I think, from discussions you and I have had in the past, that you and I are seeing this on a somewhat different scale.
I'm not suggesting every book has to be Atlas Shrugged to be political. I am saying it's pretty much impossible to tell a story with meaningful conflict without that having some political position implicit, that is not entirely in the head of any given reader. The Dresden Files avoiding taking a specific position related to contemporary US politics does not make them apolitical, because Harry's strongly held personal moral beliefs, and the occasional thing Jim has said about his philosophy going into the books (such as free will being a good thing) are to my mind strongly political aspects.
If we micro-parse any conflict, it can eventually be considered "political." The great-great bastard grandpappy of all politics boils down to one person or group seeking to compel, coerce, or convince other people or groups to do something they weren't going to do otherwise. Even if it's just one proto-hominid trying to figure out how to get laid or to convince someone else in his troop to pick those pesky butt-lice off of him... it could by some stretch be defined as "political" in the minds of readers looking for a socio-political message.
To my mind it seems unambitious, to shrug one's shoulders and give up on the possibility of consciously doing something with those reactions, though. Given that the range of human reactions is such that one absolutely cannot please every possible reader, it seems worth thinking in terms of which readers one most cares about pleasing; for myself, as reader and writer both, the more ambitious something is, the more I will admire it (if not necessarily like it), and socio-political relevance would be a pretty large swathe of human nature and endeavour to decide not to try engaging with.
Unambitious to not try to engage with this or that faction? Personally, I'm interested in telling a story, building a world, and developing characters which will be engaging to people of opposing sociopolitical viewpoints, and to do so without relying on sociopolitical issues. They're too often merely a marketing crutch, a cheap marketing checklist. So I want to create an engaging story without pandering to any faction, without relying on being just another source of external validation for their views. It's easy to entertain someone you agree with, I want to entertain both people I agree, and disagree with. That's pretty darned ambitious. It's like brewing beer so good people who don't like you still ask that you be invited to parties in hopes you'll bring a few growlers.
And, as I mentioned before, quite a few readers will draw socio-political relevance into anything they read. I have a conflict between communities regarding resources... Some readers will doubtless decide that it's a Libertarian Screed Against Collectivism. And that'll alienate some, thrill others. Yet one faction's looked at the British East India Company as a "How To" guide, among other things trying to impose the equivalent of a "Salt Tax"... which in the minds of other readers will conjure a theme of anti-colonialism/anti-corporatism. And at the end of the day? Neither communityis entirely right or wrong, with good and noble people on both sides, as well as both sides having a few terrifying fiends.
And none of those percieved messages are my intention. I'm just leaving the crayons out and letting them draw what they please, becaues no matter what theme I actually wished to take, they'd do that anyway. Many people will only weigh a story according to how it can be viewed through their preferred socio-political lense. (I confess, it amuses me comparing the differing reactions and the vast discprenencies between how different people will view the same scene in terms of "theme" or "message."
Take 1984. Long held up as a cautionary tale denouncing socilism, communism, marxism, and likely a good number of other isms... but George Orwell was in actuality a devout socialist/anarchist who was attacking totolitarianism.
People
will find what they want in a story, often with no regard for the author's socio-political goals. Some will look for things that support their views, others are simply looking to be outraged at anything they can find that they think attacks their views. (Or doesn't try hard enough to support those views, which they will percieve as an "attack.")
But in terms of an overt or intentional effort to engage a socio-political faction, I don't bother. Because those people will conjure some way to engage themselves, so to speak.
It would need to be some pretty serious magic to provide a solid world-building back-up for how one gets an interstellar civilisation from pandas; their food requirements, environment, and habits are none of them particularly credible as liable to lead to a technological civilisation. I'll stick with my Alien Space Bats and Flying Squid from Space for the moment.
That's if you don't know about
Proto-Bamboo which not only nourishes them, but gives them the Mind Power to fend off the Nether-Koalas and their Anti-Eucolpytus Space Drives.
Believing that entirely beyond my control would be extremely depressing.
Oh, you can influence it to varying degrees, but see above, Orwell.
