So we transhumanists are like the Magneto of modern society? Cool. I have to read some of Fukuyamas work. Knowing the enemy is always a good idea.

Fukuyama is good transhumanist reading, because unlike most criticism he actually has some reasoning about why transhumanism is bad, and his Aristotelean approach is not far from what many transhumanists would take. It is just that he makes a right turn (seeing human nature as something pure and unchanging) when we make a left turn (seeing human nature as changing over time, the current stage of a process), and from there we reach different conclusions.

otzruslyb ilcwoia.

A Transhumanist with some serious money behind him to instantiate his vision could pinch-hit for Magneto, as the character John Marrek does in Marlow's novel Nano. Unfortunately in the real world, more and more wealth is concentrating in the hands of individuals with socially conventional outlooks, some of whom are willing to spend good parts of their fortunes to promote retrograde social agendas.

Is wealth really just accumulating among the conventional? The Gini index appears to be rising since 1968 in the US (among the highest in democratic countries),
http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Gini_supplement.html
http://www.frbsf.org/econrsrch/wklyltr/el97-03.html
but that just means that the truly rich is a smaller part of the population. Given the sizeable growth of general wealth since then the wealth among the not-so-rich still has grown tremendously, making more resources available to people with non-conventional outlooks. It seems to me that people with non-conventional outlooks would be more willing to spend money on defending their lifestyles than people with mainstream outlooks (less perceived threat). The struggle might be between different non-mainstream groups (more and less religious, for example), with an advantage to those close to the mainstream that feel threatened (easier to get support, larger group). So the Magnetos might be fighting the bourgeois rather than Bill Gates.