Kim Stanley Robinson, an esteemed author known for his numerous acclaimed science fiction novels, attributes his survival on two occasions to advancements in medicine. Now at 72, he continues to immerse himself in his passion for creating visions of utopias, believing it is his duty to inspire future generations.

But what does a utopia entail in the year 2025? With the planet recently experiencing its hottest year on record, ongoing conflicts, and democracies around the world facing unprecedented chaos, such a vision might feel elusive.

ADVERTISEMENT

CONTINUE READING BELOW

Robinson contends that the current state of affairs should not suppress our imagination regarding a brighter future. He joined Bloomberg Green’s Zero podcast to discuss global challenges at the dawn of a new year.

He warns against becoming entangled in the “soap opera” of political drama and individual characters, asserting, “Everyone wants their daily life to proceed positively and as smoothly as possible.”

However, the rising political tensions in various countries, including the United States, cannot be overlooked. A significant sense of nostalgia has emerged among many voters yearning for what they perceive as a better past. “Nostalgia—an ache for a bygone home in Greek—is an immensely potent emotion,” Robinson reflected. “I share this feeling, but it often leads to misjudgment, bordering on delusion.”


Kim Stanley Robinson, Wikimedia Commons

Kim Stanley Robinson. Image: Gage Skidmore, via Wikimedia Commons

Additionally, a trend appears to be the diminishing focus on long-term thinking. Robinson connects this to the myriad crises we face today, which overshadow our collective consciousness. “You don’t think about future greatness when living just 250 years,” he remarked. “Science fiction has been narrowed down to near-future scenarios.”

This trend is alarming. Robinson’s earlier works from the 1990s, especially the Mars trilogy, envisioned human colonies on the red planet in the 21st century.

This is a vision that some of the wealthiest individuals, like Elon Musk, are currently striving to actualize. However, Robinson’s Martian saga unfolds against the backdrop of an environmental catastrophe instigated by humanity.

While it’s admirable that numerous billionaires from Silicon Valley have embraced science fiction, Robinson expressed his doubts. “Many have acquired riches through sheer luck,” he stated. “It’s disturbing that 95% of them are men, raising concerns about their reliability. They often display political and philosophical naivete.”

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

Throughout their discussion, Robinson consistently highlighted a broader perspective: it is only a small percentage of billionaires whose actions might jeopardize humanity…

…while the average person works to improve their circumstances.

This perspective gives him the greatest hope for the future. “The 2020s have always been a crucial juncture in human history,” he expressed. “However, that does not ensure favorable outcomes, especially with rising forces of chaos.”

Still, Robinson believes: “A positive outcome remains attainable.”

Listen to the complete episode and learn more about Zero 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 influential science fiction authors for me recently has been Kim Stanley Robinson. His Mars trilogy from the 1990s is still celebrated, but listeners of Zero will likely recognize his explorations of potential climate futures on Earth. From a submerged city in New York 2140 to a UN agency addressing the climate crisis in The Ministry for the Future, his narratives are captivating.

00:00:57 Although Robinson has appeared on Zero before, I wanted to reconnect due to my recent reflection on The Ministry for the Future. Published in 2020, the story begins in 2025—the very year we are currently in. The opening narrative revolves around a fictional COP29 summit set against the backdrop of an intense heatwave in India, focusing on UN officials as they deal with the fallout from a warming planet. With 2025 at hand, I wanted to explore Robinson’s insights about the events described in his book and the unpredictable path real-world events have taken since its release. Our discussion covered the role of science fiction in future predictions, its potential pitfalls, and Robinson’s respect for the proactive efforts of organizations like the UN.

Welcome to the show.

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:02:16 Thank you, Akshat. It’s a delight to return.

Akshat Rathi

00:02:18 I revisited our previous discussion, and you appeared optimistic then. In 2023, that optimism seemed justified due to positive developments post-Paris Agreement, including the US climate legislation and a global commitment to tackling climate change. Now, as we enter 2025—the foundation for The Ministry for the Future—I thought it would be worthwhile to reassess our perspectives. We’re currently living in the future you envisioned. How are you feeling about it all?

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

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:03:17 First, I believe you’re in a better position to assess the situation due to your connections and extensive discussions. I’d love to hear your views. From my perspective, living here in Davis, California, everything seems to be speeding up. This realization struck me in 2022 when I saw that many events I had projected for the far-off future were actually unfolding within the 2020s. Unfortunately, this acceleration seems to encompass both positive and negative trends, and I must address the unexpected re-election of Trump, which took me by surprise.

00:04:13 While working on The Ministry for the Future during Trump’s presidency, I crafted a scenario where the United States played a minimal role in tackling climate change, with other countries stepping up out of necessity. The narrative painted the United States as a wealthy yet immature entity reluctantly adapting to urgent global needs. Although this still holds some truth, significant changes have emerged between 2020 and 2024 that are creating new avenues for progress. Notably, renewable energy advancements have proven to be more affordable than fossil fuels, which is crucial in a capitalist environment where investments naturally gravitate toward profitable ventures. Positive legislative initiatives, such as the IRA bill passed by the Biden administration, highlight how legislation can yield beneficial climate actions, impacting both the economy and investments.

Akshat Rathi

00:06:01 Even though clean energy may now be cheaper than fossil fuels, we still face artificially induced methods of keeping fossil fuel prices relatively low, and we can expect to see more of that. Returning to The Ministry for the Future, the story underscores the need for greater equality to effectively confront the climate crisis. Inequality shapes the challenges presented by climate change; solutions require wealth and technology transfers, especially to developing countries. COP meetings emphasize the seriousness of these dialogues. Your narrative involves the ministry for the future within this framework, and you’ve tracked COP29’s developments. How do you perceive the effectiveness of this year’s COP in relation to your anticipated goals for these gatherings?

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:07:15 The recent COP29 was closely aligned with previous COPs and the depiction in my book—it’s a crucial process, albeit an insufficient one. They establish public commitments in an environment where awareness continues to grow, yet these pledges often lack urgency due to inherent bureaucratic delays. The COP framework is vital but not definitive. More decisive actions are needed from nations and international collaborations, with reflections on concrete trade agreements and relations extending beyond mere COP commitments. In The Ministry for the Future, the organization starts modestly, striving for year-round COP agreement support. Interestingly, last September, at the UN’s Summit for the Future, a pact for the future emerged, along with plans to appoint an envoy for future issues.

Akshat Rathi

00:08:47 That seems similar to the UN’s Ministry for the Future in your book. Did your narrative have any influence on this pact?

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:08:57 Yes, I’ve been told it did. The UN engaged with my work, perceiving it as a robust concept. The UN operates under a curious dichotomy: it wields significant power—often portrayed as a secretive master entity—while functioning as a promise-based platform for member states to engage without explicit enforcement power. While the UN possesses powerful consensus-building ability derived from its post-WWII framework, it frequently struggles with operational effectiveness. My narrative resonates with young diplomats in the UN, feeling overwhelmed as they attempt to tackle global complexities. They view this story as a potential framework to create a coordinated response to climate challenges, finding it a useful tool to navigate future issues.

Akshat Rathi

00:10:18 Fiction can have real-world repercussions. After our previous discussion, I learned that Oxford University has initiated its own Ministry for the Future at Hertford College, aiming to stimulate real initiatives. What do you believe this can achieve?

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:10:40 I find this inspiring because Oxford comprises an intelligent and committed group keen on creating change. The Oxford Ministry for the Future aims to build a dynamic meeting space, operating more as a venue for public events rather than a conventional research center. I hope it will foster and measure ideas for restructuring political economies to adequately tackle climate change. Ideally, it should promote public outreach, drive shifts in attitudes, and consistently articulate a shared narrative that resonates with audiences. Although I’m not formally involved as a collaborator, I hope to influence its direction while ensuring its discussions remain captivating and impactful.

Akshat Rathi

00:11:36 As a science enthusiast, I’ve always regarded technological advancements as avenues to envision possible futures—both immediate and far-reaching. I love the science fiction genre for this reason, and I cherish your contributions over the years. However, my journalist perspective compels me to focus on current realities. I’ve noticed a trend within the present political climate—whether due to media consumption, politics, or societal narratives—an apparent reduction in our futuristic thinking, or perhaps a narrowing of that vision. Would you concur with this observation?

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:12:29 I agree that climate change has undoubtedly emerged as a dominant concern for humanity, particularly post-pandemic. The pandemic served as a wake-up call, leading to a collective realization that climate change occurrences could be even more catastrophic. As Adam Tooze puts it, we are facing a poly-crisis, where a multitude of simultaneous crises—climate change, pollution, pandemics—intersect with our social and political challenges. Consequently, long-term visions are dwindling. Imagining interstellar travel or distant futures becomes difficult when we struggle to confront the pressing issues of the 21st century. Hence, science fiction has indeed shifted its focus toward near-future narratives.

Akshat Rathi

ADVERTISEMENT:

CONTINUE READING BELOW

00:13:47 The struggle to manage this overwhelming amount of information often translates into individual experiences. A prevailing sentiment in 2025 appears grim. If I were to ask you to envision a utopia, what might that look like for 2025?

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:14:21 That’s a fascinating question. One possible vision could be the collective understanding that we can’t solely depend on US leadership—this applies to both global matters and the anticipated administration, which may descend into chaos. A potential utopian scenario involves acknowledging that throughout history, even with errant leaders, effective governance generally arises from dedicated bureaucrats, technocrats, scientists, and educators. Civil society is resilient, and crucial everyday support continues despite unfortunate leadership. Most individuals wish for their daily lives to maintain stability, striving for positive advancement amid adversity.

00:15:24 Despite current tensions, many individuals navigate precarious situations. The spectacle of political theater shouldn’t overshadow their attempts to sustain a semblance of normalcy. If society can continue to function similarly, preserving its core elements through the merits of civil society, that by itself would signify a triumph—though it is not by any means assured.

We are currently witnessing a trial of the resilience of the American political system when confronted with potentially destructive ambitions from leadership. It’s a hybrid climate. We are certainly grappling with a flawed political structure and substantial threats to democracy. Yet votes hold power, and there remains hope that they cannot merely be purchased. Hence, we find ourselves at a crossroads. The 2020s were always envisioned as a crucial phase in human history—implying the possibility of extended challenges. While it’s not guaranteed that everything will be alright, a favorable outcome is still feasible. Could that be my utopian proposition? That a positive result is within our grasp?

Akshat Rathi

00:16:49 We’ve discussed several pressing global issues, yet there are smaller developments that could gain significance. Colombia stands out for its attempt to phase out fossil fuels by becoming the first major producer to sign the fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty. I know you’ve interacted with minister Susana Muhamad regarding these efforts, prompting me to ask how a nation can transform its economy while moving away from fossil fuel dependence.

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:18:00 Thank you for highlighting that. I’m fascinated by the scenario. Petro-states that rely heavily on fossil fuel revenues find themselves in a dual dilemma after the Paris Agreement: they are expected to halt sales, yet doing so risks economic disruption and potential state failure for many, impacting over a billion people. We can’t afford a surge of failed states. How do we provide assistance? We need mechanisms like loss and damage funds and a substantial framework similar to the fossil fuel non-proliferation treaty. Colombia’s situation serves as a case study as it transitions from being the fifth largest coal producer.

If Colombia commits to discontinuing fossil fuel reliance, it must receive significant support. A system combining strategies emulating COP processes must integrate compensation for transitional phases. This structured approach might involve staggered payments over decades, ensuring governments uphold transparency by committing funds to green initiatives, generating an economic incentive for adherence. On a global scale, such a system is crucial to prevent potential crises in the coming years.

00:20:53 I’ve discussed these frameworks with key bodies like the OECD and UN, yet responses often reflect hesitance. The historically rich yet inconsiderate strategies adopted by certain nations risk jeopardizing others. We face a unique moment where a large portion of global fossil fuel resources are held within responsible governments accountable to their citizens. It is vital to encourage constructive dialogue while simultaneously seeking modern solutions like quantitative easing, as witnessed during prior financial crises. As John Maynard Keynes famously asserted, “Anything that we have to do, we can afford to do.”

Akshat Rathi

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

00:22:24 Current politics reflect a nostalgic yearning for past eras characterized by rigid social hierarchies. Ironically, given the choice, I would prefer to be born today due to our advancements in healthcare, communication, and travel. Yet the desire for the past endures. How do you reconcile this longing for a time devoid of our current advantages?

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:23:13 This nostalgia is misguided, a combination of longing and a desire for lost comfort. Nostalgia is a powerful sentiment, and I too feel its allure; however, it often stems from misinterpretations of history. People tend to recall their formative years through a rosy lens, overlooking that those times presented challenges, if not more daunting than today’s. The past often appears superior because humans naturally shy away from contemplating their own mortality amid an uncertain future.

Across society, people find solace in the possibility of a brighter future for generations to come, nurturing hope in the potential for progress. I deeply appreciate scientific advancements. Medical science has been my salvation—having saved my life twice. I acknowledge the invaluable role science plays as a collective force for good, creating possibilities and enhancing our quality of life. When some protest against scientific understanding, they inadvertently reveal a denial of this truth—overlooking the lifesaving feats science has provided humanity.

Akshat Rathi

00:24:56 As someone with a scientific background, I’m surprised that government leadership often lacks advisors with a scientific perspective. However, we may witness a shift in the White House with new leaders emerging from the scientific community. Yet, we must assess the perils associated with science fiction-inspired thinking. Can you articulate those risks?

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:25:34 We need to make a distinction between scientists and engineers. Silicon Valley predominantly consists of computer engineers rather than scientists. Many successful tech individuals aren’t necessarily well-informed decision-makers; they often approach problems with simplistic solutions shaped by fortune rather than strategic insight. A concerning gender imbalance exists in the tech sector, with the majority being men—this raises alarms about the integrity of this industry.

Even though numerous individuals from Silicon Valley sincerely wish to contribute positively, they often operate with a naïve understanding. Good intentions frequently clash with a lack of comprehensive awareness of complex political realities. As individuals acquire wealth, there’s a tendency to assume they possess all the requisite solutions—this hubris can lead to misguided initiatives. While it is possible to find tech entrepreneurs with honorable intentions, striking outliers like Elon Musk illustrate how a person might become untrustworthy due to personal eccentricities mixed with their fortunes.

Akshat Rathi

00:27:34 For my final question, here’s a light-hearted one. If you had one wish—be it for a climate solution, a technological breakthrough, policy reform, or societal transformation—what would you wish for in 2025?

Kim Stanley Robinson

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

Akshat Rathi

00:28:06 The perfect response.

Kim Stanley Robinson

00:28:08 Reflecting on political economy, I’d like to extend my appreciation to Bloomberg Green for its exceptional coverage throughout COP29—undoubtedly the best I’ve come across. Engaging individuals with the dynamic interplay of politics, economics, business, and governance is crucial.

In this light, observing the European Union reveals what can occur when nation-states unite as member states. The EU exemplifies resilience, functioning despite financial challenges faced by smaller countries through collaboration. That shift in mindset fosters interconnected legal, financial, and emotional frameworks for participating nations.

00:29:07 If organizations like the UN, WTO, or OECD began operating as authoritative entities, adhering strictly to agreed-upon actions as a standard, it could profoundly transform our climate strategies. The US tends to dismiss thoughtful solutions, adhering to a potentially perilous doctrine of self-sufficiency. Nonetheless, promoting a broader understanding of the importance of collaboration could eventually lead to the US reconciling with global realities. Preserving these parallel advantages might just support us in overcoming the challenges we encounter; climate change cannot be solved in isolation.

Akshat Rathi

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

Kim Stanley Robinson

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

Akshat Rathi

00:30:31 Thank you for tuning into Zero. Now, for the sound of the week.

That was the trailer sound from a 1983 film titled End Game, set in a fictitious 2025, which oddly mirrors the realities of 1983 while failing to anticipate the rise of electric vehicles.

I am Akshat Rathi. Until next time.

© 2025 Bloomberg

Stay informed with Moneyweb’s extensive finance and business updates on WhatsApp here.