Utopian World Championship

Seth Nowak: Bold New Worldwide Meta-Cooperation Systems and Patterns

Summary: show/hide
Previous page |  Next page |  Page: 3 of 14 |
Jump to page: 
 

Page 3


In getting our lists together we could refer to many existing lists of "goods" and "bads", drawing from mission statements of non-governmental organizations, United Nations resolutions and declarations, statements of political rights and freedoms, and many other obvious or not-so-obvious existing sources.
That step is the easiest part. These goals and objectives for a better world are the staring off point for evaluation of the systems that exist now for solving problems and realizing opportunities. The element of bringing-into-being of utopia this points toward is the need for better systems and patterns. For robust, ongoing waves of change worldwide, our focus should be on self-replicating, self-reinforcing, categorically distinct, proliferating systems of change.

This is helpful because it gives us a way to observe and measure if, when, and to what extent utopia is becoming real.
In Sweden there is a movement for ecologically sustainable municipalities. Perhaps that is an example of a "good" thing. If powerful actors on the world stage such as corporations or governments allocate resources to speed up the pace of implementation of this example, perhaps instead of hundreds of cities becoming green, many tens of thousands might. If that trend were to have other benefits, such as improved public health in those communities, that could be a second level. If these outcomes could be measured and planned for, perhaps reduced health care financial costs might be allocated toward centralized funds that might, in turn, be used to speed the pace of environmentally friendly shifts in targeted villages, towns, and cities elsewhere. As systems are put in place, and organizational mechanisms become developed and refined, exponential change can happen.


Contradiction and Paradox

Utopia will not be tidy, symmetrical, or achieved by unanimous vote of all sentient beings. A "perfect utopia" or an "ideal utopia" is not viable at all because those options are static, uninspiring, and tend to be temporary when attempts are made to create them. They may take away the meaning of our ability to choose and to exercise free will.

There may well not be full agreement that utopia has been achieved even when it has. Many people may not even know it is utopia when it happens. Some may argue that our global situation is getting worse! More frequent experience of pleasure may be viewed as sinful in the views of many people. An increase in wealth may mean more inequality. Or, if our utopian founders succeeded in creating much greater equality of wealth, it might also mean less freedom for some: utopia could feature higher rates of taxation.

Inasmuch as this more realistic unfolding of utopian patterns will achieve a higher and increasing level of freedoms around the world, it will be a multicultural, pluralistic utopia. This means that well intentioned, utopian societies will hold mutually exclusive opinions, views, and values. Therefore as progress is made to utopia, and thresholds are crossed, it will often be seen as ironic or as embodying grand contradictions.

 

Previous page |  Next page