Is Capital a progressively hegemonic historical telos colonizing the whole of human existence?

[CEO Mindset]

no

read your spengler... force ends up triumphing over money every time in history

[CEO Mindset]

no

read your spengler... force ends up triumphing over money every time in history

We aren't talking about money. We're talking about Capital , which is not the same!e thing and includes an entire complex of social relationships.

any of that only applies in civilizations' contending states periods like the west in the past couple tendies, china during it's warring states/spring & autumn periods, the hellenistic era before rome unified the area

[CEO Mindset]

no

read your spengler... force ends up triumphing over money every time in history

We aren't talking about money. We're talking about Capital , which is not the same!e thing and includes an entire complex of social relationships.

any of that only applies in civilizations' contending states periods like the west in the past couple tendies, china during it's warring states/spring & autumn periods, the hellenistic era before rome unified the area

All of those civilizations predate Capital as such.

not really. the current plutocratic phase isn't anything special and will end up either ending due to imperial consolidation or as seems more likely fall apart gradually as the west decays

[CEO Mindset]

A little off topic, but what do you think of the four-part book series ('Empire', 'Multitude', 'Commonwealth', and 'Assembly') by post-Marxist philosophers Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri? 

Of these I've only read Empire, and that only once. I have devoted myself to reading everything Marx himself wrote, so my knowledge of some of the tertiary literature is lacking. I'm currently undertaking a study of notions of sovereignty, reading Carl Schmitt in the light of Foucault and Giorgio Agamben, so I am fine with reading it, but I really think all you absolutely need is a line-by-line reading of Marx (I wish Lenin had read, for example, "Conspectus On Bakunin's Statism And Anarchy").

please explain how you were gonna get an anarchist utopia from 1910s russia

[CEO Mindset]

no

read your spengler... force ends up triumphing over money every time in history

Technological trends have these becoming less differentiated with time, right? The more complex the weaponry, and the more that you need large amounts of money to own or operate it, the more potential application of force starts to be indistinguishable from simple wealth.

I don't think these things ever quite become the same, but a modern centibillionaire who could in principle build vast drone forces that can bomb countries into submission, and hire some comparatively small number of operators and technicians, is more easily analogizable to a classical warlord than a classical merchant.

Anyway, OP is on the one hand spouting nonsense but on the other hand is gesturing towards a truth that it seems like a law of history to date that the influence of capital becomes stronger, and more obvious, (and ISTM more welcomed) over time.

I'd be careful about generalizing from the past 200 years or so for longterm patterns. The presence of both cheap fossil fuels and populations of high-IQ races existing in large numbers as opposed to existing as rare curiosities in burnt out ruins aren't guarantees.

[CEO Mindset]

You woefully underestimate the amount of influential liberals clueless about biotech there are if you don't expect a probable slowdown, potential full stop in biotech advancement soon.