AFTERMOST: 2022 IN REVIEW

ONE of the constant themes in Human Futures this year has been to make the ‘futures field’ more accessible and structured through futures literacy. Our listserver’s articles and email traffic have also highlighted that the gates are crumbling in the old institutions; truth, science, democracies, universities, and inclusiveness. Unfortunately, the solutions have polarized email traffic in those who see the future as a rich domain of the post qualitative investigations and those who quantitatively plot a course into the future based on social data. For the most part, the rich discussion has gone unrecorded within the covers of the Human Futures Magazine, which is a pity. Collectively, the contributions to the magazine reverberate with the diversity of futurist practices, showcasing the depth of professionalism and experience that is the core element of the WFSF. The Human Futures magazine in 2023 will encourage us to challenge the comfortable and acceptable and to look at things in new ways.

The future most people on the planet live with is a product of the collective narrative of dominant influencers and the limited involvement of the population, either through lack of agency or inattention. It is a future that follows the path of least resistance, where we consider living with; covid, climate change, political corruption, inflation, fake news, and conflict as the new normal.

Narratives about the impact of technology on our lives, jobs, privacy, and social fabric that envision utopian and dystopian futures weave through the images of the future we want in equal measure. The layers of dominant narratives, structures and core beliefs all work to disempower and give the illusion of limited personal agency.

Jacques Rancière’s philosophy suggests that fiction is not removed from reality but instead saturated by it. Fiction can challenge reality to bend and transform itself, creating friction that can shape the future. The ‘futures’ is about creating a plausible image of the future and challenging what is comfortable and accepted. This means questioning our humanistic tendencies and recognizing that technology is essential for envisioning any possible future. It helps us understand how technology can be used for good and shape our future. We need to be conscious of our relationship with technology to develop society’s concept of an acceptable image of the human. It is also essential to challenge the comfortable futures that are often accepted and instead look for more rebellious approaches.

Futures grounded in humanism are about creating a plausible image of the future that is achievable and “just a matter of common sense.” Our comfortable, measurable, “well-laid plans” cannot shape the future; common sense is the corrosive safe ground that works to stifle and resist change. My ongoing observations point to the tendency of individuals to disempower themselves in the face of official data. Self-interest has become a survival skill insulating people from choices that negatively affect their quality of life. The separation of humans from their world and the exploitation of the planet as a resource damages our environment. It turns a blind eye to our responsibility for the damage we create to society and the earth.

There is no doubt we are in a transitory moment; we are witnessing the death of many of the orthodoxies that held the fabric of societies together. Futurists need to consider that the boundary between the used future and the future we need is primarily defined by power and privilege while providing a safe moment to help individuals allow themselves permission to hope and see a bolder disruptive future that excites them.