As we experience waves of unprecedented technological and political upheaval, our ability to maintain a coherent, functioning society is being eroded by algorithmically mediated digital fragmentation. This presentation explores how AI-driven media ecosystems, designed to maximize engagement rather than coherence, have led to a disintegration of shared reality, making institutions more vulnerable to both accidental collapse and deliberate destabilization efforts.

Building on insights from my paper, Polarization and the Algorithmic Undertow, I will explore how the destabilization of shared epistemic space and the erosion of institutional trust have facilitated an environment in which radical reconfigurations of governance—such as Curtis Yarvin’s RAGE strategy (Retire All Government Employees) and Patchwork vision—are no longer just thought experiments but have become live political options.

This presentation will outline two interwoven dynamics: emergent systemic forces and deliberate accelerationist forces.

The first dynamic, emergent systemic forces, arises from the transformation of algorithmic information environments, which have not directly supplanted traditional bureaucracies but have instead eroded their legitimacy and efficacy. The dissolution of a shared public sphere has further weakened collective resistance to systemic dismantling efforts, making it easier to push through radical changes without widespread opposition. Additionally, financial and institutional restructuring—such as mass buyouts of civil servants and the privatization of state functions—has been implemented with less public scrutiny than previously possible, in part due to the fractured and fragmented nature of digital realities. The weakening of these institutional safeguards has created an environment where sweeping changes to governance structures can be pursued with significantly less resistance or public awareness than in the past.

The second dynamic, deliberate accelerationist forces, involves the convergence in the US of disparate ideological actors who seek to actively dismantle the administrative state. Libertarian technocrats and Christian theocrats—groups that often hold opposing worldviews—have found a temporary strategic alignment in their shared desire to weaken state institutions. Algorithmic epistemic silos have provided a means to justify and normalize these efforts, allowing ideological factions to operate within discrete digital realities that reinforce their vision of governance. While the full realization of Curtis Yarvin’s RAGE strategy (Retire All Government Employees) remains contested, as evidenced by legal and institutional pushback, the ideological groundwork for such restructuring has already been laid, and key government functions have already been disrupted. Though AI governance is not yet the primary driver of this transformation, some proponents of systemic restructuring view AI-mediated governance as a future organizing principle, one that could circumvent democratic oversight and replace deliberative political processes with automated decision-making structures.

I will argue that these forces are driving an incipient shift from democratic governance toward post-democratic, techno-feudal models, raising urgent questions about how governance, participation, and institutional resilience can be maintained in the digital era. However, I will also suggest countermeasures, including integral, participatory approaches such as nebulocracy and moral graph research, which could preserve democratic wisdom-based systems amid accelerating digital transformation.

While wholeness is often framed as an ideal state of integration, this talk will highlight how fragmentation—particularly digital epistemic fragmentation and institutional breakdown—is not merely an obstacle but a condition out of which new forms of wholeness must be consciously cultivated. Rather than allowing accidental or opportunistic forces to dictate the future of governance, I will explore how integral, participatory approaches could redirect this transition toward eudaimonic and democratic futures, resisting both algorithmic determinism and authoritarian restoration.

Additionally, drawing from Duane Elgin’s model of civilizational futures, which identifies our future pathways as heading towards extinction, authoritarianism, or transformation, I will examine how the current moment represents a crux point between authoritarian consolidation and democratic transformation. The algorithmic undertow has made the former easier—but deliberate interventions in digital governance could still enable a shift toward an emergent, participatory paradigm.

Key Takeaways:

• Algorithmic epistemic silos have eroded institutional trust, weakening the foundations of democratic governance and reducing public resistance to unprecedented political actions.
• While RAGE-like restructuring remains more of an aspiration than an accomplished reality, algorithmic and financial conditions have enabled its partial emergence—both through systemic pressures and deliberate accelerationist efforts.
• The temporary convergence of libertarian technocrats and Christian theocrats reveals a deeper trend: as traditional institutions erode, competing factions are seizing the opportunity to reshape governance according to their own ideological visions.
• If left unchecked, these forces could solidify a post-democratic, privatized, or theocratic governance model.
• Integral and eudaimonistic models, informed by approaches such as nebulocracy and moral graph research, could provide a holistic, participatory alternative to both algorithmic fragmentation and authoritarian restoration.