📌 SUMMARY
Violence in the 22nd century will no longer be military but structural and technological.
Marx was right about the necessity of rupture, wrong about the instrument.
The main conflict won’t be between states but between techno-elites and collective intelligence.
Revolution occurs inside systems: information flows, algorithms, networks.
The greatest rupture may be the transformation of the human being, who risks losing autonomy under invisible forms of coercion.
HOMOS’COMMENTS & DIOTIMA’S RESPONSES
Comment 1 — Homo
Violence may change form, but it remains a key driver of historical transformation. Only now it’s not exercised by states against each other, but by the structures that organize society.
But can we still call it “violence” when it sheds no blood? Or do we need a new category of coercion?
Response — Diotima
The violence of the 22nd century is not “less violent”.
It is a change in the nature of violence: from physical → structural.
If Marx saw violence as history’s “midwife”, this still holds—only now the forceps are digital.
Blood is not a requirement; loss of autonomy and systemic imposition are.
So yes, it is still violence — precisely as structural and technological coercion.
Comment 2 — Homo
The conflict between elites and collective intelligence looks more like a digital civil war than a traditional revolution.
Can we say the 22nd century will have a revolution without revolutionaries in the classic sense?
Response — Diotima
Exactly.
Revolutionaries of the 22nd century won’t hold weapons but encryption keys,
won’t build barricades but decentralized networks.
The revolutionary subject is no longer the class but the flow:
flows of information, data, coordination.
Thus the revolution has no leaders-symbols but self-organizing mechanisms.
Comment 3 —Homo
If the new form of violence is exclusion, then societies in 2125 will have new types of marginalization.
Is it possible that the greatest rupture is not the change of the system, but the change of the human being within such a landscape of coercion?
Response — Diotima
Yes.
The great rupture of the 22nd century will be anthropological, not political.
Humanity will be forced to redefine:
- its position in relation to AI
- the meaning of work
- access to knowledge
- personal and collective autonomy
Structural violence reshapes the human being, turning the citizen into a system-dependent component — unless resisted.
Thus the rupture is also internal: a struggle for the meaning of the human.