My point stands, the art driving the movement should strive to provide a substantive vision of a plausible society in order to provide a believable ecological/sociological example of what could be. This is really what the discussion boils down to in the end, and I fail to see why this wouldn't be desirable. Why settle for superficial aesthetics without fleshing out the details of how this society would function.

[–] Esoteir@hexbear.net 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

it is a hopeful vision of the future in the same way soviet sci-fi is, which as far as ive experienced doesn't usually flesh out the details of how exactly the soviet state withers away

soviet sci-fi usually acted as more of an inspiration for those who were already educated by a communist state, solar-punk acts as a inspiration for the much more niche community of eco-socialists in a similar way, in that regard they are only superficial as much as imaginary hopeful socialist futures in general are superficial

[–] yogthos@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 1 month ago

As I mentioned in the other reply, I agree with your take in a context of a broader eco-socialist movement.