Karl Marx and Futures Literacy: Beyond Capitalism, Towards Imagination

 

When we think of Karl Marx, we usually picture the bearded revolutionary, hammering away at capitalism with dense critiques of political economy. When we think of futures literacy, we imagine a modern set of tools that help us see beyond uncertainty, to imagine alternative futures. At first glance, they seem worlds apart—one rooted in 19th-century Europe, the other in 21st-century foresight practice. Yet, when brought together, Marx and futures literacy speak to the same human urge: to understand where we are going and how we might change course.

Marx’s method, known as historical materialism, was more than a theory of the past; it was a framework for anticipating the future. He saw history moving through contradictions: feudalism gave way to capitalism, capitalism would eventually give way to socialism. This dialectical way of thinking resonates with futures literacy, which teaches us to see the future not as a straight line but as a field of tensions between past, present, and possibility. In both, the present is never static—it is charged with seeds of what comes next.

Where futures literacy invites us to “pre-experience” possible futures, Marx was already sketching them. He saw how capitalism unleashed productivity and innovation, but also how it produced alienation, inequality, and recurring crises. Futures literacy encourages us to look at multiple scenarios; Marx, in his time, offered a sharp binary: capitalism or its transcendence. Yet the impulse is the same: to push us beyond the illusion of permanence, to remind us that systems can be imagined otherwise.

Another overlap lies in the question of power. Marx asked: who owns the means of production? Futures literacy asks: who owns the means of imagination? In both cases, the answer shapes the future. For Marx, it was the proletariat who carried the possibility of transformation. For futures literacy, it is about widening participation so that diverse communities can imagine and co-create futures, not just the powerful few.

Of course, there are differences. Marx leaned toward determinism, believing history inevitably moved toward socialism. Futures literacy rejects inevitability, insisting instead on plurality and openness. Marx sought scientific laws; futures literacy warns against prediction and prefers imagination. Yet their differences do not cancel each other—they complement. Marx grounds futures thinking in material realities, while futures literacy frees Marxist thought from rigidity, opening the door to many futures, not just one.

In a time when inequality, climate crisis, and technological upheavals echo the very contradictions Marx diagnosed, the dialogue between him and futures literacy feels urgent. Marx reminds us that futures must reckon with class and material conditions; futures literacy reminds us that futures are not pre-written. Put together, they challenge us not just to critique the world, but to imagine and rehearse the worlds that could replace it.