No, I didn’t know about that book. Thanks for the recommendation!

“Rather than working to smash the current capitalist system, the existing infrastructure is here identified as a platform requiring repurposing towards post-capitalist, collective ends.”

In Leftspeak, “collective” nearly always means . . . well, no, I’ll just post the obvious link:

http://nydwracu.wordpress.com/2013/03/05/voice-exit-and-the-catholic-question/

In network theory, we might say that the “repurposing” of capitalism’s infrastructure for “collective ends” would mean conceptually un-making autonomous clusters of nodes and enfolding all nodes into one giant, undifferentiated cluster so that all nodes can be put to work on the same project, as defined by progressive pussies.

Not sure about this one. The same thing could have been said about the internet. Lo and behold, while it has resulted in a geographical diffusion of economic activity, this only allowed the global 1% to increase the size of the market they already dominated. AI and 3D printing may decentralize production the way the web did information services, but why would this result in anything other than the 1% responsible for design and organization increasing their reach dramatically and creating a global economy of scale?

The economic example was only an illustration of the political principle. Moldbug is brilliant enough to treat economic and political institutions as if they operate by the same rules – because they do. If there is a natural organizational advantage provided to economic institutions of greater scale — regardless of how or where the grunt work is performed — then the same is true for the institutions which decide how we spend public money, and centralization is a one way street.