MINNESOTAS RESISTANCE NETWORK - Decentralized Call to Action

#deny # defend #depose vs #resolve #resist #reform

There’s a quiet shift happening beneath the surface of our screens and streets. While the old systems argue about how to stay alive, new systems are already being born — open-source, self-organizing, impossible to fully contain.

Minnesota’s Resistance Network began as a small act of refusal — a refusal to let meaning collapse under noise, and a refusal to outsource moral imagination to power.

Our mission is simple, though not easy:

MN Resistance Archive 

to build a living archive of resistance.

To connect thinkers, makers, teachers, and dreamers who refuse to wait for permission to act.

To create decentralized pathways for collaboration — where ideas move freely, where no single voice owns the message, and where knowledge is treated as a commons, not a commodity.

We are not a party, nor a brand. We are a network — plural, local, and evolving. We seek out the friction points where activism meets ecology, where art meets strategy, where technology meets care.

Our scope stretches from the neighborhood assembly to the global conversation: supporting community defense, amplifying degrowth, sharing mutual-aid models, and hosting experimental projects that test what solidarity can look like in the twenty-first century.

The invitation is open.

Join, adapt, remix.

Bring your craft, your questions, your contradictions.

What we build here will not be perfect — but it will be alive. And aliveness is the most radical thing left to protect.

The work ahead asks for more than slogans. It asks for courage in the everyday. It asks for people willing to prototype the future while living inside the ruins of the old one.

If you’re hearing this, consider yourself part of the signal.

The network is not waiting to be launched — it’s already moving through you.

How will you forge your outrage into resolve today? 

---

Taxonomy of action

Taxonomy of action 

• What does resistance look like? 
• This is what our resistance looks like! 

 Imagine this:

 every act of resistance you’ve ever heard of — a strike, a boycott, a protest, a quiet refusal to comply — all belong to one shared language. A living system. A grammar of action.

This taxonomy of resistance isn’t just a catalog of tactics. It’s a map of how human beings reclaim agency when institutions stop listening. And here’s the secret: you don’t need to wait for permission to use it.

---

At the base of the map are the simplest gestures — *acts of omission*. 

The art of saying *no*. No to injustice, to complicity, to the assumption that you are powerless. You might cancel a subscription to a harmful corporation. Refuse to work overtime for a company exploiting your peers. Or quietly, deliberately, withhold your data from a surveillance platform.

Omission is the withdrawal of consent — the first form of power most people forget they have.

---

Next come the *acts of commission* 

— the moment you turn “no” into “something else.” You speak, organize, and rebuild. You teach others what you’ve learned. You show up at community assemblies, digital forums, food co-ops, and block clubs. You join boycotts, sign petitions, build mutual aid networks, and help fund projects that align with your values.

Commission is the creative counterpart to refusal. It’s where resistance stops being reactive and starts becoming *design*.

---

And from there, the energy scales. You might coordinate logistics for a strike, raise funds for families in crisis, or help maintain digital infrastructure for collective action. Each node, however small, strengthens the web.

Because this taxonomy isn’t hierarchical — it’s *ecological.* Every act connects, nourishes, and learns from the rest.

---

Now, some parts of this map are dangerous — occupations, blockades, or physical confrontation. They demand risk, solidarity, and strategy. Not everyone must walk those paths. What matters is that we recognize their place in the continuum. Resistance is not a ladder to climb; it’s a landscape to inhabit.

The point isn’t to glorify conflict. It’s to see that *all* forms of resistance — from quiet refusals to systemic redesign — form a continuous spectrum of participation.

---

So here’s the invitation:

Turn this taxonomy into a daily practice. Let it guide the micro-decisions of your life.

Where can you withdraw consent today? Where can you build something better tomorrow?

Maybe it’s composting waste. Maybe it’s forming a local credit circle. Maybe it’s teaching your neighbors how to encrypt their messages.

Each act is a seed. Each refusal makes room for creation.

---

We don’t need a single revolution. We need millions of small ones — decentralized, creative, persistent — that together shift the gravitational field of what’s possible.

Resistance isn’t the opposite of living well.

 It’s how living well begins.

---

Source: 

https://dgrnewsservice.org/resistance/a-taxonomy-of-action/

Hack Humanity!

 

Hack Humanity!

is a decentralized action network and governance design studio that operates at the intersection of open-source technology, systemic innovation, and regenerative social design. Primarily hosted at hackhumanity.net, the project presents itself as a catalyst for a global "paradigm shift," moving away from outdated 20th-century institutions toward adaptive, decentralized systems.

The following essay describes the platform's ideology, the scope and scale of its vision, and the specific mission and methods it employs.

1. Ideology: The Commons and Regenerative Systems

The core ideology of Hack Humanity is rooted in Systems Thinking and the Commons. It rejects the traditional competitive, extractive models of capitalism and governance in favor of "sovereignty and synergy."

The project operates under the belief that current global crises—ranging from climate change to social inequality—are symptoms of "outdated operating systems." To fix these, Hack Humanity advocates for a "regenerative society" that works for all. Their philosophy is heavily influenced by peer-to-peer (P2P) dynamics, open-source principles, and "protopian" ideals (the belief in incremental, daily progress toward a better future, rather than a perfect utopia). They view humanity as a "sleeping giant" that, if coordinated through the right technological and social frameworks, can solve complex global challenges locally.

2. Scope and Scale of Vision: A Movement of Movements

The vision of Hack Humanity is massive in scale, aiming to create a "New Operating System" for the planet. Their goal is not just to build a single app or organization, but to facilitate a "Movement of Movements."

 * Global Scope: They aim to synchronize thousands of diverse groups—NGOs, universities, environmental activists, and tech developers—into a unified "Action Network."

 * Total System Change: Their vision encompasses every major pillar of human society, including finance, education, healthcare, and governance.

 * The "Great Pause": They frame current global instabilities (such as those following 2020) as an opportunity for a "Great Pause"—a chance for humanity to reflect and consciously redesign its future rather than returning to a flawed "normal."

3. Mission: Building the "IT Carrier" for Humanity

The specific mission of Hack Humanity is to provide the technology, social systems, and innovative business models necessary for people to solve meaningful missions.

They describe their role as standing in the "gap" between centralized, legacy institutions and the decentralized future. Specifically, they seek to:

•  * Foster a community of problem-solvers.
• 
  
•  * Transition ecosystems (like the NEAR blockchain) from centralized stewardship to self-governing, permissionless systems.
• 
  
•  * Empower individuals to manufacture and implement solutions locally through a global knowledge base.

4. Methods: From Hackathons to Governance Design

Hack Humanity utilizes a distinct set of "hacktivities" and methodologies to achieve their goals:

 * Human-Centered Hackathons: Unlike traditional coding competitions, their hackathons (like "Hackathon Zero") focus on "human-centered design" to tackle real-world social challenges. These events are intended to be ongoing "serials" that build upon each other rather than one-off events.

 * Open-Source Everything: Partnering with initiatives like ENVIENTA, they promote an "open-source lifestyle." This involves sharing low-cost modular solutions for housing, food, and energy so that any community can replicate them.

 * Governance Engineering: Through their design studio, they act as facilitators for "House of Stake" and other DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization) structures. They build the "operational IT back-end" that allows large groups of people to make collective decisions without a central boss.

 * Strategic Partnerships: They act as a "connect the dots" initiative, linking their network to established platforms like the Systems Innovation Network, Global Citizen, and the P2P Foundation. This creates a "holistic toolset" where various experts can collaborate across disciplines.

Conclusion:

Hack Humanity is more than a website; it is a strategic hub for what they call "21st-century institution building." By combining the technical rigor of software development with the social ethos of the commons, they attempt to "hack" the very structure of human cooperation. Their success relies on the ability to scale small-scale "hacktivities" into a global, regenerative network capable of replacing the rigid systems of the past.

Source: https://hackhumanity.net/

Radical Librarians Collective

The Radical Librarians Collective (RLC)

 is a decentralized, horizontal network of library and information workers, researchers, and activists dedicated to challenging the status quo of modern librarianship. The organization’s ideology is rooted in anti-capitalism, critical theory, and social justice, positioning the library not as a neutral repository but as a contested political space.

The following essay describes the website’s vision, mission, and methodology as a blueprint for a transformative approach to information science.

The Ideological Foundation: Anti-Marketization and Radical Neutrality

At the heart of the RLC is a fierce opposition to the marketization of libraries and the commodification of information. The collective rejects the neoliberal trend of treating library users as "customers" and information as a "product." Their ideology is built upon the premise that information should be a common good, free from the constraints of corporate profit or state surveillance.

A key pillar of their philosophy is the rejection of "professional neutrality." While traditional librarianship often prides itself on being apolitical, the RLC argues that neutrality in the face of oppression is a form of complicity. They advocate for a critical librarianship (or "critlib") that acknowledges how libraries can inadvertently reinforce systemic inequalities, such as racism, classism, and the "hostile environment" policies of the state.

Scope and Scale: A Global Vision with Local Roots

The RLC’s vision is expansive, seeking to redefine the role of the librarian in the 21st century. Their scope transcends the physical walls of the library, reaching into the realms of digital privacy, scholarly communications, and border politics. While the collective began primarily in the United Kingdom, its scale is intentionally non-hierarchical and distributed. They do not operate as a traditional professional body with a central executive; instead, they function through regional groups (such as in Oxford or Ireland) and a global digital network. Their vision is to build a "solidarity of the critical," creating a safety net for workers who feel alienated by the institutional constraints of traditional library management.

Mission: Resistance and Reclaiming the Commons

The mission of the RLC is twofold: resistance and reclamation.

 * Resistance: They aim to resist the encroachment of state surveillance and commercial interests into library spaces. A primary example is their vocal opposition to deals between library associations and government immigration agencies (like the SCL/UKVI deal), which they argue turns librarians into "border guards" and destroys the library’s role as a trusted, safe space for vulnerable populations.

 * Reclamation: They seek to reclaim the "scholarly commons." This involves promoting Open Access, protecting intellectual freedom, and ensuring that knowledge is accessible to everyone, regardless of their geopolitical or economic status.

Methods: Solidarity, Technology, and "Radical" Tactics

The RLC achieves its mission through a variety of practical, grassroots methods:

 * Gatherings and "Unconferences": Eschewing the formal, expensive structures of corporate conferences, the RLC holds "Gatherings" (in cities like Leeds, Glasgow, and London). These are horizontal spaces where participants set the agenda, share skills, and build interpersonal solidarity.

 * Digital Sovereignty: The collective promotes high-level digital resistance. This includes teaching encryption and "key signing," supporting the Library Freedom Project, and even hosting library repositories as Tor onion services to allow users in oppressive regimes to access information without being tracked.

 * Radical Publishing: Through the Journal of Radical Librarianship, the collective provides an open-access venue for critical research that might be sidelined by mainstream academic journals.

 * Direct Action and Advocacy: The website serves as a platform for open letters, petitions, and statements that hold professional bodies and government agencies accountable. They use their collective voice to pressure institutions to return to ethical foundations—funding libraries as essential public infrastructure rather than outsourced service points.

Conclusion:

The website of the Radical Librarians Collective is more than a digital archive; it is a manifesto for the "radical" step of returning libraries to their roots as instruments of liberation. By combining technological sophistication with grassroots organizing, the RLC offers a vision of librarianship that is fiercely protective of privacy, unapologetically political, and dedicated to the belief that information is a fundamental human right, not a commodity to be traded.

Source: https://rlc.radicallibrarianship.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinua_Achebe

Albert Chinụalụmọgụ Achebe; 16 November 1930 – 21 March 2013) was a Nigerian novelist, poet, and critic who is regarded as a central figure of modern African literature. His first novel and magnum opus, Things Fall Apart (1958), occupies a pivotal place in African literature and remains the most widely studied, translated, and read African novel. Along with Things Fall Apart, his No Longer at Ease (1960) and Arrow of God (1964) complete the "African Trilogy". Later novels include A Man of the People (1966) and Anthills of the Savannah (1987). Achebe is often referred to as the "father of modern African literature", although he vigorously rejected the characterization.

Born in Ogidi, Colonial Nigeria, Achebe's childhood was influenced by both Igbo traditional culture and colonial Christianity. He excelled in school and attended what is now the University of Ibadan, where he became fiercely critical of how Western literature depicted Africa. Moving to Lagos after graduation, he worked for the Nigerian Broadcasting Service (NBS) and garnered international attention for his 1958 novel Things Fall Apart. In less than 10 years, he would publish four further novels through the publisher Heinemann, with whom he began the Heinemann African Writers Series and galvanized the careers of African writers, such as Ngũgĩ wa Thiong'o and Flora Nwapa.

What is Anarcho-pacifism?

  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-pacifism

Anarcho-pacifism, also referred to as anarchist pacifism and pacifist anarchism, is an anarchist school of thought that advocates for the use of peaceful, ethical, and non-violent forms of resistance in the struggle for social change.^[1][2] Anarcho-pacifism rejects the principle of violence which is seen as a form of power and therefore as contradictory to key anarchist ideals such as the rejection of hierarchy and dominance.^[2][3] Many anarcho-pacifists are also Christian anarchists, who reject war and the use of violence.^[4]

Anarcho-pacifists reject the use of violence, but accept non-violent revolutionary action against capitalism and the state with the purpose of establishing a peaceful voluntarist society.^[1][5] The main early influences were the philosophies of Henry David Thoreau and Leo Tolstoy while later the ideas of Mahatma Gandhi gained significance.^[1][2] Anarcho-pacifist movements primarily emerged in the Netherlands, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States before and during World War II.^[2]

Who was Dorothy Day?

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Day

Catholic Worker Movement

In 1932, Day met Peter Maurin, the man she always credited as the founder of the movement with which she is identified. Maurin, a French immigrant and something of a vagabond, had entered the Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools in his native France, before emigrating, first to Canada, then to the United States.

Despite his lack of formal education, Maurin was a man of deep intellect and decidedly strong views. He had a vision of social justice and its connection with the poor, which was partly inspired by St. Francis of Assisi. He had a vision of action based on sharing ideas and subsequent action by the poor themselves. Maurin was deeply versed in the writings of the Church Fathers and the papal documents on social matters that had been issued by Pope Leo XIII and his successors. Maurin provided Day with the grounding in Catholic theology of the need for social action they both felt.

Years later Day described how Maurin also broadened her knowledge by bringing "a digest of the writings of Kropotkin one day, calling my attention especially to Fields, Factories, and Workshops. Day observed: "I was familiar with Kropotkin only through his Memoirs of a Revolutionist, which had originally run serially in the Atlantic Monthly. She wrote: "Oh, far day of American freedom, when Karl Marx could write for the morning Tribune in New York, and Kropotkin could not only be published in the Atlantic, but be received as a guest into the homes of New England Unitarians, and in Jane Addams' Hull House in Chicago!"^[44] Maurin drew Day's attention to French models and literature.^[45][46]

The Catholic Worker Movement started when the Catholic Worker appeared on May 1, 1933, priced at one cent, and published continuously since then. It was aimed at those suffering the most in the depths of the Great Depression, "those who think there is no hope for the future," and announced to them that "the Catholic Church has a social program. ... There are men of God who are working not only for their spiritual but for their material welfare." It accepted no advertising and did not pay its staff.^[47] Publication of the first issue was supported in part by a $1 donation from Sister Peter Claver, for whom a Catholic Worker house was later named.^[48]

Fall 02025 - Resist-X update

 Its now pushing nov here in the states.

Portland frog brigade are holding it together for now

Together frog strong "

Lugi's defense case is getting stronger, 

The east wing gonzo for the epstein's ballroom,

 national guard units stationed

 in several blue states and cities,

Prop 50 in socal, 

Congress in recess, shutdown over the epstein's 

Files,

Quatar's free jet for access to a training base,

Entire carrier group moving to the Caribbean,

 to bomb Venezuela oil fields etc. 

 It looks like the americas zapatistas

 are gonna be central to this struggle. 

We, as an indie media producers, we're shifting gears towards 

A new blog format explicitly focused on

 latinx methods and issues.

Theres tons of similarities that we can learn from and support in solidarity ,

We hope to see you there. 

.https://americanas-zapatistas.blogspot.com/

Capitalists or naught' zees?

1. Is thier a clear way to define; or seperate the form and function of an active capitalist nazi from active nazi capitalists? 

2. Does one pollute the other or does one attempt to excuse the other? 

If -both are simply means to the same ends; Then - How are they different in practice, Other than- to consolidation of power into the hands of the few at the expense of the many? 

Declaration: 

It's just another form to support their function of eugenic ideology, I.e. -  Genocide with extra steps.