Abundant
People have reliable access to energy, food, shelter, tools, knowledge and care.
Ends Up Here · Topic page
Topic bank
Is our future
utopic?
Can a future be abundant, safe and humane without becoming the perfect, frictionless world we imagine when we say “utopia”?
Key propositionA better future need not be
a perfect future.
a perfect future.
Video essay · Published 2 October 2026
Is Our Future Utopic?
Watch on YouTube. This is a narrated essay, not a recorded interview. Its future examples are scenarios, not predictions; the narration is synthetic and the diagrams are illustrative, not documentary images.
The word
Utopia is more demanding than “things get better.”
In ordinary use, a utopia is an imagined place or society of ideal perfection, especially in its laws, government and social conditions. That is close to the picture we are testing here: people getting on, abundance being available, and social life becoming peaceful and lovely.
But the word also carries a warning. Thomas More’s Utopia named an imagined “no place”. A perfect society is not merely prosperous; it implies that the fundamental argument about how people should live has been settled.
Working definition: “utopic” means embodying or proposing utopian ideals. It does not have to mean bland, effortless or conflict-free—but it invites us to ask whose ideal is being built.
Illustration and scene
Three different futures
Humane
Systems increase autonomy, dignity, safety and room for relationships, privacy and meaningful choice.
Utopic?
Society is not only better resourced; it has somehow resolved disagreement, power and the question of what a good life is.
The complication
Abundance does not make people identical.
Even if machines remove much pointless labour and basic goods become cheap, people will still want different things. One person may want a quiet garden; another wants risk, competition, pilgrimage or public argument.
There will still be conflict over land, attention, status, privacy, authority, intimacy and the shape of shared spaces. A future that permits disagreement may be healthier than one that promises universal agreement.
The question for us
Could a good future be permanently unfinished?
My provisional answer is yes. I am interested in a future that is materially generous and socially less cruel, but still alive: a world where people can choose difficult projects, disagree without being ruined, change their minds and make new forms of life.
That future may look utopic from the standpoint of someone escaping preventable misery. It may look disorderly from the standpoint of someone who wants one final answer about how everyone should live.
Ends Up Here question: is the best future a utopia, or is it a civilisation with enough capability and freedom to keep making better futures?
Talking prompts
What do we mean when we call a future utopic?
Is abundance enough to make a good life?
Do people need disagreement, risk or difficulty?
Who decides what “perfect” means?
Can technology reduce misery without resolving difference?
What would make your future feel utopic?
Working source note
The definition and etymology of utopia are checked against Merriam-Webster. The argument on this page is editorial judgement and speculation, not a forecast. “Utopic” is used deliberately as the episode’s adjective; “utopian” remains the more familiar alternative.