Utopian Societies: An Analysis
Utopia is a concept which many people claim to aspire to. It is likely that there are very few people who if asked if they would like to live in a utopian society would say no. The odd thing is that the definition of what utopia actually is can be highly debatable. The term itself was coined by Thomas More. The word Utopia came from the word eutopia which means good place and the word eutopia which means no place. So, essentially More wanted to describe a place that was good but did not exist.
There are many different solutions or ideas for creating utopian societies. Large scale ideas do not seem to work very well for a variety of reasons. Forcing people into utopia is not only a difficult way to create a utopian society, but also …show more content…
inherently contradictory. One of the best solutions is one in which membership in the society is voluntary, and the size of the society is kept at a manageable number. This solution appears to be the only one that is truly feasible assuming that people are self interested.
The world which More created was kind of complicated. As far as laws go, there were very clear cut laws, but lawyers did not exist. Private property was allowed to exist because if there was common property, people would not work hard for the property that they had. Money also did not exist. All people were involved in some sort of farming as well as another trade. All Utopians only worked six hours a day. The other time that they spent was up to them, as long as they did something productive. This is a brief summary of what the conditions were like in More’s Utopia (More, 1852).
A more modern literary example of a utopian society is given in the book The Giver by Lois Lowry. Lowry describes a world that is much bleaker. In Lowry’s world, everybody is basically the same in talent and appearance. This makes it so that prejudice cannot exist. War has been eliminated entirely as has pain and hatred. The ability to choose ones’ career path has also been eliminated. Parents are not allowed to procreate independently, but instead must get their children from people whose job it is to have children (Lowry, 1993). Lowry’s book portrayed a society that was quite communistic.
Those are just a few solutions of how utopia can be achieved. Socialism could be considered utopian as well. These solutions are possible, but George Orwell might argue that they would be devoid of joy. Orwell wrote a paper called Why Socialists Don’t Believe in Fun in which he argues that it is impossible to describe a perfect world that also includes joy. Orwell uses Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol to illustrate that joy comes from having relief from pain, fear, hunger or other negative feelings. The fact that the Cratchit family has a feast on Christmas day brings them much joy because it is not something they normally get to enjoy. Orwell states it well when he says, “Nearly all creators of Utopia have resembled the man who has toothache, and therefore thinks happiness consists in not having toothache. They wanted to produce a perfect society by an endless continuation of something that had only been valuable because it was temporary.” (Orwell, 1943) That is to say that once pain, suffering and other afflictions have been eliminated for long enough, joy from the lack of those things will not be possible. Future generations would not have ever experienced these things and therefore be unable to appreciate the lack of them.
Even if it were possible to socially maintain a utopian society such as the one described above, experiments have shown that it is not economically feasible.
The most classic example of course is the former Soviet Union. Latin America has seen many experiments of a utopian society that use the socialist vehicle to arrive at those ends. Although it may not be economically feasible, many Latin American countries are still trying to achieve some sort of utopian state. Francisco Panizza wrote an article about how those on the left side of the political spectrum are finding ways to become powerful in politics once again. It is felt that although the socialist/communist experiments of the mid 1900s failed, that those in Latin America are still inclined to try and reach some sort of utopian state. Those from the leftist parties in Latin America are trying to redefine democracy and implement different types of economic systems (Panizza, 2005). It appears that a democratic style of utopia would provide a more viable option than a socialistic model would produce. However, there is not really a strong solution on how to eliminate social injustices such as prejudice and racism.
Latin America will still have trouble establishing utopian societies in their countries due to the difficulties involved with having such large numbers of people to work with. They do not have large numbers relative to other countries in the world, but only large in terms of trying to organize utopian …show more content…
societies. The reason for why large utopian societies just aren’t feasible will be discussed later on.
Another item that would be holding back these utopian societies would be the problem of collective action. Utopias require that all members be equal contributors to the society, or at least equally willing to participate in the utopian society. If there are members of the utopian society who are unwilling to do what is necessary for the betterment of the whole, then eventually the society will break down. Those members who do not wish to comply will have parasitic attitudes that will infect others to do the same. If the group were smaller, it would be easier to deal with such individuals. With smaller groups of people it would be easy to provide strong disincentives such as exile or even death to rebel against the ideals held by the society. Large groups of people would make it easier for dissenters to come together in attempts to overthrow the society.
One factor that would help to create a more viable utopian society would be the necessity for membership in such a society to be voluntary. Robert Nozick, a famous libertarian, called for a completely libertarian state. What this allowed for however, was the organization of groups that did not follow libertarian ideals. While the state had no power for compulsory means of creating a utopia, people could voluntarily join with groups that held those ideals. People would also be able to move freely between the different utopian groups for trade or other purposes. The main purpose of the government would be to enforce contracts between individuals (Nozick, 1977).
This solution for a utopian society has the most potential to work. The people in this society would have mutual goals and similar interests. Working together they could help maximize one another’s utility functions. Another thing that would be required for making this type of society work would be the size of the society. The smaller the society, the more efficient the utopia will be. The social pressure to be involved in the society will be much stronger with smaller groups. As the group grows larger, it will be easier for free loaders or others that are not willing to contribute to maintain hidden from the social pressure.
Utopia is a concept that is extremely difficult to put into action. Without manageable numbers and voluntary enrollment in the utopian society, it appears to simply not be feasible. However, the principles of a utopian society could very easily be transferred into the business world. A firm has manageable numbers, voluntary enrollment, enforceable laws and the ability to punish members of the firm by exiling, or firing, them. It is also quite possible to apply the principles of utopia to a family unit. Although utopia as a conceptual idea may not be very useful socially, it certainly has uses in other aspects of our lives.
Works Cited
More, Thomas (1852).
Utopia. London, England: M.S. Rickerby.
Lowry, Lois (1993). The Giver. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Orwell, George (1943, December 20). George Orwell - Why socialists don 't believe in fun. Retrieved April 3, 2009, from www.orwell.ru Web site: http://www.orwell.ru/library/articles/socialists/english/e_fun
Panizza, F. (2005, December). Unarmed Utopia Revisited: The Resurgence of Left-of-Centre Politics in Latin America. Political Studies, 53(4), 716-734. Retrieved April 2, 2009, doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2005.00553.x
Nozick, Robert (1977). Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York, New York: Basic
Books.
There are many different solutions or ideas for creating utopian societies. Large scale ideas do not seem to work very well for a variety of reasons. Forcing people into utopia is not only a difficult way to create a utopian society, but also …show more content…
inherently contradictory. One of the best solutions is one in which membership in the society is voluntary, and the size of the society is kept at a manageable number. This solution appears to be the only one that is truly feasible assuming that people are self interested.
The world which More created was kind of complicated. As far as laws go, there were very clear cut laws, but lawyers did not exist. Private property was allowed to exist because if there was common property, people would not work hard for the property that they had. Money also did not exist. All people were involved in some sort of farming as well as another trade. All Utopians only worked six hours a day. The other time that they spent was up to them, as long as they did something productive. This is a brief summary of what the conditions were like in More’s Utopia (More, 1852).
A more modern literary example of a utopian society is given in the book The Giver by Lois Lowry. Lowry describes a world that is much bleaker. In Lowry’s world, everybody is basically the same in talent and appearance. This makes it so that prejudice cannot exist. War has been eliminated entirely as has pain and hatred. The ability to choose ones’ career path has also been eliminated. Parents are not allowed to procreate independently, but instead must get their children from people whose job it is to have children (Lowry, 1993). Lowry’s book portrayed a society that was quite communistic.
Those are just a few solutions of how utopia can be achieved. Socialism could be considered utopian as well. These solutions are possible, but George Orwell might argue that they would be devoid of joy. Orwell wrote a paper called Why Socialists Don’t Believe in Fun in which he argues that it is impossible to describe a perfect world that also includes joy. Orwell uses Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol to illustrate that joy comes from having relief from pain, fear, hunger or other negative feelings. The fact that the Cratchit family has a feast on Christmas day brings them much joy because it is not something they normally get to enjoy. Orwell states it well when he says, “Nearly all creators of Utopia have resembled the man who has toothache, and therefore thinks happiness consists in not having toothache. They wanted to produce a perfect society by an endless continuation of something that had only been valuable because it was temporary.” (Orwell, 1943) That is to say that once pain, suffering and other afflictions have been eliminated for long enough, joy from the lack of those things will not be possible. Future generations would not have ever experienced these things and therefore be unable to appreciate the lack of them.
Even if it were possible to socially maintain a utopian society such as the one described above, experiments have shown that it is not economically feasible.
The most classic example of course is the former Soviet Union. Latin America has seen many experiments of a utopian society that use the socialist vehicle to arrive at those ends. Although it may not be economically feasible, many Latin American countries are still trying to achieve some sort of utopian state. Francisco Panizza wrote an article about how those on the left side of the political spectrum are finding ways to become powerful in politics once again. It is felt that although the socialist/communist experiments of the mid 1900s failed, that those in Latin America are still inclined to try and reach some sort of utopian state. Those from the leftist parties in Latin America are trying to redefine democracy and implement different types of economic systems (Panizza, 2005). It appears that a democratic style of utopia would provide a more viable option than a socialistic model would produce. However, there is not really a strong solution on how to eliminate social injustices such as prejudice and racism.
Latin America will still have trouble establishing utopian societies in their countries due to the difficulties involved with having such large numbers of people to work with. They do not have large numbers relative to other countries in the world, but only large in terms of trying to organize utopian …show more content…
societies. The reason for why large utopian societies just aren’t feasible will be discussed later on.
Another item that would be holding back these utopian societies would be the problem of collective action. Utopias require that all members be equal contributors to the society, or at least equally willing to participate in the utopian society. If there are members of the utopian society who are unwilling to do what is necessary for the betterment of the whole, then eventually the society will break down. Those members who do not wish to comply will have parasitic attitudes that will infect others to do the same. If the group were smaller, it would be easier to deal with such individuals. With smaller groups of people it would be easy to provide strong disincentives such as exile or even death to rebel against the ideals held by the society. Large groups of people would make it easier for dissenters to come together in attempts to overthrow the society.
One factor that would help to create a more viable utopian society would be the necessity for membership in such a society to be voluntary. Robert Nozick, a famous libertarian, called for a completely libertarian state. What this allowed for however, was the organization of groups that did not follow libertarian ideals. While the state had no power for compulsory means of creating a utopia, people could voluntarily join with groups that held those ideals. People would also be able to move freely between the different utopian groups for trade or other purposes. The main purpose of the government would be to enforce contracts between individuals (Nozick, 1977).
This solution for a utopian society has the most potential to work. The people in this society would have mutual goals and similar interests. Working together they could help maximize one another’s utility functions. Another thing that would be required for making this type of society work would be the size of the society. The smaller the society, the more efficient the utopia will be. The social pressure to be involved in the society will be much stronger with smaller groups. As the group grows larger, it will be easier for free loaders or others that are not willing to contribute to maintain hidden from the social pressure.
Utopia is a concept that is extremely difficult to put into action. Without manageable numbers and voluntary enrollment in the utopian society, it appears to simply not be feasible. However, the principles of a utopian society could very easily be transferred into the business world. A firm has manageable numbers, voluntary enrollment, enforceable laws and the ability to punish members of the firm by exiling, or firing, them. It is also quite possible to apply the principles of utopia to a family unit. Although utopia as a conceptual idea may not be very useful socially, it certainly has uses in other aspects of our lives.
Works Cited
More, Thomas (1852).
Utopia. London, England: M.S. Rickerby.
Lowry, Lois (1993). The Giver. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Orwell, George (1943, December 20). George Orwell - Why socialists don 't believe in fun. Retrieved April 3, 2009, from www.orwell.ru Web site: http://www.orwell.ru/library/articles/socialists/english/e_fun
Panizza, F. (2005, December). Unarmed Utopia Revisited: The Resurgence of Left-of-Centre Politics in Latin America. Political Studies, 53(4), 716-734. Retrieved April 2, 2009, doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2005.00553.x
Nozick, Robert (1977). Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York, New York: Basic
Books.