In Utopia, politics divide itself into the categories of crime, punishment and warfare. Crime in Utopia presents itself as it would in any other society, however, unlike the punishment in certain societies of that time period where the death penalty was common, Utopian criminals are put to use as slaves. Unlike in other societies, becoming a slave in Utopia does not depend on your families previous social standing or the colour of your skin. This society reflects the futuristic ideology of an egalitarian society where no one is considered a lesser citizen until given a reason. Furthermore, the only laws that exist in Utopia are comprehensible to all citizens in the society. Laws are interpreted in the simplest sense to project equality for all citizens rather than only to be understood by certain individuals as this would increase inequalities. War in Utopia is only used as a last resort; when such measures are required, Utopians choose to fight with skill over force. It was More’s belief that human beings are inherently evil creatures. This evidence shows us that Utopia is can be considered a satire of political culture of London in More’s time. If we consider humans as More did as evil, we can assume that even Utopians are evil at their cores. Therefor it is the physical landscape and politics of Utopia that must be considered perfect or ideal. Their method of control must be more effective, which makes them a …show more content…
There is no preference given to social status when educating the youth of Utopia. As all Utopians are seen as equal, they are also all given the same priority to be educated however the privilege to a higher education is granted to few. Unlike European philosophy, Utopians focus on the pursuit of happiness, which in their perspective is the most important mantra to life. The continuation of education in Utopian philosophy is entirely different from what is studied in Europe. More’s ideas of romanticism appear before their traditional time in the eighteenth century. By creating this image of perfection in all aspects of life, More exposes his highly critical views on his own place in society. In a way, by showing this idealistic world he is criticizing his own monarchy based government either in the view that this is the way that society should be run or merely showing perfection as an unattainable dream. It is possible that More could be commenting on the Christian lifestyle, questioning whether or not it is in fact as ideal as it might seem on the outside. Furthermore, we can come to the conclusion that it is impossible to live in the Christian way and also in the way of the kings. In the first book, Thomas More and Raphael Hithloday come to the conclusion that consulting kings on philosophy is an impossible task because a king will only hear what he wants to and