When reading Sir Thomas More’s, Utopia, searching for religion and nature in the story was a piece of cake. But what really got me was the structure of the government of Utopia and how Raphael describes it. I’m not into religion at all, and when he begins to speak about the Cardinal and the Utopians religion, honestly, I zoned out. It was just like every other religious hub-bub you read about in stories. Who cares? The really interesting thing is the society and government of Utopia.
The one line in Book one that caught my attention and I thoroughly agree with comes near the very end. Raphael states, “But as a matter of fact, my dear More, to tell you what I really think, as long as you have private property, and as long as money is the measure of all things, it is really not possible for a nation to be governed justly or happily” (543). This line really shows the whole story of Utopia, and what a perfect world could be like. It also shows the hopelessness for our world to ever be a Utopia. Our world, and particularly our government, is controlled by money and material assets. Who has the nicest car? Who has the bigger house? Who has the larger income? The people on top are those with the most money, and as Raphael stays, if this is how the world is, nothing can be ruled over justly or happily. I think that this story really relays a message for our generation.
Look at what has happened in our generation: a war in the Middle East, oil spills, rebellion, all caused by greedy people with too much money. The war in the Middle East was started because of Former President Bush’s statement that the terrorists had weapons of mass destruction. This was a ploy by Bush to outdo his father. W. Bush wanted to outdo his father and be the better president and be more liked by everyone so that he could have a longer term as president and make more money to have better cars, houses, and a better life than his father. We all know how that turned out. And BP’s little boo-boo in the gulf was all because the leaders of the company were too selfish to stop the oil drilling in order to save our environment. They didn’t want to lose any money from their pay checks in order to save the American people and government a lot of trouble. And finally, the rebellions in the Middle East are fights against the government having too much power and too much money, and instead of listening to their people, Kaddafi decided to blow his people up instead. He didn’t want to lose his possessions or money in order to rule justly or happily.
Sir Thomas More’s message he gives to the readers through Raphael is especially important today in our time and age. People need to think about others and not just themselves, and let other people worry about them. If everyone focuses on one another and not themselves the world could be a much better place.
(P.S. This is not a solution for world peace, just a step forward in the way of curing the human condition.)
It sounds like you're pretty motivated by the idea of a Socialist, or Communist society. Reading more in depth into Socialism and its flaws could help expand your ideas on the subject. What will motivate a society to grow? how would the rulers not be corrupt? When I read More's Utopian political scheme, I felt as though he didn't want his readers to agree with their views but argue with them. If he sold you on the idea of Communism that's exciting though! Look more into it.
ReplyDeletei don't know if i agree with you but i will say that u argued your point eloquently. I too was really fascinated by the idea of a society without any kind of currency. For me it was really hard to fathom, it may even be an impossibility. i think Utopia accepts a kind of basic hierarchy (with the existence of slaves) to provide the best possible kind of life for MOST but not all. i just thought the depiction of Utopia was kind of gray and boring. Isn't it more exciting, or even more fair, to live in a culture where things like social class are determined by something as trivial as money?
ReplyDeleteSo I thought I commented on this rumination earlier, but I guess it never went through. I really need to get in the habit of writing things like this in a word document for situations just like this.. anyways take two:
ReplyDeleteI found your rumination very interesting, partly because I did not think about the reading in the way you did. The quote you choose is intriguing, but I am not sure if practicality would allow us as a society to eliminate these things for the greater good. Personally I am all for helping people in need, but I'm not ready to give up private property rights to do so. Also if money was eliminated, wouldn't something else just become a status symbol? I feel like human beings are wired to want to me the best, whatever that may mean at the specific instance in time.
It seems I somewhat took the same approach while reading this as when I was preparing my rumination last week I saw myself dividing up the parts of a Utopian society into parts of religion, and government. The longing for a higher status in a society is a main reason for fighting and people acting uncivil to one another. I wonder what would occur if the United States had the resources to, for example, supply the country with its own oil. I wonder if people would find more Utopian aspects to unveil themselves.
ReplyDeleteI enjoy the fact that you have decided to side with Sir Thomas More, when most of the class have rebeled pretty harshly. Although I do not think this type of society will function properly with consistent growth, I think it is daring of you to still argue the other side.
ReplyDelete