Utopia

[GNC]

Utopia would be much better if it wasn't for all these people around...

 

[INT21]

Vardoger,

...Do we have to move to an offworld colony to escape the dystopia in the future?..

I once posed a similar question and an accompanying 'who would inhabit it ?

so, who would get to pick who lived there. What would be the qualifications, and would it be an atheist society?

INT21

 

[dejanmikic]

I think it's more of a dystopia

so very true - thank you for that

My starting point was "how does it make me feel". Well, it felt soothing to watch - I wanted to be there, at least for a while...

 

[Moth In Relay]

It was speculative media like books for children or TV shows like Tomorrow's World for adults (which you'll note isn't on anymore) that presented the upward curve of an improving future.

Interesting that instead of (the grandly, inspiringly named) Tomorrow's World we have shows about mere gadgets.

I was wondering if optimistic thinking about the future, in the 50s and 60s, was aided by their position in relation to the futuristic-sounding year 2000. That year was close enough to be imaginable without being truly guessable as to what it might be like, but far enough away (perhaps) to avoid end of century/millennium fears. (I can't think of a good future-sounding year now which has the sweet-spot of relative proximity without being too close.)

 

[GNC]

Well, Busted told us all about the Year 3000. Not much has changed but we live underwater. In which case a hell of a lot has changed, hasn't it, Busted?

 

[Mythopoeika]

From Wiki I find..

...Citizens only do work which they enjoy and which is for the common good, leaving them with ample time for the cultivation of the arts and sciences...

This would appear to suggest that if you have an income (say the dole) and a dwelling place then you have the most important ingredients for a satisfactory life.

That might depend on the quality of the dwelling place. It might be a cubicle hotel like they have in Japan, or a tiny apartment in the 5000 block (like Korben Dallas has in The 5th Element).

 

[Mythopoeika]

So the question becomes 'why do those who are provided with these first three essentials not settle into an easy existence as they are ideally situated to do so.

I suggest that many of them are intellectually incapable of doing so.

Instead they sink into boredom and this leads to alcohol or drug misuse. They also tent to have lots of kids they can't afford to look after properly.

From this it seems that the idea of a 'free' Utopia is false. A person can only be free if she/he is working or otherwise contributing positively to his/her society. And, most important, they are instinctively aware they are doing so.

INT21

Yeah, I think you're right about this.
That kind of utopia might lead to mass depression among the masses. The only people who would be OK would be intelligent people, who can make their own entertainment and DO stuff.

 

[Mythopoeika]

so very true - thank you for that

My starting point was "how does it make me feel". Well, it felt soothing to watch - I wanted to be there, at least for a while...

Funny, that! Me too - but it's only because I was drawn into that film.

 

[INT21]

This problem of social unrest though boredom is already happening in some of the old industrial parts of the UK (and probably the USA and Europe) where the work has gone away.

people moan a lot about having to go to work. But the vast majority of them soon miss it when they either lose their jobs or retire.

There is a saying that the Devil makes work for idle hands; and it is true.

What annoys me is that all this can be predicted. The trends are obvious, but nothing is done to control the problem.

If it took fifty percent of the population to provide goods, food etc for a nation, then automation comes along and takes away two thirds of the jobs, how do the displaced people get by ? In the eyes of some they are stigmatized as 'loafers' because they are not working. But they have no choice. The society can only absorb so many people as volunteer workers.
For some it will be an opportunity to do other things. If they can afford it. But most will have to settle into a realization that, while not being exactly second class citizens, they will have to accustom themselves to finding pastimes that will be fulfilling for them.

If you read any books or papers on Utopia, they either avoid this aspect completely, or assume that the people of the future will readily accept it.
The dystopia view has them taking to drugs or drink to dull the ennui of having no purpose. That is the route to social collapse.

The question becomes 'how does one define one's self worth ?'

INT21

 

[Mythopoeika]

The question becomes 'how does one define one's self worth ?'

Maybe we have the beginnings of that with social media?

 

[INT21]

Unfortunately not.

A good example of the problem that arises with social media is given in E M Forster's 'The Machine stops'.

Social media is also used for some very frivolous purposes. Facebook etc. FaceBook can be very poisonous. It can destroy families. Many of the people using it do not seem able to consider the full extent of their postings. Much is said, as can happen on these forums, that would not be said face to face. And once the word is out there it can't be retracted.

I am all in favour of social groupings on the net. It is a marvelous thing.
But it needs discipline. After all, all you folk out there have no idea what kind of a person I am. Nor I you.

It is said that one could be an Orang Utang but no one would know thanks to spellcheckers.

In a way the web allows people who would have difficulty in social situation to express their views and to partake in topics that interest them. And, of course, to avoid any aspects they don't want to address.

I can't see a totally on-line existence being a very satisfactory one.

And it takes a certain amount of intelligence and knowledge to hold up one's part of these conversations.

INT21

 

[EnolaGaia]

This problem of social unrest though boredom is already happening in some of the old industrial parts of the UK (and probably the USA and Europe) where the work has gone away. ....

It's not simply boredom (as if work were a discretionary pastime) - it's also a matter of serious desperation.

Note that a large proportion of Trump supporters can be characterized as folks left disenfranchised by the disappearance of what were once reliable careers in their home towns / regions. They can't readily obtain the jobs their parents (and grandparents, etc., etc.) had in prior decades, and they're unable and / or unwilling to adapt or make the effort to do something novel with their lives. After one or two generations of family reliance on the local 'company town' environment the current crop of would-be drones don't seem to be able to look beyond what worked for their forebears. Their immediate response is to demand resumption of a status quo whose inevitable demise they couldn't comprehend (or wouldn't acknowledge ... ) for at least 3 - 4 decades now.

people moan a lot about having to go to work. But the vast majority of them soon miss it when they either lose their jobs or retire. ...

Working life affords a lot of structure, social interactions, and bases for self-gratification (if only in terms of perceived self-worth) that aren't commonly recognized until they are lost.

I spent some years as a federal employee taking / processing claims from the aged, disabled, etc. My general impression from dealing with retirees is that those whose working lives wholly (or at least overwhelmingly) defined their adult experience were the ones who ran headlong into existential malaise upon retirement. These were also the ones who seemed to (figuratively) wither and die the soonest.

 

[Mythopoeika]

My Dad couldn't wait for retirement, because he had loads of projects he wanted to do. He retired at the age I am now (55) and has spent the past 33 years doing lots of woodwork. It's kept him amused. He said that he became more busy doing stuff once he'd retired.

 

[INT21]

Mythopoeika,

Your Dad is indeed fortunate to be able to do the things he wanted to do. Many people have no plan for when they retire. I did, but things haven't worked out quite as I expected. Mainly due to having a TIA a few years before I finished work and a bit of heart problem that means I don't have the physical strength I used to. That limits me a bit;a lot if I am honest. I have lots to do, but sometimes can't find the enthusiasm to do it. I'm ok once I get started.

But EnolaGaia is correct. A generation back, when many wives stayed at home and the husband used to be out all day working except for Sundays, there was a very quick demise when the man had to retire at 65.
Suddenly the couple found themselves together all day every day. And they couldn't hack it.
They suddenly find they have no communication.

This seems to be a class thing. And, of course, it depends upon how close the relationship was throughout the marriage.

The upcoming 'Utopia' will bring a host of new problems.

I predict the growth industry of the near future will be psychoanalysts.

It is already trending that way. There is a billboard by our local ASDA with a huge advert for mental health workers.
They even offer a £5000 golden welcome to people who will join.

INT21

 

[Mythopoeika]

So sorry to hear about that, INT21.
I hope things start to get better for you.

My Dad was (is) very lucky. He's had heart problems too, with 2 major operations. His plan for retirement was really partly down to being very careful with money, paying off the mortgage early and then being given the opportunity of a big payoff (at the time, teachers were being offered an early retirement package).

Me, I have no plan. I'm probably going to carry on working until I am old.

 

[AgProv]

Interesting stuff. Technically I'm a Boomer - born at the fag-end of the Boomer years in 1962 to parents who lived through WW2. So I should be wealthy, prosperous and want for nothing.

Hah.

In 1962 Britain was booming and going through the opposite condition to perpetual recession.There's probably a name for that but right now in 2017 it doesn't easily come to mind. So a lot of people had children about then. A lot of children. If our parents thought about it at all, they'd have probably assumed the condition of relative prosperity would persist and we'd benefit from it too. No reason why they shouldn't. So that baby bulge of the late 1950's/early 1960's grew to adulthood. Careers advice at my school was minimal and based on the assumption that the relative full employment of the 1960's and most of the 1970's would persist indefinitely and we'd all get into some sort of gainful employment for life.

Guess what. Our 1960's baby bulge came to maturity and left school. In my case in 1980. Right into the howling teeth of Thatcher's first recession. To find the largest number of young people was entering an environment where employment was shrinking and so many of us were chasing so few university places - after cuts - that my A-level grades - like many - were simply not good enough. It's not a pleasant thing to suspect that you're surplus to requirements and just not needed. I suspect a lot of us had this sinking feeling about then. Hard to get established in an environment like that.

So when I hear the current crop of twentysomethings moaning that people of my age are the problem because we cornered all the good stuff for ourselves and we're holding onto it like limpets and not sharing... I can say "I feel your pain. i can see it's not a barrel of laughs for you. But why do you think we ALL benefited? I didn't. And this is why."

A terrible thing, to be a poor boomer... worst of both worlds...

 

[Coal]

Social media is also used for some very frivolous purposes. Facebook etc. FaceBook can be very poisonous. It can destroy families. Many of the people using it do not seem able to consider the full extent of their postings. Much is said, as can happen on these forums, that would not be said face to face. And once the word is out there it can't be retracted.

Social media is a problem as it currently works.

We all become socialised (if we're 'normal') by a process of negative feedback. If you turn up at a fancy dress party in a Hitler Youth uniform, in general, you'll be castigated, socially speaking. You learn what's acceptable and more importantly what is not acceptable in this way. This process starts with your parents and continues on into your teens (and possibly beyond).

If you put a picture on yourself in said costume on social media, you'll contact a six figure number of people who think you look quite cool. This is because in a pool of a couple of billion, even a very small percentage is quite a big number. Confirmation bias will cause most folk to latch onto their 100,000 likes, not the 1,000,000 hates.

In effect it this is a positive feedback mechanism, the opposite of 'normal' socialization, which leads to instability and a rise in extreme and socially unacceptable behavior.

You need a system for social media that reflects 'face to face' socialisation rules. In real life 'likes' don't exist much, but 'dislikes' are usually very clear.

 

[Mythopoeika]

Interesting stuff. Technically I'm a Boomer - born at the fag-end of the Boomer years in 1962 to parents who lived through WW2. So I should be wealthy, prosperous and want for nothing.

Hah.

In 1962 Britain was booming and going through the opposite condition to perpetual recession.There's probably a name for that but right now in 2017 it doesn't easily come to mind. So a lot of people had children about then. A lot of children. If our parents thought about it at all, they'd have probably assumed the condition of relative prosperity would persist and we'd benefit from it too. No reason why they shouldn't. So that baby bulge of the late 1950's/early 1960's grew to adulthood. Careers advice at my school was minimal and based on the assumption that the relative full employment of the 1960's and most of the 1970's would persist indefinitely and we'd all get into some sort of gainful employment for life.

Guess what. Our 1960's baby bulge came to maturity and left school. In my case in 1980. Right into the howling teeth of Thatcher's first recession. To find the largest number of young people was entering an environment where employment was shrinking and so many of us were chasing so few university places - after cuts - that my A-level grades - like many - were simply not good enough. It's not a pleasant thing to suspect that you're surplus to requirements and just not needed. I suspect a lot of us had this sinking feeling about then. Hard to get established in an environment like that.

So when I hear the current crop of twentysomethings moaning that people of my age are the problem because we cornered all the good stuff for ourselves and we're holding onto it like limpets and not sharing... I can say "I feel your pain. i can see it's not a barrel of laughs for you. But why do you think we ALL benefited? I didn't. And this is why."

A terrible thing, to be a poor boomer... worst of both worlds...

I can say 'ditto' to all of that.

 

[ramonmercado]

Icarian Utopian Communities on the U.S. frontier.

“They were of all kinds—cranks, students of French or students of economics, …"

Icaria was supposed to be the perfect city. On broad, tree-lined boulevards organized with geometric precision, its citizens would live and work in a state of perfect equality. The community would have no prisons, no private carriages, no aristocratic mansions—just houses, schools and hospitals, as grand as the royal palaces of old.

This was the utopian vision of Étienne Cabet, a French socialist thinker whose fictional 1840 travelogue, Voyage en Icarie (Travels in Icaria), spawned one of the world’s first communist movements. Cabet’s book was so popular and affecting that it led hundreds of French citizens to leave their homes and journey to the United States to realize the egalitarian paradise he had described.

But in 1874, when journalist Charles Nordhoff visited the real-life Icaria in the wilds of Iowa, what he saw was something quite different from Cabet’s utopia. “Wandering through the muddy lanes,” he wrote, “… [I felt] a keen sense of pain at the contrast between the comfort and elegance [Cabet] so glowingly described and the dreary poverty of the life which a few determined men and women have there chosen to follow.”

How did it all go so wrong?

The story of Icaria begins in France during the July Monarchy of 1830 to 1848, when the radical spirit of the French Revolution gave way to a bourgeois government of conservative and reactionary officials.

“The promise of this free, reformist society was betrayed,” says Julian Strube, a historian of religion at the University of Vienna. “The revolution had been stolen away.”

Originally a newspaper editor, Cabet wrote Voyage en Icarie while exiled in England for his vocal criticisms of the French government. In his fictional city of Icaria, citizens shared all things in common as absolute equals. “It was a society that was built really on the principles of the French Revolution: fraternity, liberty, equality,” says Jeffrey Hancks, a scholar of utopian movements at Western Illinois University. ...

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/hist...-on-the-american-frontier-icarians-180983302/

 

[ramonmercado]

Zardoz in the context of fighting population growth.

Against the Vortex: "Zardoz" and Degrowth Utopias in the Seventies and Today by Anthony Galluzzo

JOHN BOORMAN’S 1974 FILM Zardoz is best remembered as the science-fiction cult classic that gave us Sean Connery wearing nothing but thigh-high boots, red underwear, and a pair of matching bandoliers. Anthony Galluzzo’s new book Against the Vortex: Zardoz and Degrowth Utopias in the Seventies and Today proves that the film may have much to tell us about our present moment.

Zardoz depicts a distant future in which a small technoscientific elite known as the Immortals have retreated into a domed community called the Vortex. The rest of humanity resides in the postapocalyptic Outlands, a barbaric zone patrolled by death squads called the Brutals. The Immortals have manipulated the Brutals to serve as a mode of population control, killing large numbers of people and, later, enslaving them to provide the Immortals with food.

As Galluzzo persuasively argues, Zardoz allegorizes the Malthusian panics of the late 1960s and ’70s. Paul R. Ehrlich’s 1968 bestseller The Population Bomb suggested that looming environmental catastrophe demanded the intervention of experts who could figure out ways to force people in poorer nations to adopt stringent birth control measures. The Immortals in Zardoz embody this vision of ecological balance achieved through totalitarian technocratic intervention. Indeed, Galluzzo observes that the Immortals live in what turns out to be a grounded interplanetary vessel, a literalization of Buckminster Fuller’s Spaceship Earth. The Immortals’ sustainable world is an enclosed system in which everything is monitored and controlled by an advanced computer.

This “hippie modernist” utopia depends on the violent exclusion and exploitation of the rest of the human population. Here Galluzzo draws a connection to the ecofascism of Garrett Hardin, who argued that well-provisioned First World nations should ride out the coming ecological collapse by hardening their borders against refugees, allowing the rest of the planet to die. This is precisely what the Immortals have done. For their part, the Brutals represent what Ehrlich would term a “death rate solution” to the issue of excess birth rates. The Immortals have invented a false religion to convince the Brutals to do their bidding: one of them pilots a giant floating head called Zardoz that booms, “The gun is good! The penis is evil!” before showering the Brutals with small arms to exterminate the planet’s surplus population. ...

https://lareviewofbooks.org/article...idol-on-anthony-galluzzos-against-the-vortex/