Thomas Mores Utopia and Machiavellis The Prince ideas differ on various subjects. They suggest different kinds of societies that would be ideal for people. While The Prince emphasizes power, its acquisition and maintenance, Utopia leans more on a communal society where no one owns anything. A question that one can ask himself is one that considers the effects of the two different philosophies recommended considering the political, economic and social wellbeing of society.
The Prince has suggested several guidelines for modern states. The main thesis in this book is that the end justifies the means. In this regard, power is the center point of any leadership. The use of force to perpetuate power is more important than the rule of law. A strong defense and military system is therefore recommended. This is a good idea considering some factors. First, Citizens of any country need to take pride in their country and believe that their country has the capacity to defend itself and enhance its interests. Secondly, military strength and aggression would protect and increase a countrys resources in conquered lands. This will reduce the tax burden on citizens besides providing resources for the government to provide essential services and improve the quality of life of its citizens. History has shown that not a single kingdom has been able to stand without a strong military. Even in the modern world, countries are strengthening their military capacity on a daily basis. (Machiavelli, 1515, p.110)
When it comes to ethics, he suggests that the prince should only be concerned with actions that are beneficial to a leader and ones that promote the well-being of his state. Every country has people of diverse backgrounds and opinions. These are people who may not even have all information on some issues. At the end of the day, however, a leader needs to make decisions that may contradict some good virtues. He does not need to be virtuous but may need to appear so. Citizens of any state judge their leaders on perceptions rather than on reality. It is only a leader who does not strive to please everyone and makes difficult but informed choices that will automatically contradict some values he holds who can provide effective leadership and command trust from citizens. (Machiavelli, 1515, p.110)
Machiavelli emphasizes the importance of a leader to guard about being over-generous to his citizens. Being over-generous to citizens has some obvious drawbacks. Such kind of a leader is likely to feed on peoples praise of him which is a foolish kind of leadership. Resources will also be strained raising taxes in the process thus overburdening citizens. As may arise in many cases, this kind of generosity may reduce attracting resentment from citizens. (Machiavelli, 1515, p.112)
A leader who is feared more than loved is likely to be more efficient in running a state. This is especially important in the military ranks. Military persons who do not fear their leader are likely to revolt against him with a possibility of overthrowing their leader as it has happened in several countries around the world. Military traditions in many countries that allow things like a parade inspection are among the methods employed to promote a leaders command over military forces. Likewise, important government officials need to fear their leaders; this will ensure that they carry out government decisions dedicatedly. This could be the only way to ensure that government policy is implemented at all ranks and levels. Whats more? A government that fears its leader is a government that is unified on all issues. However, leaders need to take care so that this fear they command is not transformed to hate. They should also not interfere in peoples property or affairs without cause. (Machiavelli, 1515, p.120)
Among qualities suggested by people around the world for their leaders is that their leader should be someone who keeps his/her word. This quality is recommended in the Prince. Since people will judge their leader by what they perceive of him/her, it is important for a leader to create an illusion of keeping his word. This should apply unless it is very necessary for a leader to do otherwise. Keeping your word as a leader will attract trust from citizens. Moreover, this virtue is likely to extend to other government officials and citizens. (Machiavelli, 1515, p.121)
Mores book suggests an ideal society where every person works hard. Labour is a way of promoting national cohesion and no one has any excuse for being idle. Such a society is likely to be very productive boosting a states economy. Social ills like theft are also eliminated in such an arrangement. Allowing people to own private property promotes hard work, provides employment and encourages creativity. (More, 1852, p. 126)
Utopia on the other hand is based on principles aimed at eliminating poverty in an ideal society. The primary principle is that no one owns anything and therefore no one lacks anything. All resources and wealth are nationally owned. Shortages are thus eliminated since almost anything does not have value. (More, 1852, p. 126)
In other republics practically everyone knows that, if he doesnt look out for himself, hell starve to death, however prosperous his country may be. Hes therefore compelled to give his own interests priority over those of the public; that is, of other people. But in Utopia, where everythings under public ownership, no one has any fear of going short, as long as the public storehouses are full. Everyone gets a fair share, so there are never any poor men or beggars. Nobody owns anything, but everyone is rich for what greater wealth can there be than cheerfulness, peace of mind, and freedom from anxiety? What greater wealth can there be than cheerfulness, peace of mind, and freedom from anxiety? (More, 1852, p. 128)
Evils witnessed in the capitalist world like greed are thus eliminated. Everyone has a responsibility for every other person. Misery and suffering of citizens under the burden of a few individuals who control most of the national resources are also eliminated. This can be a happy and caring society that takes care of everyone.
One of the key principles of utopia is the principle of universal labor. Under this arrangement, all people with exceptions of a few like scholars must work and enjoy goods produced from communal labor . (More, 1852, p. 130) However, Utopian religion and ethics encourage a good life free from labor and spent on entertainment. This can check against greed and promote the general health and the wellbeing of citizens. Instances, where people break their backs at the expense of more pressing issues like family, is therefore greatly minimized.
One is encouraged to be moderate while seeking social pleasures. These pleasures should not interfere with the pleasures of other people. No one is forced to follow a certain religion or impose his beliefs on others. This ensures that people enjoy their freedoms without interfering with the freedoms of others hence promoting peoples rights. Evils witnessed where millions of people have been killed or discriminated against because of their faiths are thus eliminated. Among principles suggested is that the highest form of pleasure is achieved when one sacrifices his pleasures for the sake of others happiness would promote selflessness. This should be displayed at the government level where leadership is entirely based on serving the needs of the society to society members who care for each other. (More, 1852, p. 140)
In Utopia, the family is viewed very differently from how we know it to be. It is organized to meet the needs of the state. For example, a child who prefers to be a woodworker would be moved to a woodworker family . (More, 1852, p.154) While a wife joins her husbands household, males remain in their family under the guard of their oldest male relative. One advantage of this arrangement is that it would promote unity in society since relations are not entirely based on blood. Emphasis on a family creates a good grassroots structure for implementing government policy. Order, discipline and promotion of talent are also enhanced considering the existing hierarchy of command and specialization of labor under specific families.
Conclusion
Looking at our current world one is likely to note an intermingling of both Utopian and The Prince ideas. I am even perplexed at how two different ideologies that appear too divergent on specific issues have intermingled. Looking at American society, for example, it is a society that encourages democracy and human rights based on capitalism. It is also a tolerant society that silently encourages pleasure and entertainment as long as these pleasures do not interfere with other peoples pleasures. These are both Utopian and Machiavellis ideas. While our society is capitalist, we are now recommending and implementing programs that are more communal. This includes suggested health programs by the government that would provide health services for Every American. We may merge more of these two ideas including others as we head towards globalization and as we face new challenges.
Thomas Mores Utopia and Machiavellis The Prince ideas differ on various subjects. They suggest different kinds of societies that would be ideal for people. While The Prince emphasizes power, its acquisition and maintenance, Utopia leans more on a communal society where no one owns anything. A question that one can ask himself is one that considers the effects of the two different philosophies recommended considering the political, economic and social wellbeing of society.
The Prince has suggested several guidelines for modern states. The main thesis in this book is that the end justifies the means. In this regard, power is the center point of any leadership. The use of force to perpetuate power is more important than the rule of law. A strong defense and military system is therefore recommended. This is a good idea considering some factors. First, Citizens of any country need to take pride in their country and believe that their country has the capacity to defend itself and enhance its interests. Secondly, military strength and aggression would protect and increase a countrys resources in conquered lands. This will reduce the tax burden on citizens besides providing resources for the government to provide essential services and improve the quality of life of its citizens. History has shown that not a single kingdom has been able to stand without a strong military. Even in the modern world, countries are strengthening their military capacity on a daily basis. (Machiavelli, 1515, p.110)
When it comes to ethics, he suggests that the prince should only be concerned with actions that are beneficial to a leader and ones that promote the well-being of his state. Every country has people of diverse backgrounds and opinions. These are people who may not even have all information on some issues. At the end of the day, however, a leader needs to make decisions that may contradict some good virtues. He does not need to be virtuous but may need to appear so. Citizens of any state judge their leaders on perceptions rather than on reality. It is only a leader who does not strive to please everyone and makes difficult but informed choices that will automatically contradict some values he holds who can provide effective leadership and command trust from citizens. (Machiavelli, 1515, p.110)
Machiavelli emphasizes the importance of a leader to guard about being over-generous to his citizens. Being over-generous to citizens has some obvious drawbacks. Such kind of a leader is likely to feed on peoples praise of him which is a foolish kind of leadership. Resources will also be strained raising taxes in the process thus overburdening citizens. As may arise in many cases, this kind of generosity may reduce attracting resentment from citizens. (Machiavelli, 1515, p.112)
A leader who is feared more than loved is likely to be more efficient in running a state. This is especially important in the military ranks. Military persons who do not fear their leader are likely to revolt against him with a possibility of overthrowing their leader as it has happened in several countries around the world. Military traditions in many countries that allow things like a parade inspection are among the methods employed to promote a leaders command over military forces. Likewise, important government officials need to fear their leaders; this will ensure that they carry out government decisions dedicatedly. This could be the only way to ensure that government policy is implemented at all ranks and levels. Whats more? A government that fears its leader is a government that is unified on all issues. However, leaders need to take care so that this fear they command is not transformed to hate. They should also not interfere in peoples property or affairs without cause. (Machiavelli, 1515, p.120)
Among qualities suggested by people around the world for their leaders is that their leader should be someone who keeps his/her word. This quality is recommended in the Prince. Since people will judge their leader by what they perceive of him/her, it is important for a leader to create an illusion of keeping his word. This should apply unless it is very necessary for a leader to do otherwise. Keeping your word as a leader will attract trust from citizens. Moreover, this virtue is likely to extend to other government officials and citizens. (Machiavelli, 1515, p.121)
Mores book suggests an ideal society where every person works hard. Labour is a way of promoting national cohesion and no one has any excuse for being idle. Such a society is likely to be very productive boosting a states economy. Social ills like theft are also eliminated in such an arrangement. Allowing people to own private property promotes hard work, provides employment and encourages creativity. (More, 1852, p. 126)
Utopia on the other hand is based on principles aimed at eliminating poverty in an ideal society. The primary principle is that no one owns anything and therefore no one lacks anything. All resources and wealth are nationally owned. Shortages are thus eliminated since almost anything does not have value. (More, 1852, p. 126)
In other republics practically everyone knows that, if he doesnt look out for himself, hell starve to death, however prosperous his country may be. Hes therefore compelled to give his own interests priority over those of the public; that is, of other people. But in Utopia, where everythings under public ownership, no one has any fear of going short, as long as the public storehouses are full. Everyone gets a fair share, so there are never any poor men or beggars. Nobody owns anything, but everyone is rich for what greater wealth can there be than cheerfulness, peace of mind, and freedom from anxiety? What greater wealth can there be than cheerfulness, peace of mind, and freedom from anxiety? (More, 1852, p. 128)
Evils witnessed in the capitalist world like greed are thus eliminated. Everyone has a responsibility for every other person. Misery and suffering of citizens under the burden of a few individuals who control most of the national resources are also eliminated. This can be a happy and caring society that takes care of everyone.
One of the key principles of utopia is the principle of universal labor. Under this arrangement, all people with exceptions of a few like scholars must work and enjoy goods produced from communal labor . (More, 1852, p. 130) However, Utopian religion and ethics encourage a good life free from labor and spent on entertainment. This can check against greed and promote the general health and the wellbeing of citizens. Instances, where people break their backs at the expense of more pressing issues like family, is therefore greatly minimized.
One is encouraged to be moderate while seeking social pleasures. These pleasures should not interfere with the pleasures of other people. No one is forced to follow a certain religion or impose his beliefs on others. This ensures that people enjoy their freedoms without interfering with the freedoms of others hence promoting peoples rights. Evils witnessed where millions of people have been killed or discriminated against because of their faiths are thus eliminated. Among principles suggested is that the highest form of pleasure is achieved when one sacrifices his pleasures for the sake of others happiness would promote selflessness. This should be displayed at the government level where leadership is entirely based on serving the needs of the society to society members who care for each other. (More, 1852, p. 140)
In Utopia, the family is viewed very differently from how we know it to be. It is organized to meet the needs of the state. For example, a child who prefers to be a woodworker would be moved to a woodworker family . (More, 1852, p.154) While a wife joins her husbands household, males remain in their family under the guard of their oldest male relative. One advantage of this arrangement is that it would promote unity in society since relations are not entirely based on blood. Emphasis on a family creates a good grassroots structure for implementing government policy. Order, discipline and promotion of talent are also enhanced considering the existing hierarchy of command and specialization of labor under specific families.
Conclusion
Looking at our current world one is likely to note an intermingling of both Utopian and The Prince ideas. I am even perplexed at how two different ideologies that appear too divergent on specific issues have intermingled. Looking at American society, for example, it is a society that encourages democracy and human rights based on capitalism. It is also a tolerant society that silently encourages pleasure and entertainment as long as these pleasures do not interfere with other peoples pleasures. These are both Utopian and Machiavellis ideas. While our society is capitalist, we are now recommending and implementing programs that are more communal. This includes suggested health programs by the government that would provide health services for Every American. We may merge more of these two ideas including others as we head towards globalization and as we face new challenges.
Before Sunrise is a romantic drama film telling an offbeat story of utopian love. The movie captures a bond between two people that is almost perfect despite the pitfalls that surround relationships. It works fundamentally on two central mechanisms, realistic acting and an immense script that draws the audience towards the characters through their emotions and thoughts. The presentation connects viewers to the plot uniquely to relate it with their real-life scenarios. As such, the characters are free, and they play as if it were real life and not merely as protagonists. How the movie captures this kind of realism is utterly intriguing and is perhaps the truest life exhibition on screen. Ideally, romantic love is poignant primarily because it is an infinite emotion confined in a finite frame. The characters relate to the feeling with a sense of urgency as guided by times temporal limits.
The video primarily revolves around ideologies of self-discovery and fulfillment through romance. There is a deep longing for compassion and connection that enhances understanding between lovers. The film presents the mannerism of the spontaneous reaction of an individual in their environment. The script was written in a way that makes an observation about life and how emotions influence it. I can relate to the central theme through the lovely visuals alongside the upbeat. It explicitly portrays an energetic amorousness that blossoms endlessly for the movies whole time, further magnified by the chosen location. Before Sunrise focuses on characters who dictate the shortcomings of the narrative, making it even more pleasant to watch because of its authenticity. One would say that the film offers a means to exit the real world into a realm where love is the only satisfaction in the world.
A ‘utopia’, purely from my own understanding, describes an ‘ideal place’ or ‘paradise’. According to the Oxford definition of the word, this understanding is not far from its actuality. It is defined as ‘an imagined place or state of things in which everything is perfect.’ This word, like many other in the English language, is of Latin origin and stems from the prefix ou meaning ‘not’ and the suffix topos meaning ‘place’. When translated the phrase ou-topos means ‘nowhere’, which may suggest that the reality of achieving it in a world such as our own is purely incomprehensible. It was first used in 1516 by Renaissance humanist and philosopher, Sir Thomas More in his book titled ‘Utopia’.
The book was written to criticize and bring particular attention to the shortfalls of a European political system and society that was largely based on the economic models of feudalism. The idea of this ‘utopia’ is therefore incredibly associated with the context of Europe at the time. In the fictional book, More describes through the eyes of a character other than himself, the discovery of an island referred to as Utopia. This place was an embodiment of an ideal human society governed by utilitarianism and rationalism. A place of productivity, shared resources, no greed, no hierarchy of classes, no crime, poverty or immoral behaviour, religious freedom, and little inclination to conflict.
The book is in many ways also self-critical of its themes and ideas put forth of this Utopia, as More is not oblivious to the various ways in which its policies may be perceived. It exhibits a few paradoxes and in ways portrays its subjectivity to human perspective, particularly Sir Thomas’ himself.
My initial understanding of a ‘utopia’ was derived from a story I recall from childhood. It was a mythological story about a civilisation existing in a mystical underwater city called Atlantis. The story described a pre-existing paradise that became submerged under the sea. There were structures made of gold, lush, evergreen forests and an abundance of food and wildlife. The people were believed to be just and wise beyond their years, equipped with an infinite knowledge to develop marvellous inventions. On a young and impressionable mind, I can understand how this idea may have manifested my current perception and interpretation of ‘utopia.’
The key thing to understand about this word is that it is entirely subjective. In some ways my interpretation of the word as a child correlates with Thomas More’s understanding of it. Both are true in depicting a perfect place, existing within a realm that does not quite coincide with reality. However, the difference is seen in our beliefs of what perfection is. Over the years, my perspective on the word has since shifted from perceiving Utopia as a magical, child-like fantasy but rather seeing it as a degree of ‘hope’ for an individual living in a world experiencing existential crises.
It is difficult to separate the concept of Utopia from various belief systems. As previously mentioned, Thomas More was a humanist, philosopher and highly acknowledged in many other disciplines but above all else a devout Catholic. It is a possibility that his religious beliefs may have had some influence on the manner in which he depicts Utopia. One way to analyse the intent of his 1516 Utopia could have been to promote reform in the European society according to Christian values.
I strongly believe that religion plays an intrinsic role in the conception of Utopia. There are various beliefs of alternate realms of existence. Some existing before the demise of mankind and others accessible only through death. In Christianity, the conception of ‘Heaven’ is a distinguishable Utopia as well as that of the ‘Garden of Eden’ and similarly how ‘Nirvana’ is affiliated with Buddhism. One thing is true of these utopian examples and that is they are unattainable in the parameters of the world in which we currently exist. This is similarly the case for various other contexts of utopia. By virtue of living in an imperfect world is it possible to shift deeply seeded ideas on matters such as gender inequality, racial inequality and cultural superiority?
Relating it to the context of the built environment under the discourses of architecture, culture and society. The distinct consensus in the field of architecture with regards to ideas of utopia has always been to design for the betterment of society. The manifestation of architectural utopias began at the beginning of the 20th century when the modernist movement began taking shape and architects reimagined how their architecture could solve worldly problems. Varied utopian visions came about. Some solely focused on the potential of new cities through the use of new industrial technologies, others on preservation of landscape within the built environment and even new social orders that could eliminate the gap between the wealthy and the poor. In his book, Architecture and Utopia, Tafuri Manfredo says, “To turn ideology into utopia thus became imperative. In order to survive, ideology had to negate itself as such, break its own crystalized forms, and throw itself entirely into the “construction of the future”.”
This describes the single, united mindset that the key to achieving a modern ‘Utopia’ was reliant on radically avant-garde architecture that dismantled traditional influence. There are various utopian ideas that began to stem but could never be physically executed as they only worked theoretically. As previously mentioned, this is the one true thing of the conception of ‘utopia’ and that is; it is out of the realm of reality. Architectural utopias such Le Corbusier’s ‘Plan Voison’ aimed to reconnect citizens with nature in a highly systematic and ordered manner. The ideal outcome was to better living conditions for all socioeconomic households while minimizing land use by building upwards. However, the plan involved the division of citizens through class, with the wealthy living in the lower, larger apartments with access to the outside while the poor housed the upper floors. This clearly indicates the flaws in Le Corbusier’s aspirations…..
Power
Power is one of the splendours of man that is eminently prone to evil. Ricoeur (1965:255)
The word ‘power’ is derived from the Latin word potere and carries a variety of meaning on its predominant use in everyday conversation. The context in which the word is used is interchangeable and determines how it is understood. By the Oxford definition the word is defined in four ways, all possessing the idea of ‘having a capacity or ability to do something.’ For the purpose of this lexicon, ‘power’ shall be analysed in a context in which the word insinuates the existence of a submissive or ‘inferior’ entity with which it will be compared. In the state of human affairs and according to Rorty, ‘Power is the ability…to define and control circumstances and events so that one can influence things to go in the direction of one’s interests.’ ()
I believe, in the modern world, Power, or the sense of it, is determined by a system of hierarchy that has since been perpetuated from the beginning of time. Societies have always believed that any system or civilisation is most efficient under the rule of some kind of leader or structure of authority and this is evident in the ways in which our nations, countries, cities and even households have been set up from generation to generation.
It is the one consensus that is carried forth even through the variations of different cultures. History highlights the authorities of kings dating back as far as the biblical era, Kaizers that ruled the German empire, monarchies that governed the United Kingdom as well as Chiefs that head their villages in Africa. It is through this systematic sense of supremacy that a hierarchical pyramid is formed, with the ruler positioned at the top and possessing a great sense of power. The most detrimental aspect of this
Looking particularly at the history of Africa and that of Europe in Africa, this lexicon will define ‘power’ through the phenomenon of colonisation and how hegemonic Western societies enforced their authority over indigenous civilisations in the built environment. In her book, ‘Framing Places: mediating power in the built form’ Kim Dovey says, “The nexus of built form with power is, at one level, a tautological truth— place creation is determined by those in control of resources.”
Through the process of colonization, colonial powers from the west either forcibly took land from indigenous African societies or exploited them through forms of unfair trade. Targeting areas abundant in natural resources and establishing them as their centres of colonial rule, allowed them to possess power over land development. To me, this strongly exemplifies the connection between power and built form described by Dovey. There are various ways in which ‘power over’ is believed to be executed through the built environment and according to Dovey that is through: force, coercion, manipulation, seduction and authority.
Force is the explicit exercise of power which strips the subject of any choice of non-compliance, and these types of institutions in the built environment are typically spaces of confinement or exclusion. This kind of exhibition of power is prominent in the types of architecture associated with apartheid regime in South Africa that housed migrant workers and enforced segregation. The Panopticon layout of the labour compounds allowed for a large angle of constant surveillance, with the guardhouses located at the centre and the labour units surrounding them.
The migrant labourers were themselves arranged according to certain classifications. Those that were assumed to return to their rural homes after the end of their contracts were placed in the Barracks whilst those that had become familiar to the city were placed in separate ‘private’ quarters pertaining to the ‘cubicle system’. The intent to separate the men by these means was to avoid ‘social’ and ‘moral’ contamination.
The buildings orientation with the back ends facing away from the outside world aimed to further emphasise their separation from communities beyond the fence. Apartheid regime not only aimed to separate members within the indigenous communities but to create clear distinction between black and white racial groups.
The urban layout of cities was designed such that large expanses of land as well as industrial transport systems like railways could behave as buffer zones between black and white neighbourhoods.
Other forms of control through Apartheid’s colonial architecture is depicted through the monumental structures used to signify their territorialisation. I believe this form of control aligns with ‘power through coercion’ as previously highlighted by Kim Dovey. The dictionary defines coercion as ‘the threat of a force in order to secure compliance’. In colonial architecture, the keyway in which this is achieved is through ‘intimidation’ or ‘domination’. The perceived idea of something being over-powering forces subjects to submit willingly to it. Monuments representative of colonial power are often placed on central or elevated points for this reason. In the example of the Honoured Dead Memorial in Kimberly, the significance of the structure is portrayed by its locality at the centre of a four-way street where all roads lead to circulation around it. It stands as a prominent structure around the landscape as there are no other buildings within proximity to it. Similarly, Rhodes Memorial, situated at the foot of Devil’s Peak mountain sits as a glorified monument amongst the mountain range that dominates the city of Cape Town. This colonial monument enforces its power as a result of its elevation above the landscape.
Coclusion
With regards to the two key words in relation to one another, I question who possesses the power to define the true essence of ‘utopia’? The lexicon on this word illustrates that its interpretation is largely subjective and therefore implies that there could never be one exact consensus on what it is and how it can be achieved. In some sense I believe that the perpetuated definition of utopia is already bias to the member of the social group that formulated it. In the architectural sense, ideas of utopia conceived as a result of the modernist movement are subconsciously imbedded in our minds and guide the manner in which we imagine our own utopias. The issue with this I believe is that those ideas are birthed from a western way of thinking that may not necessarily accommodate African belief systems or systems of other various colonized social groups.
It has become a complex issue to combat social problems with ever-increasing issues of theft in the modern world. The world has become much advanced as communication has exceeded from its expected boundaries. Concerns for security purpose have become seemingly very imperative in this regards.
The article written by Jennifer Saranow Schultz namely Rising Cost of Identity Theft for Consumers introduces us to a newer kind of theft referred to identity theft. Sir Thomas More has relatively discussed a framework of countering the issue of theft in his book Utopia in which an ideal of a socio-politically balanced society has been projected. This paper illustrates contemporary social problem of theft from a newspaper article along with a framework to counter it as proposed by Sir Thomas More.
The author of the article Jennifer Saranow claims that identity theft is an ever increasing social problem. In the advanced technological era, it has increased its measure of prevalence. The author has reported a great deal of statistics to present a thorough scenario of the situation. Estimated figures that have been cited from the 2011 identity fraud survey reports are claiming that around 8.1 million account holders have suffered from identity theft (Saranow).
A yearly report of the survey has incorporated enhancement of social issue. The author claims that identity theft is being undertaken in almost every part of the world with little efforts put by thieves to take up financial details. With reference to the article, identity theft has been defined as an act which is undertaken to take financial gains from the listed information (Saranow).
If a thorough research is conducted then it becomes visible that ever increasing statistics of identity theft have contributed in a more interrelated problem in a society. For majority of people, theft may remain stealing of belongings but now its definition has become vast as now thieves are able to steal identity of a person. Because of identity theft, a great deal of professionals had to come across difficulties such as defaulter fines and financial loss.
The method to counter identity theft is to apply the proposed methods by Sir Thomas More. In his book Utopia, Sir Thomas More has presented an ideal of socio-political society where every theft is examined and then thieves are punished for their act.
According to Thomas, a thief who undertakes a theft must be punished within the same frequency. For instance, if theft has been conducted by slaughtering the other person then the culprit is supposed to be slaughtered in front of members of society so that it could become an exemplary execution (More, Robinson and Sacks).
However, debate has also been noted in the book of Thomas More with respect to crime that has been committed. The author seemingly presented an argument for those who believe that theft must not be punished. The author has also supported his claim with different executions that could be applied to counter social evils such as identity theft (Lupton).
With the application of method of Thomas More that stresses on punishing theft with respect to their sins, it could be said that a great deal of social problems could be countered. In case of identity theft by stealing information from advanced computing systems, thieves must be found with accurate tracing softwares. The transactions of financial details are recorded by almost all financial institutions. To a certain degree, financial institutions can be considered as responsible for such thefts because they lack security checks.
As Sir Thomas More claimed that those punishments should be sentences that do not finish the evil mind of culprit right away. Thieves must be kept in prison for a time period that would be enough to change his personality. Furthermore, the concept of socio-politically sound society states that everything that is looted must come back as a price paid by the culprit (More, Robinson and Sacks).
The alarming statistical information provided in the article by Jennifer refers to a system that has become complexly in-combatable. The tyranny of culprits in the modern world cannot be practiced for a longer period as the methods of Thomas More is able to provide combating measures.
As Thomas More has affirmed in his book that money should stay stably in every class so that the demand does not rise selfishly. Financial institutions need to make sure that they have plans to help those who lack money and power. If punishment is considered as a way out to combat then it shall also be noted that foundations of security concerns in the advanced world are also required (Lupton).
Through the above discussion, it comes to our understanding that identity theft is increasing with higher percentage every year. It is because of the increase in the identity theft that people have started to face troubles in their financial activities. The discussion also claims that avid response to thefts must be undertaken as it refers to a socio-politically sound society. The article written by Jennifer provides a background to a social problem which is potential to be combated by the proposed method of Sir Thomas More.
Works Cited
Lupton, J. The Utopia of Sir Thomas More. New York: BiblioLife, 2009.
More, T, R Robinson and D. Sacks. Utopia. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1999.
Saranow, J. “The Rising Cost of Identity Theft for Consumers.” The New York Times 9 February 2011.
There is a plenty of evidence available as to the fact that, very often, the practical exploitation of utopian socio-political concepts leads to the creation of anti-utopias and even dystopias. The most recent example that substantiates the validity of this statement is the history of creation and the eventual collapse of Soviet Union. Ever since USSR founding in 1922, this country was meant to serve as the example of what can be accomplished, once the concept of capitalist exploitation of labor, as the basis for designing social policies in a particular country, is being disposed off. Before they had taken over a political power in Russia, Communists would never cease putting an emphasis on the fact that their doctrine of Communist society, where people contribute to society’s well-being, in accordance to their abilities, and receive back from centralized government just about anything they might need, makes perfect sense, because of its pure rationalist essence.
However, the practical realization of Communist concepts in Russia (and also just about anywhere else in the world), had resulted in millions of citizens loosing their lives and in those people, who managed to survive, during the course of Communist “social purges”, becoming the subjects of the fiercest system of slavery that world has ever seen – before the beginning of WW2, employees at Soviet factories were not even allowed to consider the possibility of changing their place of work. Moreover, if a particular employee was late showing up at work, even by as little as 10 minutes, he or she could have been easily sentenced to 10 or 15 years in jail as “saboteur”. Thus, the practical realization of Marxist idea of “workers’ paradise”, had actually resulted in creation the “workers’ hell”. And the reason for this is simple – as history shows, the designers of utopian social and political doctrines, have been traditionally deprived of a scientific understanding of Homo sapiens’ existential essence, as a species.
Moreover, as it appears, history did not teach a whole lot the spiritual and often biological descendants of hooked-nosed “idealistic promoters of workers’ cause”, as these people now actively shoving the purely utopian concept of “multicultural paradise” down citizens’ throats in Western countries. One does not have to be a prophet to realize what will come as a result, because the trail of death and destruction has always been the most characteristic consequence of political dreamers being put at liberty of “benefiting” a particular society, by subjecting society’s members to their obscure political beliefs. In this paper, we will aim at exposing the conceptual inconsistency of utopian type of thinking, by revealing it as such that simply does not correspond to the objective reality. The analysis of motifs, contained in videos “Rabbit – Run Wrake” and “Das Rad” (The Wheel), will come as particularly handy, in this respect. In the next part of this paper, we will also make mentioning of Ralph Waldo Emerson’s article “The Influences Of Nature Upon The Mind” and of Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s poem “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner”, as such that provide us with a further insight on the essence of discussed subject matter.
Videos
The animated video “Rabbit – Run Wrake” is now being commonly referred to as “innovative” and even “revolutionary”, in how it represents people’s irrational obsession with accumulation of material riches. However, the foremost idea, contained in this video, is as old as the world – the irrational instinct of enrichment, is one of the most important factors that define the existential mode of an average individual, regardless of his or her age. One of video’s most memorable aspects is that it utilizes a bucolic landscape as the background for horrific scenes of domestic animals being slaughtered in wholesale manner (the corpses of these animals would attract flies, which in their turn, would be turned into jewels by “idol”). Boy and girl, featured in “Rabbit – Run Wrake”, most certainly do not appear as being capable of killing animals, yet they pursue with their murderous task, as if they had worked in slaughterhouse for all their lives.
Thus, we can say that “Rabbit – Run Wrake” depicts the actual process of “dystopia in making”, by promoting the idea that environmental factors alone could not possibly define people’s social attitudes and their behavior. In its turn, this provides us with the insight on why utopias do not work in reality – whereas, people are best described as three-dimensional beings (they have spiritual, economic and social needs), the creation of political utopias comes as the result of philosophers idealizing only a few, out of many aspects of people’s existence. For example, Marxist theory suggests that, once people fill up their stomachs with food, all their needs are being satisfied. In their turn, religious fundamentalists idealize people’s spiritual needs – they seriously believe that a particular individual can achieve happiness by establishing a “personal contact” with non-existent God, while pointing out to citizens’ scientific, cultural, and economic pursuits as irrelevant and even counter-productive. Feudists idealize human sexuality – according to them, it namely the length of man’s penis, which directly corresponds to his perception of surrounding reality, etc. Yet, as it appears from the video, people’s way of acting does not necessarily derive out of context of their social, gender, or generational affiliation. Therefore, only very naïve people can believe that the creation of utopist society is possible by definition. When utopia does not work, it quickly transforms itself into its antipode – dystopia, as it has been illustrated by “Rabbit – Run Wrake”.
The clearly dystopian motif can also be identified in German animated video “Das Rad” (The Wheel), which provides us with rather satirical outlook on the very notion of scientific and cultural progress. In it, the human-like shaped piles of rocks observe the passing of centuries in rather melancholic manner, while coming up with short remarks as to the particularities of surrounding scenery. After having found a rounded stone, lying nearby, the younger “rock entity” becomes exited, while pointing out that this stone reminds a wheel, which in its turn, is being closely associated with the concepts of “transportation” and “progress”. The older “rock entity” smirks back, as if it wanted to say: “it might very well be the case, but what makes you to become so exited over the notion of progress, in the first place?”. As video continues on, we get to realize the actual meaning behind its sarcasm: the civilization progresses with ever-increasing speed, the highways are being built and the advertisement billboard is being hanged in front of “intelligent” piles of rocks, yet; just before this civilizational progress is about to affect both piles of rocks, something happens – people that had built a civilization – extinct, and whatever they have created begins to deteriorate physically, with the flow of time.
The older and wiser “rock entity” turns to the younger one and says: “they were very close this time”, while implying that it must have witnessed the rise and fall of civilizations many times, throughout its life. Video’s morale is simple – people tend to think of progress as an objective category, while in fact, this might not be the case. This is why, utopist socio-political doctrines, which are based on the assumption that progress is something ever-present, might not be as objective as their promoters want us to believe. For example, nowadays, many hawks of political correctness refer to the entire history of Western civilization, prior to 1960, as “intolerant”, “sexist” and “racist”, while seriously believing that from now on, people are going to live in the state of “interracial harmony”, while “celebrating diversity”, as their foremost preoccupation. Apparently, they are quite incapable of understanding a simple fact that, in time of a major international crisis, such their ideas will have as much value as the notions of etiquette and gallantry had among the passengers of sinking “Titanic”.
Texts
Despite the fact, that Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s poem “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner” was written well before the time when designing social utopias, has gained a public recognition as fully legitimate pursuit, it does relate to the theme of utopia vs. dystopia, because it promotes the idea that people’s best expectations usually result in utter frustration, on their part. The fact that, after killing an albatross, fog had dispersed was being taken by sailors as the indication that Mariner had done a right thing:
“Then all averred, I had killed the bird
That brought the fog and mist.
‘Twas right, said they, such birds to slay,
That bring the fog and mist” (Coleridge).
In the similar manner, Soviet citizens greeted the news of Yuri Gagarin being launched into the space in 1961, as world’s first cosmonaut – these people thought of it as the sign that the murder of millions and millions of Russians (they belonged to “wrong” social classes), during the course of Industrialization in thirties, was actually justified, because it is namely that fact that Stalin had succeeded in transforming Russia into highly industrialized country, which allowed it to compete with world’s major powers and to even leave them behind in space race. However, by 1991, most of these formerly cheerful citizens have been turned into miserable wrecks, for whom grubbing in garbage containers became the very point of their lives, simply because they were being dumped by their own government as “useless old farts”. This was the price they had to pay for supporting the evilest form of political utopianism -Communism.
As we have mentioned earlier, the ultimate reason why utopias, based on wishful thinking, necessarily turn into dystopias, is because, as history shows, the creators of 19th and 20th centuries’ utopian doctrines had simply lacked the understanding of the most basic laws of nature. For example, the doctrine of Marxism glorifies the concepts of social and racial equality. However, according to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, the concept of “equality” is nothing but nicely sounding synonym to the concept of “entropy”, which in its turn, signifies the notion of energetic death. This is exactly the reason why, as soon as in a particular country the doctrines of racial and social equality get to be given an official status, this country automatically begins to descend down into primeval savagery. The end of Communist rule in Russia was being marked with the scenes of citizens killing each other over the loaf of bread. Nowadays, every time an American large city experiences a prolonged electrical blackout, it becomes instantly turned into the battleground of everybody against everybody, with “ethnically unique” citizens becoming solely preoccupied with looting (diversity makes us stronger!).
As George Orwell had once said in his prophetic novel “Animal Farm”: “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal then the others”. Therefore, it is the matter of foremost importance that the laws of nature are being always considered, within a context of politicians designing new policies. Despite the fact that Ralph Waldo Emerson lived in 19th century, he was well aware of this fact. In his article “The Influences Of Nature Upon The Mind”, Emerson provides us with the insight onto nature’s objective laws, as such that should never cease serving as only the foundation, upon which society’s inner integrity can be based: “The first in time and the first in importance of the influences upon the mind is that of Nature… He (responsible individual) shall see that Nature is the opposite of the soul, answering to it part for part. One is seal and one is print. Its beauty is the beauty of his own mind. Its laws are the laws of his own mind. Nature then becomes to him the measure of his attainments” (Emerson 1820). Unfortunately, we live in time when many politicians in Western countries take pride in promoting degenerative social philosophies; therefore, the dystopian future of the Western civilization might not be quite as remote as some people believe.
In one respect, the definition of a utopia is quite clear and does not require any elaboration. On the contrary, it is theoretic and generalized, which provides room for individual interpretations based on personal views. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that the cornerstone of a utopian world is people’s willingness to use the potential of their brains, which allows for perfection but is not realistic.
First, utopian societies appreciate the freedom as the basic value. This term may be regarded through a religious, economic, or other lens, but in any interpretation, it means the absence of oppression and suffering (Betts). This is possible exclusively on the condition that people are sufficiently intelligent to have no need for self-actualizing through intimidating the other. In reality, meanwhile, such behavior is substantially easier in comparison with constant intellectual development, for which reason many opt for it.
Second, a utopian view of human performance in science, art, or other spheres presupposes excellence that enables creating masterpieces. The latter, in turn, are intertwined with the concept of “geniuses,” universal creators (Brossard 425). The explanations of their existence actually come down to reaching an outstanding level of competence through never-ending improvement. In reality, few people demonstrate such dedication; not everybody can become a genius, which makes their mass appearance idealistic.
Finally, a utopia in literature is a work that targets to ridicule the existing social system, whose imperfection results from that of humans. In the stories of this genre, the protagonist visits an imagined place where people, simply stated, live better due to a different mentality (Vieira 9). Changing the latter in everyone, meanwhile, is idealistic rather than realistic since values and motivations differ substantially from person to person.
To summarize, the central idea of utopia as a genre is the maximal possible usage of the human intellect, which is the key to an ideal world, free from suffering and full of the highest quality performance. This contradicts the reality, however, as people are not commonly willing to demonstrate maximal involvement and devote themselves to reaching perfection; furthermore, not everybody is physically able to do that.
Works Cited
Betts, Jennifer. “Examples of Utopia: Types and Features of Ideal Societies.” Your Dictionary, Web.
Greece is a European country located in the Southeast part of the continent. Many have described Greece as one of the most developed nations in the world. The country is ranked position 34 in the world as far as economy is concerned. In addition, the country’s population is found to enjoy fairly good standards of living.
The term ‘utopia’ is used to describe an ideal society. The idea of a utopian society has, however, been viewed by scholars as unrealistic. Paradigm, on the other hand, is a term used to refer to a line of thought or concepts. Leaders across the world use the ideas held in relation to a utopian society to put in place the necessary plans to improve the lives of the people.
The title of this paper, Greece in a Utopian Economic Paradigm, alludes to a fictional description of the country. The writer describes the idea of Greece as an ideal economy. Like many other countries, Greece has several economic challenges, the most common one being the debt crisis.
Over-borrowing by the country has forced the government to spend beyond its means (Cohen & Coates 2012). The situation has raised questions on the country’s ability to pay its debts, a situation that would render the country bankrupt.
Greece in a Utopian Economic Paradigm
How to do a Bankruptcy
To introduce a new era in Greece, scholars argue that the current system has to be bankrupted first. Bankruptcy is a situation where the country is unable to service its existing debts. Bankruptcy, in most instances, is brought about by poor management of resources, as well as the misappropriation of government funds (Marx 1959).
In such a situation, money is owned by the people and the government is left poor. The government lacks the money to pay its debts. To bankrupt Greece, a number of measures will be put in place.
Increasing the rate of borrowing in relation to the gross domestic product can lead to bankruptcy in Greece (Marx 1959). In a situation where the rate of borrowing is much higher than that of the growth in gross domestic product, a country is likely to lack the capability to pay its debts.
The situation is brought about by the fact that the government is generating little income, making it hard for the entity to run its local affairs and, at the same time, pay its debts. In addition, the accumulation of debts increases the period within which the country stays indebted to others.
Over- expenditure among government agencies is another possible means of bankrupting Greece. An increase in spending requires the government to borrow in order to service its ongoing projects (Marx 2008). Continuous spending drains the cash available in the government reserves. When the reserves are exhausted, the government is forced to borrow to ensure the completion of the ongoing projects.
Greece’s involvements in costly activities, such as military operations, will further worsen the economic situation in the country. The reason is that the expenses incurred in the purchase of armour, as well as the remuneration of soldiers, will reduce the government reserves. Such activities have also been found to be of no short-term economic importance to a country. A lot of property may be destroyed in the process, yet the activities portend no economic returns to the country.
High cost of infrastructure can also contribute to bankruptcy in Greece. By increasing the cost of putting up the necessary infrastructure needed for the generation of revenue, the country suffers a shortage in the amount of cash realised. The small amount of revenue generated goes into the servicing of local affairs, such as the recurrent expenditure, usually involving the remuneration of state officers and civil servants.
High costs of putting in place efficient infrastructure also hinder the setting up of new sources of revenue (Cohen & Coates 2012). Furthermore, other forms of infrastructure, such as roads, subways, and railways, slow down the movement of goods and services.
The development affects the normal means of conducting business. Interferences with infrastructural development in terms of information and communication technology also hinder the flow of ideas, an important tool in the generation of income.
The above instances cause a deficit in the exploitation of a country’s economic potential. To keep the affairs of the country running, the government of Greece will embark on borrowing externally. Matters will become worse considering that the economic activities undertaken are not productive enough. As a result of accumulation of loans, the country will eventually become bankrupt.
The Social Aspect of this Communist- Based System
There is a close link between utopia and communism. The latter refers to a system where the society tends to be classless. Means of production are owned by all the members of the society. Communal ownership allows for equal exploitation of resources among community members. As a result, equality will prevail in a utopian Greece. Property in the country will be owned by all members of the community.
According to Karl Marx, a communist society is free of social problems. The social problems in this case include unemployment, resource scarcity, and alienation in the labour market. In such a society, extremities in living standards are eliminated.
It becomes difficult to get an extremely wealthy individual, while another individual in the same society is languishing in extreme poverty. Allocation of resources in such a society is done depending on the individual’s needs and abilities. Such a society is so ideal, yet unrealistic.
Manifestos emerging from such a utopian economy are aimed at improving the lives of individuals living in that community. One of the manifestos pledged in a utopian society promotes equity. Due to the communal ownership of the means of production, all members of the society are allowed to exploit the available resources in that community.
Communal ownership of the means of production ensures that no individual person or a group of persons has full control over the resources. In a utopian Greek economy, each individual will be in a position to contribute to the national wealth.
The talents and skills of all individuals will be utilised for the good of the nation. The government of Greece will not be required to borrow externally to finance internal affairs. Revenue generated from the working population will go a long way in settling the debts (Marx 2008).
Eradication of poverty is also an important element in the new system’s manifesto. Through the communal ownership of property policy, the rights of production will be taken away from the wealthy few and transferred to all the members of the society. As a result of this utopian system, all individuals in the country will be provided with opportunities to engage in economically viable activities. Status quo will not be maintained anymore.
Social classes are likely to fall apart and wealth will flow into ‘every man’s pocket’ (Marx 1959). Greece, in a utopian economic paradigm, will see citizens engaging more in activities to serve the interests of others, as opposed to serving their own interests.
The system will be run by honest and rather modest men as opposed to the previous system ran by radical and dishonest men, whose only aim was to ensure economic prosperity at whatever cost. The new communist system will be more interested in ensuring that the welfare of the entire Greece population is enhanced. The wealth of the country is shared among all the citizens of Greece.
The provision of basic needs to the entire Greece population is another key element in the manifesto of the new utopian system. Since the new system is not a capitalist one, the cost of services is not inflated upwards. On the contrary, the costs are moderated to ensure that each and every citizen can afford to pay for the services.
The system ensures that citizens gain access to all the essential services, such as water, medical services, sewer systems, and security (Cohen & Coates 2012). As a result, the occurrence of social evils, such as insecurities, is likely to reduce since each and every individual has enough.
The government spearheading the new system is required to conduct symposiums aimed at educating the citizens on matters pertaining to the changes likely to be encountered upon the introduction of the system (Marx 1959). As already indicated in this paper, utopia is more of a line of thoughts, as opposed to a reality.
As such, education on economic psychology needs to be provided to the people for them to be in a position to create a mental picture of Greece in a utopian economic paradigm. Through the provision of this education, individuals are likely to understand the economic, social, as well as political benefits likely to come with the utopian system.
Greece in a utopian economic paradigm will also see to it that all individuals engage in meaningful economic activities. The system ensures that all individuals are employed in the various industries in the society. Most of these employment opportunities will come as a result of the exploitation of resources found at the community level (Marx 2008).
The aspect of self employment is also likely to be more popular in Greece, since individuals will have a chance to use their skills and knowledge to generate income. There will be no monopolies controlling markets and the exploitation of resources. Production rights will be taken away from monopolies and given to the communities in the new system.
A new Bank of Gold is likely to curb the effects of inflation in the country. The Bank of Gold will ensure that gold is used as a means of storing wealth in Greece. The situation is unlike in the previous system where paper money was used as a store of wealth. Since gold is rare, its use as a medium of exchange will significantly increase the value of money (Cohen & Coates 2012).
As a result of the extremely high cost of gold, citizens will purchase many goods and services using considerably small amounts of gold. As a result, the goods and services will become more affordable to the people of Greece.
The Political Aspects and Government Structures Associated with the New System
In a political utopia, a government attempts to establish a society that can be considered as perfect. The government of Greece, in a utopian economic paradigm, will strive towards perfecting the way of life of the Greek people. As a result of the decrease in the factors affecting the people of Greece negatively, peace is likely to prevail in the new system (Marx 1959).
The government’s introduction of the Bank of Gold will be a major milestone towards the realisation of a political utopia. It is argued that the amount of money circulating in a society is enough to serve the needs of the members of that society. Though critics argue that gold is scarce and may be inadequate as a means of exchange, I am of the view that what matters is the purchasing power of the little gold that is available.
A government that uses gold as a means of exchange will be in a position to offer better services to its citizens compared to a government using paper money. The citizens will also be in a better position to purchase the goods and services in the market. A gold system has reduced chances of being affected by inflation since it is easier to control the circulation of gold in a country due to its scarcity compared to paper money.
To avoid the occurrence of shocks in the economy, it is important for the government to allow for the completion of all the existing contracts before introducing the new system. Companies and individuals will, as a result, readily accept the introduction of the new system. The introduction will not affect their ongoing projects.
The introduction of a Bank of Gold will be viewed as an initiative by the government to improve the welfare of the people, rather than complicating it. The Bank of Gold’s system will be gradually introduced among the people, causing as minimal interruptions to the economic system as possible. The government’s careful introduction of the new system will ensure that individuals remain in the same financial position as they were prior to the initiation of the project (Marx 2008).
No individual will be said to have gained or lost financially as a result of the transition. The government of Greece must, however, adequately educate the public on the manner in which it is going to roll out the program and the benefits that are likely to result from the system.
For instance, the citizens should understand that the gold system will help in the reduction of inflation, thus significantly reducing the cost of goods and services. All individuals will, as a result, be in a position to purchase goods and services, making Greece an ideal society.
With the introduction of the utopian economy in Greece, the government will be required to come up with appropriate currencies, usually in form of gold coins. The government will then be required to roll out a gold transfer initiative from government holding to private ownership. The gold deposit for each and every individual in the Bank of Gold should be directly proportional to their savings prior to the introduction of the new system.
Maintaining these standards will prevent discriminatory distribution of wealth. With the introduction of communism, each and every individual is at a position to generate income. As such, gold can be used as a store of wealth for all (Cohen & Coates 2012). Equality will also be ensured in the process, since the communal ownership of resources enables each and every individual to earn a livelihood.
The mining and refining of gold will ensure a stable supply of the currency in the economy. Mining and refining activities can also be easily controlled to monitor the circulation of gold in the economy. Gold coins are difficult to mould, hence their production is only likely to be carried out when needed.
The Economic Aspect of the New System
Greece in a utopian economic paradigm will see the establishment of a system where the economy is ideal and free from harsh economic conditions. In a utopian economy, people engage in those activities that they derive joy from. For this reason, people are more passionate about their careers and occupations. The individuals work as if the job is their responsibility as opposed to a source of income.
The quality of labour provided is also likely to improve, making the country more productive. The work done is for the good of the society. The proceeds from the work done are used in developing the local community. The development is in line with the communist spirit, where the resources found in a particular community are exploited for the good of the society.
The government will have to come up with appropriate measures to bring about economic prosperity in a country (Marx 2008). First, there will be need for the total abolition of money. The setting up of the Bank of Gold will make gold the commodity of exchange. The citizens will pay for the goods and services provided to them in the country in form of gold. The abolition of money will free the society from economic problems, the most common one being inflation.
The use of paper money as medium of exchange is associated with various negative impacts to the economy and the community as a whole. The impacts include, among others, fluctuations in the prices of goods and services and inequities in the distribution of wealth. Inflation caused by the use of paper money increases the cost of goods and services.
In such cases, a lot of paper money is in circulation and, as a result, people are more willing to pay for goods and services. The prices of commodities are pushed up to cater for the rising demand. The establishment of the Bank of Gold will help curb this problem since the supply of gold can be easily monitored (Cohen & Coates 2012).
Furthermore, scarcity of gold increases its purchasing power and, consequently, that of the citizens. It considerably lowers the cost of commodities, making them available to all members of the society. Ensuring that all members of the society can afford goods and services leads to equality.
To facilitate the exchange process, the Bank of Gold will prepare currencies that will be used in the purchasing of goods and services. In this case, gold coins will be prepared in different denominations to facilitate trading (Cohen & Coates 2012). Gold will also be used to pay for labour provided by the citizens. The communist system proposed in the utopian economy of Greece will also cater for those who do not have the means of production necessary for the generation of income.
Communism ensures that the needs of all the members of the society are catered for. The wealth of the nation will be shared equally among the members of the society on the basis of the person’s needs. To achieve this, people from areas where there is plenty in terms of resources are required to make contributions to the national kitty. Individuals from the areas affected by scarcity of resources will benefit from the national kitty.
The relatively low prices of goods and services in a utopian economy will also go a long way in promoting equity among the members of the society. The reason for this is that all individuals will be in a position to acquire basic services in the society. In addition, the Bank of Gold ensures that the amount of gold circulating in the society does not affect the economy negatively. The bank achieves this by regulating the amount of gold deposits.
Conclusion
There are several benefits and costs associated with Greece in a utopian economic paradigm. The introduction of a utopian economy in Greece will ensure that the country is considered as an ideal society in the world.
Strategies proposed in the utopian economy will go a long way in safeguarding the wellbeing of the citizens. The utopian system will also see the introduction of communism, whereby social and economic evils, such as corruption, are averted.
The system is, however, characterised by a number of shortcomings. For example, it is just an imaginary economy, which is described by many as unrealistic. Solving some of the problems in the society will lead to the emergence of new ones. As such, there is no one time that an economy can be considered as ideal.
References
Cohen, S & Coates, K 1982, Selected writings on the state and the transition to socialism, M.E. Sharpe, New York.
Marx, K 1959, Basic writings on politics and philosophy, Doubleday, New York.
Marx, K 2008, The revolutionary ideas of Karl Marx, Alex Callinicos, New York.
Urban planning has evolved into different forms throughout the history of cities and city planning. Urban planning aims at improving a city to cater for the future social and economic needs of its inhabitants. It seeks to link the existing knowledge with the appropriate forms of action (Sager 1992, P. 67). Planning, therefore, has to be visionary with an appropriate idea about the future design of a city and the implementation of that design.
Modern urban planning entails two different approaches; visionary city planning that involves radical changes in the design of the city with substantial social and economic changes, and the institutionalized city planning, which proposes changes to the existing city structures and is affected by the prevailing economic and political forces within the city.
Historically, urban city planning began in the nineteenth century with the sole purpose to regulate the new urban growth brought about by industrialization and improvement of transport and communication following the invention of the railway (Sitte 1965, P. 43). Military strategies to control territories and aesthetics of expression of cities significantly influenced visionary urban planning in the nineteenth century.
Although visionary city planning made many achievements in city building, many of which are still monumental and beautiful today, it remained insensitive to the wider needs of the society and would have been disastrous if implemented on a large scale. The poor living conditions of the urban poor, forced most middle class urban dwellers towards the end of the nineteenth century to begin agitating for reforms in city planning, which culminated into utopian planning (Cherry 1970, P. 87).
Central to this movement was Ebenezer Howard, who conceptualized the ‘garden city’ to be the ideal alternative to the city planning of the nineteenth century. The garden city was an attempt to connect the vision for a new social order to the spatial expression of the city (Fisherman 1977, P. 23).
Le Corbusier conceptualized the “Contemporary City for Three Million People” in 1922 and the “Radiant City” in 1935 both of which proposed a centralized city with high population and many facilities including skyscraper buildings and residential apartments (Cherry 1970, p. 89). Frank Lloyd Wright on the other hand, envisioned the Broadacre City plan in 1935, which was a decentralized city with low population and suburban residential homes (Mumford 1946, p. 42).
Ebenezer Howard and the Garden City
The garden city was a brilliant idea conceived by Ebenezer Howard in response to the environmental and social changes that were results of industrial revolution in Britain. Industrial revolution encouraged migration into urban areas and consequently led to poor and unhealthy living conditions in cities.
In a bid to curb overpopulation in cities and the associated deterioration of social facilities, Howard envisioned an organized planned dispersal, whereby people could set up industries in towns to provide the services and various occupations to the people of a particular culture within the town (Gossel & Leuthauser 1991, p.94). He also envisioned that the population size in the towns be reduced to about 30,000 inhabitants so that the inhabitants could live and work within walking distance.
In this way, the garden cities could provide social facilities near the residential places and avoid overpopulation in cities. The garden cities also comprised of a spacious layout to for occupation by residential suburban houses, parking space for the residents and enough space for schools and other social amenities. The garden city envisioned the larger urban system as a network of interlinked communities.
It proposed a close link between the town and the countryside with a clear definition of the country, which the design would reserve for agriculture. It also provided for easy access by the urban residents to the countryside (Hall & Ward 1998, p.71). It also envisioned the creation of common developmental and social facilities that would lead to neighborhoods and estates within cities.
To control the city development, Howard envisioned a unified land ownership, whereby the trust ownership controlled the agricultural zone. He also envisioned a cooperative municipal enterprise, which would regulate trade and industry in the cities without affecting the individual freedom with regard to trade and industry.
The main major purpose of the garden cities was to promote dispersal of the people from major cities using the three magnets concept. The garden city provided a channel for an organized relocation of the city dwellers to other towns to relieve the pressure on social facilities and the impacts of overpopulation in the major cities in the nineteenth century (Hall & Ward 1998, p.81).
However, dispersal could have happened in any case because of majority of the urban dwellers avoiding the problems of overpopulation could have sought a better environment either in the suburbs or in smaller towns away from the cities (Fishman1977, p.153). Still, the garden city was an ideal alternative to reducing congestion in the cities. The cities of the nineteenth century experienced traffic congestion and provided little room for expansion.
In contrast, the planned new towns provided an opportunity to avoid problems of overpopulation by providing the right infrastructure to match the expanding population growth in the major cities. Despite Howard’s garden city concept providing an opportunity to reduce urban congestion by promoting decentralization of industries and facilities, its implementation could have been disastrous.
According to Howard, the social city concept entailed one garden city giving rise to another garden city after attaining a population threshold of 30,000 inhabitants (Howard 1902, p.14). However, this would have produced a cluster of interdependent towns that would be expensive to administer. Verma (1996) points out that despite the noble nature of the garden city concept, the many new regional centres would have been economically expensive to administer as opposed to a small number of large centres (p.43).
Fundamental to the concept of the garden city was the neighbourhood idea, where the people would live within walking distance to their workplaces, shops, primary schools and public spaces. The idea behind this concept was the need to establish some kind of balance between work and homes. However, Howard based this concept on the belief that the population growth would match industrial expansion to cut down the level of commuting back and forth the workplaces.
The concept would not have worked; firstly, given that industrial growth leads to population increase due to attraction of immigrant workers into cities, establishment of smaller towns would not have encouraged outward labour mobility since many people worked in the industrialized cities (Cherry 1970, p.61). Secondly, the workers in the new towns would have been still dependent on the employers in the major cities and thus would continue working in the major cities.
Under the garden city concept, people from all social classes were to move to the smaller towns including the employers. This would be possible through provision of various incentives to employers, thereby attracting them to invest in the small towns. Such incentives included already built factories on lease among others (Fishman 1977, p.154).
However, given that, the cost of operating a new franchise is high few employers could have relocated their businesses to the smaller towns. In addition, relocation of large factories would have exerted unprecedented pressure on infrastructural facilities further affecting transport and communication.
Howard envisioned that the establishment of the garden city would encourage people to move into the city and as a result, the population would steadily rise to maximum of 30,000 inhabitants, after which another city would arise (Fishman1977, p.321). In addition, Howard envisioned that the establishment of the garden city would result into a rise in land value, which would generate enough money to pay off the investors and finance schools, parks, museums and other public places.
However, Howard failed to note that for the land value to rise, productivity in the garden city had also to be high (Sager 1992, p.73). Obviously, rise in land values alone would not achieve productivity of the garden city; it also required increase in productivity of the enterprises and factories established in the garden cities. In this regard, investors could only benefit if there was a rise in productivity of their enterprises rather than on rise in land value.
Surplus productivity in the garden city would encourage capital and labour flows into the garden city, which would create more congestion in the garden city than anywhere else would. The physical realization of Howard’s garden city was in the construction of the city of Letchworth guided by architects, Raymond Urwin and Barry Parker.
The design of the residential homes of this garden city was attractive but it took longer than Howard had anticipated for the city to attract people (Glasscock 1996, p.24). After 35 years of Letchworth’s establishment, it had only 15,000 inhabitants compared to the population of 30,000 anticipated. In addition, most workers could not afford houses in the garden city with some opting to commute from other towns while others opted for cheap informal settlements set up by speculators. The envisioned idea of the garden city did not match the Letchworth city in terms of architecture and social life.
Frank Lloyd Wright’s and the Broadacre City
Broadacre City was Frank Lloyd Wright’s concept for the ideal multi-cantered, low density, suburbs. The utopian planner introduced this scheme with an aim of decongesting cities in 1932 in his book, The Disappearing City. In terms of population density, Broadacre city, catered for a low population with a density of five people per acre. The scheme aimed at reducing congestion in cities to avoid development of informal settlement.
In contrast to Ebenezer’s garden city, which involved turning the city into a suburban countryside, the Broadacre city converted the countryside into a city (Rybczynski 2005, p. 17). The spread of the Broadacre city would constitute an urban where each family had access to small farms and recreational sites with industrial and other urban facilities placed a few miles from the residential places.
The Broadacre city plan embodied economic reforms based on Wright’s model of democracy, which he described as Usonia. The Usonia was against Marxist’s socialism ideology and Wright derived it from the ideas of the nineteenth century utopians like Edward Bellamy and Thorstein Veblen. The Wright’s plan allowed the families to own homes and relieved them from property owners.
Wright assumed that the land use would be the responsibility of the owners (Rybczynski 2005, p.132). Under Wright’s plan, the land would be public and then redistributed to the private owners including families, who would use the land productively. Therefore, the Usonia concept opposed cooperation but encouraged individualism whereby it encouraged private ownership of land.
The Broadacre city offered an opportunity to ordinary people to live in countryside lifestyle while enjoying the economic opportunities and recreations associated with urban centres. Wright’s plan envisioned that the residential houses adopt any design the owners preferred with no two houses built the same so long as the structures, the construction method and the materials used in the construction were integral and natural.
A central civil authority would have the responsibility of determining what is natural and integral to the place. The plan envisioned an “a sprawling, open, individualistic structure” where families would live in suburbs surrounding urban centres (Duany, Zyberk, & Speck 1992, p. 54). Wright realized that in his plan physically separate the communities.
The plan brought communities of interest together through communication and transportation and the process would replace the physical communities of a place. However, Mumford criticised the plan’s suggestion of establishing an individualistic structure by referring to it as being antisocial that would affect the decongestion of the cities.
It is evident that Wright’s plan would have turned out to be disastrous if implemented. The suburbia would not match Broadacre City’s low densities, which Wright envisioned would become suburbs. Under the Broadacre plan, the buildings were concentrated in the city centre, where offices and industries were located.
This would have contributed to congestion within the city, as more activities were concentrated there (Duany, Zyberk, & Speck 1992, p.231). Wright’s Broadacre city intended to reduce congestion from the city centre; however, concentration and dispersal are a common occurrence in cities. In addition, Wright assumed that the rise in land value would promote economic development and improvement in the standards of living.
However, land alone cannot contribute to economic prosperity particularly in cities (Rybczynski 2005, p. 42). Economic prosperity in cities allows more people to own land and homes hence his assumption that increase in land value would lead to dispersal could have turned out to be incorrect as more people could afford land leading to concentration.
Wright never envisioned the suburban homes to be sites of wealth production in the future. Nowadays, suburban homesteads can be used to generate income through crop farming and livestock rearing, which can support families living within city suburbs. Broadacre plan was not fully implemented as Wright had envisioned. Nowadays, the city suburbs do not match what Wright had envisioned in his Broadacre city plan (Hall, & Ward 1998, p. 75).
This indicates an appropriate judgment considering that the rationale behind Broadacre City was Wright’s program of social reform. In essence, the substance of Broadacre City was aesthetic and to curb the problems occasioned by overpopulation (Ritzdorf 1996, p. 212). Wright envisioned a system of governance in Broadacre city that promoted architecture and aesthetics with regard to particular culture rather than on physical city construction laws.
Wright did not seek to protect nature but rather he proposed the establishment of homes in the countryside (Muschamp 2001, p. 67). This would have affected nature and wildlife. Wright defended his plan by suggesting that establishment of the city within the country side would not affect nature but would contribute to improved quality of the building and the city. However, establishment of human settlements in countryside forests would have adversely affected the wildlife.
In addition, the Broadacre city plan cannot be a conventional architectural design for all cities because of its emphasis on aesthetics but rather a plan designed to redeem a particular city from the challenges of high population by promoting dispersal. Nevertheless, Wright’s plan would have found a role in the modern urban planning, which increased demand for aesthetics as its central aspect characterizes (Duany, Zyberk, & Speck 1992, p. 27).
Most people demand public action to prevent acquisition of public places as part of aesthetics. In this regard, people feel that aesthetics, as enshrined in Wright’s plan, are both a public and private affair and building homes away from the city center is a common phenomenon nowadays.
LeCorbusier and the Radiant city
LeCorbusier’s Radiant city concept arose out of a new concept of expanding the individual freedoms and establishing a capitalist economy. The plan involved clearance of the existing prehistoric cities followed by the rebuilding of a modern city using modern architectural designs (Le Corbusier 1967, p. 41). Under this plan, quality housing, les unites, would be available to everyone based on the size of each family.
He envisioned a city with buildings five meters above the ground and therefore ensuring allocation of more land to nature. Within the les unites, would be pedestrian streets linking buildings together (Richards 2003, p.114). Le Corbusier suggests that the center of the radiant city would mainly composed of commercial buildings mainly skyscrapers (about 5%) while the surrounding area (95%) would be occupied by trees and parks.
Residential buildings taking a zigzag shape would surround the city center. The residential buildings would house catering and accommodation services. In essence, Le Corbusier based his plan on the belief that modern age architecture should be suitable and expressive of modernism. In the Radiant city design, he employed architectural skills and picture designs to develop his idea of the city as opposed to a rational basis (Etlin 1994, p. 72).
Le Corbusier, unlike Howard, did not belief in the natural economic order but believed that leadership within the society was important (Serenyi 1975, 82). In his plan of the radiant city, Le Corbusier envisioned a pyramid of hierarchies with the workers occupying the bottom position so that the order would prevail in the society (Fisherman 1977, p. 211).
The leadership would occupy the top position in his plan of the radiant city for easy administrative control of the workers. Le Corbusier envisioned social lifestyle of the citizens of the radiant city. He saw that division of labor within the society would promote unity and cooperation, which is necessary to promote economic growth (Fisherman 1977, p. 65).
Unlike his first design of the Contemporary city of three million people, where he designed the residential buildings according to economic classes arranged around the business center of the city, he designed the Radiant city for all people with less regard to the economic classes (Le Corbusier1967, p. 87). The les unites accommodated every member of the society regardless of his/her economic status and promoted cooperation and equality (Fisherman1977, p. 41).
Additionally, Le Corbusier integrated nature into the residential areas by allocating less land to residential housing and the rest to nature. Despite Le Corbusier design of the Radiant city providing a way of promoting equality and individual freedoms, the plan raised many concerns. Kennedy (1998, p. 53) believed that Le Corbusier individual freedom that were promoted by the Radiant city design were not personal liberties since Le Corbusier did not consult the citizens for whom he was planning for (Curtis1986, p. 112).
His design of the facilities, services, and rules were more favorable to him rather than to the other citizens reducing the citizens into mere performers with no say in issues affecting their social life (Verma 1996, p. 72). Moreover, under the Radiant city plan, individuals had no say in the administration or governance issues affecting their lives and the plan expected them to act rationally all the time with antisocial behavior not conceived in his plan (Kennedy 1998, p.54).
In this respect, the plan did not cater for social problems such as crime in the society. In addition, the plan did not address the needs of minority members of the society but rather considered that all citizens were equal. However, it was highly unlikely that all the people would behave rationally with no criminal or social problems taking place within the radiant city. In this regard, Le Corbusier assumption that humans would behave rationally with no crime or any social problems occurring was rather naïve than real (Kennedy 1998, p. 63).
In the radiant city, Le Corbusier notion of authority was rather bureaucratic and patriarchal than administrative (Sennett 1980, p. 74). The plan, less grand unities, reserved for the administration the top part of the residential houses consisting of multi-storey buildings and skyscrapers, which represented a paternalistic authority (Kennedy, 1998).
In addition, Hawkins (1997) while supporting the radiant city design concept as a way of providing housing for the masses in the wake of unprecedented population growth occasioned by industrial revolution argues that the design would have ultimately led to congestion in future (, p. 82).
Conclusion
The theories of Howard, Wright, and Le Corbusier were remarkable providing an alternative to the architectural designs of the nineteenth century urban planning. In addition, they offered solutions to the social problems experienced in the nineteenth century cities and promoted quality of living for the citizens.
However, the plans failed to address all the social aspects affecting the nineteenth century cities and consequently their implementation would have produced disastrous results. Despite the plans having a visionary view of connecting humans with nature, they failed to address issues related to human history and the future population growth needs.
Reference List
Cherry, G., 1970. Town Planning in the Social Context. London: Leonard Hill
Curtis, W., 1986. Le Corbusier: Ideas and Forms. New York: Rizzoli International Publications.
Duany, A., Zyberk, E., & Speck, J., 1992. Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream. New York: Routledge
Etlin, R., 1994. Frank Lloyd Wright and Le Corbusier: The Romantic Legacy. New York: Manchester University Press
Fishman, R., 1977. Urban Utopias in the Twentieth Century. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press. Glasscock, R., 1996. Ebenezer Howard: 1850-1928 and the Garden City. Advanced journal in Policy Studies: Sustainable Urban Design, 15(7). pp. 126-142.
Gossel, P., &Leuthauser, G., 1991. Architecture in the Twentieth Century, Berlin: Benedikt Taschen
Hall, P., & Ward, C., 1998. Sociable Cities: The Legacy of Ebenezer Howard John. New York: Wiley & Sons.
Howard, E., 1902. Garden Cities of To-morrow. London: Routledge.
Kennedy, R., 1998. Le Corbusier and the Radiant City Contra: True Urbanity and the Earth. Advanced journal in Policy Studies: Sustainable Urban Design, 15(7), pp. 221-223
Le Corbusier., 1967. The Radiant City. New York: The Orion Press Mumford, L., 1946. Green-Belt Cities: The British Contribution. London: Faber and Faber
Muschamp, H., 2001. File Under Architecture. New York: MIT Press
Richards, S., 2003. Le Corbusier and the Concept of Self & New Haven London: Yale University Press.
Ritzdorf, M., 1996. Feminist Thoughts on the Theory and Practice of Planning. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell
Rybczynski, W., 2005. City Life. New York. Blackwell publishers
Sager, T., 1992. Why Plan? A Multi-Rationality Foundation for Planning. Scandinavian Housing & Planning Research, 9, pp. 129-147
Sennett, R., 1980. Authority. New York: W.W. Norton and Company. Hall Publishers.
Serenyi, P., 1975. Le Corbusier in Perspective. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Publishers.
Sitte, C., 1965. City Planning According to its Artistic Principles. New York: Random House
Verma, N., 1996. Pragmatic Rationality and Planning Theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 16 (1), pp. 5-14
The concept of an ideal life forms the core of utopia according to Saint Thomas More who developed it in the beginning of the 16th century. His ideas follow the prevailing challenges in the social, political and economic situation of England at this time. In his book titled Utopia published in 1516, More shows different people in their vain attempt to achieve their ideals. In his utopian Book I, Moore conceptualized the idea of utopia out of strict adherence to moral and knowledge when he sailed to an island south of England. In his views, utopia refers to an ideal and imaginary island like the one they encountered during their voyage in the North. From the onset of his writing, More leant the importance of travelling not merely as of beauty but as an activity with meaning and appropriate justification to learn more from the environment. Utopian ideology embraces all areas of human life with the intention of bringing them happiness, power and creating expectancies. When Thomas More and his friends arrived in New Castle, Prince the ruler of the Utopian islands gave them a warm welcome and gave them all they needed to stay as they waited to leave for their next destination.
Utopia Book I
Thomson More thought out a land with plenty of resources in a highly productive land that had many inhabitants. Despite meeting difficulties in the first period of entry into the island, the situation gets better as they travel more into the sea. They get to see exciting places and meet people who receive them warmly. While travelling under the interest of Prince Henry the VIII, More meets Peter Giles and Raphael Hythloday who form the two main characters in his book. In this part we explore the utopia of happiness. According to Thomas More, the idea of utopia in Book I, a person(s) lives in utopia when they assume a state of merry physically or virtually away from their normal place of residence. In their daily struggle, every person seeks happiness and would even assume a state of happiness if they lack it where they stay. Many people create their own happiness in their minds to fulfill their longing for the excitement (More I 2).
Raphael’s utopianism appears when his concerns of better conditions of living compared to those which prevailed at the time, as he illustrates the pictures of a place they visited in the past. More uses Raphael to illustrate the presence of a new location useful in marketing their non metallic material. He explains as though he had lived the whole of his life, many times in real life, people tend to seek after their needs with desired commitments as they wish to put up with new things, people and places. Raphael’s excitement leads him to asking More about his intentions with the monarch and why he has not taken over authority for this is their nation, he knows more very minimum thing in this location. We first meet a socio-academic utopia in Raphael when he notes that Mores’ elevated Mores position in the monarch would make him happier. Raphael talks of a condition where he treasures his education so much that his wisdom coupled with the knowledge cannot allow his will to go hostage of any king to serve him. While More admires Raphael, we can clearly see the intricate of Raphael’s happiness. In fact, view of monarch’s preoccupation with issues of war disgraces his knowledge of monarch and the happiness of the entire workers in this system. In his view, knowledge should bring permanent peace and not war as it is common in most monarchs (More I 5).
Raphael also finds no happiness in the lives of ministers whose best communication revolves around any technical assistance that never comes from genuine people or fiends. Instead the ministers find cheap lies more appealing to their subjects who do not need to know about the latest business in the kingdom. In his view this are a people held hostage by their office responsibilities and the king’s interest vested in their efforts. This justification on why he may require to delay work in the site of the king lead readers towards believe that Raphael rests his mind in permanent utopia as his views can only help up to pay for his basic interest. The main cause of Raphael’s pride and happiness blinds his opinions to present well before More’s lawyer.
Utopia 2: Money
In his utopia, Raphael argued that the aristocracy of classical philosophers played an important role in motivating people to steal. He bases his argument on the view that not everybody can engage in business faithfully and succeed. Thus, beyond farming in productive areas, engaging in trade to generate revenue and unite the society towards some unified course. At Cardinal Morton’s house, Raphael introduces us to an English lawyer who had high tendency of sentencing thieves to hash punishment of the law. Despite the fact that the subsistence farmers faced destabilization from frequent movement to and fro in their residences in England leaves us in believing that money scored little in their priority. Nonetheless, the lawyer maintained that those who steal out of any situation that might justify their course; they just have to face hanging. As the cardinals remain with no remedy for the punishment or the act, Raphael gets motivating to the readers when he suggest that people must find ways of desisting from such habits that give the society a bad name (Thomas and Booker 75).
As much as the society glorified money, human life could take the second place in the laws of the land. But Raphael’s argument that the law punishing a thief should be in consistent with the divine laws, flops at More’s presentation of the value of money and how money begets money. In the view of Thomas More, reinvesting money back into the economy through treasures such as gold forms the basis of a stable economy instead of stealing the money for individual interests. These concepts made significant changes in the lives of Europeans at the time that got inspiration and motivation from the works of Thomas more. In essence, those who failed to experience mental utopia like the prisoners and unlucky slaves ended up in dystopia. Unfortunately they could not get money. Instead they depended on the working group to give them manna (More 23).
Utopia 3: Values/morals
In classical ordinances, Thomas More presents certain utopian behaviors as very rewarding to those who believe in them. More envisioned a utopian world of ideal morals where each person respects their elders and shows obedient to their parents. In his humble perspectives, people should value their families and serve the interest of every member. Living in utopia means that wives must serve their husbands in great love and submission as children owe their parents. His litany of family love, that runs through the mother, from the father, to the children in the family, demands humility and deep respect. He never delays in identifying the special parks in reward to persons who uphold the social values he narrates in the Book I.
Perhaps in an ideal situation, Thomas More introduces us to the environmental social beliefs of utopians; utopians never kill animals for the sake of enjoying an expedition. Utopians consider hunting as immoral in the conservative ideology of utopians. Only in isolated cases do utopians kill animals. This includes sacrifices offered to God for atonement of the evil committed by the people to one another and to the supreme God. In general, this practice is common among utopians and even ordinary Christians of this day. All disciples of Saint Thomas More embrace these values as worship without sacrifice for a fallen man does not appeal to God. In addition, God’s presence in the utopian world rests in the core of human virtues practiced and not merely uttered in empty rhetoric (Schaer, Claeys, Sargent, and New York Public Library 46).
In particular, utopians highly hold to the notions of community life. This theory emanates from the law of god that emphasizes love for one another based on the love of oneself. From More’s perspective, utopian Europeans at the time valued their neighbors’ work and fruits of their labor. They believed in sharing work as visitors who would spend many days in a particular visit find it ideally appealing to partake in the activities of the people in that particular country. On the basis of loving your neighbor as yourself, utopians firmly believe in personal hygiene and all means used to keep the body fit and healthy. Personal attention to individual activity, mental state and physical predisposition to function in the intent of God is a primary concern of utopians. In the philosophy of Saint Thomas More, believers in this school of thought take bodily involvement in rewarding activity scores more in their practices as opposed to just staying idle. The idealist world of Thomas More believed in the virtue of love based on God’s laws to the latter. Any form of intimacy before marriage definitely led to chastisement. Since utopianism forbade polygamy and made it very difficult to obtain a divorce, marriage took centre stage as the most important form of reward or punishment as the interplay between love and respect could only find relevance in the union of two mutually related persons in the institution of marriage (More II 46).
Thomas Jefferson echoed the utopians value for freedom and equality. In the view of Jefferson’s utopian ideology, all people are equal in the eyes of God. Deriving from the premise of equal creation, Jefferson maintained that people assume rights inherent in them that condition them to pursue happiness and freedom. This confirms the utopians’ willingness to serve their fellow community members. In essence, this practice inculcated the art of humanity in the utopian world and increased their degrees of freedom to challenge tyrants as Saint Thomas More used animations to attack totalitarian corrupt leadership of London in the time. More’s conviction about the plight of Slaves and tyrants follows his utopian beliefs that from creation, God empowered both male and female equally and wanted every person to exercise their own freedom.
With their earnest belief in God, Utopians persistently embattled authorities that did not conform to the requirement of God’s laws because these laws formed the foundation of their very existence. Similarly, the claims of Thomas Jefferson at independence declaration portrayed his belief in a utopian system. In his address to the Virginia delegation to the continental congress, Jefferson maintained sincerity and composure while working at his discretion to put down his oratory speeches that scored the confidence of his fellow statesmen (Bleich 12).
In the American struggle for independence that saw it come to the day of independence, Thomas Jefferson had in his belief, a utopian ideology that human freedom and the respect for humanity formed the core of people’s existence (United States, Jefferson and Fink 23). This led to his endless attempts to abolish slavery in the American continent (Jayne xii). Through his devotion Jefferson did a lot of work in shaping the ideologies on which the current American civilization is based. Though Jefferson was passive in his attempts to stop slavery in America, one must admit that he made unrecognized efforts in terms of legislative changes that saw the elimination of slavery. This is reflected in drafting the ‘Declaration of Independence’ in 1776. In his work, Jefferson states that, “The colonists have the right to rebel against the British government and establish their own government based on the premise that all men are created equal and have the inalienable right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” (Jayne 176; United States et al 23). The rebellion/ abolition would come from the government/authority in power trying to alter these rights (life, liberty and, pursuit of happiness) (United States et al 23). Moreover, it was Jefferson’s efforts that inspired the Northwest Ordinance that permanently wiped out slavery from the American continent (Jayne xii). Jefferson’s activities show that it is possible for an individual to change the world around him/her for the better and contribute positively to the lives of the whole population. While Jefferson believed in utopia that could come through armed struggle, More’s belief in utopia led him to a firm belief in God’s role in giving human freedom and as the solitary head of the church. In the event that he refused to accept the King as the head of the church, the King beheaded him to prove his wrath to those who defy him but this did not end the imaginary world of utopians. Throughout his work, this incident marks the antidote of all dystopia in the book (Wells 25).
We as individuals have the capability to contribute much on the welfare of others rather than just our own self welfare. To start with, we can develop positive attitudes, which are contagious. In other words, the attitudes about life that we hold can be transmitted to other people so that we may change their perception about certain aspects of life. Attitudes do make major differences in life. Positive attitudes will contribute immensely to the welfare of the human life and existence. In the context of utopia, happiness is an attitude. In the pursuit of happiness and positive living we as individuals can impact positively in other people’s lives by transmitting positive attitudes towards healthy and happy living for the welfare of all people in our society. This way we will not only have made ourselves benefit from positive thinking and approach to life, but also help other people in their pursuit of happiness. For example, today we are talking of healthy eating so as to check on our weight, cholesterol levels and, avoidance of related diseases like diabetes. Positive attitudes are very vital in the realization of the ultimate goal, “healthy living”. We as individuals can help many others in the society on healthy eating and regular exercising and inculcate these attitudes to all people in the society top realize happiness and positive living and coexistence in life.
Conclusion
More used his talent just as Jefferson to portray their innermost desire to see a perfect world where people live according to some higher standards. Thomas More’s visualization of a world where people preserved nature and lived harmoniously with one another according to God’s law earned him the canonization of a Saint after his death. His achievements in academia, social and political career and the imagination of a Utopian world forever remain a motivation to many people who envy him for his socio-economic contributions. As individuals we can also contribute to the welfare of other people through changing their attitudes to embrace positive attitudes towards life in the pursuit of happiness. Through positivity in facing life and in our daily living we inculcate a culture of happiness and healthy living which will ultimately contribute to the welfare of humanity in all aspects of life.
Works Cited
Bleich, David. Utopia: the psychology of cultural fantasy. Michigan: University of Michigan Institute research Press. 1984. Print.
Jayne, Allen. Jefferson’s declaration of independence: origins, philosophy, and theology. Lexington, Kentucky: The University Press of Kentucky, 2000. Print.
Moore, Sir Thomas. Utopia. New York: NuVision Publication, LLC. 2007. Print.
More, Sir Thomas (Saint). Robinson, Ralph and Sacks, David (ed.) Utopia: The Bedford series in history and culture. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. 1999. Print.
More, Thomas, Sir Saint and Lupton J. H. The utopian of Sir Thomas more. London, UK: Bibliobazaar, LLC. 2009. Print.
More, Thomas. Utopia. London, UK: Adamant Media Corporations. 2005.
Schaer, Roland, Claeys Gregory, Sargent Lyman and New York Public Library. Utopia: the Search for ideal society in the western World. New York: Oxford University Press. 2000. Print.
Thomas, Marie-Anne and Booker, Keith. The science fiction handbook. Malden, MA: John Wiley and Sons, 2009. Print.
United States, Thomas Jefferson and Sam Finch. The Declaration of Independence. New York: Scholastic, Inc., 2002. Print.
Wells, H. G. A modern utopia. London, UK: First world library, 2006. Print.