By DEBORAH TAVARES*
Reflections on a world in ruins
The idea that we are living in a dystopian film or book constantly finds an echo in our contemporary reality. And this is not by chance, since the material conditions in which we live seem to determine the ideas we have. Based on this, a good reflection can be made through the concept of capitalist realism, proposed by Mark Fisher. He invites us to think about how we are not only living in a dystopia, but also something more complex and, above all, contradictory, since reality is, in fact, even more degrading and limiting than many literary dystopias.
Thus, the analysis that reality surpasses fiction can be better understood from the perspective of dialectical historical materialism, which allows us to see this “capitalist dystopia” as the result of historical and economic processes in constant transformation. As Bertold Brecht rightly reminds us, “In times of darkness/ Must we also sing?/ Must we also sing:/ The times of darkness.”[I] In other words, in times of crisis, elaboration in art and culture seems to be a powerful tool for reflection and transformation. It seems that this is where we come close to being inserted in a cruel dystopian script.
Mark Fisher points out that “it is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism.” This statement reflects a condition in which capitalism has been naturalized to the point of becoming an “inescapable reality,” which echoes the neoliberal dictates of Margaret Thatcher when she stated that there is no alternative to capitalism – the consecrated acronym TINA (there is no alternative), which imposes the supposedly inescapable logic of capital.
From a dialectical materialist perspective, this naturalization occurs due to the hegemony of capitalist ideology, which prevents the perception of alternatives, after all, as Marx would say, “The ideas of the ruling class are, in each era, the dominant ideas.”[ii] Thus, the sense of dystopia here is not a distant future, but a present and systematic condition, in which the very capacity to imagine the end of capitalism is compromised.
Literary dystopia, which often exposes oppressive regimes and dehumanizing realities, serves as a form of social and cultural critique. However, capitalism severs the connection between past and present, creating a disconnect from the origins of catastrophes and fueling the absence of hope. Gregory Claeys[iii] reflects that what seems unreal in fiction turns out to be historically accurate, capturing extreme perversions of the mindset that governs capitalism. This shows that dystopian fiction helps us see what reality already is, but through metaphorical means.
Under capitalism, ideology becomes a control mechanism that prevents effective criticism of the system, reinforcing the idea that it is natural and inescapable. Since the 19th century, Karl Marx has helped us understand that this ideology is not neutral: it is a historical construction and, therefore, can – and must – be overcome. Marx reminds us throughout his work how education, work and even culture are shaped by this ideology, which penetrates all spheres of social life and eliminates the hope of a different future.
This analytical perspective allows us to understand that the feeling of waking up and being faced with dystopian news emerges from the internal contradictions of capitalism. While this system promises a certain amount of progress and well-being for some – what Noam Chomsky calls “socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor”,[iv] since the system engenders poverty, alienation and environmental destruction for the marginalized, at the expense of their exploitation, and a world full of opportunities only for those in power. Gregory Claeys reinforces that the structure of a dystopian narrative reveals these contradictions and, furthermore, exposes how much the capitalist structure itself feeds inequality and destruction.
Another recurring aspect when we approach this theme of dystopia is technological advancement that, instead of promoting freedom, intensifies control over individuals. Walter Benjamin[v] reminds us that progress in capitalism only works for some: “But from paradise a storm blows, which has become entangled in his wings and is so strong that the angel can no longer close them. This storm drives him irresistibly towards the future, to which he turns his back, while the pile of rubble before him grows skyward. What we call progress is this storm.”
Walter Benjamin reminds us that under capitalism, technology is developed and used to consolidate the power of elites, not to humanize and improve communication between communities. In today's society, digital surveillance and control represent a new form of alienation and oppression, an invisible power that restricts the autonomy of individuals and that now produces more value in the form of technological platforms and oligopolies.
Thus, culture in late capitalism also becomes an instrument of control, since it functions as an institutional superstructure that reinforces the values of the economic infrastructure: exploitation, inequality and profit. Mass entertainment and advertising consolidate the status quo, reinforcing capitalist ideology, so that dystopian works such as 1984 by George Orwell and Admirable new world by Aldous Huxley have already elaborated this reflection in literary form, since cultural objects are a construction that reflects in form and content the production relations of the society in which they are created.
So, instead of thinking that we are immersed in the halls of the Ministry of Love of 1984, we can reflect on the role that these narratives play in a world in ruins. Dystopia challenges the hegemonic system by imagining realities that break with dominant values. It acts as an imaginative tool, enabling a change in perspective and promoting hope in breaking with current values.
By conceiving the worst possible scenario (hence the term dystopia, in Greek for “bad place”), the dystopian narrative invites us to think about what we can do to prevent this scenario from coming to fruition. This imaginative function is capable of projecting an alternative and egalitarian outcome, and perhaps literature is one of the many other spaces in which we can imagine what the system deems impossible – an end to capitalism.
Therefore, it is necessary to reiterate: we do not live in a dystopia, because reality surpasses fiction, precisely because it is more cruel, contradictory and, literally, real. The hope of an emancipatory society is seen as “naive” simply because the current system blocks our ability to imagine a different future. However, it is through critical analysis and effective mobilization that we can glimpse a humanizing reality, as suggested by Carlos Drummond.[vi]: “so it’s time to start all over again, without illusions and without haste, but with the stubbornness of the insect that seeks a path in the earthquake”.
*Debora Tavares She holds a PhD in literature from the University of São Paulo (USP).
Notes
[I] BRECHT, Bertold. Bertolt Brecht: Poetry: 60. São Paulo: Perspective, 2019.
[ii] MARX, Carl. the german ideology. Sao Paulo: Boitempo, 2007.
[iii] CLAEYS, Gregory. Dystopia: a natural history. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.
[iv] POLYCHRONIOU, C.J. “Socialism for the Rich, Capitalism for the Poor: An Interview With Noam Chomsky.” Truthout, Dec. 11, 2016, https://truthout.org/articles/socialism-for-the-rich-capitalism-for-the-poor-an-interview-with-noam-chomsky/.
[v] BENJAMIN, Walter. “Theses on the concept of history”. In: Magic and Technique, Art and Politics. Essays on Literature and Cultural History – Volume 1. São Paulo: Brasiliense, 2012.
[vi] DRUMMOND, Carlos. Self-Portrait and Other Chronicles. São Paulo: Record, 2018.
the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE
