Utopianism and Social Change (original) (raw)
Capital and Class, 42, 2018
This article discusses criticisms that utopia and utopianism undermine social change. It outlines two types of utopia, future and current. It argues against claims that utopianism is idealist and steps aside from material and conflictual dimensions of society and so undermines change, proposing that utopias are material and conflictual and contribute to change. Against liberal and pluralist criticisms that utopianism is end-ist and totalitarian and terminates diversity and change it argues that utopianism can encompass liberal and pluralist dimensions and be dynamic rather than static. It is proposed that criticisms create false conflations and dichotomies. Critical perspectives, rather than being rejected, are answered on their own terms. Utopianism, it is argued, is part of change, materially, now and in the future.
Sign up for access to the world's latest research.
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Related papers
Mapping the Unmappable: Dichotomies of Utopianism
Filozofski vestnik, 2017
The 500th anniversary of the first edition of Thomas More's Utopia was accompanied by a seemingly inexhaustible wave of discussions, conferences, and publications on utopianism and its innumerable well-and less-known forms. All this buzz around the topic showed, on the one hand, that there is plenty of interest in utopia at the beginning of the 21st century, most notably in academia given that utopian studies are thriving, and researchers are publishing books and articles on a regular basis. On the other hand, however, at least in developed countries, there has been a growing tendency toward dystopia for the last couple of decades, and utopia became predominantly a pejorative word-a way to insult someone for his or her political orientation.
Utopianism and its discontents A conceptual history
Algemeen Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Wijsbegeerte, 2016
Utopianism is often rejected out of hand for one of two reasons: either it is thought to be politically dangerous, or it is thought to be a mere fantasy. It is nevertheless an important theme in contemporary political philosophy. This article reviews part of the political-philosophical career of ‘utopia’ as a concept by considering the different traditions that have been influential in shaping the way utopia and utopianism are perceived today. A brief reading of Thomas More’s Utopia is followed by a consideration of the utopian socialist tradition and Karl Marx’s criticism of it. Their understanding of utopia continued into the twentieth century. Utopianism’s bad reputation is partly due to its association with the attempt to realize communism in the Soviet Union, but other factors include the Eastonian empirical turn in political theory and the onset of postmodern incredulity. It made a perhaps surprising comeback in the work of John Rawls, whose work was recently criticized by Amartya Sen for being overly ‘utopian’ – a criticism that is highly analogous to Marx’s onslaught against the utopian socialists. With the help of counterarguments devised by Pablo Gilabert, the article considers three ways in which utopianism can be useful to contemporary political thought.
Utopia as Counter-Logical Social Practice
JYU Dissertations, 2021
The central question of this dissertation is “What is the function of utopia today?”. This question already implies a certain kind of historicity. It implies the possibility of utopias having different functions in different times. This is why a larger question is in this dissertation asked as well: “what functions of utopia have become emphasized in the history of utopian thought?”. And to answer both of these questions will I need to ask a third question: “What kind of different forms has the concept of utopia taken during its historical existence?”. Herein it is argued that utopias can be understood as relational counter-images and counter-practices grounded in the historical circumstances they are developed in. This dissertation focuses especially on the historical changes the function of utopia has gone through and on the function of utopia in the current neoliberal era in which utopianism has become suspicious socio-political mode of thought. The main function of utopia, in this context is the disruptive function, which has the possibility of opening social and political imagination to new possibilities. Especially the possibility of different experimental social practices is explored in this dissertation. These practices are described with the concept of a “utopian counter-logical social practice”. This concept is one developed through the usage of autonomist Marxist theoretician John Holloway’s texts. The concept refers here to a collectively carried out practice which is at the same time within, against and outside of the present. It is within the present since it exists in the here-and-now. It is against since it orients itself according to a logic of practice that challenges and relativizes the practices of the existing society. It is outside of the present since it prefigures new and better forms of being in its very existence. Utopian counter-logical social practice is here regarded as having a disruptive function which has the possibility of causing “cracks”, not only in the social cohesion of the existing society, but also in the worldview of the subject. Utopian counter-logical social practice has the potential to offer new, surprising perspectives on the existing society for the subject. It is argued that utopian counter-logical social practices have the potential to cause disruption on both ideological and practico-structural levels.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
Related papers
In What’s New in the New Europe? Redefining Culture, Politics, Identity;. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego., 2019
International Encyclopedia of Political Science, 2011
Palgrave Encyclopaedia of the Possible, 2021