I would say that the world became more centralized with the emergence of national states. Industry became more centralized. Cities grew and grow further still. Scientific, industrial and societal structures became bigger and bigger. Today we have multinational companies. Researchers from all over the world working on huge projects. Much of our technologie is impossible to research, create and maintain without cooperation in huge centralized organizations. The information is much more easy to tranfer may make in some cases make the physical attendance less and less important but this does not negate the need for centralized structures. I would argue that we are still lightyears aways from a revolution you imagine.

Also a free flow of information does not automatically mean it will be used. Without any guidance many people just will use it to validate their most baseless believes. The speed and freedom of transfer and creation of information might also lead to magnify the effects of fearmongering and propaganda. The emerging media at his time helped hitler a great bit.

All in all I'm much more pessimistic. But we'll see. The Weltgeist will materialize ;)....

EV surely is a nice complement for the private household but comparing that to the surge which coal brought to society is a bit over the top. Fusion could be something as revolutionary. It is fine and dandy to live off the grid as a single household, it is a whole different thing if you are talking about industry. They mostly need huge amounts of power 24/7. That is something Solar and wind are not capable of delivering. Geothermal is only viable in some specific places. With wind and solar you always need something to fall back on and that is typically gas or coal. All those servers and serverfarms also want to stay online 24/7.

Also electricty generation is only about a quarter of all the energy a society consumes. Also I never heard anything about decentrealized geothermal plant. Those drilling operations for a geothermal plant aren't exactly cheap. I don't see your concept hapenning anywhere in the forseeable future.

There is more to most discussions then simple facts. There is the assumption in the text that if we only understood the material world perfectly, we could all agree in the proven objective truth about anything. This simply ignores all of human emotion and the way that we live together in society. If we all could just be perfectly rational the world would be perfect without any conflict. But we are not. You simply ignore that humans have emotions and live in societies which live by certain morals and ethics. Those are not simply utilitarian.

Even if a complex subject would become graspable in every little tiny facet and only facts remain, those facts have to be evaluated. The evaluations about the relevance of facts are subjective by definition.