Michael Moorcock on Sci-Fi luminaries
I know this is a little outside the normal scope of this community. However, I think it’s undeniable that a contributing factor to the ideas and behavior of contemporary tech oligarchs is their love of older sci-fi and fantasy literature. Seeing the authoritarian and sometimes even straightforwardly fascist ideals hidden in those works can be helpful in understanding how these people think.
It took me a while to read it because it's written in a style I'm not used to, and it felt very rambling and messy. Despite that, I liked his rants against Heinlein, Lovecraft and Star Wars, and it conveyed quite a great point on what science fiction should be about.
The concerns are legit. :(
Then again, empires and wars make for great story material. Persistent peace... not so much. So I believe science fiction has a bias towards epic messes.
As for when this was written - wow, 1978. Probably before Iain M. Banks brought a typewriter home and started typing his first Culture novel...
...but as a result of his typing, even libertarian / socialist viewpoints of science fiction contain empires (often defeated) and wars (sometimes resolved without mass casualties, but not always). The damnable reality of literature tends to be: if there's no gun on the wall in chapter 1 and someone isn't shot by chapter 3, you have to figure out what sells the story. :(
I think Moorcock does recognize the value of having empires in fiction, his point is more about the underlying philosophy revealed by the protagonist(s).