The Comforts of Dystopia

Elites tell us the future is inevitably bright; left curmudgeons insist it’s inevitably gloomy. We don’t win from playing this game.


I’m currently working on a longer treatment of “Four Futures,” my social science fictional speculation about the possible successor systems to capitalism, in a world characterized by pervasive automation and ecological crisis. That book is slotted for Jacobin’s series; more about that at a later date.

“Four Futures” was, itself, an extension of “Anti–Star Trek,” a post that still gets some love around the Internet from time to time. The core intuition of both pieces of writing was that while we live in a world that abounds in utopian potential, the realization of that potential depends on the outcome of political struggle. A rich elite that wants to preserve its privileges will do everything possible to ensure that we don’t reach a world of leisure and abundance, even if such a world is materially possible.

But one of the things I’ve struggled with as a writer is the tendency of my more speculative writing to mine a streak of apocalyptic quiescence on the radical left. To me, the story I’m telling is all about hope and agency: the future is here, it’s unevenly distributed, and only through struggle will we get it distributed properly. I suppose it’s no surprise, though, after decades in retreat, that some people would rather tell themselves fables of inevitable doom rather than tackling the harder problem of figuring out how we can collectively walk down the path to paradise.

Sorry, but this article is available to active subscribers only. Please log in or become a subscriber.