=\"https://www.minds.com/thaddeusrussell\" target=\"_blank\">@thaddeusrussell</a>'s book, \"A Renegade History of the United States\", which touches on some pretty spicy stuff, I'll just be honest.<br /><br />Link to podcast:<br />YouTube - <a href=\"https://youtu.be/C6-9wmmVr6o\" target=\"_blank\">https://youtu.be/C6-9wmmVr6o</a><br /><br />Apple - <a href=\"https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pdamx-3-1-the-pros-and-cons-of-moral-decay/id1691736489?i=1000617804408\" target=\"_blank\">https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pdamx-3-1-the-pros-and-cons-of-moral-decay/id1691736489?i=1000617804408</a><br /><br /><a href=\"https://www.minds.com/search?f=top&t=all&q=history\" title=\"#history\" class=\"u-url hashtag\" target=\"_blank\">#history</a> <a href=\"https://www.minds.com/search?f=top&t=all&q=philosophy\" title=\"#philosophy\" class=\"u-url hashtag\" target=\"_blank\">#philosophy</a> <a href=\"https://www.minds.com/search?f=top&t=all&q=politics\" title=\"#politics\" class=\"u-url hashtag\" target=\"_blank\">#politics</a> <a href=\"https://www.minds.com/search?f=top&t=all&q=renegade\" title=\"#renegade\" class=\"u-url hashtag\" target=\"_blank\">#renegade</a> ",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/followers"
],
"tag": [
{
"type": "Mention",
"href": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1098635912956354565",
"name": "@thaddeusrussell"
}
],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1644381132491329555",
"published": "2024-06-03T15:03:32+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "Another podcast episode form the vault\n\nEpisode #3.1 - The Pros and Cons of Moral Decay\n\nWe discuss chapter 4 of @thaddeusrussell's book, \"A Renegade History of the United States\", which touches on some pretty spicy stuff, I'll just be honest.\n\nLink to podcast:\nYouTube - https://youtu.be/C6-9wmmVr6o\n\nApple - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pdamx-3-1-the-pros-and-cons-of-moral-decay/id1691736489?i=1000617804408\n\n#history #philosophy #politics #renegade ",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1644381132491329555/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1640843623887015951",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"content": "Our final episode from almost a year ago on medical history<br /><br />Episode 2.3 - Galen was a complicated man<br /><br />In this episode we discuss Galen, the 2nd century A.D. Greek/Roman physician whose writings served as the preeminent medical authority for ~1500 years in the West. As with the last 2 episodes, much of the information presented is from Sherwin B. Nuland's book \"Doctors: The Biography of Medicine\".<br /><br />Links to episode:<br />Apple - <a href=\"https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pdamx-2-3-galen-was-a-complicated-man/id1691736489?i=1000617095784\" target=\"_blank\">https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pdamx-2-3-galen-was-a-complicated-man/id1691736489?i=1000617095784</a><br /><br />Spotify - <a href=\"https://open.spotify.com/episode/49atDfRLCB1u9q1Qrgants?si=b26ab353d8aa4963\" target=\"_blank\">https://open.spotify.com/episode/49atDfRLCB1u9q1Qrgants?si=b26ab353d8aa4963</a><br /><br />Youtube - <a href=\"https://youtu.be/sxabFG7LFiQ\" target=\"_blank\">https://youtu.be/sxabFG7LFiQ</a><br /><br /><a href=\"https://www.minds.com/search?f=top&t=all&q=podcast\" title=\"#podcast\" class=\"u-url hashtag\" target=\"_blank\">#podcast</a> <a href=\"https://www.minds.com/search?f=top&t=all&q=history\" title=\"#history\" class=\"u-url hashtag\" target=\"_blank\">#history</a> <a href=\"https://www.minds.com/search?f=top&t=all&q=philosophy\" title=\"#philosophy\" class=\"u-url hashtag\" target=\"_blank\">#philosophy</a>",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1640843623887015951",
"published": "2024-05-24T20:46:44+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "Our final episode from almost a year ago on medical history\n\nEpisode 2.3 - Galen was a complicated man\n\nIn this episode we discuss Galen, the 2nd century A.D. Greek/Roman physician whose writings served as the preeminent medical authority for ~1500 years in the West. As with the last 2 episodes, much of the information presented is from Sherwin B. Nuland's book \"Doctors: The Biography of Medicine\".\n\nLinks to episode:\nApple - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pdamx-2-3-galen-was-a-complicated-man/id1691736489?i=1000617095784\n\nSpotify - https://open.spotify.com/episode/49atDfRLCB1u9q1Qrgants?si=b26ab353d8aa4963\n\nYoutube - https://youtu.be/sxabFG7LFiQ\n\n#podcast #history #philosophy",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1640843623887015951/activity"
},
{
"type": "Announce",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/716588952437399569/entities/urn:activity:1636761687228944392",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/716588952437399569",
"content": "Cassette Jazz<br />Dropping them 【ＦＬＵＴＥ ＶＩＢＥＳ】 from cassette.<br />天気ジャズ! (⌐◪_◪) --ACE<br /><br /><a href=\"https://www.minds.com/search?f=top&t=all&q=music\" title=\"#music\" class=\"u-url hashtag\" target=\"_blank\">#music</a> <a href=\"https://www.minds.com/search?f=top&t=all&q=jamming\" title=\"#jamming\" class=\"u-url hashtag\" target=\"_blank\">#jamming</a> <a href=\"https://www.minds.com/search?f=top&t=all&q=flute\" title=\"#flute\" class=\"u-url hashtag\" target=\"_blank\">#flute</a> <a href=\"https://www.minds.com/search?f=top&t=all&q=jazz\" title=\"#jazz\" class=\"u-url hashtag\" target=\"_blank\">#jazz</a> <a href=\"https://www.minds.com/search?f=top&t=all&q=vaporwave\" title=\"#vaporwave\" class=\"u-url hashtag\" target=\"_blank\">#vaporwave</a> <a href=\"https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1636761687228944392\" target=\"_blank\">https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1636761687228944392</a>",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/716588952437399569/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1636761687228944392",
"published": "2024-05-13T14:26:35+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "Cassette Jazz\nDropping them 【ＦＬＵＴＥ ＶＩＢＥＳ】 from cassette.\n天気ジャズ! (⌐◪_◪) --ACE\n\n#music #jamming #flute #jazz #vaporwave https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1636761687228944392",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1638053744585216017/activity",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/716588952437399569",
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/followers"
]
},
{
"type": "Announce",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1104021704688017420/entities/urn:activity:1637743405649891344",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1104021704688017420",
"content": "Horseshoe crab helps his fren<br /> <a href=\"https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1637743405649891344\" target=\"_blank\">https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1637743405649891344</a>",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1104021704688017420/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1637743405649891344",
"published": "2024-05-16T12:00:00+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "Horseshoe crab helps his fren\n https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1637743405649891344",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1638053233421193224/activity",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1104021704688017420",
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/followers"
]
},
{
"type": "Announce",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1147857380176830481/entities/urn:activity:1637949834117779464",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1147857380176830481",
"content": "<a href=\"https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1637949834117779464\" target=\"_blank\">https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1637949834117779464</a>",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1147857380176830481/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1637949834117779464",
"published": "2024-05-16T21:07:51+00:00",
"attachment": [
{
"type": "Document",
"url": "https://cdn.minds.com/fs/v1/thumbnail/1637949823476830222/xlarge/",
"mediaType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 397,
"width": 578
}
],
"source": {
"content": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1637949834117779464",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/entities/urn:activity:1638052324473573387/activity",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1147857380176830481",
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/followers"
]
}
],
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/outbox",
"partOf": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/945524233511903248/outboxoutbox"
}