Before understanding the role of Utopias, Utopia, and utopianism in political thought we must first understand the diverse origins of these terms and ideas. The word “Utopia” derives from the original Greek meaning of “nowhere” and the English interpretation of “good” or “well” place. This leads to the popular notion of Utopia as the “good place that is no place” (Sargisson, 2007, p30). The word itself was invented by Thomas More, and entered the vocabulary via his publication in 1516, long after the best-known early utopian writing: Plato’s Republic. More’s Utopia depicted the frame work of an island, including its social, political and religious structures. The Utopia described was understood to be an ideal model of society, a critique on the existing order by imagining the perfect alternative, a style which has since blossomed into what is now described as utopian thinking, or utopianism (Heywood 2007).
It is also important at this point to understand the term “political thought”. Political thoughts and thinking within this essay will be taken to involve both the classic and modern political ideologies and theories, as well as the notion that “politics” is encompassed in almost every aspect of our day to day lives. From communism, to the price of coffee, we understand that political thoughts can be had on both.
Utopianism has grown in many different ways since Utopia and has affected many aspects of social life such as philosophy, economics, sociology and architecture (Sargisson, 2007). But the major influences have been in literature and political ideology, some of which have been positive and some of which have been negative, some have been written and some have been lived. So, in order to understand Utopia in political thinking, we must first understand these.
Many anti-utopians claim that Utopia is as an untouchable blueprint, and as such, utopianism “can be used, as justifications for terrible wrongs” (Wallerstein, 1999, p1), can only be achieved through violence, and can only be kept through political repression. Utopia is then totalitarian (Levitas, 2001), and it was dreams of “perfection” that lead to Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia; both states which killed possibilities of change and progress for large sections of society, disallowing them the chace of a “perfect society”(Sarigsson, 2007, p31).Sarigsson explores this vein of argument by looking at the views of philosophers such as Karl Popper who argue that: “Utopia is supposed to make us all happy, but how could one person know another’s interests or desires? …One person’s dream may be another’s nightmare” (2007, p28). Popper argued totalitarianism has its roots in utopianism as far back as Plato’s Republic. The society described by Plato, was according to Popper; anti-libertarian, anti-democratic and in the interest of the ruling class, as were, in parts, the two aforementioned real-life totalitarian states. This displays the dangerous links between attempting to turn fiction into reality, and such criticisms continue to fight the cause of utopianism and its alleged search for perfection.
Respondents to the criticism that Utopia is a final-blueprint, or that it is perfection seeking, see utopianism as much more than this. Sargisson (2007,p30) suggests that some Utopias are in fact blueprints, but that perfection “is a final condition, it is static and it does not change”, continuing to say that utopias are seldom static or even reached. Conversely to Popper, Sargisson views both Plato’s and More’s respective Utopias not as final plans but as thought experiments, explorations of another way. This point is supported by Bloch who argues that the “propensity to reach for a better life is manifest in everyday life” (Levitas, 2001, p27) and:
“Most people in the street look as if they are thinking about something else entirely. The something else is predominantly money, but also what it could be changed into.” (Bloch, 1986, p33)
Utopias, then, are omnipresent in our lives. Through our thoughts, as Bloch suggests, they help us imagine alternatives, allowing us to approach society anew. But also in the physical world around us, for example, many allegedly utopian seeking societies practice alternatives that aren’t alien to us at all, e.g. the co-operative, co-inhabitant and trust methods of owning property (Sargisson, 2007).
So whilst utopian thinking is all around us, we begin to understand that Utopias are not so much about the final result, as this is very rarely reached, but the small footsteps in between. For example, the utopian dream of a 20th century British Feminist may have been a nation of complete gender equality, and though this has not been achieved to date, many things that would lead to the end goal have; enfranchisement to say the least. Particularly in the sense that Utopia is within our everyday thoughts, Utopia is political and plays a large role in political thinking. In August 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. stood at the footsteps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington and said “I have a dream”, a dream which led to huge changes in the USA and around the world, a dream of a better nation: a Utopia that he imagined as not perfect, just better than the society currently in existence. It is this kind of utopianism that responds best to Popper’s criticism of “seeking perfection”.
Sargisson (2007, p30) proposes another argument saying that “Utopias are self-consciously flawed”. The word itself is “the good place that is no place” after all. This is perhaps one of the strongest indictments in favour of utopianism; that whilst its supporters embrace its possibilities, the majority do so whilst realising that “Utopia” itself is the least important part of the journey. It is all that comes in between which makes the difference.
The final criticism that must be rebuked by utopianism is that it takes it’s directives from fictional literature, and as such, should not be taken seriously. This point is combatted by some of the arguments already made, most effectively by Bloch’s suggestion that utopian thoughts are in everyone’s minds, not just those that take the time to formulate them into written word. More than this though are the examples of positive real-life utopian projects, which can be said to be much more influential than many utopian writings. Robert Owen’s New Lanark for example, was a founding community in the development of Socialism. A 19th century British commune focused on the development of its members through education, improving living standards, and creating a fairer society; displaying once again how the search for Utopia is much less about the final destination than the changes which can be made along the way. As such, New Lanark had major impacts on social philosophers, politicians, and communities the world over: from the Russian Royal family, to the new communities springing up across America, and into smaller groups such as those who later founded “New Australia” in Paraguay. These examples perhaps show the role of Utopia in political thinking at its active best; inspiring positive communities. But it is the accusation that utopianism is, and has been, the inspiration for some of the most negative communities on our planet that damages its cause the most. This argument has partially been explored by Popper who suggests totalitarianism derives from utopian literature. The examples given of Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia are examples which certainly strive for another way, but they surely cannot be described as being driven towards Utopia. And although Utopia itself is built upon slavery, its aim is a land “free of the inequality, economic exploitation, dynastic squabbles, and legal chicanery that More observed all around him” (Greenblatt, 2005, p519): a society that would be the “perfect alternative” for every citizen, not just a select few. Something even the most ardent utopian would suggest is near impossible in practice. So the fault lies then not within the texts, they merely provide a message for change, the fault of utopianism resulting in totalitarian societies lies with the reader extracting the wrong message.
Politics and utopianism then seemingly play a role within one another. Utopias lived and written offer examples of another way, observations of political, social and economic alternatives. In this sense, the imagining of another way surely suggests that politics needs utopianism in order to create any change whatsoever. Utopias give politics and political thinkers a sense of where they want society to be, and in return for these thoughts, politics supplies some of the vehicles needed to implement them, such as political parties and pressure groups. Sargisson (2007, p42) says “Without politics, Utopia remains on the page”.
Utopias can also be attributed as one of the best indicators of the issues and debates of their time. Plato and More were both Humanists but their publications are separated by nearly two millenniums meaning that their conclusions are very different. Utopian thoughts and writing much closer to each other in timescale can also result in very different visions of the world, such as Bellamy’s Looking Backward and Morris’ News from Nowhere. Dystopian literature is also worthy of note in the discussion of utopianism and political thought. Novels such as Orwell’s 1984 and Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale describe societies that are not the “perfect alternative” but some of the foulest alternatives imaginable. These dystopias can be seen to act as warnings to society, perhaps most starkly warning us against misunderstanding Utopia.
It is such misunderstandings of utopianism that have led to its downfall in popular culture; linked to totalitarianism and in turn all things negative about politics. But as we have seen you need not delve too deep to find the truth about utopianism, and dispel the myths of an ideology reaching for an impossible dream.
In conclusion, having viewed both the arguments for and against utopianism, we begin to understand the importance of the subject in political thinking. It’s most important role being to provide the driving force behind change, and whilst we have seen arguments that suggest utopianism can sometimes bring changes considered dangerous, we have come to understand that however it is viewed, it is ever-present and in every sense required by politics. Every change made in society, particularly those for the better, are because of someone’s, or some people’s, dreams and hopes. The practice of taking these such ideas and turning them into reality, is neither utopian nor political, it is both. Politics and utopianism exist not just alongside one another, but they are interwoven entities, drawing life and feeding from one another.
With this thought in mind, we understand how utopian thoughts and writings have had major influences on society throughout time. From Plato’s Republic to Huxley’s Island, Utopia has been ever-present and at the forefront of man’s mind. Similarly at the forefront has been politics, it was, after all, Plato’s most famous student Aristotle who told us that: “Man by nature is a political animal”. The role of utopianism in political thinking then lies not in the agreeance or disagreeance of it, but the fact it exists in our minds; anarchists have strongly clung to utopian thinking, relating the two individual ideologies through their similar features of “contingency, immanence and prefiguration”, whilst opposing groups, such as the followers of Marx have suggested it as “unrealistic, impracticable, and unscientific”. The most recognisable factor being that both groups are thinking about Utopia (Honeywell, 2007, p239;241).
Utopianism then lives on into the 21st century through the notion that social change is part of the utopian process. More than this we understand it lives in both people’s minds and in literature. Specific 21st century political ideology may also be described as utopian; the “Third-Way” for example describes a new way of politics, pulling from both the left and right of the political spectrum to achieve a final goal. However, Spannos (2008, p3) says that “where utopia offers vision escaping reality it has rightly been rejected by serious Leftists”, giving hope to the thought that utopianism is now beginning to be understood for what it is on a more wide scale level.
Finally then, the importance of Utopia’s role in political thinking can be summed up best by the thought of a world without the dreams of figures such as Emmeline Pankhurst and Martin Luther King. The thought of political thoughts without Utopia is a miserable one indeed.
Bibliography:
ATWOOD, Margaret (1996). The Handmaid’s Tale. London, Vintage.
BELLAMY, Edward (1986). Looking Backward: 2000-1887. Harmondsworth, Penguin Classics.
BLOCH, Ernst (1986). The Principle of Hope. Oxford, Blackwells.
CORNFORD, Francis Macdonald (1941). The Republic of Plato. London, Oxford University Press.
DICKSON, Niall (1999). What is the Third Way? [online]. Last accessed 6 December 2010 at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/458626.stm
EATWELL, Roger and WRIGHT, Anthony (eds.). (2004) Contemporary Political Ideologies, 2nd Edition. New York, Continuum.
GREENBLAT, Stephen and LOGAN, George (2005). Sir Thomas More 1478-1535. Reprinted in: GREENBLAT, Stephen et al (eds.) The Norton Anthology of English Literature, 8th Edition. London, W. W. Norton & Company, 2005, 518-590. Vol. B.
HEYWOOD, Andrew (2000). Key Concepts in Politics. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.
HEYWOOD, Andrew (2007). Politics, 3rd Edition. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.
HONEYWELL, Clarissa (2007). Utopianism and Anarchism. Journal of Political Ideologies, 12(3), 239-254.
HUXLEY, Aldous (2002) Island. London, Joanna Cotler Books.
LEVITAS, Ruth (2001). For Utopia: The (Limits of the) Utopian Function in Late Capitalist Society. In: GOODWIN, Barbara, (ed). The Philosophy of Utopia. Abingdon, Routledge,25-43.
LEVITAS, Ruth (2010). The Concept of Utopia. Bern, Peter Lang. Ralahine Classics, Vol. 3.
MORE, Sir and Saint Thomas (1997). Utopia. Translated by Ralph Robinson. Ware, Wordsworth Editions.
NEW LANARK. Robert Owen. (2010). [online]. Last accessed 6 December 2010 at: http://www.newlanark.org/robertowen.shtml
ORWELL, George (1986). Nineteen Eighty Four. Harlow, Heinemann.
PLANT, Raymond (1991). Modern Political Thought. Oxford, Blackwells.
SARGISSON, Lucy (2007). The Curious Relationship Between Politics and Utopia. In: BACCOLINI, Raffaella and MOYLAN, Tom (eds.). Utopia Method Vision. Bern, Peter Lang. Ralahine Classics, Vol. 1.
SPANNOS, Chris (2008). What Is Real Utopia?. In: SPANNOS, Chris, (ed). Real Utopia. Edinburgh, AK Press, 3-11.
WALLERSTEIN, Immanuel (1999) Utopistics. New York, The New Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment