Mankind looks at the future, and it appears to be bleak. This theme has surfaced in dozens of literary works. One of those was The Time Machine, written by H. G. Wells in 1895, which involved a future society in which there were only two races: the Eloi, who lived above ground, were weak and barely able to think; and the Morlocks, who lived under ground, did all of the work, and had Eloi as their food. This kind of future certainly did not bode well for mankind.
There have been dozens of novels of dystopia—a future world where there is oppression or misery. George Orwell wrote 1984, in which Big Brother was watching everyone—and all had to conform to the latest propaganda. It was a thoughtcrime to have any desire for individualism.
Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World showed a future where people became dehumanized. Both individualism and initiative were discouraged, along with any kind of critical thinking. Families did not exist, since children were created technologically.
Logan’s Run depicted a future where, to avoid overpopulation, every citizen was put to death at the age of 30 in a process called Carousel. People were told the ritual was a form of “renewal.” The only way to escape was to try to make it outside the city to “Sanctuary,” but policemen called Sandmen would pursue if that choice were made.
In Fahrenheit 451, all books were banned and burned when they were discovered. The content of any particular book was irrelevant. All of them had to be burned. Only outside the city was a place where book-lovers lived.
To avoid emotional distress, the society of The Giver opted for “sameness.” Thus everyone lived in an identical, colorless house with a perfect climate. Only one person was granted to be the Receiver of Memories. No one seems to have been able to think critically here, either.
In Divergent, there are five groups of people, and everyone must fit into one (and only one) of those categories, which are Abnegation, Erudite, Dauntless, Amity, and Candor. One of the slogans was: “Faction is thicker than blood.”
One of the most popular of the recent dystopian novels (and movies, which were very well done) was The Hunger Games, in which two youths are chosen from each of the twelve districts after the war to compete in a contest to the death. The purpose was to satisfy man’s lust for violence. The young people in the “games” try to kill each other, as well as face unexpected challenges from the environment on which they do battle—only one champion survives the ordeal.
These are just a few of the dozens of novels about the dismal outlook for man in the future. Why are they so popular? What is so fascinating about them? They have now saturated our culture. Even Zager and Evans locked down the number one spot on the American pop chart back in 1969 for six weeks with: “In the Year 2525.” It also was number one for three weeks in the U.K. and has been recorded in seven different languages. What is the fascination?
Is it that we do not like the way things are going in this world and are afraid that one of these dystopian nightmares will overtake us? Is it the fear that something worse will come upon us than what we now experience? The imaginations of those who have written such novels are certainly keen. Soylent Green was based on the idea of overpopulation. Brave New World played off the development of technology and what it might lead to. 1984 seemed plausible because of the political ideologies involved.
Many seem to fear the taking away of critical thinking and individualism. Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged proposes a solution to the nightmares that bureaucratic aristocracies can impose on society—on those who actually produce. Orwell frighteningly talked about convincing children that 2 + 2 = 5. Today we have teachers who say, “It’s okay if you want to believe that.” How long will it be until it is mandatory to believe error?
Apparently, a good many of us have fears that some of these outlined dystopian scenarios might have some validity. It seems that every day less and less of our world makes sense. One wonders at times if we are all being prepped to believe anything and to disregard logic. In many aspects of life, we are told to listen to our emotions—to place the heart above the head, which means that feelings should triumph over intellect, which is scary enough in the present culture.
Why do writers not depict Utopian societies? Maybe that requires even more imagination. And it might be more boring. After all, if life is perfect, no conflict exists, and without conflict, no one is going to have a book readership or a movie audience. What was the last movie anyone saw without a conflict that needed to be resolved? It might be an internal battle that an individual is fighting, but most likely the plot centers on a war between two individuals, two nations, or a small group of rebels against an oppressive regime.
Usually, the reader/viewer is pulling for the one who is being abused, but Winston Smith does not win (1984). Most of the others do because we want to see justice done. We want to see fairness win out. We want the dystopian universe to become normal. Why do we care, since it is only fiction? We identify with the abused individual, and we want them to triumph—just as we want ourselves to be victorious.
The problem that mankind has in general is sin. Dystopian futures frighten us—probably because we can envision them occurring—but problems have existed since the Garden of Eden. Abel apparently had no indication that his brother Cain would kill him (Gen. 4). And look at what happened within a relatively short period of time afterward. As families had children, and little or no disease as yet existed, people truly were fruitful and multiplied. If Adam and Eve had brought into the world only ten children in 100 years (although Adam lived to the age of 930), that would have meant that five couples could have had 50 children in the next hundred years. (These are conservative estimates, as each woman could have had 25 or 50 youngsters.)
By the third hundred years those 25 couples probably had in excess of 250 children who married and reproduced. At that same rate, with only a few deaths by the tenth generation (100 years for a generation, and only ten children per family during that hundred years), there would be a world population of nearly 20 million. In the next 500 years that population would increase to roughly 50 billion people—minus about 31,250 for the first six generations having entirely died off. This is about 7 times the earth’s current population. Genesis 6:5 and 11 describe our dystopian past:
Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.
This world’s condition was not the hypothetical possibility that sprang from the mind of a clever author; it is the dismal reality of the way earth developed. Notice that what is described did not just affect one nation or one city—violence filled the earth. It was not imposed by one regime, such as Stalin murdering perhaps as many as 20 million of his own people—it was worldwide. The description seems to indicate a world in chaos. What had happened to the concept of love? It seems to have been replaced by that of, “Kill thy neighbor.”
No greater dystopia could exist than a world in which love is largely absent. Nothing is quite so ugly as any place in which God has been largely forgotten and the operating philosophy is “the survival of the fittest.” Might makes right means that, if I am more powerful than you, I can take what you have—just like the Danites who stole from Micah. They numbered 600, and they knew what Micah possessed. They entered his house and took his graven image, his ephod, his household idols, and his molded image (Judges 18:18). When Micah’s priest asked what they were doing, they invited him to come with them, too, and he did. When Micah discovered what happened, he protested their stealing of his property. They told him:
“Do not let your voice be heard among us, lest angry men fall upon you, and you lose your life, with the lives of your household.” Then the children of Dan went their way. And when Micah saw that they were too strong for him, he turned and went back to his house (Judges 18:25-26).
Even though this event occurred after the Flood, during what we often refer to as “the dark ages” of Israel’s history, it represents the type of behavior that existed before the Flood. Any time man chooses to exclude God from his thoughts, moral collapse follows close behind. Individuals or the state can confiscate property, control one’s children, and even impose death, should they so desire. And there is no seeming solution to those situations.
In most of the dystopian novels, however, a hero, heroine, or an alliance of rebels succeeds in conquering the evil ruling forces and setting things right. But they always succeed on their own ingenuity and not because of God. Usually peace results but not necessarily morality. Sometimes love triumphs, which is a characteristic of God, but that is about as close to Him as any writer gets. In fact, it is usually the human spirit that prevails. Dystopian novels do not usually exalt God.
In truth, God’s answer to a wicked and perverse world was to destroy it. There was no easy fix. Cleansing the earth and beginning again only lasted for a short time; it was not long before man created idolatry and began to worship the creature rather than the Creator (Rom. 1:18-32). God used the rising and falling of nations to punish those who rejected Him thereafter. Unfortunately, it has never made much difference. People do not usually associate sin with their downfall even though the example of Babylon and Belshazzar is a vivid one. Many have ignored that God punished Israel for their sins and brought them back to their land when they repented. When people choose to forget God, they do not recognize His involvement in these matters.
Christ coming into the world had a powerful effect—for a while. He was certainly the answer to an evil society, but before too many centuries elapsed, even the purest religion became corrupt—and it has never recovered. Man, it seems, in general has rejected the way to an actual Utopia by refusing to apply the principles of Christianity as God designed them. What would the world be like if people showed love and kindness to all—if we were truly united and acted in the best interests of others? What if we truly honored God as a nation?
It will never happen because the free will God gave us allows us to be selfish if we so desire. Only Heaven itself will be where God and righteousness reigns (2 Peter 3:10-13). Only those who truly desire to be there and have proven it by their obedience to God on earth shall ever experience the blessings God has always wanted for mankind. All others will live (continually die) in the worst, inescapable dystopia imaginable (Rev. 20:15).