What can be wrong with wanting a perfect world? Well, for starters, many people may die.
If you believe that the statement above is just a little fanciful, think again. I believe it can be argued that utopianism has been one of the most destructive forces in all of history. Whether the dream was to establish the Third Reich, the Great Workers Paradise, or a restored Islamic Caliphate, people died in their millions.
Surely very few political or religious leaders start out with the declared aim of leaving desolation in their wakes. Yet, this is so often exactly what happens when ideologues lapse into promises of heaven on earth. Why would this be the case, and how can we promote more realistic (read, ‘less deadly’) aims in political discourse?
Perhaps it would be good to begin with a bit of a definition of Utopianism. In short it can be stated that it refers to the idea that it would be possible to achieve a perfect world that is free from social, political, and economic problems. Utopianism is characterized by the belief that human society can be fundamentally transformed and improved through the implementation of idealistic principles and structures. In terms of finding these principles, some utopians look back to some idealised past (e.g., the rule of the first four ‘Rightly Guided Caliphs’ in Islam) or forward, to some idealised future (e.g., the ‘Great Workers Paradise’ of Soviet Communism).
The very origin of the word ‘Utopia’ should give any thoughtful reader pause. The phrase was originally used as the title of a philosophical and satirical work written by the statesman, and later Catholic martyr, Sir Thomas More. It was published in 1516 and is considered one of the most influential works of Renaissance humanism. In the book, More describes a fictional island society, which he calls Utopia. The name "Utopia" is derived from the Greek words "ou" meaning "not" and "topos" meaning "place," suggesting that Utopia is a place that does not exist. More was, therefore, not trying to map out the contours of some perfect society that he believed possible. Instead, he used ‘Utopia’ as a mirror that he could hold up to his own society to better identify some of its challenges, as a means to inspire reform.
More’s rather hesitant approach was, of course, not followed by later (or earlier) utopians. There have been many, throughout history, who were more than willing to smash a few heads together in the service of paradise on earth. Often with horrendous consequences. I believe that these consequences are particularly due to the following factors:
Utter Rejection of What Came Before: Utopian ideologues have nothing but disdain for the systems that they are seeking to replace. In Islamic utopianism this is reflected in the insistence that everything that came before Islam can be dismissed as Jahiliya (Ignorance). Communist utopianism also regularly distinguished between pre- and post-revolutionary stages of development. This was perhaps most strikingly exemplified in Cambodia where the year of the Communist revolution was declared to be ‘Year 1’. This feature of utopianism can often manifest itself in orgies of destructive rage. Notice, for example, the determination of ISIS to get rid of the ruins of the ancient city of Palmyra, even while fighting for the very survival of their movement. Note also how a key feature of Mao Zedong’s Cultural Revolution was the incessant drive to get rid of the so-called ‘Four Olds’ (Old Customs, Old Habits, Old Culture and Old Ideas). It should, therefore, not come as a surprise that statues, place names, and history books so often appear in the gunsights of a whole range of modern utopians.
(Note: My shorter writings, under 1000 words, will remain free. However, my longer opinion pieces will henceforth be available to paid subscribers only. Please click below to upgrade your subscription, if you have not already done so.)