Why have all attempts to create utopias inevitably failed, and almost always resulted in backlashes that were worse than the state of affairs before the utopian experiment started? I have trouble believing that as a species, we're we're that bad at putting our ideas into practice. I mean hell, we've done it countless times before, when it comes to physical inventions or even model forms of social organization.
So why is it so hard to eliminate things like jealousy, stupidity, prudishness, restraint, reactionary impulses, shame, and the like? Why can't Donatien Alphonse François's vision be realized?
>>1062682
>Why have all attempts to create utopias inevitably failed, and almost always resulted in backlashes that were worse than the state of affairs before the utopian experiment started?
Like?
>>1062695
The paris commune springs rather readily to mind.
I would guess that it's because when any society is widely considered to be "failing" then violence and instability tends to result. A utopia is by definition a perfect or near-perfect society, so it's much easier for it to reach a stage of affairs where everyone considers it to be going down the tubes.
Consider our current society: there's no pretence that it's some perfect utopia, so when we learn about x example of it being imperfect we don't freak out and start talking about revolution, because we expect there to be a certain level of imperfection. Things would have to get really bad before large numbers of people started trying to tear the whole thing down. If you live in a "utopia", you're being sold the idea the it IS a perfect society, so when that turns out not to be the case people get very upset.
>>1062682
Because the baseline society that utopian political thinkers try to break away from is the natural product of thousands of years of ideology interacting with human nature in real-world conditions, while a utopia is an artificial construct based on the ideas of one man or a small group of like-minded men. And the utopia will inevitably be populated by people who grew up in the baseline society and have internalized its values.
>>1062682
>So why is it so hard to eliminate things like jealousy, stupidity, prudishness, restraint, reactionary impulses, shame, and the like? Why can't Donatien Alphonse François's vision be realized?
Because humans aren't fucking blank slates that are infinitely malleable and can just be programmed into doing things "correctly" you fucking mongoloid
>>1062682
>why is it so hard to eliminate things like jealousy, stupidity, prudishness, restraint, reactionary impulses, shame, and the like?
Because they are hard wired into the human mind. Utopia's fail because humans evolved to function in far less than utopian circumstances
>>1062682
Life exists to struggle to live
Once it doesn't have to struggle it stagnates
Modern civilization being a good example: obesity, mental health, happiness, it all goes down the drain once you stop having to at least make an effort to survive comfortably
>>1062682
>jealousy, stupidity, prudishness, restraint, reactionary impulses, shame
you cant eliminate those things, you have to completely accept them both in yourself and moreso in others, and deal with them in yourself
people will not change, the world will not change, you must change
>>1062702
Yes, but your OP gives the impression humanity has been plagued by these 'utopias' since the beginning. In reality though this thread just boils down to another case of capitalism vs communism. With that in mind I guess your definition of utopia is simply any society that tries to abolish private property relations over the production of goods. It's worth noting that I sympathize with this idea. Such societies have existed in small scale around the world over the past century or so, but was realized fully just once in the USSR during the Stalin period. For whatever the problems these societies had, the idea that they stemmed purely from the fact that humans have emotions is straight up mysticism. Let it be stated plainly, this idea ultimately amounts to nothing more than a defense of property rights over production. In this case it's capitalism, though the very same 'utopian' argument was used to defend manorialism as well.
>>1062846
No, and in fact I don't consider the Commune to be particularly utopian from my point of view.
What's important (for the purposes of this thread) is that they attempted to establish a society that would be free of ills. It failed, in large part because their vision lacked, but it is a quintessential example of a group that reached high and fell even lower.
Stop trying to read economic reductionism into everything. It's stupid. Creating a place where people live free of hate and just do what comes naturally to themselves and to others is more than coming up with an optimal method of distributing goods and services.
