> a particularly diverse set of white men. I don't even really agree here - there are a few that stand out, but I'm reminded of something I read in an intervie

> a particularly diverse set of white men. I don't even really agree here - there are a few that stand out, but I'm reminded of something I read in an interview with Samuel R. Delaney recently: > Understand that, since the late ’30s, that community, that world had been largely Jewish, highly liberal, and with notable exceptions leaned well to the left. Even its right-wing mavens, Robert Heinlein or Poul Anderson (or, indeed, Campbell), would have far preferred to go to a leftist party and have a friendly argument with some smart socialists than actually to hang out with the right-wing and libertarian organizations which they may well have supported on principle and, in Heinlein’s case, with donations. (from "Discourse in an Older Sense" included in "The Atheist in the Attic".) SF writers up through basically the New Wave (and the context of Delaney's quote is Pohl's infamous excoriation of the New Wave) were a largely insular social and philosophical group, even though they had strident political differences. And even some the more modern authors in this list - e.g. Crichton, Howey - still fit firmly within that world view. Regardless of whether they lean left or right they're positivist, technocratic, Enlightenment-focused, often leaning towards scientism, etc. That's why something like "Dangerous Visions" was such a provocative title - the idea that the future would be maybe not great and advanced technology probably wouldn't help was a "dangerous" idea for the sf culture at the time.