The Rise of Tech Ultraism & Effective Accelerationism

In both subtle language and overt ideology, many of today’s tech billionaires and powerbrokers present themselves as ultraists. Not just futurists, but extreme believers in transcendence, optimization, and control. They may not use the term explicitly all the time, but their behavior, investment patterns, and stated beliefs reveal it. 

So, what is ultraism in this context? It’s transhumanism, where they are attempting to merge humans with machines, in hopes of escaping biology. It’s effective accelerationism (e/acc), where speeding up technological change is the priority, regardless of human cost. It’s longtermism, which prioritizes hypothetical far-future outcomes over current suffering. It’s techno-supremacy, where believing technology can and should solve all human problems. And it’s post-humanism, which is the desire to go “beyond” humanity itself, often starting with their own bodies or minds. These men aren’t just building companies, they’re building belief systems. And those systems are ultraist at the core.

Now, let’s break down who some of these ultraists are, and how it shows up in the real world. First, we have Elon Musk, who wants to implant Neuralink in humans to “solve” brain disorders and later achieve mind-machine symbiosis. He openly talks about simulation theory and species-level existential risk. And he believes that we must colonize Mars as a “backup drive” for humanity. Next, we have Sam Altman, who funds longevity research, synthetic biology and AI alignment (aka controlling godlike machines.) He invested in Worldcoin, a biometric crypto system aimed at managing global digital identity. And he believes in “intelligence explosion” and the coming of a superintelligent AGI. Then, we have Peter Thiel, who openly supports life extension, cryogenics, seasteading, and accelerationist politics. He believes democracy is incompatible with freedom (in his libertarian framing), and he funds ultra-conservative and ultra-futurist experiments alike.

This is dangerous because ultraism sells itself as progress, but it devalues the present, the vulnerable, and the earth. It tells us that “the future matters more than you,” that “we must transcend nature, not live with it,” and that we must “sacrifice now for the utopia that we define.” This ideology treats suffering as a cost of progress. It justifies authoritarian moves “for the greater good”, and reinforces white, male, Western dominance in defining the future. And this leads to AI systems built for optimization, not for care, consent, or coherence. In other words, it’s a religion of escape. Deep down, the ultraists are trying to escape mortality, uncertainty, accountability, and interdependence. And maybe even guilt. Because if they did slow down and reflect, they’d have to face the ecological collapse of the industries accelerated, the cultures their systems erased, and the human cost of their visions.

The counter to ultraism is coherence. Where ultraism seeks to transcend the body, coherence honors the body as intelligent. Where ultraism escapes nature, coherence re-integrates with nature. Where ultraism prioritizes a few imagined future minds, coherence centers living systems and relational intelligence - across cultures, timelines, and forms of life. Ultraism builds the simulation, but coherence breaks it.

These tech ultraists talk endlessly about “species-level existential risk,” which is the risk that AI or some runaway technology might wipe out humanity. They frame themselves as the last line of defense, as the heroic stewards guiding us away from extinction. But the truth is that they are simultaneously the architects and accelerators of that very risk. They are focused on acceleration without accountability, and they push AI development, geoengineering, synthetic biology, and digital surveillance faster than society can ethically regulate or even understand. This reckless speed increases the chances of catastrophe, whether unintended or not. They’ve caused ecological destruction due to the tech industry’s resource extraction, massive energy use (think crypto mining and data centers), and e-waste contribute heavily to climate change and environmental collapse. Then, we have the consolidation of power, where by centralizing control of critical infrastructure, information, and AI, they create fragile systems vulnerable to failure or abuse. And a single failure or malicious act could cascade globally. Plus, they have narrative control and spread misinformation by controlling much of the media and narrative around “progress,” shaping public opinion to accept risks and suppress dissent, which blocks collective caution and democratic governance.

So, what’s the real risk? It’s not AI itself, nor is it the technology. But letting this small, ultraist elite define the future - when their motivations are tied more to control, profit, and legacy than to true stewardship. They’ve become like Icarus, flying ever higher on wings of hubris; staring the sun of systemic collapse directly in the face, yet unwilling to slow down or change course.

Icarus was the son of Daedalus, a brilliant inventor and craftsman. They were imprisoned on the island of Crete by King Minos, and to escape, Daedaalus crafted two sets of wings made from feathers and wax for himself and his son. Before they took flight, Daedalus warned Icarus not to fly too high or too low. If he flew too low, the sea’s dampness would weigh down the wings. And if he flew too high, the sun’s heat would melt the wax holding the feathers together. But overwhelmed by the thrill of flying, Icarus ignored his father’s warnings. He soared too close to the sun, the wax melted, his wings fell apart, and he plummeted into the sea and drowned. 

This story of Icarus is often interpreted as a cautionary tale about hubris; one of excessive pride, overambition, or defiance of natural limits. It warns that the reckless pursuit of freedom or power without respect for boundaries can lead to disaster. That ignoring wisdom and modernization in favor of ego or impulse can cause ruin. And that sometimes the greatest dangers come from soaring too high without a grounded foundation. This is relevant today, because like Icarus, some modern tech leaders push limits recklessly, ignore warnings from science, ethics, or public concern, get caught in their own ambition and mythology, and risk catastrophic fallout from unchecked flight. Their “wings” (technology, capital, influence, etc.) can empower or destroy. And they’ve built their wings high, racing toward the sun, even as the wax melts beneath them. 

Another alarming aspect is that ultraists’ attitudes toward women and “others” are often complicated and problematic; and they are rooted in the same power structures that shape their twisted worldview. Despite some surface-level claims to inclusivity, ultraist cultures are overwhelmingly male-dominated, especially white, cisgender men. The tech and transhumanist scenes often valorize stereotypically masculine traits, including aggression, dominance, rationality, and control. Women and nonbinary people are frequently marginalized, tokenized, or pressured to assimilate into a hyper-competitive, male-centric culture. Many ultraists either ignore gender dynamics outright, focusing solely on “optimization” and “efficiency,” or frame women’s participation in instrumental terms, such as “diversity as a metric,” but never as genuine equity. 

Their attitudes toward “others” (including racial, cultural, and social minorities) tends to center Western, white, techno-capitalist ideals; often excluding or appropriating non-Western knowledge systems without true respect or integration. Many ultraists operate within a framework that assumes universal applicability of their model, effectively erasing alternative epistemologies. There can be a subtle (or overt) undercurrent of techno-supremacy, where those not aligned with ultraist values are seen as “backward,” “irrational,” or obstacles to progress. And those structural inequalities often remain unaddressed or are rationalized as collateral damage on the path to a “better” future, which ultimately results in reproduction of exclusion. Ultraism often reinforces existing hierarchies rather than dismantling them. The drive for acceleration and transcendence frequently comes at the expense of empathy, community, and embodied wisdom; qualities traditionally associated (sometimes stereotypically and problemmatically) with women and marginalized groups. And this results in a monoculture of “genius” that’s narrowly defined and gatekept.

However, many women, queer, BIPOC, and Indigenous thinkers actively challenge ultraism from within and outside the tech world. They advocate for decolonization, embodied, and relational approaches to technology, intelligence, and progress. And their work tends to emphasize coherence, care, and connection rather than mere acceleration and extraction. Ultraism, in its current mainstream form, tends to exclude or marginalize women and others by perpetually narrow, hierarchical definitions of genius and progress that align with white, male, capitalist power. But the cracks in this system are growing - and new forms of genius and intelligence are emerging, ones that are inclusive, relational, and whole.

Tracing how the ultraist pattern first emerged helps to reveal how deep and systemic it really is. The core pattern is the intertwining of male-dominated power structures, capitalistic acceleration and control, exclusion of women and marginalized groups, and techno-utopian visions of transcendence. It has roots going back several centuries, but it crystallized most clearly over the past 200-300 years. Its early roots occurred during the scientific revolution of the 16th-17th century; when the rise of modern science was deeply entangled with patriarchy and colonialism. Figures like Francis Bacon and Renè Descartes laid foundations for objective knowledge but framed the world mechanistically and hierarchically. Women and Indigenous knowledge systems were systemically excluded or dismissed as irrational or superstitious. And the scientific method became a tool of control and domination, not just discovery.

This was followed by the enlightenment and industrial revolution of the 18th-19th century, when enlightenment ideals of “progress” and “reason” fueled capitalist expansion and justified colonial conquest. The narrative of the “rational, white, male genius” as the driver of history solidified. Women were largely confined to domestic roles or excluded from intellectual life, and industrialization introduced the logic of acceleration, extraction, and mechanization into society. 

In the early 20th century, we were introduced to technology and futurism. The rise of technology, and the rule by technical experts, began to valorize specialized knowledge over lived experience. Futurist movements glorified speed, technology, and disruption, often with aggressive, masculine aesthetics. Women’s voices in science and technology remained marginalized, despite pioneering figures like Marie Curie emerging around during this time. And the myth of progress became tightly linked to control over nature, bodies, and societies.

Then, in the mid-late 20th century, from post-WWII and into the Silicon Valley Era, the tech boom entrenched a new form of ultraism - the belief in accelerating technology as the ultimate solution. The “genius inventor” became a cultural icon, mostly embodied by white men. Capitalism and neoliberalism intensified focus on markets, efficiency, and scalability. And early computer and AI research largely excluded women and minorities, reinforcing gatekeeping. 

And in the 21st century, we got the rise of tech ultraism. Today’s ultraists pattern in the amplification of these historical dynamics, now accelerated by global capital flows, algorithmic media control, transhuman ideologies, and the cult of the billionaire CEO as visionary savior. This pattern isn’t new, it’s a centuries-old fusion of patriarchy, capitalism, exclusion, and techno-utopianism. What’s new is the scale, speed, and visibility; and the urgent need to break this cycle.   

The myth of progress isn’t just an abstract idea; it’s deeply woven into how governments, especially powerful ones, frame their legitimacy and authority. Leaders often use it to justify controversial policies by portraying them as necessary steps toward a “better future,” even when those policies cause harm in the present. They promote endless economic growth and technological development as inherently good, sidelining concerns like inequality, environmental damage, and social justice. They manufacture consent through narratives of inevitability; making citizens feel that resisting certain agendas is resisting progress itself. And they distract from systemic failures by constantly promising a “next breakthrough” or “new dawn” that’s always just out of reach. This tactic can create a political and cultural simulation where dissent is framed as backward or anti-patriatic, and complex problems get reduced to simplistic “move forward or fall behind” binaries. 

Literally everything these billionaires represent is the exact opposite of how you truly achieve coherence and evolve successfully as a species. And this is one of the deepest paradoxes of our time. Hustle culture and their speed obsession, where the reigning narrative is “move fast, break things,” is glorifying burnout, the endless grind, and sleepless nights. But we need coherence and evolution. And true coherence comes from integration, balance, and rhythm; not nonstop acceleration. And ultimately, evolution is a process of harmonizing internal and external systems, honoring cycles of rest, reflection, and renewal. It’s about quality over quantity, depth over breadth, and sustainable growth over explosive gain. The cost of this hustle culture leads to physical and mental health crises, social disconnection and loneliness, environmental degradation, and cultural fragmentation and loss of meaning. 

QuantumPhi’s vision is a radical reorientation; moving from noise to signal, from ego-driven frenzy to embodied wisdom, from extraction to reciprocity, and from burnout to regeneration. This isn’t just self-care, it’s a fundamental evolutionary stop for individuals, communities, and civilizations.