There is little difference in most cases between a futurist and a doomsday prophet. It is a thin veneer of science around what is essentially a religious troubodour.
"Futurism is the American dream on overdrive: a disdain for the status quo and a belief that we can solve it all without unions, public education, and social safety nets."
So scratch futurism off the list of usable political terms. It goes to the same dust bin as libertarian, socialist, communitarian, etc.
Seems to me that any term that actually means something and that gains any use in politics will quickly get co-opted and turned into a dog whistle by some political tribe, rendering it useless for the purpose of actual meaningful communication. Futurism seems to have become a dog whistle for a wing of the alt-right or something like that.
Maybe we need some kind of annotation scheme, like libertarian[1.14] where 1.14 refers to some kind of shared objectively published dictionary that defines terms precisely. That might make actual communication about political ideas possible.
I mostly appreciate the points and discussion this article raises. How about, super intelligent but not 'ruling' per say AI. I mean if the super intelligent AI (better they) are really super intelligent, won't they want people to be involved? I'm sure a super intelligence can recognize egomania as not a great thing, even whilst it claims to know all the answers.
Also, please stop using the 'white male not oppressed line' if you have a bio like that. It just detracts from your points. Feel free to call me out for this, I don't care because it's a good point- white male here, with a math ph.d. (same as you) also, 30, have only for 8 months out of 30 years made more than minimum wage. To call out "white males" everywhere is a tiresome oppression itself. Let's let racism and sexism subside please in 2017.
There's a pretty good response here:
http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/10/09/in-favor-of-futurism-be...