I was originally going to write a more thoughtful response, but then I got to this section: "The names of these e-deologies tend to be both fantastical and lit

I was originally going to write a more thoughtful response, but then I got to this section: "The names of these e-deologies tend to be both fantastical and literal." "post-civilizationist" "voluntarist post-agrarianist" "Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism" I've really never heard of categories like these. It makes me think the author has delved into subcultures I really have no experience in. In that sense her descriptions may or may not be valid. But, she makes no attempt to bring specificity to a lot of her claims. Who are these people in these subcultures? How many people are in them, and how many people are out of them? In this sense, it reads a lot like a "cultural studies" piece; there is some great individual insight, but the overall essay makes claims it hasn't supported.