Tolkien's sci-fi shows we need only one ring

Mail & Guardian

4 days ago

(Graphic: John McCann/M&G)
I love science fiction movies and series. But what always bothered me was that as imaginative, forward-thinking, inventive and superlatively intelligent as the worlds and multiple universes they created, it was no match for the diversity we have on Earth and humankind.
Even my current favourite Apple TV+'s Foundation, based on the genius Isaac Asimov's 1950s book series, cannot create a world or planet as diverse as ours. Generally speaking, movies and TV series have just one type of people per planet. Indeed, a planet is often a single city.
When I read politics and philosophy at university, I was introduced to Douglas Adams and his amazing book series The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, the 'trilogy in four parts'. It was through Adams' Hitchhiker's books that I began to recognise the lessons I had been picking up from Star Trek and Star Wars movies.
All the stories involved good fighting against an overwhelming evil power, while they try to build a new society that is based on equality and freedom. There are obvious comparisons to South Africa's resistance against the apartheid government and military.
But some of the greatest minds cannot imagine a world as diverse as Earth's or conjure up a species with a multitude of cultures, nationalities and peoples as the human race.
It is British-South African writer JRR Tolkien, in The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit, who is able to best reflect the many sides of humankind. In truth though, Tolkien's books are fantasy and, strictly speaking, not sci-fi. But I like to think of fantasy and sci-fi as close cousins.
Although Tolkien wrote the books during World War II, he strongly denied they were an allegory of that war. But it would not be incorrect to reflect that Tolkien's experiences in World War II influenced his writing. So maybe the evil Sauron was not necessarily Hitler, but it is not too farfetched to relate Sauron's evil purpose to build a world that serves him and over which he has complete control to the objectives of Nazi fascism.
We should not focus on the banal evil of Sauron or his minions, the Orcs. There have been articles accusing Tolkien of being racist in his descriptions of the Orcs. But thinking of the Orcs as black people is a cop-out and not a useful unpacking of The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit. It is in The Hobbit that Tolkien explores and describes the inequality of the world and how accepting we are of the inequality, despite supposedly fighting against it.
It is the experiences of the dwarfs and the difficulties they face that reflect our world; one in which those who have precious resources are made to mine them and hand them over to the elves so that they can rule the world forever.
Tolkien presents the elves as close to immortal and beautiful, almost God-like. The dwarfs are short and stumpy, nothing noble about them. They covet Earth's riches, but do not know how to develop them. So it's in the interests of all of Earth that the elves take these jewels to invent machinery and technology to make the world easier. But it requires the dwarfs to live in the dark, remain in the bowels of the mountains and mine the precious treasures.
The hobbits are of course, the simple rural and working class, who befriend the dwarfs and assist in creating a balance with their simple lives. Just when the opportunity of equality presents itself, the human penchant for greed takes over and this allows evil to reign.
The implication is clear: there can only be a semblance of equality. The elves rule (benevolently because they are naturally good, of course) and the dwarfs remain underground mining for the elves, while the rural and working class produce the goods and live in their Middle Earth. The elves like to say that if they are not revered and allowed to remain in charge then an evil Sauron will take over.
Our world today is not very different to what Tolkien reflected upon.
The instability in the world is not fuelled by US President Donald Trump, even though he benefits from it. The real fear for our elves (the political West) is that if the current path is allowed to continue it will result in them no longer being in charge. In their understanding they cannot exist unless they have hegemonic control of the world; it is the natural order of things. For them, Russia and China are Sauron, and it is in our interests to reinforce the West so that the 'evil' Russia and China do not take over.
If we look at our international multilateral system, we have to accept that even though it is stated that all countries are equal and sovereign, the multilateral institutions are deliberately created with structural inequalities. The obvious one is the United Nations, where it is only the UN Security Council that makes decisions that must be implemented. The resolutions of the UN General Assembly are ceremonial and no one is compelled to implement them. And the five permanent members of the UN Security Council possess a veto vote, which means all five must agree for a resolution to be passed.
The unequal power dynamic of the Security Council is generally catered for by creative means by all other multilateral institutions. Thus, the International Monetary Fund is always headed up by a European, who must be approved by the United States. The World Bank is always headed by an American. The International Criminal Court (ICC) must charge those the Security Council tells it to, even though not all the permanent members of the Security Council have ratified and signed the ICC's Rome Statute. Essentially, the inequality is multiplied and reinforced.
It is impossible that these unequal relations could go on forever. But, just like the elves regarded themselves as immortal, in reality the West and its leaders cannot understand why they are not liked. French leaders find it weird that former French colonies would prefer Beijing over Paris. The legions of Western sympathisers in Central and South America, as well as Africa and parts of South East Asia, have a difficult time trying to understand why the masses would cheer Putin and Xi Jinping, but not get excited by Joe Biden or Kamala Harris.
For too long we have regarded a see-saw as balance. A see-saw is unbalanced or, at most, an uneasy balance, where one is higher and the other lower, only for the reverse to occur. If one remains on top, the other at the bottom need only to walk away for the one on top to be brought back down to earth. As Tolkien's books reveal, we are made to believe that someone has to be on top or in charge for there to be stability and balance. But that is not stability, that is dominance expressed as stability.
Our three-legged potjie or four-legged chair is balance and stability. We need to reconstruct this world, so that it reflects not who is in charge or is the most powerful but rather how to ensure that everyone has a voice. Africa, together with Central and South America and parts of South East Asia, should not swop the dominance of the West for China, Russia and India. It is important that they join Brics, but they need to recreate the Non-Aligned Movement without India, Russia and China. They can provide Pakistan conditional membership because of its nuclear weapon capability. If Iran goes the nuclear route, they should also be treated in a similar manner.
The Gen-Z Non-Aligned Movement has to be different to its predecessors; it has to form a trade bloc. The non-nuclear political South has to either unite or accept that either the Western or Eastern elves remain in charge, and that we, like the dwarfs, must hide in the dark and only come out to praise them.
Donovan E Williams is a social commentator. @TheSherpaZA on X.