Yes, I think the minimal and most abstract definition is that it's positive-oriented cybernetics. And I think even in its kind of, in its incarnation that I have been sort of tracking and involved to some extent. That just simply is the way it was generated, I think. It's like basically turning Norbert Wiener upside down and you're in. The motor of modernity, its fundamental
infrastructure is capital. And that is because capital is, in its fundamentals, nothing but a self-amplifying diagram that will, you know, every attempt to sort of fix a particular epoch or set of characteristics of capital that concretizes it beyond that abstract loop tends to be just outflanked and enveloped by the actual process,
which has no sort of attachment to any particular concrete instantiation as long as that concrete instantiation allows this abstract, amplificatory loop to realize itself. And anything that obviously inhibits that loop tends to be outcompeted by something that inhibits it less, which I think, again, is already a fully Marxian insight. I don't think there's anything original about that. So that's why it tends towards an increasingly intense actualization of this extremely abstract diagram.
You can't depart from the diagram without dysfunction, without being competitively eliminated. And that's why, in the way that you just described it, it monopolizes escape. If escape into capitalism isn't the escape you want, then modern history is not for you. It's not something that's going to work for you. Try and experimentally prove me wrong on this. And my attitude to that is extremely supportive, as long as it is not entertained globally. I mean, you know, as long as this is a local, peculiar experiment that can fail on its own without taking everyone with it,
then I'm delighted to see people try and experiment with post-capitalist social arrangements. Humanism is itself something that we haven't... We've only begun to see what humanism will be, an impending massive conflict between those processes that are supporting the kind of emergence of synthetic intelligences and those that are resisting it. And it seems to me that the name, the banner or the flag under which resistance will take place
is that of man, that of the human. And that in waving that flag, it will actually, in a certain sense, produce or crystallize what the nature of the human is in a way that has never previously happened. So vague intuitions and a vague attachment and loyalty to some notion of Marx, because it's species being, various notions of what man, the nature of man. I think that we see those things actually historically transformed and
assembled into something far more definite, institutionally realistic, rigorized, and this will happen as an essential part of the orientation of resistance to the capital process, to the autonomization of capital or intelligence expansion.