Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Individuals in Utopia

“Our greatest fear is not that we are inadequate, but that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that frightens us. We ask ourselves, who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, handsome, talented and fabulous? Actually, who are you not to be? You are a child of God. Your playing small does not serve the world. There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that other people won’t fee l insecure around you. We were born to make manifest the glory of God within us. It is not just in some; it is in everyone. And, as we let our own light shine, we consciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our fear, our presence automatically liberates others.” – Nelson Mandela, Nobel Peace Prize

“When we are happy, we are a light, a beacon, for others. When we are unhappy, we seek the light given off by others.” –Rigoberta Menchu, Nobel Peace Prize

Does anybody else notice the similarities? Not one, but two different Nobel Peace laureates talk of the light within each person. Doesn’t it seem like this is a fundamental part of the human existence?

Our class deals utopian societies. All of these societies have exactly one thing in common; they have people living in them. Individuals are the building blocks of any society. In order to build an ideal society, the individuals need to be ideal themselves. I am not saying that there is one ideal model all people should follow. In fact, I am saying that all people need to be uniquely themselves. Each and every human being is blessed with natural (in my view, God-given) talents. These talents are unique to the person who possesses them. Rather than trying to fit into a society, individuals should strive to become the best they can be.

The concept of each person being the best individual they can be is relatively simple. Why then is it not in practice in our world today? Menchu attributes this failure to an overly materialistic education system. People care about money and possessions more than moral or scholarly issues. In America, the rich are the most famed celebrities. People you meet on the street are much more likely to be able to name Hollywood actors than American Nobel laureates. Money is an issue everyone is concerned with, but it should be considered as a means, not an end. Individuals should want to make money to live their lives in a comfortable, but not excessive, manner.

Many of the utopias we have read about and discussed in class have touched on a sort of individual support of the society by its citizenry. For example, in Ecotopia the individual citizens share the same attitude towards life. They agree with the importance of keeping their environment clean and are willing to work to achieve this goal. The individual is the foundation on which the utopia is built. In Herland, the women combine their individual talents to make their society work. The citizens here attempt to be the best they can be in their individual fields in order to promote a better society at large.

The idea is out there. There are individuals who aspire to be the best they can, but there are also those who are content just to get by. These individuals who hide or squander their individual talents are ultimately hurting those around them and the society they live in. Instead of sinking to the level of normality, individuals should strive to excel in their endeavors.

2 comments:

keefe Dempsey said...

I agree that the individuals are important in Utopias and are the main reason why they are hindered. People are free thinking, and as a result your idea of a Utopia is much different from anothers.

But..

Isn't it the right of people to be able to strive for mediocrity and not be the best they can?

Gerri McNenny said...

Hey Alex,
Great post. I love Keefe's comment too. Very astute. But it also points to the weakness in an individualistic model of utopian thought. We need to think systemically, in terms of economic, political, environmental, and governmental systems. And systems are socially constructed, with everyone agreeing to or consenting to the rules of the game. That may be why systems have to have democratic input in order to work. Great contrast, though.