It seems to me there is a predilection in modern science fiction to discount all utopias but not to do the same with the dystopias. While I agree that utopias are generally out of reach for societies, there seems to be no balancing idea that dystopias are also out of reach. Indeed, they seem quite obtainable if you are to listen to a lot science fiction.
Personally, I think utopias and dystopias are both out of the question for our society in any near future. The first is too perfect and the latter is too imperfect. What isn’t out of the question is improving and failing societies. Again I think people tend to latch onto the failing societies as the way things are going and dismiss improving societies as impossible fluff.
I think that this is largely the triumph of cynicism over intellectualism. This is where the cynics are considered realistic and thus more important than the intellectuals.
I think that the truth of the matter is that cynicism is easier. It is easier to point out problems than to actually fix them. The intellectual not only thinks of the problem, they provide a possible fix to the problem as well and that is harder. This is why I believe intellectuals deserve praise over cynics. As such I prefer the more optimistic entries in science fiction.
But probably the main reason that I would wish to see dystopian science fiction wiped out as much as possible is because politicians keep trying to use the worst of dystopian SF as something to aspire to. We don’t want big brother and we don’t want the handmaid’s tale. But we are at the risk of getting both at the same time! Some politicians do want this, and are too stupid to think of how to run such a society. So they are inspired by dystopian SF. Quit providing a blueprint!!!!!
If the politicians are successful, then the cynics can say their SF foresaw the future accurately. Which gives them even more street cred. This is why we must say intellectualism over cynicism, improving societies over failing societies and even utopias over dystopias!
