This past summer, many of us traveled back to the future.
Octavia Butler’s 1993 novel, Parable of the Sower, begins in July 2024. Through the eyes of Lauren Olamina, the novel’s young Black protagonist, Butler unveils the story of a not-too-distant future in which America is divided between a wealthy elite and the impoverished masses. While the rich shelter in gated communities with private armies, the “street poor” face threats of crime, corporate exploitation, and the use of deadly force to protect elite privilege.
Butler’s award-winning work helped to establish the genre of Afrofuturism, which merges elements of science fiction, speculative fiction, and African diasporic history to explore the intersection of race, technology, and the future. This cultural and artistic movement reimagines the past and envisions alternative futures where Black people and cultures are liberated from historical marginalization and oppression. In so doing, Afrofuturism offers a platform for marginalized voices to reassert their presence and agency in social, political, and legal discourse. By challenging the perceived permanence of existing power structures, Afrofuturism creates space for envisioning new, emancipatory futures.
This approach, I argue in a recent article, is apparent in Parable of the Sower’s powerful critique of how capitalism impacts marginalized communities, as well as its vision of economic institutions grounded in democratic cooperation and mutual benefit. Yet, as I will argue in this post, what I call Butler’s “Afrofuturist legal critique” extends beyond merely advocating for social justice. Instead, Butler’s speculative fiction uses the freedom dreams of Black Americans to show how the structure of a political economy not only reflects but also shapes legal concepts, defining key democratic principles like equality, liberty, and dignity. This suggests that Afrofuturism offers critical insights into how legal meaning is produced and understood within the broader context of democratic life.
Between the World and Law
An Afrofuturist legal critique rests upon three claims about law familiar to critical legal scholars. First, the Afrofuturist legal critique suggests that law’s meanings are not objective or natural but are instead continually produced through cultural discourse and legal contestation, which take place within the parameters of a society’s political economy. We might call this law’s dialectical nature.
For example, this iterative production of legal meaning is evident in the shifting interpretations of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. Initially used to justify segregation in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the Warren Court later relied on the Equal Protection Clause to support desegregation in Brown v. Board of Education (1954). More recently, in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023), the Supreme Court ruled that affirmative action programs are inconsistent with equal protection. These shifts in the interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause reflect how legal meaning is continuously shaped in response to broader extra-legal forces, such as political discourse, social movements, and the evolving structure of the political economy. For instance, the Plessy decision was deeply influenced by the prevailing forces of White supremacy and racial segregation, while the Brown ruling was shaped by the rise of the Civil Rights Movement and growing public opposition to institutionalized racism. More recently, the Students for Fair Admissions case reflects contemporary debates over racial equity and meritocracy, as well as backlash to affirmative action policies.
Butler’s novel illustrates how the capitalist workplace fundamentally shapes the legal understanding of human dignity within the U.S. political economy. In Parable, the workplace is not only a barrier to the characters’ independence and well-being but also reflects a society that prioritizes profit over people. Trapped in predatory systems driven by profit-seeking investors, the characters experience a profound sense of alienation. The wealthy retreat into gated communities, where they are insulated from the consequences of their exploitation and rely on private security that fuels growing state authoritarianism. In stark contrast, company town laborers and the street poor confront barbarism, cannibalism, and the rise of fascism—conditions that deny marginalized groups legal protections and recognition. This material predicament is the product of a society that views legal rights as contingent upon economic status. In turn, these economic relations influence how human dignity is legally interpreted and understood.
For some of the characters in Parable of the Sower, alienation from the capitalist workplace offers a form of freedom. Butler’s protagonist, Olamina, attracts followers through her visionary philosophy known as Earthseed, which emphasizes adaptability and the need to reshape human society for the better. As she and her followers flee crumbling Southern California communities beset by crime and poverty, they embark on a quest northward in search of safety and stability. In Earthseed’s scripture, The Books of the Living, Olamina declares, “When no influence is strong enough [t]o unify people [t]hey divide. They struggle, [o]ne against one, [g]roup against group, [f]or survival, position, power.” Rejecting capitalism therefore becomes a source of social solidarity for Olamina and her followers. By embracing Earthseed’s principles, her followers seek to create a community grounded in mutual support and cooperation, ultimately allowing for the individual freedom that capitalism promises but often fails to deliver.
Second, the Afrofuturist legal critique posits that law actively shapes social conditions and material realities, reflecting and reinforcing existing power structures. We might call this law’s constitutive role. For example, the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC (2010) functionally redefined corporate personhood and altered campaign financing, reinforcing the political influence of the wealthy. While the majority opinion makes no explicit mention of corporate personhood, by holding that speech rights do not depend on the identity of the speaker, it effectively extended First Amendment protections to corporate political spending. This decision has profoundly altered American campaign finance, leading to the creation of Super PACs and intensifying debates about the role of money in politics and the nature of corporate rights in a democratic society.
The constitutive role of law is central in Butler’s dystopian future, which illustrates how law in capitalist economies contributes to the alienation many workers experience in their daily lives. The state’s legal framework not only facilitates corporate dominance but also actively drives tensions between workers and their employers. This conflict between workers and corporations results in extreme wealth disparities and widespread disengagement from political life, exacerbated by a pervasive lack of faith in government and dwindling resources. As Olamina’s father observes, “Politicians and big corporations get the bread, and we get the circuses.” Meanwhile, the government’s market-based solutions to poverty, such as cutting minimum wage and dismantling environmental and worker-protection laws, reflect a broader political ideology that favors accumulation by the wealthy at the expense of ordinary citizens. Consequently, many workers in the novel find themselves trapped in debt slavery or stripped of their agency, revealing how corporate dominance erodes democracy and human dignity.
Third, the Afrofuturist critique suggests that law legitimates and enforces “essential legal relations” that define social existence in any historical period. We might refer to this as law’s legitimating function. This function involves establishing normative frameworks that justify and sustain social structures. For instance, Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) institutionalized racial segregation under the doctrine of “separate but equal,” entrenching racial hierarchies and legitimating systemic oppression. Conversely, Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) recognized same-sex marriage, redefining legal norms to promote greater inclusivity. In Parable of the Sower, Butler highlights law’s legitimating function by illustrating how neoliberal visions of the state normalize involuntary human sacrifice, framing such practices as a rational response to the social and economic crises produced by the market itself. This normalization reflects how legal frameworks can uphold and perpetuate violence against marginalized groups under the guise of maintaining law and social order.
However, Butler’s Afrofuturist critique also offers a path to resist this exploitation. In Parable of the Sower, Olamina’s Earthseed community strives “to learn to shape God with forethought, care, and work; to educate and benefit their community, their families, and themselves; and to contribute to the fulfillment of the Destiny.” As Jerry Phillips notes, Olamina articulates a “race-transcendent communalist ethics” that finds hope in even the bleakest circumstances. Through Olamina’s narrative, Butler emphasizes collective agency—not individualism—as the foundation of freedom and radical possibility. This collective agency manifests in the community’s efforts to establish equitable labor practices and mutual support systems that counteract the exploitative nature of the capitalist workplace.
Asserting Black Humanity
These examples highlight how Afrofuturist fiction can embody ideas that are familiar to critical legal theorists, such as the indeterminacy of law. However, Afrofuturist works also offer distinctive insights by centering the lived experiences and radical imaginations of Black people, in turn suggesting different proposals for political reform. That focus should lead legal scholars to re-think our understanding of many of the central moments in our constitutional and legal history. Take, for instance, the dialectical process that led to the passage of the 13th Amendment.
The 13th Amendment’s Enforcement Clause played a crucial role in reconciling the conflict between America’s professed liberal values and its entrenched racial caste system. By granting Congress the power to “enforce this article by appropriate legislation,” it significantly expanded federal authority in the post-Civil War era. This provision empowered Congress to enact programs designed to transform aspects of society tainted by the slavery system, going beyond merely ending legal slavery to address its lasting social, economic, and cultural impacts. It provided a constitutional basis for challenging both overt discrimination and more subtle forms of racial oppression, offering a mechanism to begin closing the gap between America’s founding ideals and the reality of its racial hierarchy.
Reconstruction era debates centered on the contested meaning of liberty, equality, and citizenship. The formation of the Freedmen’s Bureau reflected substantive demands for Black voices to have a meaningful role in shaping a new political economy and producing legal meaning. Yet, interpretations of the Declaration of Independence’s promise of human equality did not meaningfully incorporate the views, experiences, or imagined futures of Black activists and abolitionists.
Frederick Douglass, for example, can be understood as an early Afrofuturist writer and thinker, as he engaged in a profound critique of the law and political economy of White supremacy while envisioning radically different futures to address the oppression experienced by Black people. In 1857, he captured the depths of what was at stake by highlighting the distinction between the abstract concept of “liberty” embedded in founding documents and the more radical notion of possessing “the dignity of striving to be free.” Douglass argued that true freedom involves both agency and equality, a notion that the Black abolitionist movement fought to realize. As he declared in his autobiography, “A man without force is without the essential dignity of humanity.” However, this radical Afrofuturist vision of law was stifled by White supremacist backlash after Reconstruction. Instead of critically engaging with Douglass’s vision of human dignity, white supremacists imposed new forms of Black subjugation, such as convict leasing, disenfranchisement, and Jim Crow terrorism.
The Afrofuturist critique of law’s dialectical, constitutive, and legitimating nature was not merely ignored after Reconstruction; it was often intentionally sidelined, perhaps best epitomized by the Wilmington Coup of 1898. This violent overthrow revealed how legal structures were co-opted to impose White supremacy and suppress Black political progress. By dismantling Black governance, the coup exemplified how the law was manipulated to stifle Black autonomy and foreclose any Afrofuturist vision of a more just and equitable society.
The unfinished struggle to assert Black humanity and achieve true freedom gives Butler’s Parable of the Sower its haunting power. At its core, Olamina’s journey from the suburbs of Los Angeles to Northern California with her followers is about reimagining what it means to be human, reclaiming equal dignity in a decaying capitalist system. Like Frederick Douglass, Olamina believes external freedom from oppression—the mere fight for survival—means little without the deeper internal freedom to define oneself. Her commune endures by collectively seeking “[a]nother place. Another way. Something!”
Earthseed teaches that communities must “[e]mbrace diversity. Unite—[o]r be divided, robbed, ruled, killed [b]y those who see you as prey.” By taking collective responsibility, they avert disaster. As Jim Miller notes, Earthseed’s new religion rejects traditional hierarchies and embraces “radical reciprocity,” where freedom comes with accountability. Earthseed’s message—that a community’s primary duty is to protect its children—suggests that true freedom lies not only in self-determination but also in the willingness to sacrifice for a greater good. The Afrofuturist critique thereby suggests that embracing self-sacrifice can become a path to freedom.
Capitalist Exploitation
The novel’s commitment to human dignity provides the source of its most trenchant criticism of capitalism. Plagued by “hyperempathy syndrome,” Olamina is forced to viscerally share in the suffering of others. Even the death of a stray dog is agony, an ongoing reminder of the unnecessary cruelties that humanity visits upon the vulnerable in modern society, as well as the dehumanizing impact of societal neglect.
In highlighting such cruelties and Olamina’s unusual sensitivity, Butler exposes the strategies of avoidance we normally employ to deal with the pain that surrounds us. Consider, for instance, the suffering of the many Black Americans who were hailed as “essential workers” during the COVID-19 pandemic: the stories of people like Annie Grant, the 55-year-old meat processing plant worker who succumbed to the virus after being pressured to return to work without adequate protections, or Jason Hargrove, the Detroit bus driver who died within days of pleading on social media about being forced into unsafe viral exposure.
By labeling marginalized workers as essential while ignoring their suffering, we project our discomfort with the capitalist system onto them. The term serves not to genuinely honor the pain visited upon exploited workers, but to salve the alienation that we all feel toward an economic system that assigns value based on an individual’s capacity for productive output. This mirrors James Baldwin‘s argument that “the ni**er is a white invention … white people invented him out of terrible necessities of their own,” reflecting a collective unwillingness to reckon with the exploitation required to sustain capitalist economies. We continue to hide from the truth.
Butler’s critique warns against romanticizing essential workers’ sacrifices. When Olamina describes her society as a “carcass covered in maggots” or observes that “debt slavery” has become the norm, she is not critiquing a temporary aberration from the continual progress of society. She is not calling for Black excellence, enhanced financial literacy, or for workers to pull harder on their bootstraps. Rather, she is providing an indictment of a capitalist political and economic system that is fundamentally rotten at its core, premised on injustice, violence, and the dehumanizing denigration of entire peoples as disposable sources of labor to be brutalized and consumed.
* * *
The Afrofuturist project should not, however, be reduced to just a critique of the capitalist system. Instead, it also serves as a powerful platform to imagine alternatives to such a system. By re-envisioning humanity’s collective future, Butler and other Afrofuturist theorists suggest alternative political, legal, and economic systems that would center marginalized voices and prioritize human dignity and social justice. This forward-looking vision includes a radical redefinition of work, labor rights, and social relations.
Butler’s Parable of the Sower thus serves as both a critique and a call to action. It demands that readers confront the pervasive exploitation inherent in contemporary capitalist systems, while also challenging them to envision and work towards more equitable futures. The novel’s portrayal of a decayed, fractured society forces readers to reckon with the way capitalism produces widespread human suffering. At the same time, it provides a vision of hope and resistance, offering a blueprint for a world where true human dignity and collective well-being can be achieved.
For Butler’s Olamina, that vision is to “take root among the stars.” For us, who knows. But it must be a vision premised not on mitigating fundamental contradictions through superficial reforms, but instead on resolving them through a Reconstructionist approach that enables collective human thriving.
