You seem to be implying that ideas and goals about preserving and benefit humanity indefinitely are somehow only benefiting a subset of humanity, or worse, are used to harm some subset of humanity. Anyone looking to twist such ideas or goals to only benefit themselves or a subset of humanity should be called out on that. But right now you're attacking the entire concept over your perception that it only benefits the rich, or perhaps some other subset of people.
By all means, attack inequality. But let's work to fix it. The response to "other people have nicer things than me" should not be "people other than me shouldn't get to have nice things", it should be "more people should get to have nice things". That's even more critical when those things are fundamental improvements and safeguards of people's lives. Let's raise the baseline for everyone, rather than focusing excessive energy on cutting down the tall poppies.
And science fiction has a way of inspiring and driving science fact.
This I agree with. Their future dream isn't super plausible, is much too specific, and doesn't even seem desirable.
> they are supremacist - based on the unproven belief that humanity has an obvious manifest destiny
Normally "supremacist" means "this group of humans is superior to this other group of humans". I don't see a lot of that in this, except in the bit about "resources should be invested in the developed world".
(And "manifest destiny" is of course incredibly loaded, but you knew that!)
But --
> Humanity has multiple immediate challenges now. They need actionable, practical intelligence.
-- yes. I agree with the "actionable, practical" bit. Solving climate change isn't some research problem. It just needs leadership to organize people to do things we already know how to do.
These supremacist ideas have a long and toxic history. And the moral foundations are always similar - some people today can be considered wholly disposable.
And they are supremacist - based on the unproven belief that humanity has an obvious manifest destiny which will incarnate (or perhaps insiliconate) super-intelligence across multiple galaxies.
It's juvenile Tom Swift fantasy.
Humanity has multiple immediate challenges now. They need actionable, practical intelligence.
If we can't find the relatively limited intelligence to deal with them, where are we going to find the IQ needed to colonise a galactic supercluster?
Of course some other species might evolve on Earth. But also - it might not. No matter what grand name this is given, "thinking" about it is just well-funded science fiction.