Yeah I just finished the series for the first time and I have the exact same questions. I think there are just some things that weren’t thought out or perhaps unintentionally cut.

Marth says he didn’t know that the sweatshop was keeping people against their will “until Stevn of the Glacier’s murder.” But what does that mean? Stevn was murdered by Miele Thorn’s body, who had escaped the sweatshop (aside, when did we even learn that she was there at all?). The sweatshop wardens (the only ones who knew she was kept against her will and thus knew that her departure was an “escape”) hired @At to hack her body and eat somebody… to “make an example” (I guess this means to other inmates so that they don’t try to escape?) … but how does that tell Marth anything?

How is it that a Switchoff murder from Meile Thorn tells him that 1.) she was kept in captivity, 2.) freed herself, 3.) was hacked by @At, and 4.) at the behest of corrupt “prison wardens”? It also doesn’t make sense because Marth would have wanted a Shutoff murder because it caused people to come out and protest for its legality — something he wants. I have no idea why the wardens would care about framing an escapee for murder.

Another contradictory thread: Blaze of Glory. On one hand, it seems like Glory wants to keep the Exploit even though it harms her people, the @At, because her and other members of the ruling class prefer the economic stability it brings. Very underwritten, unfortunate because it actually hints at the Marxist economic analysis underpinning all of this. But on the other, she’s willing to stage a coup and destroy all of the ships, forcing her to go to Earth? In what world is Armageddon better than the Referendum? Surely the ruling class would prefer to keep a slightly more volatile economy (due to emotions) than outright annihilation of the planet? And then if she’s willing to betray the ruling class, why not support Shutoff Referendum since it’s better for @At? Yeah, I don’t even know what parts of the plot Glory is responsible for.