Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

Why did science fiction stop moving forward?
lareviewofbooks.org

I'm fairly literate in Liberal Arts English, but I don't follow what this means, especially as the context around it seems to complain about portrayals of race. What does it mean to "believe in 'culture' with a Victorian faith in white mythologies"? What does that modifier mean about one's belief in culture (whatever that even means, all on its own—do the scare quotes mean we're not supposed to think culture's a thing anymore, or is this a hardcore we-can-never-judge-a-culture-as-inferior thing the writer's assuming we all buy?). How does that relate to the rest of the paragraph?

It does not look at the broader question of "why did science fiction stop moving forward", but mostly Star Trek, with a few references to Battlestar Galactica and The Expanse.

I write this because when I saw "L.A. Review of Books" I thought it would include SF in books, and touch on things like Stephenson's Hieroglyph Project (See http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dear-science-fi... - "Dear Science Fiction Writers: Stop Being So Pessimistic!".)

Edit: Ah, the usual SJW refrain. Silence any criticism via flags, -1's and other tools available, instead of discussing why the quote is right/not and what it means.

But the article is about television. I really am not qualified to say much about television other than until very recently, it was very hard to have a hit TV show that only appealed to a niche audience. A series faithfully based on "The Martian" isn't likely to get a slot in prime time. The closest you'll get is so-called soft science fiction, which presents stories that happen to be set in unfamiliar locations (usually space), but where science has no influence on the story.

Maybe there's a chance now, with a very different distribution model, but even if hard science fiction fans can be perfectly targeted through Netflix or Amazon, special effects will keep production costs high.