Kim Stanley Robinson Imagines a Utopian World in 2025

Kim Stanley Robinson, a celebrated writer renowned for his numerous bestselling science fiction novels, attributes his survival on two occasions to medical advancements. Now at 72 years old, he is still committed to his passion for visualizing utopias, which he believes is a duty to future generations.

But what might a utopia look like in 2025? In light of the recent record-setting hottest year on earth, the persistent conflicts worldwide, and the unparalleled instability faced by democracies everywhere, it may seem like an unattainable ideal.

Robinson insists that our current situation should not limit our creativity in imagining a better future. He discussed global challenges on Bloomberg Green’s Zero podcast at the dawn of a new year.

He warns against becoming engulfed in the “soap opera” of politics and individual personas, expressing, “Everybody actually wants their daily life to continue as positively as possible.”

Nevertheless, the increasing political strife in many nations, including the United States where he lives, is unavoidable. Many voters are gripped by a sense of nostalgia for what they believe was a better past. “Nostalgia — the ache for a lost home, as the Greeks would say — is a remarkably potent feeling,” Robinson noted. “I feel it too, but it’s often a miscalculation, nearly a delusion.”

Additionally, there appears to be a decrease in long-term thinking about the future. Robinson attributes this to the overwhelming crises we currently face, which dominate our shared consciousness. “You don’t think about future greatness when living up to 250 years,” he remarked. “Science fiction has been confined to near-future scenarios.”

This shift is alarming. Robinson’s past works from the 1990s, such as the Mars trilogy, visualize human colonization of Mars in the 21st century.

It’s a vision that some of the wealthiest individuals, like Elon Musk, are now attempting to make a reality. However, Robinson’s Martian narrative unfolds against the backdrop of an ecological catastrophe caused by humanity.

While the enthusiasm shown by various Silicon Valley billionaires towards science fiction is commendable, Robinson remains doubtful. “A lot of them acquired their wealth through sheer luck,” he noted. “It’s concerning that 95% of them are men, which raises questions about credibility. They frequently display political and philosophical naïveté.”

Read:
Musk is about to find out what $130m for Trump gets him
Elon Musk’s Mars ambition could be the riskiest human quest ever

During their dialogue, Robinson persistently highlighted a wider perspective: it is merely a small number of billionaires whose actions may threaten humanity…

…while everyday individuals work diligently to improve their lives.

This, he believes, is what provides him with the most optimism for the future. “The 2020s have always been a crucial turning point in human history,” he asserted. “However, it is not promised that outcomes will be favorable, given the growing forces of chaos.”

Nevertheless, Robinson declared: “A positive outcome is still achievable.”

For the complete episode, and to explore more about Zero, click here.

Akshat Rathi

00:00:00 Welcome to Zero. I’m Akshat Rathi. This week, we’re envisioning Utopia in 2025.

00:00:19 One of the science fiction writers influencing me recently is Kim Stanley Robinson. His Mars trilogy from the 1990s remains celebrated, but listeners of Zero might be more familiar with his explorations of possible climate futures on Earth. From a submerged New York City in New York 2140 to a UN agency tackling the climate crisis in The Ministry for the Future, his work is nothing short of captivating.

00:00:57 Although Robinson has previously guest-starred on Zero, I wanted to reconnect now due to my recent reflections on The Ministry for the Future. While published in 2020, its narrative begins in 2025—the year we currently inhabit. The story kicks off at a fictional COP29 summit set against a backdrop of extreme heat in India, focusing on UN officials navigating the fallout from a warming planet. With 2025 here, I sought Robinson’s insights regarding the events in his book and the unpredictable path real-world events have taken since its release. We covered the role of science fiction in forecasting the future, its potential pitfalls, and Robinson’s admiration for the practical efforts of organizations like the UN.

Welcome to the show.

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:02:16 Thanks, Akshat. It’s a joy to be back.

Akshat Rathi

00:02:18 I revisited our previous discussion, where you appeared optimistic. In 2023, that optimism felt justified due to encouraging progress following the Paris Agreement, US climate legislation, and global efforts toward combating climate change. Now, as we find ourselves in 2025—the starting point for The Ministry for the Future—I felt it would be prudent to reevaluate our outlook. We are living in the very future you imagined. What are your thoughts on it all?

Listen to the 2023 conversation with Kim Stanley Robinson on the Zero podcast

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:03:17 To begin, I think you are better positioned to assess the current situation due to your connections and in-depth conversations. I’d like to hear your perspective. From my vantage point here in Davis, California, things seem to be speeding up. I had a realization in 2022 that many occurrences I anticipated for the distant future are actually unfolding within the 2020s. Unfortunately, the pace of this acceleration seems to be intensifying, encompassing both positive and negative developments. I should also mention the unexpected outcome of Trump’s reelection, which caught me by surprise.

00:04:13 While writing The Ministry for the Future during Trump’s presidency, I described a scenario in which the United States plays a minimal role in addressing climate change, as other nations take the lead out of necessity. The narrative painted a picture of the United States as a wealthy yet immature entity reluctantly responding to pressing global situations. While this perspective may still hold some truth, significant changes have occurred between 2020 and 2024, creating new pathways for progress. The advancements in renewable energy, now cheaper than fossil fuels, are crucial in a capitalist context where investments tend to flow toward more profitable opportunities. Positive legislative initiatives, like the IRA bill passed by the Biden administration, illustrate that climate actions can yield beneficial economic and investment outcomes when backed by appropriate legislation.

Akshat Rathi

00:06:01 Though clean energy may now be more financially viable than fossil fuels, there are still artificially induced means of keeping fossil fuels relatively cheap, which we can expect to see more of. Returning to The Ministry for the Future, the story reflects the necessity for greater equality to effectively confront the climate crisis. Inequality frames the challenges associated with climate change; solutions demand wealth and technology transfers, particularly aimed at developing nations. COP meetings emphasize the severity of these discussions. Your narrative depicts the ministry for the future within this context, and you’ve been tracking the developments of COP29. How do you perceive the efficacy of this year’s COP in relation to your envisioned objectives for these gatherings?

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:07:15 The recent COP29 aligns fairly well with prior COPs and the depiction in my book—a process that is necessary but insufficient. They generate public commitments in a setting where awareness increases each year, yet such promises often lack immediacy due to bureaucratic delays. The framework established by COP is essential but not conclusive. More tangible actions are required from nations, along with international collaborations, reflecting on concrete trade relationships beyond mere COP commitments. In The Ministry for the Future, the organization begins small, striving to build year-round support for COP agreements. Interestingly, last September, during the UN’s Summit for the Future, a pact for the future appeared, along with plans to establish an envoy for the future.

Akshat Rathi

00:08:47 This sounds akin to the UN’s Ministry for the Future in your work. Did your narrative influence this pact?

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:08:57 Yes, I’ve been informed that it did. The UN has engaged with my work, viewing it as a potent concept. The UN operates under a peculiar dichotomy—while it possesses immense power, it’s often perceived as a promise-based forum where nation-states engage without tangible enforcement capabilities. Although the UN has considerable consensus-building abilities from its post-WWII structure, it frequently struggles with operational effectiveness. My novel resonates with young diplomats at the UN, who feel overwhelmed as they strive to manage global complexities. They view this narrative as a potential template for a coordinated response to climate change, identifying it as a useful framework for navigating future predicaments.

Akshat Rathi

00:10:18 Fiction can have real-world consequences. Following our last discussion, I discovered that Oxford University has launched its own Ministry for the Future at Hertford College, aiming to inspire real-world projects. What do you hope this initiative can achieve?

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:10:40 I find it inspiring, as Oxford harbors a brilliant and committed group dedicated to instigating change. The Oxford Ministry for the Future aspires to be a dynamic hub, serving as a venue for public events rather than a traditional research center. My hope is that it will generate and benchmark ideas for reworking political economies in a manner that adequately confronts climate change. Ideally, it should promote public outreach, encourage attitude shifts, and keep conveying a unified story that resonates with audiences. While I’m not directly involved as a formal collaborator, I hope to influence its direction and ensure its dialogues remain engaging and impactful.

Akshat Rathi

00:11:36 As a science enthusiast, I’ve often viewed technological advancements as pathways to envision potential futures—not just immediate ones, but distant prospects as well. I treasure the science fiction genre for this reason, and I deeply value your contributions over time. However, my position as a journalist compels me to focus on pressing realities. I’ve noticed a trend in the ongoing political landscape—whether shaped by media consumption, politics, or societal narratives—where we seem to be envisioning the future less, or possibly in a more restricted manner. Would you concur with that observation?

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:12:29 I agree that climate change has certainly become a dominant thought for humanity, especially since the pandemic. The pandemic acted as a wake-up call, fostering a collective realization that climate change events could potentially be even more catastrophic. As Adam Tooze puts it, we are facing a poly-crisis, where several simultaneous crises—climate change, pollution, pandemics—intermesh with our social and political dilemmas. Consequently, there’s a decrease in long-term visions. Dreaming about things like interstellar travel or long-term futures becomes arduous when we are struggling with the present realities of the 21st century. Therefore, science fiction has indeed drifted towards narratives set in the near future.

Akshat Rathi

00:13:47 The overwhelming amount of information often manifests in individual sentiments. A prevailing emotional state in 2025 appears to be a bleak outlook. If I were to ask you to visualize a utopia, what would that entail for 2025?

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:14:21 That’s a stimulating question. One possibility could be a shared acknowledgment that we can no longer rely exclusively on US leadership—this applies both to international dynamics and the anticipated administration, which may devolve into chaos. A utopian vision could manifest through recognizing that even amidst foolish leaders, effective governance frequently arises from the actions of committed bureaucrats, technocrats, scientists, and educators. Civil society tends to be robust, and essential everyday support continues despite unfortunate leadership. Most people wish for continuity in their daily lives, striving for positive advancements amid adversity.

00:15:24 Despite the current tensions, many individuals are navigating difficult situations. Political theater should not overshadow their efforts to maintain a semblance of normalcy. If society can continue to function similarly, preserving essential elements through the merits of civil society, that in itself would signify a victory—even if it’s not guaranteed.

Currently, we are witnessing a test of the resilience of the American political system in the face of potentially disastrous intentions from leadership. It’s a mixed climate. We’re definitely grappling with a flawed political architecture, facing significant threats to democracy. Yet, voting holds power, and there remains a possibility that votes cannot simply be purchased. Hence, we find ourselves at a crossroads. The 2020s have always been seen as a critical turning point in human history—implying that prolonged challenges are conceivable. While it’s not guaranteed that everything will turn out fine, a positive result isn’t out of reach either. Is that my expression of utopia? That a favorable outcome remains achievable?

Akshat Rathi

00:16:49 We’ve discussed multiple urgent global issues, yet there are smaller developments that could rise in importance. Colombia stands out for attempting to eliminate fossil fuels by being the first major producer to sign the fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty. I know you have engaged with Minister Susana Muhamad regarding these efforts, which leads me to ask how a country can reconfigure its economy while transitioning away from its reliance on fossil fuels.

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:18:00 Thank you for that. I find the situation intriguing. Petro-states, which rely significantly on fossil fuel income, find themselves in a dual predicament post-Paris Agreement: they’re expected to curb sales but doing so risks economic instability and state failure for many, affecting over a billion individuals. We cannot afford a wave of failed states. How do we assist? We need frameworks such as loss and damage funds alongside a strong system like the fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty. Colombia’s case offers a clear example as they transition from being the fifth-largest coal producer.

If Colombia commits to weaning off fossil fuel dependency, it will require significant support. A hybrid system that mirrors COP processes must integrate discounted compensation for transitional phases. This structured plan could involve payments staggered over decades, ensuring governments pledge funds transparently toward green projects, thereby incentivizing compliance. A global framework like this is crucial to avert potential crises in the years ahead.

00:20:53 I’ve discussed these frameworks with influential entities such as the OECD and UN, although their responses often reflect hesitancy. The historically wealthy but irresponsible approaches taken by certain nations endanger others. We are standing at a unique juncture where a substantial share of global fossil fuel resources lie within responsible governments accountable to their citizens. It’s vital to foster constructive discussions while encouraging modern solutions like quantitative easing, which has been invoked during previous financial crises. As John Maynard Keynes famously claimed, “Anything that we have to do, we can afford to do.”

Akshat Rathi

00:22:06 After the break, we’ll continue our conversation with Kim Stanley Robinson. If you’re enjoying this episode, please take a moment to rate and review the show on Apple Podcasts or Spotify—it helps others discover us.

00:22:24 Contemporary politics reflect a nostalgic desire for past eras marked by rigid social hierarchies. Ironically, if given a choice, I’d prefer to be born today due to our advancements in health, communication, and travel. Yet this yearning for a bygone era remains palpable. How do you reconcile this desire for a time that lacks the advantages we possess today?

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:23:13 This longing is misdirected—an amalgamation of nostalgia and a wish for lost comfort. Nostalgia is a strong emotion, and I too succumb to its pull; however, it frequently stems from historical misconceptions. People often view their formative years through rose-tinted glasses, neglecting that those times were equally challenging, if not more so, than present-day circumstances. The past often seems superior because humans tend to avoid confronting their own mortality while facing an uncertain future.

Collectively, individuals manage to envision a more hopeful future for generations to come, seeking solace in the possibility of positive change. I hold great admiration for scientific advancements. Medical science has been a crucial aspect of my life—saving me twice. I recognize the invaluable role science plays as a unified force for good, fostering new possibilities and improving quality of life. When some individuals protest against scientific understanding, they reveal a denial of this reality—overlooking the lifesaving achievements that science has brought to humanity.

Akshat Rathi

00:24:56 As someone with a scientific background, it surprises me that governmental leadership often lacks advisors with a scientific mindset. However, we may witness a shift in the White House, as new leaders emerge from the scientific community. Still, we must evaluate the risks posed by sci-fi-inspired thinking. Can you delineate those dangers?

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:25:34 We need to differentiate between scientists and engineers. Silicon Valley consists predominantly of computer engineers rather than scientists. Many successful individuals in technology are not inherently informed decision-makers; they often tackle problems with simplistic solutions shaped by good fortune rather than informed strategies. There exists a troubling gender imbalance within the tech industry, with a significant majority being male—a red flag regarding the integrity of this sector.

Even though numerous individuals from Silicon Valley genuinely aspire to contribute positively, they frequently operate from a naïve perspective. Good intentions often collide with a lack of comprehensive knowledge and an awareness of complex political realities. As individuals accrue wealth, they may assume they comprehend all the requisite solutions—this arrogance can lead to misguided initiatives. While it’s plausible to encounter well-meaning tech entrepreneurs, dramatic outliers like Elon Musk epitomize how personal quirks intertwined with wealth might render someone untrustworthy.

Akshat Rathi

00:27:34 Last question—a lighthearted one. If you could make one wish for a climate solution, technological advancement, policy reform, or societal change in 2025, what would it be?

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:27:56 That’s a tall order! I would wish for three more wishes!

Akshat Rathi

00:28:06 The perfect response.

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:28:08 Returning to the realm of political economy, I want to express my gratitude to Bloomberg Green for their exceptional coverage during COP29—it truly is the best I’ve encountered. Engaging people with the dynamic interplay between politics, economics, business, and governance is of utmost importance.

In this context, observing the European Union illustrates the possibilities that can arise when nation-states come together as member states. The EU serves as an example of resilience, operating effectively even as smaller nations confront economic challenges through collaboration. This shift in mindset has led to reciprocal legal, financial, and emotional frameworks for member countries.

00:29:07 If organizations like the UN, WTO, or OECD began to function as authoritative bodies, with strict adherence to mutually agreed-upon actions as a baseline, it could profoundly reshape our climate strategies. The US tends to disregard thoughtful solutions, clinging to a potentially damaging doctrine of self-sufficiency. However, ensuring broader recognition of the significance of cooperation may aid the US in reconciling with global realities. Sustaining these parallel merits may play a significant role in overcoming the obstacles we face; climate change cannot be addressed in isolation.

Akshat Rathi

00:30:13 I appreciate you highlighting the potential for a more robust G20 influence. Thank you, Stan.

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:30:22 Thank you, Akshat. It’s been delightful.

Akshat Rathi

00:30:31 Thank you for joining us on Zero. And now for the sound of the week.

That was the trailer sound from a 1983 film titled End Game, set in a fictional 2025. Yet, it eerily mirrors the realities of 1983 while failing to anticipate the advent of electric vehicles.

I am Akshat Rathi. Until next time.

© 2025 Bloomberg

Stay updated with Moneyweb’s comprehensive finance and business news on WhatsApp here.