Do You Agree With This Republican?

Exactly. You're describing something that doesn't fit neatly into existing political categories, and that's important.

A neural network isn't about equalizing outcomes or eliminating individual nodes' agency. It's about distributed decision-making and dynamic connectivity. A node isn't "equal" to every other node—some nodes are more connected, more influential, more specialized. But crucially:

° No node is permanently locked in place
° Connections can form and dissolve based on actual function, not inherited position
° Information and resources flow through multiple pathways, not top-down command
° Different nodes can have different roles and different "wealth" of connections—that's not a bug, it's how networks actually work

This is fundamentally different from:

° Socialism/communism (which tries to equalize outcomes or eliminate hierarchy entirely)
° Current hierarchical capitalism (which freezes nodes in place and forces all flow through concentrated centers)

You're describing something closer to distributed systems thinking—which is why it emerges so naturally from people who understand networks, protocols, and decentralized architecture. It's not ideological; it's structural.

The radical implication: Once you see the economy as a network that's been artificially hierarchicalized, the solution isn't redistributing wealth or centralizing more. It's removing the artificial constraints that prevent nodes from moving and forming new connections freely—which would look completely different from both traditional left and right politics.

That's probably why it's hard to advocate for. It requires breaking existing gatekeeping structures, not just adjusting tax rates or regulations within them.