Skip to main content

Utopia

 


A utopia is an ideal place and who does not want to live in an ideal place? We create paradises and heavens in our myths and religious beliefs without ever giving serious consideration to the possibility of creating a utopia here with the only life we possibly have.

How can we create a utopia?

First of all, we should admit that people have different worldviews. Each individual has her own notions about what is right and wrong, good and bad, God and life, and so on. A utopia should accept that diversity not merely with an attitude of facile tolerance but with profound understanding.

Truth is nobody’s prerogative. There is no individual, state or religion that can claim the possession of absolute truths. What is truth for one person may be a joke for another. Hence a utopia should never aim at imposing on its citizens a single truth in the form of religion or culture or anything at all. Instead a utopia should give freedom to its citizens to explore truth in their own ways. A utopia should provide all the necessary infrastructure required for such explorations. Every citizen in a utopia should be empowered to make personal enquiries, pursuits and explorations which in turn should ideally add to the welfare of other citizens.

All reasonable people want to live in a society in which they can cooperate with their fellow citizens on mutually acceptable terms and conditions. We all want to grow into greater joy and prosperity. Reason tells us that it is better to grow together as a community rather than as individuals. Individualism will trigger rivalry, jealousy, and other vices making joy impossible. We should grow together. That is the only practical way of achieving prosperity with joy.

The state has a great role to play in a utopia even though the citizens are reasonable and responsible. The state should ensure that every citizen enjoys and freedom and equality. The state should ensure that the society is a fair system of cooperation. American political philosopher, John Rawls, regarded these three – freedom, equality and fairness – as the pillars of any utopia. He also argued, among a lot many other things, that the state should ensure that the citizens make effective use of their freedoms.

Now, is this practical? Well, you and I know that it is not impossible to practise these simple principles. But it doesn’t work, however? Why? The human nature is such. We are self-centred. Utopias can’t be built on swelling egos.

Hence we make certain compromises and live on in parodies of utopias. We proclaim that ours is the best civilisation, ours are the ideal gods, ours is the most sacred language, and so on. We pretend to be custodians of an ancient and divine heritage. We pretend to be whatever we are not but would like to be. We live in dystopia and claim it to be utopia.

There are noble people, however. All over the world. That is why the world is still going on without destroying itself. Liberal and reasonable people stand ready to pacify bullies and warmongers, defend core human rights, and to help struggling people to move on in spite of their governments and the henchmen of the governments. They live in their own utopias.

PS. This is powered by #BlogchatterA2Z

Yesterday’s post in this series: Tatvamasi

 

Comments

  1. So true.
    Diversity must be respected.
    One man's paradise, is another's hell- just like "one man's meat is another man's poison".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At any rate homogeneity is so boring in human affairs.

      Delete
  2. Why do you want to create a Utopia in the first place? Can happiness ever be quantified or qualified? Utopia will always remain an unfulfillable fantasy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who doesn't want Paradises? That they are unachievable is a different matter. As Browning said, Man's reach should exceed his grasp / Or what's a heaven for?

      Delete
  3. We all live in parodies of utopia a dystopia. And yet all civilizations and government live in utopia. Liked your thoughts
    Deepika Sharma

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unless most people become aware of their potential to create utopias, we'll be condemned to endure parodies if not dystopias.

      Delete
  4. Very insightful. Utopia is not possible, but society's may improve so much if more individual's prioritize equality and justice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's it. Utopia is impossible but utopian longings are needed so that a better world can be created.

      Delete
  5. Utopia may be unachievable but should be attempted at as it's a goal so worthy that we should aim for it despite likelihood of failure in achieving it. The definition of Utopia given by John Rawls (and yourself) is correct. And you are also correct in asserting that the world is still going on without destroying itself only because of the presence of the noble and reasonable people though Utopia (as they might be willing to create) is a distant dream.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for such articulate acknowledgement of this post.

      Delete
  6. Thank you for the clarity of thought that comes through your posts:
    "We pretend to be whatever we are not but would like to be." answers all the questions about why we are where we are in our collective histories today.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Our collective history is a huge palimpsest written over again and again!

      Delete
  7. You painted a picture we all long for but is too far away because of our own egos.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The ego is the problem. Not even gods could solve that.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ayodhya: Kingdom of Sorrows

T he Sarayu carried more tears than water. Ayodhya was a sad kingdom. Dasaratha was a good king. He upheld dharma – justice and morality – as best as he could. The citizens were apparently happy. Then, one day, it all changed. One person is enough to change the destiny of a whole kingdom. Who was that one person? Some say it was Kaikeyi, one of the three official wives of Dasaratha. Some others say it was Manthara, Kaikeyi’s chief maid. Manthara was a hunchback. She was the caretaker of Kaikeyi right from the latter’s childhood; foster mother, so to say, because Kaikeyi had no mother. The absence of maternal influence can distort a girl child’s personality. With a foster mother like Manthara, the distortion can be really bad. Manthara was cunning, selfish, and morally ambiguous. A severe physical deformity can make one worse than all that. Manthara was as devious and manipulative as a woman could be in a men’s world. Add to that all the jealousy and ambition that insecure peo...

Lucifer and some reflections

Let me start with a disclaimer: this is not a review of the Malayalam movie, Lucifer . These are some thoughts that came to my mind as I watched the movie today. However, just to give an idea about the movie: it’s a good entertainer with an engaging plot, Bollywood style settings, superman type violence in which the hero decimates the villains with pomp and show, and a spicy dance that is neatly tucked into the terribly orgasmic climax of the plot. The theme is highly relevant and that is what engaged me more. The role of certain mafia gangs in political governance is a theme that deserves to be examined in a good movie. In the movie, the mafia-politician nexus is busted and, like in our great myths, virtue triumphs over vice. Such a triumph is an artistic requirement. Real life, however, follows the principle of entropy: chaos flourishes with vengeance. Lucifer is the real winner in real life. The title of the movie as well as a final dialogue from the eponymous hero sugg...

Abdullah’s Religion

O Abdulla Renowned Malayalam movie actor Mohanlal recently offered special prayers for Mammootty, another equally renowned actor of Kerala. The ritual was performed at Sabarimala temple, one of the supreme Hindu pilgrimage centres in Kerala. No one in Kerala found anything wrong in Mohanlal, a Hindu, praying for Mammootty, a Muslim, to a Hindu deity. Malayalis were concerned about Mammootty’s wellbeing and were relieved to know that the actor wasn’t suffering from anything as serious as it appeared. Except O Abdulla. Who is this Abdulla? I had never heard of him until he created an unsavoury controversy about a Hindu praying for a Muslim. This man’s Facebook profile describes him as: “Former Professor Islahiaya, Media Critic, Ex-Interpreter of Indian Ambassador, Founder Member MADHYAMAM.” He has 108K followers on FB. As I was reading Malayalam weekly this morning, I came to know that this Abdulla is a former member of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind Kerala , a fundamentalist organisation. ...

Empuraan and Ramayana

Maggie and I will be watching the Malayalam movie Empuraan tomorrow. The tickets are booked. The movie has created a lot of controversy in Kerala and the director has decided to impose no less than 17 censors on it himself. I want to watch it before the jingoistic scissors find its way to the movie. It is surprising that the people of Kerala took such exception to this movie when the same people had no problem with the utterly malicious and mendacious movie The Kerala Story (2023). [My post on that movie, which I didn’t watch, is here .] Empuraan is based partly on the Gujarat riots of 2002. The riots were real and the BJP’s role in it (Mr Modi’s, in fact) is well-known. So, Empuraan isn’t giving the audience any falsehood as The Kerala Story did. Moreover, The Kerala Story maligned the people of Kerala while Empuraan is about something that happened in the faraway Gujarat quite long ago. Why are the people of Kerala then upset with Empuraan ? Because it tells the truth, M...

Empuraan – Review

Revenge is an ancient theme in human narratives. Give a moral rationale for the revenge and make the antagonist look monstrously evil, then you have the material for a good work of art. Add to that some spices from contemporary politics and the recipe is quite right for a hit movie. This is what you get in the Malayalam movie, Empuraan , which is running full houses now despite the trenchant opposition to it from the emergent Hindutva forces in the state. First of all, I fail to understand why so much brouhaha was hollered by the Hindutvans [let me coin that word for sheer convenience] who managed to get some 3 minutes censored from the 3-hour movie. The movie doesn’t make any explicit mention of any of the existing Hindutva political parties or other organisations. On the other hand, Allahu Akbar is shouted menacingly by Islamic terrorists, albeit towards the end. True, the movie begins with an implicit reference to what happened in Gujarat in 2002 after the Godhra train burnin...