I mean, I'd only call you an accelerationist if you advocated for a second Trump president because that's what you wanted. There's a difference between predicting/speculating and acting to make something a reality.
Edit: apparently people think that thinking something will happen is the same as thinking that it should happen.
Edit 2: accelerationism is bad, and anyone who thinks otherwise is either an idiot or fascist.
Okay, I've had a nice nap, so here's the answer: I'd take over Putin's body, demand the nearest person's gun, and rid the world of him (Putin) once and for all.
I'm making a distinction between money as a system of abstracting wealth and what wealth practically means. You're making a highly disputable philosophical argument about the ontological nature of money instead of engaging with the germaine ideas. Simply put: I don't consider a physical representation of money to be money in-and-of-itself; I consider each bill to be a part of a grand fragmented ledger. Furthermore, bitcoin is literally a public ledger for which there is no physical exchange of any representation of money. As a final example, the Yap isles famously have a monetary system that has physical Incarnations but no physical exchange among the people of the isles. It's literally just a public ledger that exists in the minds of those who use it.
Technically, money is just a number on a ledger. Practically, there's a finite amount of wealth in the solar system, much less on earth, significantly less accessible to humans and only a slim amount can be taken from the working class before people start starving. We already have little enough that the population is going to start contracting.
It works either way. Top bottom or left right.