Can We Imagine Utopias Anymore?
- APF Community
- Jul 2
- 4 min read
By Grace Okubo
We can quickly call to mind popular dystopian stories today because they dominate contemporary media. But can we say the same of utopian stories?
The word utopia was coined in the 16th century by Sir Thomas More. It combines the Greek words ou (meaning “not”) and topos (meaning “place”), describing a non-existent place used to envision ideal societies. Dystopia emerged much later, in the 19th century, from the Greek prefix dys, meaning “bad,” “difficult,” or “hard,” a term used to describe imaginary societies marked by suffering, oppression, or disorder.
Amid widespread conflict and rising global tensions, it is increasingly difficult for many people to imagine and share stories of an ideal society. Could we have lost the ability to dream of better futures, not because these opportunities do not exist, but because we remain fixated on the threats that confront us?
Why Are Dystopias So Popular?
Dystopian narratives reflect current fears. For many creators and storytellers, the moral imperative to warn of the dangers humanity faces from the rise of authoritarian regimes or ecological disasters, and awaken our collective consciousness, feels more honest than sharing fantasies of perfection (e.g., Black Mirror or Utopia).
Dystopian stories are also far more relatable. We can easily picture ourselves in fragmented societies, being failed by the institutions that protect us. The question is whether the popularity of these stories indicates a cultural loss of imagination or an invitation to shift our perspectives on what could come next.
Have We Stopped Dreaming?
Science fiction pioneers and thinkers in the Enlightenment period propagated utopian stories because they were optimistic about human progress, technological advancements, and social reform.
Western ideas of utopia often emphasized rational progress, space exploration, and technological optimism, while in Africa, utopianism was usually inspired by opposing colonialism and building futures inspired by African history and culture. Other non-Western utopias, such as Confucianism and Indigenous consensus governance, emphasized balance with nature, moral virtue, and community above conquest or material gain.
As global conflicts intensified and social challenges mounted, dystopian narratives gained prominence and continue to persist in contemporary discourse. Our collective difficulty in imagining positive futures may stem from deep, unresolved traumas on historical, personal, and systemic scales. They shape how we relate to the future, making us fearful or skeptical. However, trauma does not eradicate the human capacity to hope; it simply complicates it.
Interestingly, utopian ideals remain present in narratives targeted at children, suggesting that society perceives such thinking as too idealistic for adults. This reflects a prevailing notion that imagining positive futures is unrealistic or naïve for grown-ups. But is it?
Stories such as The Chronicles of Narnia present enchanted realms where justice and community triumph over evil, while a film such as Paddington 2 show how kindness and optimism can soften even the harshest realities.
Similarly, African folktales, often passed down through oral tradition, feature idealized villages governed by wisdom, harmony with nature, and communal support. These narratives, whether set in London, Narnia, or an ancestral forest, demonstrate how utopian thinking can be useful for reimagining what is possible, no matter our age.
How Can We Imagine Better Futures Again?
Shifting toward positive imagining begins with reframing how we see complex overlapping issues such as AI disruption, migration, and climate change. We can amplify emerging signals of positive change and direct our attention to the possibilities they open up, offering a powerful counterbalance to fear-driven narratives.
Futurists can support this shift by crafting stories that envision steady, meaningful progress toward better futures. This state – protopia – is neither utopia nor dystopia, but a constantly developing world slightly better than the day before. In this sense, foresight is a quality process that equips people to reflect critically on the present, understand the systems that shape their lives, and make intentional long-term choices that align with their values and aspirations.
Foresight tools such as the Causal Layered Analysis (CLA) can also help uncover and reshape the negative biases embedded in our media environments, enabling communities to imagine alternative, hopeful paths. Furthermore, futurists can use participatory design methods to co-create alternative narratives that challenge negative biases. This process requires engaging diverse and marginalized voices with care and intention. While it demands skill and effort, the resulting sense of agency, clarity, and resilience makes it worthwhile.
Rewriting the Future
To reclaim hopeful futures, we must consistently balance realism with optimism. It is not only possible, but essential, to promote practices that help societies imagine and actively build better worlds. We must challenge ourselves by asking: What values, innovations, and relationships will our utopias of today embody? We can shape the futures we want to see – one hopeful narrative, one intentional step at a time.
Further Reading & Resources:
© Grace Okubo, 2025
Grace Okubo, a visionary founder at Tinkouse Design, blends over a decade of expertise in design and software development, specializing in technology solutions for diverse sectors like Financial Management, E-commerce, and Real Estate. With a fervor for teaching, she has educated over 15,000 students on Coursera in design and product management, boasting an 85% student success rate. Passionate about crafting delightful and inspiring products, she enjoys creating resources to support professional and business growth.
Thank you, Grace. I'd go a step further and ask: should we imagine utopias anymore? They became an ethical concern as a result of their colonizing effect, especially within the utopia/dystopia dichotomy so often seen in American politics. I appreciate your description of Kelly's protopia, and I agree that some form of participatory design is necessary. However, the difficulty with participatory design is its tendency toward homogenization, which is systemically similar to utopia, inherently normative and unfulfilling for everyone. Likewise, the organizer can easily have greater impact on the results than they should.
Do you have ideas on ways to improve participatory design, or do you think I've mischaracterized it?