I never like liberal movies where mankind devolves into the gutter in the future.
I prefer the future as portrayed in Star Trek, where mankind is prosperous and the leaders of the universe.
Of course that Star Trek future came AFTER mankind devolved into the gutter and managed to rise back up. Blade Runner humans were already in space, they could just as easily have turned into Star Trek mankind.
The only difference is that San Fran occasionally gets overrun with these insect creatures who take over the High Command and in Blade Runner the Chinese own the streets ~ and that's because they are not as rich as the white people who have moved to the stars.
I do believe Africa is a dangerous radioactive waste ~ the Africans not having succeeded incontrolling thermonuclear weapons. In Star Trek note that Jordi and other blacks are treated like they belong to an endangered species. There are so few of them Jordi couldn't even get an eyeball for transplant ~ no one compatible!
They are missing completely in Blade Runner.
Then, there are the Arabs ~ there are NO ARABS in either theatrical event, nor any Moslems!
Both stories draw from the same imagined reality.
I hear you, but Star Trek is also a liberal’s wet dream. The worst liberals I know say things like “why can’t society be more like Star Trek?”
Which is a warning sign. Their Star Trek is a unrealistic utopia (no money, everyone works to better themselves) mixed with a military dictatorship (you all better do what the Captain says).
A society with your aspects of Star Trek (a prosperous meritocracy) would be fine - don’t misunderstand me - but I worry about the liberals’ take on it. They have a horrific blood-spattered record when it comes to trying to force society to adopt their utopias.