>>Kelly just takes this (dubious, reductive) reading of Hegel, which was spun into apologetics for Prussian absolutism, and spins it into apologetics for contemporary tech entrepreneurship.
There's a lot of bias packed into this one sentence.
Firstly, it's biased toward the presupposition that Kelly's take is dubious/reductive. That is what actually needs to be demonstrated, as opposed to accepted as an axiom for secondary arguments.
Secondly, it focuses on "Prussian absolutism", a term which conjurs a vague association to fascism, to the exclusion of all other less foreboding developments associated with Kelly's line of thinking. This suggests a manipulative, agenda-driven characterization of Kelly's theology.
Thirdly, it presupposes that tech entrepreneurship is a generally objectionable phenomenon, and that defenses of it are merely apologism. Again you need to demonstrate your presupposition to be true, rather than implying it's an irrefutable fact that can be used as an axiom on which to discuss the issue.
This kind of snide counter-culture cynicism - where you take the role of a crusading critic of The Man - seems profound to the naive, but has little substance.