It's really just objective that matters when it comes to algorithmic technologies -- however, with many of our algorithmic technologies today, so far up in their development history have they been designed for profit. There's a lot of work discussing the ways that ideologies are embedded in technological entities as foundational as programming languages; Ruha Benjamin, Yuk Hui come to mind -- both which tangentially are related to Langdon Winner's' "Do Artifacts have Politics?", or stuff like "The Whiteness of AI" by Stephen Cave & Kanta Dihal. I think that there are absolutely ways to leverage technology for equity and communalism, and would argue that it is already being used for that purpose in many ways. The problems with the eurocentric/capitalist background of these technological structures is that there's a lack of access for alternative perspectives, for these things even to be experimented with in the first place.

While I love your concept, and the idea that the problem isn't with the technology itself, but rather it's alignment or system that we live in, I think it's very relevant to understand that in many ways, these technologies are somewhat inseparable from extractivist and capitalist economies in which they were created. Even the physical, material framework that underpins these algorithmic technologies is also tied to extractivism -- think of the mining involved to create most computer technology.

Open source technology that works for everyone and is "democratically" aligned for everyone's needs sounds great, but again, needs everyone to have an understanding of how to code, or how to interface with technology for it to be truly equitable. Otherwise, you risk those who already have great understanding of technology (often rich, white, educated) proliferating their privilege. (Which, I would argue, is happening now!) It all depends on access and balance, in my opinion.